Before you read this, please read
my document titled, "What do the scriptures teach about
the second or final coming of Jesus Christ?"
To me, there are two things with
which I must deal in writing about this subject:
- How little can I write in
order to give my readers a correct knowledge of Heb.
9:28?
- I consider the book of
Hebrews to be the most difficult book in the "new
testament" to understand (that's right, even
Revelation).
We are looking at a book written
to the Hebrews through 20th century western
eyeglasses. If we indeed are to discern the correct meaning, we
must try to see the book through 1st century eastern
eyeglasses. May the Spirit of God help me to communicate the
right understanding to you, and may His Spirit assist you in
comprehending it.
I have noted that the terms
"second coming" or "final coming" of Jesus
Christ are not found in the Bible. If people are asked to prove
that the Bible teaches a second coming of Jesus or a final coming
of Jesus, they either look puzzled, like "Why would you
even ask such a stupid question?" or they would offer
such passages as Mat. 24 and other comparable scriptures.
However, none of those passages mention either of the phrases "second
coming" and/or "final coming" of Jesus
Christ. The only other answer is, "Because it is
stated that way in Heb. 9:28".
Initially, read Hebrews 9:23-28,
with special interest in verse 28, because it deals with the "second
appearance" of Jesus Christ.
"(23) It was therefore
necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be
purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with
better sacrifices than these. (24) For Christ is not entered into
the holy places made with hands, which are the figures
of the true; but into heaven itself, now to APPEAR
in the presence of God for us: (25) Nor yet that he should offer
himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place
every year with blood of others; (26) For then must he often have
suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the
end of the world (age, r.m.) hath he APPEARED
to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (27) And as it is
appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: (28)
So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto
them that look for him shall he APPEAR the
second time without sin unto salvation. "(Emphasis mine,
r.m.)
One will immediately notice two
things:
(1) The phrases "second
coming" and "final coming" are not mentioned.
(2) The word "appear"
occurs in verses 24, 26, and 28. Do they mean the same?
I
"APPEAR"
The word "appear"
in verse 24 is from the Greek word "emphanizo".
The word "appear" in verse 26 is from the Greek
word phaneroo". The word "appear" in
verse 28 is from the Greek word "optomai".
Notice that there are three different Greek words translated by
the same English word, "appear". If they mean
the same, why did the Hebrews writer use three different words?
EMPHANIZO (Heb. 9:24)
This word literally means, "to
shine in", or it can be translated "manifested".
How was Jesus manifested in this verse? Since His
manifestation was in the presence of His Father, one would think
it to be a spiritual manifestation, since God is a
spirit. A physical manifestation of Jesus before God after His
death, burial and resurrection, just does not seem to fit.
PHANEROO (Heb. 9:26)
W.E. Vines (Expository
Dictionary of New Testament Words), under "appear",
number 4, says, "Signifies, in the Active Voice, to
manifest: in the Passive Voice, to be manifested: so, regularly,
in the R.V., instead of to appear." He goes on to say, "To
be manifested, in the Scriptural sense of the word, is more than
to appear. A person may appear in a false guise or without a
disclosure of what he truly is; to be manifested is to be
revealed in one's true character; this is especially the meaning
of phaneroo." God always knew the true character of
Jesus, so to think of Him appearing in the presence of God again
(as in verse 24), would seem rather strange. The meaning of these
two words do not mean the same.
OPTOMAI (Heb. 9:28)
This word is more recognizable to
the reader of the English language, since words like "optometrist"
(which deals with seeing) are derived from it. It means to
see or be seen, depending on whether written in the Active or
Passive Voice.
These three words, in context,
deal with three appearances of Jesus, the three being used
by the writer of Hebrews of:
- a past appearance
- a present appearance,
and
- a future appearance.
Even to the novice, it should be
apparent that there are three appearances of Jesus
mentioned in this context. What does that do to the idea of a
"second" or "final" coming of Jesus,
especially in view of the fact that neither of the terms "second
coming" or final coming" of Jesus appear
anywhere in the Bible, especially in Hebrews 9:23-28?
On the surface, what do we see?
- First, we see Jesus making an
appearance in the presence of God (verse 24). Is the
second appearance of verse 28 a second appearance in the
presence of God? Would you even consider such an
interpretation?
- We see in verse 26 that Jesus
appeared at the end of the world ("age", i.e.,
Jewish age) to sacrifice Himself for the sins of the
people. Is this not His appearance in the flesh, actually
seen by humans?
- Is the next appearance of
verse 28 another appearance of Jesus to be seen of
mankind? Did not Jesus say, "Yet a little while,
and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I
live, ye shall live also" (John 14:19)? In a
very short time after He spoke this, Jesus did appear in
the form of the Holy Spirit on the Pentecost of Acts 2.
He had taken His blood into the presence of God and made "atonement"
for His sins (not His own sins, for He did not sin
personally, but the sins of mankind that He had taken
upon Himself). At Pentecost, Jesus' sin problem had been
resolved. He must make one more appearance. At His first
appearance before the believers on Pentecost, He had no
sins, but others did have sins. Their sin problem must be
resolved, which would require another appearance
(manifestation).
Since the Bible is a book of
types/antitypes, figures (Heb. 9:24) and shadows, the best
way to resolve this difficulty lies in the types and figures
set forth in what we call the "old testament". To it we
shall direct most of the study from henceforth, and then arrive
at a conclusion.
II
THE OLD TESTAMENT HIGH PRIESTHOOD
Aaron was the first high priest of
Israel. Miriam was an older sister and Moses was a younger
brother. Aaron's wife's name was Elisheba, who bore him four
sons; Nadab and Abihu (one of which was to become high priest
when Aaron died, but they disobeyed God and He killed them) and
Eleazar and Ithamar. Aaron was an excellent speaker, and was
appointed to be Moses' spokesman. He was told to meet Moses and
go with him to see the Pharaoh of Egypt. He did the signs that
were foretold and the plagues commanded of God.
The Israelites murmured against
him and Moses for lack of food. He held up the hands of Moses
during the battle with Amalek. He was set apart, with his family,
to the priesthood, which required sacred garments prepared for
him. He was anointed and consecrated to his office by Moses,
appointed to light the lamps, burn incense and make atonement.
Two bad things are mentioned of
Aaron:
- He was persuaded by the
people to make a molten image, to which the children of
Israel could worship, for which Moses reproved him. When
he saw the shining of Moses' face, he was very afraid.
- He rebelled, along with his
sister, and spoke against Moses, and both were reproved
by God for so doing.
The priestly duties of Aaron and
his sons are prescribed in Leviticus. He was told how he was to
enter the holy place, not to mourn for the dead, nor touch the
holy things in uncleanness.
He was commanded to number the
people with the help of Moses and the twelve princes of Israel.
He received the tribe of Levi as his helpers.
One very interesting thing
happened, i.e., his rod flourished, and was preserved for a
memorial. He died on Mount Hor in the land of Edom and was buried
there. On his tombstone (if he had such) could be written, "Born
B.C. 1574, died B.C. 1451 at the age of 123 years".
Now that we have before us the
background of Aaron, the first high priest of the Israelites, let
us state that we believe the answer to Heb. 9:28 can be found in
the duties of Aaron the high priest, which are recorded in the
book of Leviticus. Let us note a few of the things, which
according to the book of Hebrews were types (figures, Heb.
9:24) of their Messiah, Jesus the Christ. The other figure of
Jesus' priesthood, compared with Melchisedec's, is another and
different subject.
Since Jesus' principal mission was
to save His people (Mat. 1:21), it is noteworthy to observe the
atonement procedure of Aaron, the high priest of the physical
tabernacle and temple. Then, I will compare that procedure with
the work of Jesus for the redemption of mankind.
III
AARON AND THE ATONEMENT
SACRIFICES
Leviticus, chapter 16, shows us
that even though Aaron was the high priest, he could not go any
time he desired into the holy place within the veil before the
mercy seat. If he did, he would die. When he did go into the "most
holy place", he had to wear the sacred garments ordained
by God.
Perhaps Lev. 16:6 is the most
important verse to begin this study. It says:
"And Aaron shall offer his
bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an
atonement for himself, and for his house" (cf. Verse
11).
Aaron offered the blood of a BULL
to make atonement for himself and his house. What is not
said in this verse speaks more loudly than what is stated, i.e.,
the blood of the bull did not make atonement for all
people.
The next few verses tell of the
two goats, one for the sin offering for the people and the other
to be the scapegoat. Regarding the goat sacrificed for the sin
offering, let us read Lev. 16:15-17,34:
"(15) Then shall he kill
the goat of the sin offering that
is for the people, and bring his blood within the
veil, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the
bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the
mercy seat: (16) And he shall make an atonement for the holy
place, because of the uncleanness of the children of
Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins:
and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that
remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness. (17) And
there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when
he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until
he come out, and have made an atonement for himself,
and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.
… (34) And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to
make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins
once a year. And he did as the Lord commanded Moses" (emphasis
mine r.m.).
If we have read this correctly,
Aaron took a bull and offered its blood as an atonement
for only himself and his household. He would then come out
of the holy place the first time to cast lots for the two
goats, at which time he was seen by the people. The goat
selected to have his blood shed, would be killed. Aaron would
then take the blood of the goat into the holy place and
make atonement for the people. Then he would come out of
the holy place the second time and again be seen by
the people who were "waiting" for him to make
his second appearance. They would then know that their sin
problem had been taken care of. It was not the first appearance
to them by the high priest that gave them assurance, but they
knew that if God had taken care of the sins of the high priest
and his house, then they had hope that in just a short time he
would make that second appearance unto them and their sin
problem would have been taken care of. For "them that
looked for him, he would appear the second time without any sin,
either of himself or the people", and then they knew
they had a right relationship with God again.
IV
COMPARE
AARON AND HIS SACRIFICES TO JESUS AND HIS SACRIFICE
The book of Hebrews does this very
thing (with some major improvements in Jesus Christ). But in
type/antitype fashion, we have before us the answer to Heb. 9:28.
Contrary to what most believe,
Jesus became sin. Whoa, just a minute! Would you please repeat
that? Surely. Jesus became sin. Of course, He did not commit sin
Himself. How then did He become sin?
"(21) For even hereunto
were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us
an example, that ye should follow his steps: (22) Who did no sin,
neither was guile found in his mouth" (1 Pet. 2:21,22).
However, we forget a couple of things.
- We have failed to recognize
the significance of 2 Cor. 5:21:
- "For he (God)
hath made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew
no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him."
Because
Jesus took upon Himself the sins of the world, God
reckoned Him as a sinner. In order to be the offering for
the sins of the people, He first had to enter the
presence of God and offer His blood (life) for "Himself
and His house", as Aaron did the blood of the
bull. This appearance (phaneroo) in verse
24 was for the purpose of taking upon Himself the sins of
the world. So, any appearance in the presence of God had
to show Himself purged of those sins. When the book of
Hebrews was being written, the writer put that even in
the past. In fact, it was in the sacrifice of
Jesus on the cross while on this planet in the flesh. Was
it possible for Jesus (or any man) to stand face to face
with God until his sin problem had been resolved? Would
that not even have included Jesus, since He had on His
back the sins of the people?
- We must compare the blood of
the bull regarding the atonement sacrifice made by
Aaron the high priest to the blood of Jesus, the eternal
high priest. Having offered His blood to rid Himself of
sins (the sins of mankind He had taken on Himself), Jesus
could then appear (emphanizo) in the
presence of God.
"For Christ is not entered
into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures
of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear (emphanizo) in
the presence of God for us" (Heb. 9:24).
The blood of the bull had
been offered to God for atonement of the high priest. Jesus now
no longer carried the burden of the sins of the world. His first
coming on the first Pentecost after His resurrection was to set
in motion the plan to forgive the people by the blood of the goat.
In His second appearance, the Hebrew writer said that
Jesus' appearance would be "without sin". He had
to resolve His own sin problem the first time and could not be
the one to intercede on behalf of mankind at the same time. But
having His sins removed, He would appear (optomai,
i.e., "be seen") the second time unto the salvation
of those who waited for Him. Look again at the verse that has
troubled us so much:
"So Christ was once
offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him
shall he appear (optomai) the second time without sin unto
salvation."
Was the "appearance"
of Jesus in verse 26 His first appearance to mankind when dealing
with the sin problem? Was the "appearance" of
Jesus in verse 28 His second appearance to mankind? Most
assuredly verse 28 was His second appearance, but what makes us
think it was His "second coming"? Can we not
distinguish between an "appearance" and a
"coming" of Jesus?
Did not Aaron first make an
offering of a bull only for himself and his house and then was
"seen" outside the most holy place selecting the
blood of the goat, which he took back inside the holy place to
atone for the sins of the people? Did he not then appear a
second time outside the most holy place, showing those who "waited
for him" that their sin problem had been
resolved?
V
WHEN
WILL OUR SIN PROBLEM BE RESOLVED?
Do we have to wait for a future
date to have our sin problem resolved? Are we not "free
from sin" at this very moment? Worse yet, did the first
century Jews have to wait for 2,000 years or more to have their
sin problem resolved? Is it still not resolved? Will it not be
resolved until "Jesus comes again" in our near or
distant future?
My sin problem was resolved many
hundreds of years ago. It was solved by two occasions.
- When Jesus died on the cross
and ascended to the Father.
- When He made His second
appearance in AD 70 to give the saints their inheritance.
Would he give them their
inheritance if they were yet in their sins?
The cross of Christ played a very
important role in the eradication of man's sins. But the
consummation of the plan of God to free man from the guilt of sin
in AD 70 was equally (if not more so) important than the event of
the cross. It would do us good to study much about what happened
in AD 70.
Instead of the necessity of two
sacrifices (of both bulls and goats) for the atonement of the
high priest, his family, then all the people, Jesus offered His
own life's blood for the sins of the people. He was the bull
sacrifice. He was the goat sacrifice. He was the scapegoat. All
three wrapped up in one sacrifice for all things - one time
for all time!
"For it (was) not possible
that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins"
(Heb. 10:4). Jesus' blood did! Praise God!
CONCLUSIONS
- Christ was once offered to
bear the sins of many; and unto them that looked for him
(in AD 70), He appeared the second time without sin unto
their salvation. Thank God for Jesus, His saving blood
and the salvation He brought at His "second
appearance".
- These verses do not say nor
prove a second or final coming of Jesus Christ!
You have permission to reprint
this and share it with whomsoever you wish, provided you copy it
in its entirety. Partial reprints are not permissible.
My love to each and every one of
you. God bless you.
