What does the Writer of Hebrews mean by a “Better” Covenant?
Text: Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. KJV
And we need to go back one chapter and read:
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Unfortunately, many antinomians use these verses to support their assertions that YHVH’s Torah is no longer valid. Equally unfortunate is that that unwary bible student may become confused and uncertain about his/her conviction concerning the efficacy of being Torah Observant.
The purpose of this study is to allow scripture to speak to us addressing the doctrine that Torah is dead, and that the scriptures cited support that contention.
First, let us examine the second scripture cited Hebrews 7:12 from an unbiased perspective.
Again, it reads in the KJV: For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
From and earlier study in this same book we learned that Yahshua is a Cohen Gadol after the order of Melchizedek, and we learned that this priesthood is superior to the Levitical priesthood. Therefore, to correctly interpret the passages we must start with the right premise, and that is to identify the subject of these passages. Without doubt the subject is the Priesthood and the superiority of Yahshua’s order over the Levitical order.
In the verse just read the writer of Hebrews points out to us that since the priesthood is now “changed” or better yet “transformed” by a superior priesthood it becomes necessary to also “change” the “law.” Now you’ll learn why I choose to employ the word “transformed” instead of the KJV word “changed.”
The Greek words translated “changed” and “change” in this verse are misleading and if we are to successfully divide rightly the verse under consideration we need to go to the original Greek.
1. “Changed” is translated from the Greek word, met-at-ith'-ay-mee. This word means: to transfer, literally to transport.
2. Keeping that in mind let us see what “change” means. Met-ath'-es-is is the word from which the KJV translators derive their word “change.” In Greek, it means: transposition, i.e. transferral (to heaven).
As a result, we find a more literal translation of these two words casts a slightly different interpretation of the KJV.
In all of the B’rit Chadasha, this is the only place that speaks of a “transformation” of law. It is important to note that we are not talking about abrogation of the Torah, but a transformation of a specific element of it. It is so important to understand that the writer of Hebrews is addressing only the priesthood and not any other aspect of YHVH’s Torah. Moreover, there is a Scriptural precedent for this as found in the Tanakh.
In Psalm 110:4 we read when David speaking of the Messiah says: “YHVH hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” The writer of Hebrews quotes this legal precedent in chapter 5:6, 6:20 and in verse 17 of chapter 7.
The logical necessity for such a transformation is demonstrated by vv. 11–14, but a more compelling reason for the “transformation of Torah” (v. 12) is that the Levitical priesthood set up by the Torah in the form that Moshe received it from YHVH was based on a rule concerning physical descent from L’vi’s son Gershon in the case of cohanim in general, and from Gershon’s great-grandson Aharon in the case of the cohen hagadol. While Pinchas, Aharon’s grandson, was given “the covenant of an everlasting priesthood” (Numbers 25:13), Yahshua however has an everlasting priesthood by the power of an indestructible life. This was expressed midrashically by the life of Melchizedek as we earlier learned. This transformation sets aside the need for a system of passing on the priesthood from generation to generation, as is stated in this chapter explicitly in vv. 23–25. In addition, we must recall that Ps 110:4 sets the legal precedent for this transformation for Yahshua is the goal at which the Torah aims. In addition, Yahshua’s office is superior to the Levitical order in that he is alive forever, so that he does not need to be replaced; his position as cohen is permanent, it does not pass on to someone else.
Hebrew 8:6 “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also is the mediator of a “better” covenant, which was established upon better promises. KJV
In this chapter, the author of Hebrews turns from Yahshua’s superior credentials as Cohen HaGadol to His work in the heavenly Holy Place. Not only is Yahshua better than the Levitical cohanim, as shown in chapter 7, but the work Yahshua has been given to do is superior to theirs, since the place where they serve is only a copy and shadow of the heavenly original. In Revelation 15:5 we are told this is “the Tent of Witness in heaven,” and we are reminded that long before there was a Temple, YHVH dwelt with his people. One of the Hebrew words the Tanakh uses for “tent” is “mishkan,” which is related to both “shakhen” (“neighbor”) and “Sh<khinah” (“God’s immanent presence.”) This “tent of meeting is where YHVH communicates with his people; whereas “Tent of Witness” speaks of YHVH’s witness to his own righteousness
The context of this chapter assures us that there is no change or transformation in Torah other than the priesthood and the sacrificial system. The term Met-ath'-es-is, referred to and defined earlier implies the preservation of the essential structure of Torah, howbeit some of its elements are rearranged (transformed) due to Yahshua’s event and priesthood after the Order of Melchizedek. Nothing herein implies the abrogation of either the Torah as a whole or the mitzvot not connected with the priesthood and the sacrificial system. Yahshua said Himself in Matthew Matthew 5:17 that He had not come “to abolish but to complete.”
We must see that there is no conflict between the Levitical priesthood established by the Torah of Moshe, and that of Yahshua as prophesized in Psalm 110. We need not think of Yahshua’s priesthood as superseding the Levitical one since it was ordained from everlasting for we see in the Millennium Kingdom the sacrificial system will be reinstated by Yahshua (Ezekiel 47:1-12). YHVH has said in Numbers 25:12 that the earthly Cohanim, descendants of L’vi is and everlasting priesthood. Yet, Yahshua from the Tribe of Judah serves in Heaven as an eternal priesthood after the Order of Melchizedek.
Now we need to take up this issue of a “better” covenant. Christians refer to this as a “new covenant” replacing the Moshe covenant, which YHVH declares as eternal, and they use as their proof text Jeremiah 31:31. Which by the way leads to a contradiction in G-d’s word. Reading this text carefully, we see that YHVH establishes this “new” covenant with the house of Israel and the House of Y’hudah. It does not say that YHVH will make his “new” covenant with Gentiles or even with Christians.” Gentiles enter into this “new” covenant only by being “grafted in” Ro 11:17–24; Ephsians 2:11–16. Secondly, we need to understand that “new,” here, so translated in the KJV version of the bible may be read as “renewed or refreshed.” In my estimation, this “new” covenant has yet to be established for Jeremiah says in preceding verses that both Judah and Israel will have to be back in the land and this will not occur until the Millennium reign of Yahshua. There are other reasons as well to believe this. Wherein is YHVH’s Torah demonstrated to be put into the minds and hearts of so-called believers. If the Torah were written in their hearts they would be Shomer Mitzvot, that is obeying all the Torah of YHVH. Therefore, we are talking about a different event entirely here and should not confuse the transformation of the Priesthood with the abrogation of YHVH’s Torah.
Furthermore, Ezekiel speaks of this reunion of Judah and Israel along with their fellow travelers believing Gentiles in Ezek 37:16-19. It would profit us if I read the passages.
Eze 37:19 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
Ezek 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
Ezek 37:18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these?
Ezek 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
Now let me conclude with this word:
Christians and Messianic Jews must understand that everyone whether or not under the “New Covenant” has the Torah to observe. That is the plain sense, the Pashat sense of the phrase, “I will put my Torah in their minds and write it on their hearts.” It is not some new Torah, different from Old Testament Torah. It is the one and only eternal Torah, understood in the spirit of the Messiah, “as upheld by the Messiah” (Ga 6:2; 1C 9:21). Antinomian theology all too often attempts to escape or water down the plain sense of what YHVH says here. At the extreme YHVH’s Torah is dead, invalidated by a “new” covenant or only for the Jews or at the least professed believers only need a vague “sensitivity to God’s will” which is impossible to pin down. In essence, each man/woman becomes a self-revelator and a god unto him or herself. So often, this antinomian spirit authored by HaSatan is anti-Semitic producing a separation, a spiritual distance and unpleasant comparison between the quote “Church” and the insidious Jews. However, there are Christian commentators who have had a correct understanding, for example, A. Lukyn Williams:
“God’s words through Jeremiah do not announce the coming of a new Law, but of a new principle of keeping the Law, according to which God forgives the sinner, writes the Law on his heart, brings him into a new relation to Himself, and makes Himself known to him.” (Manual of Christian Evidences for Jews, London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1919, I:184.)
The voices of such commentators are becoming less and less in this Dark Age, and we have to look back into history to find Christians who understood and upheld Torah. Think about it! Would it not be fantastic to see Christians take a stand for Torah? Would not this world benefit and become more livable and enjoyable? Would not peace and harmony have a better chance of being? What could anyone have against Torah: G-d’s instructions for successful living.