Hebrews 8:7
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Original Language Analysis
γὰρ
For
G1063
γὰρ
For
Strong's:
G1063
Word #:
2 of 12
properly, assigning a reason (used in argument, explanation or intensification; often with other particles)
ἡ
G3588
ἡ
Strong's:
G3588
Word #:
3 of 12
the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in english idiom)
ἐκείνη
that
G1565
ἐκείνη
that
Strong's:
G1565
Word #:
5 of 12
that one (or (neuter) thing); often intensified by the article prefixed
δευτέρας
for the second
G1208
δευτέρας
for the second
Strong's:
G1208
Word #:
10 of 12
(ordinal) second (in time, place, or rank; also adverb)
Cross References
Hebrews 7:11If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?Hebrews 7:18For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.Galatians 3:21Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.Hebrews 8:6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
Historical Context
Jeremiah 31:31-34, written c. 600 BC, promised a new covenant long before Christ. This prophecy indicated God's dissatisfaction with the old covenant arrangement from within the OT itself, so the new covenant isn't a New Testament innovation but OT expectation.
Questions for Reflection
- What 'fault' in the old covenant required a new one, and how does the new covenant remedy it?
- How does God's plan for a new covenant from the beginning demonstrate His sovereignty in redemption?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
If the first covenant 'had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.' This logical argument demonstrates the first covenant's inadequacy. The fault wasn't in God's law itself but in its inability to transform hearts and permanently remove sin. The very prediction of a new covenant (Jeremiah 31) proves God planned to replace the old. Reformed covenant theology sees this as progressive revelation, not contradiction.