Hebrews 9:20

Saying, this is the blood of the testament,.... The first testament or covenant; this proves what the apostle had asserted in Heb 9:18 that it was dedicated with blood, or confirmed by it; compare with this Mat 26:28 which God hath enjoined unto you; the people of Israel, to observe, and which they promised to do; see Exo 24:7.

The Greek "diathece" means both "testament" and "covenant": the term "covenant" better suits the old dispensation, though the idea testament is included, for the old was one in its typical relation to the new dispensation, to which the term "testament" is better suited. Christ has sealed the testament with His blood, of which the Lord's Supper is the sacramental sign.

[The original title of this sermon was The Blood of the Testament.. THE Apostle declares that whenever God has entered into covenant with man it has not been without the shedding of blood. To a covenant a sacrifice and to a testament a death was evidently necessary. It was so when the arrangements of Israelite worship were first published and established in the wilderness. Paul says, "Neither the first testament was dedicated without blood."

[The original title of this sermon was The Blood of the Testament.. THE Apostle declares that whenever God has entered into covenant with man it has not been without the shedding of blood. To a covenant a sacrifice and to a testament a death was evidently necessary. It was so when the arrangements of Israelite worship were first published and established in the wilderness. Paul says, "Neither the first testament was dedicated without blood." He probably had in his mind's eye the 24th chapter of the book of Exodus where we read that after the tribes had entered into covenant with God and promised to keep His Law, Moses, "sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the Lord. And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And He took the Book of the Covenant and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord has said will we do and be obedient. And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people and said, Behold the blood of the Covenant which the Lord has made with you concerning all these words." As it was in the old dispensation so is it in the new—there could be no Divine Covenant, even though it was of Grace, without the shedding of blood. Inasmuch as the new Covenant was not the type, but the substance, a more precious sacrifice was needed and nobler blood than any which is found in the veins of bulls or of goats. Jesus, the Son of God must die, or the Covenant would be unsealed, the testament without force. No Covenant blessing comes to us apart from the death of our great Sacrifice, for "without shedding of blood is no remission," and remission is one of the earliest of the gifts of Divine Grace.

[Another Sermon by Mr. Spurgeon, upon verse 20 is #1567, Volume 26—THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT.] Blood is always a terrible thing. It makes a sensitive mind shudder even to pronounce the word. But to look upon the thing, itself, causes a thrill of horror. Although by familiarity men shake this off, for the seeing of the eyes and the hearing of the ears can harden the heart, the instinct of a little child may teach you what is natural to us in reference to blood.

[Another Sermon by Mr. Spurgeon, upon verse 20 is #1567, Volume 26—THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT.] Blood is always a terrible thing. It makes a sensitive mind shudder even to pronounce the word. But to look upon the thing, itself, causes a thrill of horror. Although by familiarity men shake this off, for the seeing of the eyes and the hearing of the ears can harden the heart, the instinct of a little child may teach you what is natural to us in reference to blood. How it will worry if its finger bleeds ever so little—shocked at the sight, even if there is actually no pain! I envy not the man whose pity would not stir to see a sparrow bleed or a lamb wantonly put to pain. And as for the cruel man, I shudder at the thought of his depravity. What exquisite pain it must have caused our first parent—how keenly it must have touched the fine sensibilities of their nature—to have had to offer sacrifice! Probably they had never seen death until they brought their first victim to the altar of God. Blood! Ah, how they must have shuddered as they saw the warm life-fluid flowing forth from the innocent victim. It must have seemed to them to be a very horrible thing and, very properly so, for God intended them to feel their feelings outraged. He meant them to take to heart the anguish of the victim and learn, with many a shudder, what a destructive and killing thing sin was! He meant them to see before their eyes a commentary upon His threat—"In the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die." He meant Adam and Eve to witness the harrowing appearance as the sentence upon sin was executed, stabbing at the very heart of life, convulsing all the frame, sealing up the senses and leaving behind but a wreck of the beautiful creature and not a relic of happiness for it in the world.

This is the blood of the testament - (covenant.) Our Lord refers to the conduct of Moses here, and partly quotes his words in the institution of the eucharist: This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins, Mat 26:28. And by thus using the words and applying them, he shows that his sacrificial blood was intended by the blood shed and sprinkled on this occasion, and that by it alone the remission of sins is obtained.

Saying, This is the blood of the testament - Of the covenant; see notes on Heb 9:16-17. That is, this is the blood by which the covenant is ratified. It was the means used to confirm it; the sacred and solemn form by which it was made sure. When this was done, the covenant between God and the people was confirmed - as a covenant between man and man is when it is sealed. Which God hath enjoined unto you - In Exo 24:8, “which God hath made with you.” The language used by Paul, “which God hath enjoined” - ἐνετείλατο eneteilato - “commanded” - shows that he did not regard this as strictly of the nature of a “covenant,” or “compact.” When a compact is made between parties, one does not “enjoin” or “command” the other, but it is a mutual “agreement.” In the transactions between God and man, though called בּרית beriyt, or διαθήκη diathēkē, the idea of a “covenant” or “compact” is so far excluded that God never loses his right to “command” or “enjoin.” It is not a transaction between equals, or an “agreement;” it is a solemn “arrangement” on the part of God which he proposes to mankind, and which he enjoins them to embrace; which they are not indeed at liberty to disregard, but which when embraced is appropriately ratified by some solemn act on their part; compare notes on Heb 8:6.