Hebreus 9:4

Having a golden censer. — Or, having a golden altar of incense. Hardly any passage in the Epistle has given rise to more controversy than this; and even now opinions are greatly divided. The question raised does not merely concern the interpretation of a single verse, but has been brought into prominence in all recent discussions as to the authorship of the Epistle. It will be possible to notice all important points in the controversy without entering into any discussion of the Greek, for it is allowed on both sides that the word here used — thumiaterion (which simply means an instrument or a place connected with the offering of incense) — will admit of either rendering. The usage of the LXX., in most cases peculiarly helpful in this Epistle, throws little light on the matter; for this word is entirely absent from the descriptions in the Pentateuch, and occurs twice only in later books (Ezequiel 8:11; 2 Crônicas 26:19 — both times for “censer”). The Pentateuch, indeed, makes no mention of a special censer for the use of the high priest on the Day of Atonement (Levítico 16:12); but, as we learn from the Mishna, the later law not only prescribed a censer of gold, but laid stress on the particular kind of gold. On the other hand, in Philo and Josephus the word here used is the regular designation of the altar of incense. That altar, it is true, was not of gold, only overlaid with gold; but as one of its names in common use was “the golden altar” (Êxodo 40:5, et al.) this point is of no moment. If we look at internal probabilities, it is hard to decide which would be more surprising — the special mention of the censer (by the side of the ark and the cherubim) in this description of the Most Holy Place, or the absence of all notice of the incense-altar, which held so important a place in connection with the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement. Hence, though “censer” has (mainly through the influence of the Vulgate) been the more familiar rendering, the most eminent modern commentators have, with some marked exceptions, adopted the other view. Probably there would be little difference of opinion on the question, were it not that the words here used seem to assign to the altar of incense a place within the veil. As, however, there are the strongest reasons for believing that the golden censer was not kept in the Holiest Place, this difficulty applies almost equally to both interpretations. At first sight the difficulty is very great. The incense-altar and the ark are coupled together, and the word which describes their relation to the Holiest Place is that which, a little later in this verse, distinctly signifies “containing.” So weighty is this consideration that many have been unable to avoid the conclusion that the writer has erred in this matter of detail; and various suppositions have been resorted to in explanation of his mistake. (See Introduction.) But, to take the lowest ground, surely ignorance on such a point is inconceivable. Not only are the notices in Exodus perfectly plain, but passages in Philo and Josephus show how customary in the writer’s own age it was to speak of the three sacred objects in the Holy Place — the candlestick, the table, and the golden altar. There must exist some special reason for this connection of the altar with the Most Holy Place — a connection which (we may well believe) would have been otherwise expressed had the writer held it possible that readers, familiar with the facts, could regard his language as even ambiguous. Such a reason will be found to be suggested by the language of the Pentateuch, and by the ceremonial of the Day of Atonement. In Êxodo 30:6, Moses receives special injunction to place the altar of incense “before the veil that is by the ark of the testimony, before the mercy seat that is over the testimony;” similarly in Êxodo 40:5. The purification of this altar is most expressly associated with the purification of the Holiest Place on the Day of Atonement: this stands out in strong relief both in the Pentateuch (see Êxodo 30:10; Levítico 16:18) and in the Mishna. The typical significance of the altar of incense (comp. Apocalipse 8:3; Apocalipse 9:13) we might also show to be in full harmony with the thought here presented. There is, however, one passage in the Old Testament (1 Reis 6:22) which appears to give direct expression to what these other passages imply; for there the true translation must be, “also the whole altar that belongeth to the oracle he overlaid with gold.”[10]

[10] Some interesting remarks on this passage will be found in a paper by Dr. Milligan in the Bible Educator (vol. iii., p. 230). His suggestion is that the writer, having in mind the Day of Atonement, sees the Tabernacle with its inner veil withdrawn.

Ark of the covenant (Números 10:33; Deuteronômio 31:26, et al.), often called “the ark of the testimony,” i.e., the ark containing the tables of the Ten Commandments, which were the symbol of the covenant of God with the people. (See Êxodo 25:10.)

Wherein was... — Rather, wherein are (see Hebreus 9:2) a golden pot having the manna, &c. In Êxodo 16:33, and Números 17:10, the pot containing “an omer of manna” and also Aaron’s rod are said to have been laid up “before the testimony.” This is often understood as meaning “before the ark of the testimony;” but it is as natural to suppose that these memorials were placed inside the ark, in front of the tables. 1 Reis 8:9 clearly suggests that the ark had at one time contained more than the tables of stone, and so it has been understood by Jewish commentators. There is no mention of a “golden” vessel in the Hebrew of Êxodo 16:33; the word is added in the LXX. It will be observed that this epithet is mentioned three times in the verse: such splendour was natural in the sanctuary “of this world” (Hebreus 9:1).