In chapter five of Paul’s letter to the Hebrews, he continues to show how Jesus measures up to those highly esteemed in the Jewish faith. Jesus is better than angels (Hebrews 1:4-14), has more authority and is more effective than Moses (Hebrews 3:1-6), and now Paul tells his readers that Jesus is a greater High Priest than those who serve in the Temple at Jerusalem. Indeed, he is greater than Aaron, himself. The problem is that the Jews of the first century had become so formal in their worship that they worshiped for worship’s sake alone. They no longer understood why they did the things they did. Like the joke that must be explained and is, therefore, no longer funny, worship without understanding isn’t worship at all.
According to Hebrews 5:1, high priests are taken from among men and appointed to represent men in the things that pertain to God. However, unless this statement is made to show angels were never made high priests or any other class of beings that might be superior to men, the statement seems unnecessary. If it is made to specifically show only men are chosen to that office, that would be obvious. So, why isn’t there something stated to explain why such a statement was made? I believe Paul’s statement refers to specific men, a group of men taken out of mankind. I believe it refers to the fact the high priest was appointed from among his brethren, the Levites, and specifically from among the sons of Aaron (cf. Leviticus 21:10). So, men in Hebrews 5:1 refers to Levites and the sons of Aaron in particular.
The high priest wasn’t elected to his office by a popular vote. Neither did he seize his office by force. Rather, Aaron was appointed to the office of high priest by the Lord (Exodus 28:1; Numbers 17:1-13; 18:1-3). Therefore, according to the ordinance of the Lord, only the Levites served in the Tabernacle, and of the Levites only the sons of Aaron were priests, with Aaron as the chief or high priest,[1] and he served the Lord in matters pertaining to God.
Several of the princes of Israel rose up to challenge Aaron’s appointment to be the high priest (Numbers 16:1-3). Many in Israel felt Moses and Aaron merely assumed leadership of the people. Nevertheless, this was not so, as we can conclude from the Scriptures above. Concerning those men who challenged Moses and Aaron, saying they were not appointed by the Lord, but rather seized their high authority by force, the Lord judged them and slew them and all the people who supported them in their rebellion against the authority that was given to his two servants (Numbers 16:5-10, 17-20, 28-33).
According to Hebrews 3:1, Paul told his readers that Jesus was the believer’s High Priest and Apostle of our profession. Our profession of faith is that Jesus is the Messiah (Matthew 16:16), our Apostle, that is, our Representative, who has gone out from among us to appear before the Lord. Yet, in an even greater sense he is the Lord’s High Priest, Messiah and Apostle. He is the Apostle of God, because he was sent out from the Father to reveal the Father to men (John 5:23, 30, 36-37; 16:27; cf. John 1:18). Moreover, he is also the Lord’s Messiah, because the Father had declared him to be his Son (i.e. the Messiah), when he raised him from the dead (Acts 13:33; cf. Hebrews 1:5), and at that same time he was appointed by God to be the High Priest in that he raised him from the dead (Hebrews 5:5), just as he caused Aaron’s rod to bud and bear almonds (Numbers 17:1-13; 18:1-3).
Obviously, Jesus wasn’t taken from the same stock as other high priests were taken, namely, Jesus was not of the tribe of Levi. Rather he was of the tribe of Judah (Hebrews 7:14), so neither could he have been a ‘son’ of Aaron. So, how could Jesus have become our High Priest? I intend to speak to this issue in later studies, but suffice to say for the present, that, just as God had appointed Aaron (Exodus 28:1; Numbers 17:1-13; 18:1-3), so he appointed Jesus (Acts 13:33; Hebrews 5:5-6). Moreover, it had been prophesied long ago that the priesthood of Aaron would be replaced. In the days of Samuel, the prophet, when he was but a child, a prophet came to Eli, the high priest, saying Eli’s priesthood was rejected by God. In fact, the whole priesthood stemming from Aaron was rejected in favor of a new priest, whom God would choose (1Samuel 2:27-36).[2]
[1] Aaron’s first born would have succeeded him to the office of high priest, according to the inheritance instructions of the Law. Later the kings, David and Solomon would assume power over the priesthood, organizing them into 24 courses (1Chronicles 24:1-19), and even the right to appoint the high priest, but neither of them assumed the right to appear before God and perform the duty of the priest, nor did they appoint any man priest who was not among Aaron’s sons (cf. 1Chronicles 24:30-31; 1Kings 2:26-27; 1Chronicles 29:22). When Uzziah, the King of Judah, assumed the office of high priest for himself, he was struck with leprosy from the Lord (2Chronicles 26:16-22).
[2] See my study: Jesus and Samuel the Prophet.
Smoodock's Blog 