The Apostle Paul uses language equally explicit in Eph. v. 2:—“And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, _and given Himself for us_, _an offering_ and a _sacrifice to God_, of a _sweet smelling savour_.” {46} Having thus shown how, on the _principles_ of the _priesthood of Aaron_, the Lord Jesus had proved Himself to be a priest, although of the higher and more perfect order of Melchisedec—the order of righteousness and peace, and everlasting endurance—this epistle points out in a very conclusive manner the defects of the Mosaic institutions, which were enjoined for a time only, to prepare the way, and lead up to the enduring realities of the Gospel of Christ. And here we cannot but notice again how completely the Christian mind of the author had passed from all the Jewish prejudices and predilections of his former training, to regard everything in the light and spirit of Christ; while far from disregarding or repudiating that which he showed to be past, worn out, and abolished, he draws from it his most powerful arguments in favour of the New Covenant as required to complete the first, by making good its typical meaning, and securing to all who had passed from earth to heaven under the provisions of the Law, those blessings which they had already entered on, upon the promise of the sacrifice of Christ to come. “For the Law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God” (Heb. vii. 19). That better hope is stated to be the “blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God,” purging our conscience, &c. (Heb. ix. 13, 14) “For the Law having a shadow (or shadowing forth) of good things to come, and not the very image (or substance and reality) of the things, can never by those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect” (Heb. x. 1). It was “therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens, should be purified with these, {48a} but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices {48b} than these” (Heb. ix. 23). The passage last quoted follows verse 22, which declares, “without shedding of blood is no remission” (See also Lev. xvii. 11). But if it was impossible that the blood shed under the law of Moses (Heb. x. 4), should take away sins, it is evident that other blood _must be_ shed of which that was typical, and which should be effectual for the purpose, agreeably to Heb. ix. 15, referring to Christ; “For this cause He is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first Testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” In the former sacrifices there was a remembrance again made of sins every year (Heb. x. 3). But after the one Sacrifice for ever it is said, “their sins and iniquities will I remember no more” (x. 17).