Old Testament Reading: Exodus 24:1-8

“Then he said to Moses, ‘Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship from afar. Moses alone shall come near to the LORD, but the others shall not come near, and the people shall not come up with him.’ Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD and all the rules. And all the people answered with one voice and said, ‘All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.’ And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD. He rose early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the people of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the LORD. And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and half of the blood he threw against the altar. Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, ‘All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.’ And Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, ‘Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.’” (Exodus 24:1-8, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Hebrews 9:11–28

“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, ‘This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.’ And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.” (Hebrews 9:11–28, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction: Looking Forward To The New Covenant

I have said half-jokingly to some that the reason I decided to preach through the book of Exodus is so that I might prepare the congregation for a future sermon series through the book of Hebrews. Of course, that is not the full reason. There is tremendous value in studying the book of Exodus on its own. But there is some truth to this. There is a sense in which a good and proper understanding of the book Exodus (and the rest of the Old Testament for that matter) does help us to understand the gospel of Jesus Christ and the New Testament scriptures that speak of him. In fact, I think it is safe to say, if we wish to understand the gospel of Jesus Christ and the New Testament scriptures which speak of him, we must understand the Old Testament scriptures, for the two Testaments are intimately related.

I trust that you were able to see the connection between the Old Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant ratified in Christ’s blood as I read Exodus 24 and Hebrews 9 just a moment ago. Clearly, there is an intimate relationship between what God did with Israel through Moses and what God did for all of his elect, Jew and Gentile, through Jesus Christ. The two events, the two mediators, and the two covenants are related. Nevertheless, I trust that you were also able to see (even as I read quickly) that these two covenants – the Old and the New – are substantially different. The Old anticipated the New, and the New fulfills the Old. The Old Covenant provided for the purification of the flesh, but the New Covenant provides for the purification of the conscience. The Old Covenant was indeed good in that it accomplished God’s design, but the New Covenant is far superior in that it actually deals with the problem of sin and makes its partakers right before God in a heavenly, spiritual, and eternal way. If you are familiar with the book of Hebrews you know that that really is its main point. In the book of Hebrews, the Old Covenant is compared and contrasted with the New Covenant, and the author wishes to convince his audience of the superiority of the New Covenant which Christ mediates, over the Old Covenant which was mediated by Moses. But please note this: The writer to Hebrews does not pit the New Covenant against the Old, nor does he pit Christ against Moses. No, he, along with the rest of the New Testament scriptures, shows that the New is greater and Christ is superior because the New fulfills the Old. In other words, the Old and New Covenants, and the mediators of those covenants, Moses and Christ, are not enemies, but dear friends. If I may speak in this way, the Old Covenant was happy to give way to the New, for this was its intended purpose. Stated differently, Moses and Elijah were very, very happy to commune with Christ on the mountain (Matthew 17). They were dear friends, but they were not equals. Moses (and Elijah) were servants in God’s house – Christ is the Son (Hebrews 3). 

I mention all of this in the introduction to this sermon on Exodus 24 because, as we consider this text which describes to us the confirmation of the Old Mosaic Covenant, it is important for us to keep the New Covenant in mind. We must be mindful of the relationship between the two covenants. We must recognize the similarities and the differences if we hope to properly interpret this portion of Holy Scripture. In other words, we must interpret this Old Testament text in the light of Christ and the New Testament scriptures which speak concerning him.

Introduction: Looking Back To The Abrahamic Covenant

As I have said, Exodus chapter 24 describes the confirmation of the Old Mosaic Covenant. And, by way of introduction, I do also wish to remind you of the covenants that God had made with man before this. Yes, there is a vital connection between the Old Mosaic Covenant and the New, which would be ratified some 1,600 years later. But there is also a vital connection between the Old Mosaic Covenant and covenants previously made, particularly the covenant which God made with Abraham.  

As you probably know, the Bible teaches that God has always related to man through covenants. Through covenants, the terms of the relationship between God and man are established. Through the making of covenants God declares his “sovereign pleasure concerning the benefits he will bestow on [man], the communion they will have with him, and the way and means by which this will be enjoyed by them” (S. Renihan quoting N. Coxe, Mystery of Christ, 41).   

In these biblical covenants, it is God who takes the initiative; it is God who sets the terms. All are the outworking of God’s kindness in that they offered something to man better than what man previously possessed. 

Do you remember how God made a covenant with Adam in the garden? God established the terms of the relationship. Adam was called to obey God. The consequence for disobedience would be death; the reward for obedience would be life eternal. Adam broke that covenant of works, but God was gracious and promised to send a Savior. 

God entered into another covenant with Abraham. He called him out from the nations and promised to make him into a great nation, to give his descendants the land of Canaan, and to bless all the nations of the earth through him. All of that was the unconditional promise of God, and you may read about it in Genesis 12. But God did also expand upon this unconditional promise. For Abraham’s descendants to be blessed in the land that God would give to them, they were to “keep” the covenant. You may read about this expansion of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 17. In Genesis 12, God made unconditional promises to Abraham concerning offspring, the land of Canaan, and the blessing of the nations through him. In Genesis 15 the unconditional promises concerning his offspring were reiterated and claitified – he would have an heir from his own loins through Sarah. But in Genesis 17, conditions are introduced. For Abraham’s descendants to be blessed in the land of Canaan and to remain there, they would need to “keep” the covenant. Their remaining in the land, and their being blessed in the land, were conditioned upon their keeping of the covenant. And there in Genesis 17 the terms of the Abrahamic covenant were concluded and sealed with the bloody (remember that word “bloody”) sign of circumcision. That bloody sign of circumcision signified many things. It marked the Hebrews off as God’s chosen people. It called for circumcision of the heart. But it also reminded the people that should they fail to keep the terms of the covenant – should they fail to obey God’s law – they would be cut off.  The sign of circumcision did also point forward to the Messiah, Jesus Christ, who would be born from Abraham’s seed, and who would himself be cut off through the shedding of his own blood, not for his own failure to keep God’s law, but for the failures and sins of others. 

So then I ask you, would Abraham certainly have a son and through that son become as numerous as the sand of the seashore? Was that a guaranteed thing? Yes, certainly. Why? Because of God’s unconditional promise. 

Would Abraham’s descendants take possession of the land of Canaan and have it as their own – a land flowing with milk and honey? Yes, certainly. Why? Because of God’s unconditional promise. 

Would Abraham’s descendants become a great nation with kings to rule over them? Yes, certainly. Why? Because of God’s unconditional promise. 

And would all of the nations of the earth be blessed through Abraham, through the Messiah that would one day come into the world through him? Yes, certainly. Why? Because of the unconditional promise made to Abraham in the covenant that  God transacted with him. 

Now I ask you, based upon the terms of the Abrahamic Covenant, would this nation be blessed in the land that the Lord would give to them? Would they flourish there? Would they be fruitful and multiply there? Would they remain there? Or was it possible for them to be cut off (exiled)? According to the terms of the covenant that God made with Abraham, it was possible for them to be cut off individually, and cast out of the land as a nation. Why? Because of the conditional element introduced in Genesis 17. The covenant was to be “kept”, and the bloody sign of circumcision was a sign of this.

So then, you can see that this Old Mosaic Covenant which is confirmed here in Exodus 24 was organically connected to the covenants which preceded it – the Adamic and the Abrahamic. God entered into this conditional covenant of works with Israel through Moses after he graciously redeemed them from Egyptian bondage. This redemption was in fulfillment of the gracious and unconditional promises made to father Abraham hundreds of years earlier. This Mosaic Covenant was a kind of development of the Abrahamic, in other words. And it was also organically connected to the covenant which was ratified later in Christ’s blood, the New Covenant, which is the Covenant of Grace. 

Introduction: The Immediate Context

So far, I have attempted to set Exodus 24 in its biblical context. Now let me briefly remind you of the more immediate context. 

One, the Old Mosaic Covenant was made with Isarel after God redeemed them. That significant. Though it is right for us to call this a conditional covenant or works, it is also right to remember that this was all by the grace of God. Any and all interaction between God and man after the fall of man into sin other than full and final judgment must be regarded as gracious. True. This a covenant of works with conditions for man to keep. But the grace of God is certainly present. 

Two, we must remember that we have been considering the making of this Old Mosaic Covenant ever since Exodus 19. 

In Exodus 19 the covenant was proposed with these words from God to Israel: “‘You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant [think Genesis 17], you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:4–6, ESV). And how did Israel respond to this proposal? “All the people answered together and said, ‘All that the LORD has spoken we will do.’” (Exodus 19:8, ESV)

Starting in Exodus 20, the laws and statutes of this covenant were presented to Israel. These were the words and rules that Isarel was to “keep” according to the terms of this covenant. First, the Ten Commandments, which contain a summary of God’s moral and abiding law, were spoken by God to Israel from Sinai. This is recorded for us in Exodus chapter 20. And after that, we find instruction for worship at alters. And finally, the LORD added positive civil laws to the moral and ceremonial. The civil and ceremonial laws were delivered to Israel, not directly, but through Moses the mediator.

And finally, we come to Exodus 24 where the covenant is confirmed. All of this can be compared to the marriage covenant. Getting married is a process involving a proposal, a betrothal or engagement period, a ceremony wherein the meaning of marriage is explained, and finally, vows are taken, and, in our culture, rings are exchanged symbolizing the marriage bond. Well, in this analogy, Exodus 24 is the marriage ceremony for YHWH and Israel. Let us consider now the covenant ratification ceremony. 

 *****

Moses, Aaron, Nadab, And Abihu, And Seventy Of The Elders Of Israel 

Verse 1: “Then he said to Moses, ‘Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship from afar. Moses alone shall come near to the LORD, but the others shall not come near, and the people shall not come up with him’” (Exodus 24:1–2, ESV).

Three things should be noted.

One, Israel as a nation was invited to come before the LORD, but they were to worship from afar. 70 elders were invited to come up on the mountain to God as representatives of the people, but even they were to “worship from afar”. This theme will remain throughout the Old Covenant. Israel was invited to approach God under the terms of the Old Mosaic Covenant, but the way to God was not opened up for them by the terms of that covenant. If you wish to have an illustration of this, think of the veil in the temple that separated the holy place from the most holy place where the glory of God was manifest. Who was invited to go behind that veil? Only the high priest, once a year, and not without blood. The people were not invited in. But when Christ died, the veil was torn in two from top to bottom. The way to God was opened up, so that all who have faith in Christ may come boldly before the throne of grace. And this is the difference between the Old Covenant and the New, and between Moses and Christ. It is through Christ and his covenant, and not Moses and his, that we gain full access to our Father in heaven. Indeed, any who drew near to God in Old Covenant times to enjoy sweet communion with him with their sins really and truly washed away (as King David did, for example), did so, not through Moses and according to the terms of Old Covenant, but through faith in Christ and by virtue of the terms of the New Covenant. The Christ had not yet come, and the New Covenant had not yet been made, and yet, to quote 8.6 of our confession, “the virtue, efficacy, and benefit [of Christ’s life, death, burial, and ressurection] were communicated [or applied] to the elect in all ages successively from the beginning of the world, in and by those promises, types, and sacrifices wherein he was revealed, and signified to be the seed of the woman which should bruise the serpent’s head; and the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, being the same yesterday, and today and for ever.”  What is my point? My point is that the Old Mosaic Covenant did many things. But one thing it could not do was to bring the worshipper immediately into the presence of God Almighty. Only faith in Christ can do that, and that had always been the case. 

Two, under the Old Covenant order, the people of Israel were invited to approach God from a distance and through the priesthood. Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu are named by name. All were priests from the same family. Moses and Aaron were brothers. Nadab and Abihu were Aaron’s sons. From them, the priesthood of the Old Covenant would descend. They would have the responsibility to represent the people of Israel, to intercede for them through sacrifice and prayer. But we know that they were sinful men too. So when they offered up animal sacrifices according to the command of God they would have to do so repeatedly, not for the sins of others only, but also for their own sins. 

Three, notice the special role that Moses played. He was a priest before God, but he was also a prophet, and the mediator, or middle man, in this Covenant which God made with Israel. As great as Moses was, it is important to remember that he was not perfect. No, he was a sinner who needed cleansing. He was not the Messiah. He was not the one who would crush the serpent’s head, or lead God’s people into the new heavens and earth. Indeed, soon we will see that he would not even lead Israel into Canaan! As great as Moses was, we must not make him into something he was never intended to be. He was the mediator of the Old Covenant, not the New. He was a servant in God’s house, not the Son. Neither Moses nor the Covenant he mediated could reconcile anyone to God, “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time” (1 Timothy 2:5–6, ESV).

Look with me now at verse 3: “Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD and all the rules. And all the people answered with one voice and said, ‘All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do’” (Exodus 24:3, ESV). These words should sound familiar to you. The people said the same thing when the covenant was first proposed in Exodus 19. By this time the Ten Commandments were spoken. In addition to this, ceremonial and civil laws were revealed to and through Moses. And the people responded in the same way. This is now the second time that they said, “with one voice and said, ‘All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.’”

Given that many of us were raised in dispensational churches, I should probably address the view that says that the people were foolish to enter into this covenant. Have you heard this view? The idea is this: the people should have known that they would fail, and so they should have rejected YHWH’s proposal. I’m must admit, I feel (what I hope is righteous) anger when I think about this view.  Are we to think that it would have been right for Israel to reject God’s proposal? Would that have been the right way to respond to the God of Glory having been redeemed by him, led by him, and fed by him? And what are to think of God in this view? Was God tempting Israel to do something foolish? Was he leading them astray as he proposed the Old Covenant to them? This view is truly preposterous. Only a deeply flawed system like the dispensational system could produce a view like this. No, instead, Israel is to be commended for their obedience here. God redeemed them. God initiated this covenantal arrangement. The Old Covenant, and the laws which governed it were good, provided that we correctly interpret them and understand their purpose and limitation. The law is good. It is the people who are sinful. But here Israel was right to respond to the Lord in this way. “All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.” Indeed, all who have been redeemed by the blood of Christ should say the same: “All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.” We are right to say this though we know that we will fall short. We are right to have this as our sincere resolve, knowing that the Lord has provided atonement for our sins. 

Verse 4: “And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD.” I take this to mean that he wrote down the laws that we now have in Exodus 20-23. Yes, the LORD himself would write the Ten Commandments on tables of stone, but here Moses is said to have written them down, along with the laws concerning worship, and the laws concerning a just society, in the Book of the Covenant, which will be mentioned again shortly.” 

 *****

Five Things: Altar, Twelve Pillars, Burnt Offerings, Book Of The Covenant, Blood

Starting in verse 4b, five things are mentioned that are used in this covenant ratification ceremony. 

One, an alter. Verse 4b: “He rose early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain…” God’s people had worshipped at altars from the days of Adam onward. They are prominent in the Genesis story. The patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob worshipped at altars. Theologically, these altars are to be seen as a testimony to the grace of God. When man fell into sin God withheld his full and final judgment so that he could provide a Savior – one who would crush the serpent’s head, but would be wounded in this process. The heal of the Savior would be struck. Altars were little access points between God and man. They were little Edens in miniature if you will. And soon we will see that these altars would be expanded to include a tabernacle and later a temple. And this is expansion was quite fitting given the advancements that were made in God’s program of redemption under the Old Covenant.

Two, twelve pillars were erected. Verse 4c:  “He rose early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain… and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel” (Exodus 24:4, ESV). These pillars were likely pillars of stacked stone. They stood before the altar, and there they represented the whole nation of Israel, which was divided into twelve tribes, as you know.  

Three, burnt offerings. Verse 5: “And he sent young men of the people of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the LORD” (Exodus 24:5, ESV). These burn offerings were offerings of thanksgiving before the LORD. Some of the meat offered up on the altar would have been consumed by the fire, symbolizing the LORD’s eating, and as we will see, some of the meat would have been eaten by Israel through the representation of the 70 elders, along with Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu. 

Four, the Book of the Covenant. Verse 7: “Then[Moses] took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, ‘All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient’” (Exodus 24:7, ESV). The Book of the Covenant contained the laws of the covenant that Israel was obligated to “keep”. 

Let me ask you this. What was the blessing that would fall upon Israel if they kept the terms of this covenant? What blessing would they earn? What blessing would God bestow on them? Would they earn life eternal? Would they earn the forgiveness of their sins and a right-standing before God? Or to use the language of Hebrews 9, would their consciences be cleansed through the keeping of this covenant? No. No such thing was promised to Israel under the Old Covenant, and the New Testament makes this very clear.  This covenant was never intended to provide life eternal or salvation from the eternal wrath of God. What blessings would come upon Israel should they keep the terms, then? Answer: they would be blessed in the land that the Lord their God was giving to them. This principle was clearly communicated in Genesis 17 when the covenant of circumcision was made with Abraham, and this covenant here is an expansion of that one. This is one of the serious errors made by some dispensationalists. They assume that God transacted this covenant with Israel so that they would be saved, really and truly for all eternity, through the keeping of it. But no such thing was ever said to them. More than that, the New Testament scriptures are clear that this was not the case. The Old Covenant promised blessings in the land and provided for the purification of the flesh, but it had no power to bring the sinner into the presence of God in heaven or to cleanse the conscience from the guilt of sin. Only Christ the mediator of the New Covenant can do that. 

The fifth item used in this covenant ratification ceremony was animal blood. Some of the blood from the animals offered up as peace offerings was sprinkled on the alter. Verse 6 tells us about that. And in verse 8 we learn that after the reading of the Book of the Covenant, and after the people said (for the third time), “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient”, “Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, ‘Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words’” (Exodus 24:8, ESV). Some have suggested that Moses did not actually throw the blood on the people, but on the pillars of stone which stood before the alters and represented the people. Whatever the case, the symbolism is very powerful.  

What should we say regarding the sprinkling of the blood of these animals upon the altar and the people? Three words come to mind: purification, consecration, and inauguration. Allow me to explain.

One, the sprinkling of animal blood upon the people and the altar signified purification. The blood was a reminder of the guilt of sin and of the fact that the wages of sin is death. When blood is shed, things die. And these animals served as a substitute for the people. Now, it is clear that animals cannot substitute for humans to make the really and truly right before God. Animal blood cannot wash away human guilt or cleanse the conscience of sinners. But under the Old Mosaic Covenant, animal blood did purify the flesh as it pertained to the breaking of the terms of the Covenant. That is precisely what the writer to the Hebrews says when he compares and contrasts the Old Covenant and the New, saying, “For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God” (Hebrews 9:13–14, ESV). So then, the blood of bulls provided a kind of purification for Israel – an earthly, fleshly, and temporary purification. More than this, the blood of the bulls did also point forward to the purification that Christ provides as the lamb slain before the foundation of the world. The purification he provides is real, spiritual, full, final, and eternal.

Two, the sprinkling of animal blood signified consecration. To consecrate is to set apart as sacred or holy. When the blood of the bulls was sprinkled on the people, it signified the fact that they were set apart as holy. A special obligation was set upon them to obey the LORD. And special threats were also set upon them should their fail. So then, the symbolism of the blood cut two ways. It signified purification, but also the special obligation that rested on the Hebrews to obey the Lord, with the curses of the covenant looming large over them. Circumcision also functioned this way.

Three,  the sprinkling of animal blood signified inauguration. And here I am referring to the inaguartion of the Old Mosaic Covenant. It was with the splattering of the blood that the Old Mosaic Covenant was put into force. Listen again to verse 8: “And Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exodus 24:8, ESV). It was with the blood of animals that the Old Mosaic Covenant was put into force. 

Brothers and sisters, this storyline, and these themes should sound very, very familiar to you. 

“Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom’” (Matthew 26:26–29, ESV).

This storyline and these themes will sound familiar to those well acquainted with the New Covenant even if they are poorly acquainted with the Old Covenant because the two covenants are intimately related to one another. There is a deep connection between the covenant that God made with the nation of Israel through Moses and the covenant made with God’s elect through Christ. There are many similarities. 

The question is this: what is the nature of that connection? Are the two covenants the same? No,  certainly they are not the same. Are they different but relatively equal, each providing a different but valid way for the salvation of sinners? No, that cannot be it either.  The writer of Hebrews is very eager for us to see that the Old Covenant anticipated the New. It prepared the way for it in many ways. And one way that the Old prepared for the New was by foreshadowing or prefiguring the New and the work that Christ the Mediator would do.

Listen again to Hebrews 9:24:  “Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (Hebrews 9:23–28, ESV).

 *****

Prayer