Christ Superior to Aaron — Part 1

Paul wants the Hebrew believers—and us—to know that Christianity excels Judaism. Our previous posts examined his two opening arguments: Christ excels the agents—angels (Heb. 1:4 – 2:18) and Moses (Heb. 3:1 – 4:13)—through whom God gave the law. This post will examine Paul’s next step as he argues that Christ also transcends the agents through whom God had preserved the law—the Aaronic priesthood (Heb. 4:14 – 10:18).

From the space Paul devotes to this section, we might conclude this is his most important point so far. He places a disproportionate emphasis on Christ’s superiority to the Aaronic priesthood. The sections comparing Christ to angels and Moses each contain about the same number of words. Paul quadruples that number in his discussion of Aaron.¹

This third argument penetrates the heart of the Judaism of the Mosaic age. The angels and Moses had established the religion of the Hebrews, but that was in their distant past. The Aaronic priesthood, however, was a living reality in their present. It connected them to their religion in real time. The priests activated all of Judaism’s benefits for the Hebrews and linked them to the things that mattered most, including God himself.

This post will begin our examination of how Paul reasoned as he persuaded his readers to leave the Aaronic priesthood of the Mosaic Age and embrace Christ’s priesthood in the Messianic Age. We will examine the major steps he takes using, as before, John Brown’s divisions of the text.² Our goal here is not to trace the details of Paul’s arguments, but to show how inmillennialism suggests insights that might otherwise escape our notice.

Paul says Christ’s priesthood is superior to Aaron’s because 1.) of how God established it (Heb. 4:14 – 5:9); 2.) it is like Melchisedec’s (5:10 – 7:25); 3.) of his Qualifications (7:26 – 8:5); 4.) of the new Covenant (8:6–13); and 5.) of direct comparison (9:1 – 10:18). This post will consider inmillennialism’s contribution to the first two.

Because of How it was Established

Paul reassures the Hebrew Christians of an important fact: they have a high priest that will serve throughout the Messianic Age (Heb. 4:14). Paul knew, from Jesus, that the Temple would fall in his generation (Matt. 24:34). This would end the Mosaic Age and its Aaronic priesthood that had defined the Hebrews’ lives for a millennium and a half (cp. Heb. 7:12; see below). The people needed assurance that this would not eradicate the priesthood altogether. Paul said the High Priest was replacing the high priests with which they were familiar. Christ was for and with them. His priesthood was superior because of how God had established it (Heb. 4:14 – 5:9).

In Optimism

This replacement was occurring according to God’s plan (Heb. 5:4–6, 10). Paul appeals to Psalm 2 to make his case: “So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee” (Heb. 5:5; cp. Ps. 2:7). Paul’s reasoning is plain: God fulfilled his promise to raise Christ from the dead (Ps. 2); he will also fulfill his promise to make him a High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec (Heb. 5:6; cp. Ps. 110:4).

God surrounded these prophetic promises to Christ—of both resurrection and priesthood—with others of the most optimistic nature. In Psalm 2, God said after he would raise Christ from the dead, he would invite him to “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel” (Ps. 2:8–9).

God promised Christ he would overcome all opposition as the kings of the earth would learn to “Kiss the Son” and submit to him (Ps. 2:10–12). This was God’s plan for the Son after his resurrection. During the Messianic Age, the Son would reign as a victorious King. Christ far surpasses all rivals in this respect.

God connects similar promises to Christ’s future priesthood. David recorded the prophetic conversation between the Father and the Son: “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. . . . The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:1, 4). Christ would act as a priest during the age in which his enemies would become his footstool. The New Testament quotes this passage more than any other, showing its importance to the gospel of the kingdom.

Inmillennialism highlights the kingdom optimism³ that surrounds God’s promises to resurrect Christ from the dead and to make him a priest after the order of Melchisedec.

As the “Perfect”

Our prophetic model can enhance our understanding of “perfection” as Paul uses it in Hebrews. He introduced the concept in his discussion of Christ’s superiority to angels: God made Christ “perfect through sufferings” (Heb. 2:10). He strikes the same note here in relation to Christ’s priesthood: “And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb 5:9). Paul will mention “perfection” at least nine more times in the Hebrew letter. This concept is central to his argument.

What does Paul mean by “perfection”? God making Jesus perfect does not imply moral improvement. It “does not mean that he [Jesus] was imperfect and that out of his imperfection he became perfect.”⁴ Rather, “it reflects upon the sufferings by which he was brought to the goal appointed for him by God.”⁵ The associated noun (telos) “means ‘completion’ as a state.”⁶

Acknowledging our oversimplification, we suggest “perfection” is the state of completion or maturity into which God brought Christ and, by extension, his people. He established this state during the Mosaic Age to Messianic Age transition.

Christ excels Aaron because God has brought him to the goal—the “perfection”—appointed for him. He now serves as the High Priest for his people during the new age as planned.

We shall soon see that Paul also believes God has, in this sense, “perfected” Christians and provided a “perfect” age in which they dwell. The “perfected” High Priest ministers to the “perfected” people during the “perfect” age.

Inmillennialism shows this exaltation of the Messianic Age over the Mosaic Age.

Because it is Like Melchisedec’s

Paul moves from his argument regarding the establishment of Christ as High Priest to one based on the nature of his priesthood—it is “after the order of Melchisedec” (Heb. 5:10 – 7:25). We noticed the optimism this implies above. Inmillennialism provides insights into several related statements Paul makes in this section.

The Time for Change

The Hebrews seemed to not understand what God was doing in their day. They required more instruction. Paul says this should not be the case: “for the time ye ought to be teachers” (Heb 5:12). Using a more literal translation, they should have been teachers “because of the time” (YLT; emphasis added).⁷

To what “time” did Paul refer? He and his readers were living in the “last days” of the Mosaic Age (Heb. 1:2). This was a time when God was performing redemptive acts that served as antitypes to those that established the Mosaic Age. (Inmillennialism shows this typology, as seen here.) Had God established Aaron and his sons as (typical) priests (Exod. 28:1)? Yes, and he had now, in Paul’s time, established Christ as the permanent (antitypical) High Priest.

The Mosaic Age was about to end; the Messianic Age had already begun. The Hebrew Christians should have understood this and realized the time for priest-transition had arrived. “Because of the time,” they should have realized Christ’s Messianic-Age priesthood would soon remain unrivaled by Aaron’s. And, it would be unending—like Melchisedec’s. They should leave Aaron’s priesthood in favor of Christ’s.

Inmillennialism portrays this critical time of transition and makes Paul’s because-of-the-time argument relevant to his historical situation.

Beyond Building Blocks

Paul wanted the Hebrews to graduate from “the first principles (Gk. stoicheia) of the oracles of God” (Heb. 5:12). They should have already learned “the elements of the beginning of the oracles of God.”⁸ Inmillennialism can help us understand the Apostle’s thinking at this point.

These “elements” originated in the Mosaic Age, as we see in Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Like the Hebrews, these Christians were in danger of returning to the worship forms of the previous age. Paul asks them, “now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements (Gk. stoicheia), whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?” (Gal. 4:9).

Paul encourages the Galatians to cast away the law-bondage of the Mosaic Age and embrace the Spirit-freedom of the Messianic Age (Gal. 4:30-31). He wants them to leave their spiritual childhood (Gal. 4:1), during which they were under “the elements” of the law (Gal. 4:3–5), and embrace their status as adopted mature sons (Gal. 4:7). God’s appointed time for such change had come (Gal. 4:4).

Paul’s admonition to the Galatians is almost identical to the one he gives the Hebrews in our current passage. Here, too, the “elements” belong to Mosaic-Age immaturity—they were like a diet of milk (Heb. 5:12). Paul wanted them to grow to maturity and completeness. “The phrase translated, ‘them that are of full age,’ is, literally, the perfect”⁹ (Heb. 5:14). The Hebrews were “perfect men” (Heb. 5:14, YLT) who belong to the “perfect” Messianic Age.¹⁰ They should wean themselves from milk and eat the “meat” of the Messianic Age. This meant that, among other things, they should embrace Christ, whom God had “perfected,” as their High Priest.

Paul lists some of the foundational “elements” God had established through the Mosaic Age priesthood (Heb. 6:1–2). “The perfect” ones (in Christ) should build on these, but leave them behind in favor of stronger food.

A discussion of each of these “elements” would exceed the limitations of this post, but we will glance at one to show how they relate to the Aaronical priesthood. Paul did not want to lay again the foundational element “of the doctrine of baptisms” (Heb. 6:2). The Old Testament imposed “divers washings” or “different baptisms” (Heb. 9:10, AV/YLT) on the people. The Aaronic priests performed these baptisms. When Jesus came as the true High Priest, however, things changed. These Aaronic “baptisms” gave way to the “one baptism” (Eph. 4:5) of the Messianic Age. Similar arguments could be made for the other “elements” in Paul’s list.

The passing away of these “first principles” or “elements” of the Mosaic Age in favor of the Messianic Age fits inmillennialism well.

The (Mostly) Future Age

Inmillennialism highlights one of Paul’s statements in his discussion of the “elements.” He warns the Hebrews that repentance would be impossible for those who “have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come” (Heb 6:5) should they reject Christ’s priesthood and remain attached to the Mosaic Age. Kenneth Wuest provides a more literal translation: Paul speaks to those who have “tasted the good word of God, also the powers [miracles] of the age that is about to come.”¹¹

Wuest’s version recognizes the presence of the Greek word mellō. We have discussed the importance of this word in a previous post. Our point here is that inmillennialism recognizes this unique age-about-to-come perspective. Other prophetic systems tend to misidentify the ages involved and, therefore, obscure this important time orientation in Paul’s argument.

Age of Perfection

As we saw above, the Apostle mentioned the “perfection” of Christ (Heb. 2:10; 5:9) and his people (Heb. 5:14, YLT). He now admonishes the Hebrews to leave the “elements” of the Mosaic Age by pointing to the Messianic Age as the state of “perfection.” He says, “Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God” (Heb. 6:1).

Paul asks an important question in this context: “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical¹² priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” (Heb 7:11).

“Perfection” is the state of maturity or completion into which God was leading his people during the transition generation. (Another glance at our diagram here or here will show what we mean by “transition generation.”) The Messianic Age is the “perfect” state (or age) during which Christ serves as the “perfected” High Priest for his “perfected” people. This understanding becomes important for interpreting other Pauline passages, including those related to the cessation of apostolic miracles (e.g., 1 Cor. 13:10).

Verb Tenses

The verb tenses Paul uses in this section are incidental demonstrations of an inmillennial perspective. Present tense verbs describe the priesthood of Christ: “we have a great high priest” (Heb. 4:14); “this man . . . hath an unchangeable priesthood” (Heb 7:24); etc.

Also germane to inmillennialism are the present tense verbs that describe the Aaronic priesthood. The Levitical priesthood “is receiving tithes” (Heb 7:9, YLT). This suggests the Apostle is writing with a consciousness of the continued existence of the Temple services.

Paul’s use of the present tense is also compatible with the change underway in his generation: “For the priesthood [is] being changed, there is [being made] of necessity a change also of the law” (Heb. 7:12; brackets mine). Again, “For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof” (Heb 7:18).

The participle and verbs in these statements are all present tense—the change of which they speak was in process as Paul wrote. The change would soon reach its appointed end, however. Paul shows this below in his discussion regarding the covenants: “Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13).

Other prophetic models struggle to account for these verb tenses. Inmillennialism, however, is well suited to explain them in their historical context.

Conclusion

Paul makes his case for the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over Aaron’s in a way consistent with inmillennialism. The optimism inherent in his citations of Psalm 2 and 110 fits that of our prophetic model. Paul’s use of “perfection”—his application of it to Christ, his people, and the Messianic Age—also fits well within our scheme.

The Apostle’s comparison of Christ’s priesthood to that of Melchisedec further shows inmillennialism’s agreement with his prophetic understanding. His was a generation of age transition: the Messianic Age was replacing the Mosaic Age. “Because of the time” during which he and the Hebrew Christians lived, they should embrace Christ’s priesthood and teach others to do so.

The Hebrews should build on the “elements” God had laid in the Mosaic Age, but not cling to them as though they were the final state he had designed for them. That age, the age of “perfection,” was about to come.

All these elements fit well into our inmillennial model. The verb tenses throughout this passage confirm we are on the right track.

1. This word count is approximate and based on the English (AV) text.
2. John Brown, Hebrews, (London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961). We will combine several of Brown’s sections and insert sub-sections to expedite our analysis.
3. We have documented this optimism in multiple posts, including He Must Reign, Hooray for Big Government!, Inmillennialism, and First Corinthians Fifteen And Inmillennialism.
4. Leon Morris, “Hebrews,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews through Revelation, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 12 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1981), 50.
5. William L. Lane, Hebrews 1–8, vol. 47A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 122. Emphasis added.
6. Gerhard Delling, “Τέλος κτλ.,” ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 8:49. Emphasis added.
7. “On account of the time—[Eng. Ver., less correctly, for the time].” John Albert Bengel, Romans – Revelation, vol. 2, New Testament Word Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1971), 614.
8. Brown, Hebrews, 267.
9. Brown, Hebrews, 271.
10. We will (D. V.) discuss the Messianic Age as the “perfect” age below.
11. Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1961), Heb 6:1–8.
12. Aaron was from the tribe of Levi.