Hebrews 8:4 Shows The Levitical Priesthood & Sacrifices Legitimately Continued After Christ's Crucifixion

Scripture Says Sacrifices Continued After Christ

Hebrews 8:1-5 8:1 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. NKJV

The This verse is talking about Christ's High Priesthood but notice VERY CAREFULLY what it says.

4 For if he (Christ) were on earth, he should NOT be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

Firstly it says if Christ was on earth today He would not be a priest. Hebrews 7: goes to great lengths to validate that indeed Christ is our High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. That is true. It is incontrovertible. Look through as many commentaries on the book of Hebrews as you like and they'll all say pretty much the same thing, that Christ either is a type of Melchizedek or that He was Melchizedek.

But since Hebrews 8:4 says if Christ was on earth He would not be a priest where is Jesus Christ our Melchizedek High Priest? The answer's in verse 1 of the same chapter.

Hebrews 8:1 We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

Jesus Christ is a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek as he sits on the right hand of the throne of God the Father in heaven.

So let's read Hebrews 8 verse 4 again and then move onto verse 5: where it adds some more detail.

4 For if he (Christ) were on earth, He should not be a priest, seeing that there are (notice that, are, not were) .priests that offer ( not offered, but offer, present tense) . gifts (that is sacrifices) according to the law: :5 Who serve (not served but serve - present tense - serving after Christ's sacrifice) unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

or if you like...

4 for if, indeed, he were upon earth, he would not be a priest—(there being the priests who are offering according to the law, the gifts, 5 who unto an example and shadow do serve of the heavenly things, as Moses hath been divinely warned, being about to construct the tabernacle, for ‘See (saith He) thou mayest make all things according to the pattern that was shewn to thee in the mount;’) —Young's Literal Translation

The pattern shown to Moses in the mount represented what happened to some extent in heaven. It appears that the Levitical ordinances were a type (or as it says here an example and shadow) of the original heavenly original where Christ is now the High Priest. So very clearly at the time that the author of Hebrews is writing, which is believed by many to be in the 60s AD, (some thirty years after Christ's death), the author says that Christ's High Priesthood is a heavenly High Priesthood that the Levitical priesthood, was an earthly example and shadow of it.

So does the fact that it's an example and shadow mean that its done away with?

Arguably not necessarily.

And if it was, then why did sacrifices continue after Christ's crucifixion?

Actually we read nothing here that says the role of the Levitical priesthood was invalid even thirty years after Christ's sacrifice and resurrection. In fact we read in Hebrews 8:4 exactly the opposite; that they continued to offer gifts/sacrifices.

Not disimilarly a few pages earlier in Hebrews 7:5 we also read:

Hebrews 7:5 And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham; NKJV

...or from Young's Literal Translation:

5 and those, indeed, out of the sons of Levi receiving the priesthood, a command have to take tithes from the people according to the law, that is, their brethren, even though they came forth out of the loins of Abraham;

Why is the author of Hebrews using the present tense in cases like this, if he believes the Levitical priesthood has been "done away"?

Arguably the use of the present tense in these scriptures in Hebrews appears to agree with what the Protestant commentaries say about Paul keeping Nazarite vows and Paul sponsoring Nazirite vows and therefore offering animal sacrifices long after the New Covenant was established.

Does they not?

Return to the start of Paul's Post Crucifixion Temple Sacrifices a Judianity website ?
© www.pauls-post-crucifixion-temple-sacrifices.info March 2006.

In Galatians, does Paul really say the Torah law, given by God to Moses, was "done away"? Certainly in Acts even one small & predictable change to an "Old Testament" law about the circumcision of gentile proselytes caused massive turmoil in the predominantly Jewish first century church. Why then, isn't there any comparable tension recorded if most of the other Old Testament laws were "done away"?