Exegesis and Analysis of Hebrews 7:1-28

 I am utilizing the Reformed Puritan theologian John Owen's Exposition of  the Epistle to the Hebrews for my studies on this text, as well as the commentaries of William L. Lane (Word Biblical Commentary series) and John Gill. 

Hebrews 7 is a key text in debates about the sacrifice of the Mass. Romanists often cite the example of Melchizedek bringing bread and wine to prove that this is a type of the Roman Mass and that he offered the bread and wine as a sacrifice. 

The overall purpose and argument of this chapter is the superiority of Christ's priesthood over the Levitical Priesthood.

7:1 - "This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him"

Greek Text: Οὗτος γὰρ ὁ Μελχισέδεκ, βασιλεὺς Σαλήμ, ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου, ὁ συναντήσας Ἀβραὰμ ὑποστρέφοντι ἀπὸ τῆς κοπῆς τῶν βασιλέων καὶ εὐλογήσας αὐτόν,

"In the opening sentence the writer addresses two questions: (1) who was Melchizedek and (2) what significance is to be attached to his brief and enigmatic appearance to Abraham in primal history?" (William L. Lane)

Who exactly was Melchizedek? There are a number of different views as to the identity of this figure:

1) Some people have thought that Melchizedek was an angel. This was the view of some of the Qumran documents. Hebrews 5:1 ("every priest is taken from among men") seems to refute this idea, however. 

2) Others say that Melchizedek was the Son of God, a view which is so ridiculous that it needs no refutation.

3) Many of the Rabbinical Jewish texts view Melchizedek as the son of Shem, who was the son of Noah. This contradicts the fact that Melchizedek is "without father or mother". 

Melchizedek's name in Hebrew literally means "king of righteousness". He was the king of Salem, which is the name given to Jerusalem in Psalm 76:2. This lead many ancient Jewish scholars to view him as the king of Jerusalem at the time of Abraham (which I agree with).

It is certain that Melchizedek was not a priest by succession (as it was with the Aaronic priesthood), but rather he was called to be a priest immediately by God, thus making him a type of Christ in this regard (as he is in a couple other of points as well). 

7:2 - "and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace"

Greek Text: ᾧ καὶ δεκάτην ἀπὸ πάντων ἐμέρισεν Ἀβραάμ, πρῶτον μὲν ἑρμηνευόμενος βασιλεὺς δικαιοσύνης ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ βασιλεὺς Σαλήμ, ὅ ἐστιν βασιλεὺς εἰρήνης

"It was Abraham that gave the tenth of all to Melchisedec; whereby he acknowledged him to be the priest of the most high God, and the type of the Son of God as incarnate,—every way superior unto him, who had but newly received the promises. And the tenth which he gave was only of the spoils that he took from the enemies, as a token and pledge in particular that the victory and success which he had against the kings was from God." (John Owen)

Abraham's donation of the tenth of the spoils of war to Melchizedek was a sacerdotal act:

1) Giving the "tenth of all" is chiefly given to God, cf. Genesis 28:22.

2) The tenths given to Melchizedek were most likely what he offered in his sacrifice to God (not the bread and wine he brought, as Romanists think). 

This text shows that Melchizedek was the king of Jerusalem, then called Salem. He is called "king of peace" (shalom). The similar etymology of "Salem" and "Jerusalem" further confirms this point. 

7:3 - "He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever."

Greek Text: ἀπάτωρ ἀμήτωρ ἀγενεαλόγητος, μήτε ἀρχὴν ἡμερῶν μήτε ζωῆς τέλος ἔχων, ἀφωμοιωμένος δὲ τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, μένει ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸ διηνεκές.

When it says that Melchizedek had no genealogy, this does not mean he was born apart from sexual reproduction between a father and a mother. Rather, ἀγενεαλόγητος ("without genealogy") carries the idea of a genealogy that it not recorded or written down. 

This is a type of Christ's eternal pre-existence. The wisdom and sovereignty of God can be seen in this instance quite clearly.

"Wherefore it must be granted, as that which the plain design of the apostle exacteth of us, that Melchisedec even in these things in the story, —that he was "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life,"—was a type and representative of Christ. But it is not of the person of Christ absolutely, nor of either of his natures distinctly, that our apostle treateth, but merely with respect unto his office of priesthood." (John Owen)

What does the writer to the Hebrews mean when he writes that Melchizedek "continues a priest forever"?

It seems that he continues a priest forever, not in his own person, but in the person whom he (Melchizedek) represents (antitype), i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ. 

Here is a summary of a few of the similarities (for typology) between Melchizedek and Christ:

1) He was the king of righteousness (cf. Jer. 23:6) and the king of peace, as Christ is.

2) Melchizedek received the homage from his people, as Christ does. 

3) Touching his office of priesthood, Melchizedek was indeed without progenitors or successors, as Christ is in His eternal priesthood.

7:4 - "See how great this man was to whom Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth of the spoils!"

Greek Text: Θεωρεῖτε δὲ πηλίκος οὗτος, ᾧ [καὶ] δεκάτην Ἀβραὰμ ἔδωκεν ἐκ τῶν ἀκροθινίων ὁ πατριάρχης.

The writer of the Hebrews is beginning to apply the argument he has made in the previous verses.

7:5 - "And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, though these also are descended from Abraham."

Greek Text: καὶ οἱ μὲν ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν Λευὶ τὴν ἱερατείαν λαμβάνοντες ἐντολὴν ἔχουσιν ἀποδεκατοῦν τὸν λαὸν κατὰ τὸν νόμον, τοῦτ’ ἔστιν τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτῶν, καίπερ ἐξεληλυθότας ἐκ τῆς ὀσφύος Ἀβραάμ

The "commandment in the law to take tithes" is a reference to Numbers 18:20-26. 

7:6 - "But this man who does not have his descent from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises."

Greek Text: ὁ δὲ μὴ γενεαλογούμενος ἐξ αὐτῶν δεδεκάτωκεν Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τὸν ἔχοντα τὰς ἐπαγγελίας εὐλόγηκεν

"In the five following verses [verses 6-10] the apostle pursues and concludes that part of his argument, from the consideration of Melchisedec, which concerned the greatness and glory of Him who was represented by him, and his preeminence above the Levitical priests. For if Melchisedec, who was but a type of him, was in his own person in so many instances more excellent than they, how much more must He be esteemed to be above them who was represented by him? for he whom another is appointed to represent, must be more glorious than he by whom he is represented." (John Owen)

"This man" refers to Melchizedek. 

The writer to the Hebrews tells us two things about Melchizedek in order to demonstrate his greatness and dignity:

1) He received tithes from Abraham

2) He blessed him (Abraham)

The apostle here views Abraham's having of "the promises" as adding to his dignity. These promises probably refer to the ones given in Genesis 12:2-3; 13:15-16. 

7:7 - "It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior."

Greek Text: χωρὶς δὲ πάσης ἀντιλογίας τὸ ἔλαττον ὑπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος εὐλογεῖται

"Χωρὶς πάσης ἀντιλογίας." - "it is beyond dispute". The writer of Hebrews lays down this verse as a general indisputable argument for the greatness of Melchizedek over Abraham. 

τὸ ἔλαττον ὑπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος εὐλογεῖται - "the inferior is blessed by the superior" - This is the proposition or rule that is being modified to support the apostle's argument. 

There are four sorts of benedictions/blessings in use:

[1]. benedictio potestativa - "such a blessing as consists in an actual efficacious collation on, or communication of the matter of the blessing unto, the person blessed." (John Owen)

[2]. benedictio authoritativa - "This is when men, in the name, that is, by the appointment and warranty, of God, do declare any to be blessed, pronouncing the blessings unto them whereof they shall be made partakers" (John Owen)

[3]. benedictio charitativa - "This is, when one is said to bless another by praying for a blessing on him, or using the means whereby he may obtain a blessing." (John Owen) -- 1 Kings 8:14; Proverbs 30:11

[4]. benedictio reverentialis - "Hereof God is the object. So men are said often to "bless God," and to "bless his holy name:" which is mentioned in the Scripture as a signal duty of all that fear and love the Lord. Now this blessing of God is a declaration of his praises, with a holy, reverential, thankful admiration of his excellencies" (John Owen). This is obviously not the case 

It is the benedictio authoritativa that is contained in Melchizedek's blessing of Abraham, where the lesser is blessed by the greater.

7:8 - "In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives."

Greek Text: καὶ ὧδε μὲν δεκάτας ἀποθνῄσκοντες ἄνθρωποι λαμβάνουσιν, ἐκεῖ δὲ μαρτυρούμενος ὅτι ζῇ

This verses give a comparison between Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood. 

"In the one case tithes are received by mortal men..." - This refers to the Levitical priests.

"....but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives." - This refers to Melchizedek (cf. Psalm 110:4). 

"this may respect the silence of the Scripture concerning him, which gives no account of his death; and may be interpreted of the perpetuity of his priesthood" (John Gill)

The Levitical priesthood died out, but the priesthood Melchizedek lives on in the priesthood of Christ. 

7:9-10 - “One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, 10 for he was still in the lions of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.”

Greek Text: καὶ ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν, δι’ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Λευὶ ὁ δεκάτας λαμβάνων δεδεκάτωται· ἔτι γὰρ ἐν τῇ ὀσφύϊ τοῦ πατρὸς ἦν ὅτε συνήντησεν αὐτῷ Μελχισέδεκ

The apostle uses this to further prove that the priesthood of Melchizedek is superior to that of Levi. 

By “Levi”, it meant the posterity of Abraham, among whom were the Levites. 

“When Abraham himself gave tithes to Melchisedec, he did it not in his own name only, but in the name of himself and his whole posterity. And this, upon the principles before laid down and vindicated, proves the pre-eminence of the priesthood of Melchisedec above that of the house and family of Levi.” (John Owen)

The argument of the writer to the Hebrews is valid in light of the fact that Abraham had already recieved God’s promise to Him of future offspring.

One  difficult question discussed by the scholars and expositors of this text in Hebrews is this: If Levi can be said to have paid tithes in the loins of Abraham, could Christ have done the same thing? If so, this seems to defeat the argument of Hebrews 7 altogether.

“Augustine and others have well laboured in the solution of it. The sum of what they say is, that the Lord Christ was not in Abraham as Levi was, not in his nature as it was corrupted; nor did he educe or derive his nature from him by carnal generation, or the common way of the propagation of mankind. And these things do constitute a sufficient difference and distance between them in this matter. But yet with these considerations, and on the supposition of them, there is another which contains the true and proper reason of this difference. And that is, that the Lord Christ was never in Abraham as a federate, as one taken into covenant with him, and so represented by him, as Levi was. Abraham was taken into covenant with Christ, as the head, sponsor, surety, and mediator of the new covenant; with respect whereunto he says of himself and the elect, "Behold I and the children which the LORD hath given me." Hereon he was the representative of Abraham and all that believe, and what he did is imputed unto them. But he was never taken into covenant with Abraham, nor was capable of so being, seeing unto him it was a covenant of pardon and justification by faith, which He was no way concerned in but as the procurer of them for others. Wherefore what Abraham did cannot be imputed unto him, so as he should be esteemed to have done them in him. ” (John Owen)

7:11 - “Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?”

Greek Text: Εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς Λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν, ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπ’ αὐτῆς νενομοθέτηται, τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι

“Perfection” (τελείωσις) is the ultimate end and goal of the office of the priesthood (compare with the usages of the same word in John 17:23; 19:30; Ephesians 4:13; Colossians 1:28; Hebrews 12:2):

“That priesthood which perfects or consummates the people, in order unto their acceptance with God and future enjoyment of him, their present righteousness and future blessedness, is that which the church stands in need of, and cannot rest till it comes unto.” (John Owen)

 Any priesthood which does not get humans to this end, is flawed and imperfect by definition.

The things which would form a “perfect priesthood”, so to speak, would be things like righteousness (Psalm 72:7; Jeremiah 23:6), peace (Isaiah 9:5; 32:17; Romans 5:1; 14:17; Eph. 3:4-6), light, knowledge , liberty (Hebrews 4:16), expectation of future blessedness and acceptance with God, joy, confidence ,all of which were not attainable under the priesthood of Levi. The people of Israel themselves acted as though Levi’s priesthood and the Old Testament institutions of worship were not sufficient for attaining the above-mentioned things (Numbers 17:12-13). These things are only found in perfection in the priesthood of Melchizedek, i.e. Christ’s office as our great High Priest. 

7:12 - “For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.”

Greek Text: μετατιθεμένης γὰρ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐξ ἀνάγκης καὶ νόμου μετάθεσις γίνεται

The basic argument is that if the priesthood of Aaron is abolished, then the law of Moses will be abolished as well, due to the intimate relationship between the priesthood and the law. Without the priesthood, no sacrifices would be offered, and sacrifices were the primary liturgical institution of the Mosaic law.

7:13-14 - “For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.”

Greek Text: ἐφ’ ὃν γὰρ λέγεται ταῦτα, φυλῆς ἑτέρας μετέσχηκεν, ἀφ’ ἧς οὐδεὶς προσέσχηκεν τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ · πρόδηλον γὰρ ὅτι ἐξ Ἰούδα ἀνατέταλκεν ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν, εἰς ἣν φυλὴν περὶ ἱερέων οὐδὲν Μωϋσῆς ἐλάλησεν

"the one of whom these things are spoken" - this refers to Christ, not Melchizedek

"belonged to another tribe" - that is, the tribe of Judah.

"from which no one has ever served at the altar." - Nobody from the tribe of Judah ever offered the sacrifice. One might try to cite the example of Uzzah, however he had no right to the altar.

7:15-17 - "This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek,  who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. For it is witnessed of him, 'You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.'"

Greek Text: καὶ περισσότερον ἔτι κατάδηλόν ἐστιν, εἰ κατὰ τὴν ὁμοιότητα Μελχισέδεκ ἀνίσταται ἱερεὺς ἕτερος,

ὃς οὐ κατὰ νόμον ἐντολῆς σαρκίνης γέγονεν ἀλλὰ κατὰ δύναμιν ζωῆς ἀκαταλύτου. μαρτυρεῖται γὰρ ὅτι - σὺ ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ.

The apostle is here showing the necessity of the Levitical priesthood being abolished. 

Verse 16 shows the means by which this priest arose, expressing it in both negative and positive terms: negatively in that he is not a priest according to filial succession, and positively in that he is a priest on the basis of "the power of an indestructible life."

What is the "indestructible life" spoken of in verse 16? Two main views present themselves to us: 1) the life given to believers by Christ, or 2) the life that Christ has in and of Himself.

I personally agree with the latter interpretation for a few reasons:

1. It is circular reasoning and contrary to the nature of a priesthood to be a priest on the basis of the benefits of the priesthood given to others.

2. Scripture portrays Christ as having life in Himself (John 5:26-27).

7:18-19 - "For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God."

Greek Text: ἀθέτησις μὲν γὰρ γίνεται προαγούσης ἐντολῆς διὰ τὸ αὐτῆς ἀσθενὲς καὶ ἀνωφελές–οὐδὲν γὰρ ἐτελείωσεν ὁ νόμος– ἐπεισαγωγὴ δὲ κρείττονος ἐλπίδος δι’ ἧς ἐγγίζομεν τῷ θεῷ

The law (especially concerning the priests and sacrifices) is weak in the following respects:

[1]. The ceremonial animal sacrifices could not obtain forgiveness for the sins of the people.

[2]. After the coming of the Lord Jesus, the law is now effectively useless in terms of leading sinners to salvation and acceptance with God.

It might be asked: if the law was imperfect and weak, then why did God institute in the first place? Here is Dr. Owen's response to this important question:

" 1) Mankind having wofully prevaricated and apostatized from God, it was just and equal that they should not be at once re-instated, in their reparation. The suddenness of it might have taken off from its greatness...2) That people unto whom the law was peculiarly to be given, and by whom God would accomplish his further design, were a stubborn, earthy, hard-hearted people, that stood in need of a yoke to burden and subdue them unto the will of God.....3) God had designed that the Lord Christ should in all things have the pre-eminence. " (John Owen)

Under the Old Covenant, the Levitical priests drew near (Heb. qarab) to God. Under the New Testament dispensation, believers have access to God through Christ (Ephesians 2:18; Hebrews 7:25; 1 Timothy 2:15).

"For as, by the law of old, the priests in the solemn worship of the church did draw nigh to God in those visible pledges of his presence which he had appointed; and this they did by virtue of the Aaronical priesthood and the law of its institution, which was the utmost that could be attained in their imperfect state; so now, upon the introduction of "the better hope," and by virtue thereof, believers in all their solemn worship do draw nigh unto God himself, and find acceptance with him. " (John Owen)

7:20-22: "And it was not without an oath. For those who formerly became priests were made such without an oath, but this one was made a priest with an oath by the one who said to him: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever.’” This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant."

Greek Text: Καὶ καθ’ ὅσον οὐ χωρὶς ὁρκωμοσίας· οἱ μὲν γὰρ χωρὶς ὁρκωμοσίας εἰσὶν ἱερεῖς γεγονότες, ὁ δὲ μετὰ ὁρκωμοσίας διὰ τοῦ λέγοντος πρὸς αὐτόν·ὤμοσεν κύριος καὶ οὐ μεταμεληθήσεται·σὺ ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.κατὰ τοσοῦτο [καὶ] κρείττονος διαθήκης γέγονεν ἔγγυος Ἰησοῦς.

Here is the basic structure of these three verses:

1) A new proposition intended for confirming the argument. (v. 20)

2) A proof/illustration of this point. (v. 21)

3) An inference from the point that has been proven (v. 22)

Since God has confirmed Christ's priesthood with an oath, something which he did not do under the Levitical priesthood, this shows that Christ's priesthood is superior to the Aaronic priesthood.

7:23-24 "The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever."

Greek Text: Καὶ οἱ μὲν πλείονές εἰσιν γεγονότες ἱερεῖς διὰ τὸ θανάτῳ κωλύεσθαι παραμένειν· ὁ δὲ διὰ τὸ μένειν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ἀπαράβατον ἔχει τὴν ἱερωσύνην

The ongoing succession of the Levitical priests is an evidence of their imperfection (cf. Numbers 20:25-29). Even the Jews grant that the ongoing change in the priesthood under the Second Temple Period is an evidence of God's displeasure with them.

The Jews themselves knew the Messiah would be an everlasting priest (John 12:34).

The Romanists rightly view this passage as a difficulty to their position of their being present priests in their "church". One way they try to escape this difficulty is by saying that their priests are not successors of Christ in His priesthood in the absolute sense, but rather His vicars/representatives on earth. This proposition fails for the following reasons:

"(1.) This is directly contrary unto the words and design of the apostle. For the reason he assigns why the priesthood of Christ doth not pass from him unto any other, is, because he abides himself for ever to discharge the office of it. Now this excludes all subordination and conjunction, all vicars as well as successors; unless we shall suppose, that although he doth thus abide, yet is he one way or other disenabled to discharge his office. (2.) The successors of Aaron had no more another priesthood but what he had, than it is pretended that the Roman priests have no other priesthood but what Christ had. Nor did they offer any other sacrifice than what he offered; as these priests pretend to offer the same sacrifice that Christ did. So that still the case is the same between Aaron and his successors, and Christ and his substitutes." (John Owen)

7:25 - "Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them."

Greek Text: ὅθεν καὶ σῴζειν εἰς τὸ παντελὲς δύναται τοὺς προσερχομένους δι’ αὐτοῦ τῷ θεῷ, πάντοτε ζῶν εἰς τὸ ἐντυγχάνειν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν.

The writer to the Hebrews is applying His previous argument in order to show how Christ's priesthood is a source of comfort and strength for the church.

"There are in the words, 1. The illative conjunction, or note of inference, "wherefore." 2. An ascription of power unto this high priest; "he is able." 3. The end of that power, or the effect of it; it is "to save:" which is further described, (1.) By the extent of it; it is "unto the uttermost:" (2.) The especial object of it; "those that come to God by him." 4. The reasons of the whole: which are, (1.) His perpetual life: (2.) His perpetual work; "he ever liveth to make intercession for them." (John Owen)

Christ is able to save to the uttermost, due to His eternal priesthood. 

Christ's intercession is foreshadowed in the OT in the following ways:

[1]. The fire that was continually burned on the altar was a type of His prayers (cf. Hebrews 5:7) 

[2]. The daily morning sacrifice (Exodus 29:38-42)

[3]. By the incense that was continually burned in the sanctuary. The incense is a type of prayer (cf. Psalm 141:2; Luke 1:9-10)

7:26 - "For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens."

Greek Text: Τοιοῦτος γὰρ ἡμῖν καὶ ἔπρεπεν ἀρχιερεύς, ὅσιος ἄκακος ἀμίαντος, κεχωρισμένος ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν καὶ ὑψηλότερος τῶν οὐρανῶν γενόμενος,

The apostle here shows what kind of priest was necessary for sinners to have access unto God, namely one who is "holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens." (cf. 1 Peter 1:19)

7:27 - "He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself."

Greek Text: ὃς οὐκ ἔχει καθ’ ἡμέραν ἀνάγκην, ὥσπερ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς, πρότερον ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων ἁμαρτιῶν θυσίας ἀναφέρειν ἔπειτα τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ· τοῦτο γὰρ ἐποίησεν ἐφάπαξ ἑαυτὸν ἀνενέγκας

There are two main differences between the Levitical priests and Christ proposed here in this text:

[1]. The frequency of the offerings - the Levitical priests had to offer sacrifices "daily" whereas Christ offered Himself once. 

[2]. The Levitical priests had to offer sacrifices for their own sins first, whereas Christ did not, since He was sinless (v. 26). 

This text further refutes the mass of the Papists:

"So our apostle affirms expressly, that if the sacrifices of the law could have made perfect them that came to God by them, or given them perfect peace with God, they would have ceased to be offered. And so it would be with the sacrifice of the mass. Only by the one offering of Christ they are perfected, as to peace with God, for whom he offered." (John Owen) 

7:28 - "For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever."

Greek Text: ὁ νόμος γὰρ ἀνθρώπους καθίστησιν ἀρχιερεῖς ἔχοντας ἀσθένειαν, ὁ λόγος δὲ τῆς ὁρκωμοσίας τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον υἱὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον.

"The word of the oath" refers to Psalm 110:4.