Hebrews 8

The point: we have such a high priest, down on the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. Wesley: having finished the type in Melchisedec, the apostle treats directly of Christ's priesthood beyond the Levitical. Who is set down—having finished his oblation—on the right hand of the Majesty of God.

Shared: seated heavenly priest, not an earthly Aaron. The verse presses finished offering and present session. Better mediator already in view. The sum of chapters 7–8 turns from type to the Son enthroned.

Calvin: he reminds readers that his object is to prove Christ's priesthood spiritual and celestial. Since Christ has ascended to God's right hand to reign gloriously in heaven, he is not minister of the earthly but of the heavenly sanctuary.

Held in common: the point is such a high priest—seated in heaven. Ascension removes the reproach of abject flesh and displays the Spirit's power by which his priesthood's dignity is estimated. Earthly Mosaic priesthood is voided by a celestial priest.

A servant of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle the Lord pitched, not man. Wesley: minister of the sanctuary—heaven, typified by the holy of holies—and of the true tabernacle, perhaps his human nature, which the Lord fixed forever, not man as Moses fixed the tabernacle.

Shared: true tent versus man-made. Heavenly ministry of the same priest who offered himself once. Copy yields to true; the Lord pitches what man cannot.

Calvin: "true" is not opposed to false but to typical—as grace and truth came by Christ. The old tabernacle was the effigy of the heavenly; as shadow differs from substance, the Apostle denies it to have been the true tabernacle. The Lord pitched it: God the builder, for stability and perpetuity.

Lord-set true tent; not man. Whatever earthly appears in Christ's suffering must be viewed spiritually; the hidden power of the Spirit makes his priestly ministry heavenly. Both camps keep Jer 31 ahead as the covenant this minister mediates.

Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; this priest must also have something to offer. The necessity points forward to his once-for-all self-offering already stated in 7:27 and unpacked in chapter 9.

Common ground: priesthood without offering is empty. Arminian readers hear the fitting requirement met in himself—not in daily animals. Better mediator brings a better sacrifice. Hear the office; do not invent another mediator with no sacrifice of his own.

Calvin: no priest is appointed except to offer gifts; no favor from God without sacrifice. Our prayers must be founded on a sacrifice; audacity that passes by Christ and forgets his death yet rushes into God's presence is fatal. No one among men or angels can pacify God without a sacrifice of his own.

Common ground: this priest must have something to offer. The something is his own death's benefit, spiritually estimated. Shared once-for-all from 7:27 stands; chapter 8 states the office's necessity before naming the better covenant.

If he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, seeing law-priests offer gifts. Wesley: if his priesthood terminated here, he could not be a priest consistently with the Jewish institutions, there being other priests to whom alone this office is allotted.

Common to both: earthly slot is already filled by Levi. Christ's priesthood is heavenly by necessity as well as glory. The law's priests occupy the copy; the Son serves the true.

Calvin: Christ has no earthly visible sacrifice of the Levitical kind; he cannot be a priest on earth in that order. Either Christ is no priest while the Law's priesthood continues—or the Law's sacrifices cease when he appears. The first is impious; therefore the Levitical order is abolished.

Coexistence is impossible; celestial priesthood displaces the earthly. The death was on earth, but its priestly virtue is heavenly.

Who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. Wesley: who serve the temple after the pattern and shadow of heavenly things—of spiritual, evangelical worship and everlasting glory. Pattern like penciled strokes awaiting color; shadow giving a dim idea of the body. Both lead the mind nobler than themselves. The verse quotes Exodus 25:40.

Copy and shadow, patterned from the mountain. Wesleyan Arminians hear Moses' tent as pedagogical shadow, not final home. The true tent of v. 2 is the substance. Do not cling to the copy when the heavenly priest has come.

Calvin: they perform sacred rites unto an example and shadow—copy inferior to the prototype. The worship according to ancient sacrifices was not superfluous because it referred to heavenly realities. Moses was admonished to make all according to the pattern: the whole service was a picture shadowing what is spiritual in Christ; hence nothing ultimate in the rituals themselves.

Modes of worship beyond God's pattern are spurious; symbols must conform to Christ. The shadow kept expectation of the Mediator—now present.

Christ has obtained a more excellent ministry; the covenant he mediates is better, enacted on better promises. Wesley: his priesthood as much excels theirs as the promises of the gospel (whereof he is surety) excel those of the law. Better promises specified in vv. 10–11; those in the law were mostly temporal.

Both readings: better ministry, better covenant, better promises—Jer 31 central for both. Gospel promises of inward law, knowledge of God, and mercy outstrip temporal land-promises. Better mediator stands under better oath and better hope.

Calvin: as he inferred the covenant's excellency from the priesthood, so now the priesthood is more excellent because Christ is Mediator of a better covenant. The covenant of the Gospel was proclaimed on better promises—yet fathers had the same hope of eternal life; the comparison refers to the form rather than the substance of revelation. Manner and character of revelation differ; salvation hoped is not another gospel.

More excellent ministry; better covenant on better promises. Same salvation substance, clearer form under Christ. Keep both camps on Jer 31's promises without inventing a different God.

If the first had been faultless, no occasion to look for a second. Wesley: if that dispensation had answered all God's designs and man's wants—if it had not been weak and unprofitable, unable to make anything perfect—no place for a second.

Arminian readers tie fault to weakness already named in 7:18–19. The look for a second is Jeremiah's new covenant, not human improvement of Moses. Hear the conditional; the second has come in Christ.

Calvin confirms the excellency of the covenant through Christ: the covenant of the Law was neither valid nor permanent. If nothing was wanting, why substitute another? Another has been substituted; therefore the old was not in every respect perfect.

Faultless first would have blocked a second. Reformed setup for v. 8: blame attaches to the people's breach, yet weakness of a covenant not written on hearts also required amendment. The occasion for a second is true in history and in Jeremiah.

He finds fault with them, he said Jeremiah's word: days are coming—a new covenant with Israel and Judah. Wesley: finding fault with them who were under the old covenant; a new covenant with the house of Israel—with all the Israel of God, in all ages and nations. New in ratification by Christ's death; freedom from burdensome rites; clearer spiritual religion; larger Spirit; extended to all; never abolished.

Membership language stretches to all the Israel of God who are in Christ—true Christians of the nations—not a denial of Jeremiah, but the gospel's reach. Shared: fault with them; new covenant promised. God declares days coming and establishes by the Son.

Calvin: though crime of violating the covenant was justly imputed to the people, the weakness of the covenant is also pointed out—because it was not written on their hearts. To render it perfect and valid, God declares it needed amendment. The Prophet arraigns perfidy; the Law was the covenant broken. Days coming signify Christ's kingdom; house of Israel and Judah promise gathering of the elect into one body.

Neither side disputes this: finds fault with them; new covenant with Israel and Judah; Jer 31 central. People at fault, yet covenant form needed heart-inscription. Elect gathered; better promises in clearer revelation.

Not like the covenant made when he took them by the hand out of Egypt; they did not continue, and he showed no concern. Wesley: with the care of a parent he took them by the hand; while this was fresh they obeyed, then shook off the yoke. They continued not; he regarded them not—so that covenant was soon broken in pieces.

Old covenant broken by non-continuance. Wesley’s heirs hear warning and history: continuance mattered under that economy; the new will write law inwardly. The Lord's declaration stands. The contrast prepares heart-writing in v. 10.

Calvin: the difference between covenants is expressed. They might have said only "I will renew"; instead, unlike the former. Reminding them he took them by the hand enhances the sin of defection. The whole nation became covenant-breakers. He disregarded them: adoption once would profit nothing without this new remedy.

Common ground: not like Sinai-out-of-Egypt; they did not continue. Breach is the people's; the new kind of remedy is heart-inscription and mercy (vv. 10–12). First growing old already implied in "not according to."

This is the covenant: laws into minds, written on hearts; I will be their God, they my people. Wesley: after the Mosaic dispensation is abolished—I will open their eyes to the true spiritual meaning; write on hearts so they inwardly experience whatever I have commanded; God their all-sufficient portion; they his treasure, beloved, loving, obedient children.

Inward experience of the law is holiness of heart, not bare tablet religion. Shared with Reformed: God writes; we do not invent the inscription. Fork: Wesley stresses inward experience in the Israel of God; Calvin stresses effectual Spirit-engraving that overcomes stony inability. Both keep Jer 31 central.

Calvin: two main parts—gratuitous remission and inward renovation; illumination unto knowledge of God depends on the second. God calls without effect while he only speaks by man's voice; the heart is iron until softened; in vain the Law on stones unless written by his Spirit. Freewill before regeneration will not obey; God engraves his laws on hearts or the covenant is vain.

Shared: laws on minds and hearts; God/people bond. Effectual inscription by the Spirit, not merely clearer teaching left to native powers. Better promises include this divine writing—remedy for the old weakness.

They will not teach every man his neighbor "Know the Lord," for all will know me, from least to greatest. Wesley: those under this covenant shall not need that first lesson in the old sense; they shall all know me—all true Christians. Saving knowledge proceeds from least to greatest, not first to the nobles.

All true Christians know the Lord—membership marked by knowledge, not bare external Israel. Shared: universal knowledge within the covenant people. Teaching for progress remains; the Prophet targets ignorance of who God is. Perseverance fork sits near: Wesley's "true Christians" versus Calvin's elect household illuminated by the Spirit.

Calvin: third point included in putting laws in the mind—the Spirit illuminates so we know God's will and bends hearts to obedience. Right knowledge surpasses human comprehension; none attain it except by secret revelation of the Spirit. From least to greatest: grace on all ranks; rude not barred; nobles not climbing by acumen. The promise is peculiar to the Church—the household of faith. Fanatics wrongly abolish preaching; the Prophet denies ignorance, not pastoral teaching unto progress.

On this both agree: all shall know me within the covenant people. Effectual illumination of the elect church, not every hearer by nature.

For I will be merciful to their iniquities, and remember their sins and lawless deeds no more. Wesley: I will justify them, the root of all true knowledge of God. God's method: first a sinner is pardoned; then he knows God as gracious and merciful; then God's laws are written on his heart—he is God's, and God is his.

Common ground: mercy and non-remembrance of sins as new-covenant gift. Pardon → knowledge → heart-writing. Both camps refuse a covenant without forgiveness. Historic Jeremiah mercy; not a divine shrug. The once-for-all priest of ch. 7 secures this mercy.

Calvin: second particular—gratuitous pardon. God never so forms us but corrupt affections remain; without free forgiveness the covenant would have no stability. Pardon is promised not for one day only but to the end of life—daily reconciliation in Christ's kingdom. This is the only true asylum of faith.

On this both agree: merciful to iniquities; sins remembered no more. Perseverance of mercy for those in the covenant—ongoing pardon joined to heart-renovation—not a one-day amnesty. Better promises include sure propitiation through the Mediator.

In that he says, A new covenant, he has made the first obsolete; what grows aged is near to vanishing away. Wesley: in saying a new covenant he hath antiquated the first—shown it disannulled and out of date. That which is antiquated is near to vanishing away—as it did quickly after, when the temple was destroyed.

Shared close for both camps: first obsolete, aging, vanishing. Arminians hear temple judgment as the historical vanishing of the copy. Better covenant in Christ remains. Jer 31 has been central; Melchizedek was never the camp war—new covenant membership and heart-writing were. God speaks "new," and the first is antiquated.

Calvin: from establishing one covenant he infers subversion of the other; calling it old assumes abrogation—what is old tends to decay. If the whole Mosaic dispensation opposed to Christ has passed, ceremonies cease with it.

On this both agree: new makes first obsolete; growing old, ready to vanish. Accessory ceremonies fall with the old principal. The heavenly priest and better promises remain. First made obsolete—shared verdict—while camps differed above on how hearts are written and who "all" are that know the Lord.