Hebrews 7:13 · Bible study
Hebrews 7:13 Commentary: Priest from Another Tribe
Greek · 11 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
How can Jesus be a legitimate priest from the tribe of Judah? Hebrews 7:13 shows that His priesthood requires a change in the Law.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Jesus, coming from Judah, cannot serve as a Levitical priest, proving the priesthood must change.
- Key words: φυλῆς ἑτέρας, another (different) tribe; μετέσχηκεν, has partaken (perfect tense, permanent sharing); προσέσχηκεν, has served (perfect, no past or present service from Judah).
- Main debate: Little debate; the verse is taken as straightforward evidence for the change of priesthood.
- Theological theme: The supersession of the old covenant and the inauguration of a better priesthood through Christ.
- Best use: Teaching Christ’s superiority over the Levitical system and the grounding of the new covenant.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar.
WEB World English Bible 2000
For he of whom these things are said belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar.
KJV King James Version 1769
For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
For he of whom these things are said belongeth to another tribe, from which no man hath given attendance at the altar.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
for he of whom these things are said in another tribe hath had part, of whom no one gave attendance at the altar,
Darby Darby Bible 1890
For he, of whom these things are said, belongs to a different tribe, of which no one has [ever] been attached to the service of the altar.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
For he of whom these things are spoken is of another tribe, of which no one attended on the altar.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Porque aquel del cual esto se dice, de otra tribu es, de la cual nadie asistió al altar.
Porque aquele de quem estas coisas são ditas pertence a outra tribo, da qual ninguém serviu ao altar;
En effet, celui de qui ces choses sont dites appartient à une autre tribu, dont aucun membre n’ a fait le service de l’ autel;
Denn von dem solches gesagt ist, der ist von einem andern Geschlecht, aus welchem nie einer des Altars gewartet hat.
Want Hij, op Wien deze dingen gezegd worden, behoort tot een anderen stam, van welken niemand zich tot het altaar begeven heeft.
Difatti, colui a proposito del quale queste parole son dette, ha appartenuto a un’altra tribù, della quale nessuno s’è accostato all’altare;
Bo ten, o którym się to mówi, inszego jest pokolenia, z którego żaden nie służył ołtarzowi.
Ибо Тот, о Котором говорится сие, принадлежал к иному колену, из которого никто не приступал к жертвеннику.
因為 這 話 所指的 人 本屬 別的 支派，那支派 裡 從來沒有一人 伺候 祭壇。
For he of whom these things are said comes of another tribe, of which no man has ever made offerings at the altar.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · Hebrews 7:13
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators uniformly identify “he of whom these things are spoken” as Jesus Christ, the one addressed in Psalm 110:4. Barnes states that the apostle assumes this as settled. Clarke confirms that Jesus came from Judah, not Levi, making it impossible for Him to serve as a Levitical priest. Gill notes that Uzziah’s attempt to do so (2 Chronicles 26) was punished. The perfect tense of μετέσχηκεν (“has partaken,” G3348) indicates a permanent sharing in humanity, according to Jamieson-Fausset-Brown. Vincent adds that ἑτέρας (G2087) means “a different tribe,” one not set apart for priestly service. The unanimous conclusion: a change in the law of priesthood was necessary (Hebrews 7:12).
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: Jesus was born into the tribe of Judah, which had no legal role in the Levitical altar service, so His priesthood requires a change in the Law.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Identity of 'he of whom these things are spoken' | All called commentators refer this to Jesus Christ, the subject of Psalm 110:4. | None; the identification is unanimous. |
| Jesus' tribal origin | Jesus is from the tribe of Judah, not Levi, as stated in Hebrews 7:14. | No debate; this is an established fact used in the argument. |
| Necessity of a change in the law | Because Jesus is from Judah, the Levitical priesthood cannot continue as before; a change in law is required (Heb. 7:12). | Some within the Jewish Christian community may have resisted this conclusion, but the author presents it as inevitable. |
| Force of the perfect tense | The perfect tense verbs indicate a past act with continuing significance. | No substantive disagreement among the commentaries on this point. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The Law of Moses reserved priestly service exclusively for the tribe of Levi. Numbers 16:40 records a memorial that “no stranger who isn’t of the offspring of Aaron” could burn incense. Deuteronomy 10:8 describes the Levites being set apart to stand before Yahweh and minister. This restriction was well known to the original readers of Hebrews, many of whom were Jewish Christians still attached to the temple system.
The tribe of Judah had no role at the altar. The most famous violation came from King Uzziah, who entered the temple to burn incense and was struck with leprosy (2 Chronicles 26:16, 21). His story served as a cautionary tale: even a king could not cross the boundary.
Into this rigid structure comes Jesus, from the tribe of Judah. The author uses the perfect tense in προσέσχηκεν (“has served,” G4337) to emphasize that no one from Judah had ever, and still never had, attended the altar. The perfect tense also appears in μετέσχηκεν, stressing that Christ’s taking on humanity from Judah is an ongoing reality. The logic is straightforward: if the Messiah is from Judah, the Levitical system must give way. Verse 12 had already stated, “the priesthood being changed, there is of necessity a change also in the law.” This verse grounds that change in Jesus’ actual tribal identity.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The manuscript tradition is stable across all major families.
Reception History
Throughout church history, Hebrews 7:13 has been used to demonstrate the transition from the old covenant to the new. Early patristic writers (e.g., Origen, Chrysostom) saw it as proof that Christ had replaced the Levitical priesthood. During the Reformation, both Lutheran and Reformed traditions appealed to this verse to argue that the ceremonial law was fulfilled and set aside. The verse also appears in debates about the nature of Christian ministry: if Christ’s priesthood is not according to the order of Aaron, then Christian worship is not tied to a specific tribe or lineage. It has been woven into liturgical celebrations that confess Christ as the one true High Priest.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Who is spoken of: Jesus, the Messiah of Psalm 110:4, not a Levitical priest.
- Where He comes from: The tribe of Judah, which has no share in altar service.
- What this means: The old priesthood is ended; a new order has begun.
Five-point outline
- The subject of the prophecy, Jesus is the priest after Melchizedek.
- The tribe of Judah, royal, not priestly.
- The Law’s restriction, only Levites at the altar (Numbers 16:40; Uzziah’s punishment in 2 Chronicles 26).
- The necessary conclusion, the priesthood has changed (Hebrews 7:12).
- The hope, a better covenant with a High Priest who lives forever.
Illustration hooks
- A company that hires a new CEO from outside the founding family because the family lacks the needed expertise. The change of leadership signals a change of strategy.
- A child who inherits a property that, by original deed, could only be passed to a biological son; but the will was rewritten. The old document no longer applies.
- Someone trying to use an expired coupon. The offer has been replaced by a new one.
Questions your congregation is asking
- How can Jesus be a priest if He wasn't from the tribe of Levi?
- Does Hebrews 7:13 mean the Old Testament Law is now invalid?
- What does this change mean for how we approach God today?
Leading a Discussion
This verse sits at the heart of the argument that Christ’s priesthood supersedes the Levitical order. It answers a pressing question for early Jewish believers: could Jesus, a man from Judah, truly serve as priest? The author points to the undeniable fact of His tribal lineage and lets the logic follow. For small groups, this passage invites reflection on how God’s dealing with His people has always been progressive, always leading toward Christ.
Discussion questions
- Why does the author refer to Psalm 110:4 in the context of tribe?
- What does the perfect tense μετέσχηκεν add to the understanding of Jesus’ humanity?
- How does the story of King Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26) illustrate the seriousness of the tribal restriction?
- In what way does verse 13 support the claim of verse 12 that the law must change?
- How would first-century Jewish Christians have felt hearing that the Levitical priesthood was no longer necessary?
- How does this change affect our confidence in Christ as our High Priest today?
- What does it mean that Jesus’ priesthood is “after the power of an endless life” (v. 16)?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Numbers 16:40 | to be a memorial to the children of Israel, to the end that no stranger who isn’t of the offspring of Aaron, would come near to burn incense before Yahweh, that he not be as Korah and as his company; as Yahweh spoke to him by Moses. |
| Numbers 17:5 | It shall happen that the rod of the man whom I shall choose shall bud. I will make the murmurings of the children of Israel, which they murmur against you, cease from me.” |
| II Chronicles 26:16 | But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up, so that he did corruptly and he trespassed against Yahweh his God, for he went into Yahweh’s temple to burn incense on the altar of incense. |
| II Chronicles 26:21 | Uzziah the king was a leper to the day of his death, and lived in a separate house, being a leper; for he was cut off from Yahweh’s house. Jotham his son was over the king’s house, judging the people of the land. |
| Hebrews 7:11 | Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people have received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron? |
| Hebrews 7:14 | For it is evident that our Lord has sprung out of Judah, about which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke highlights the striking contrast that Jesus, the Messiah from Psalm 110, came from the tribe of Judah, a tribe that never produced a priest for the Jewish altar and could not by law serve as a priest. This makes his priesthood utterly unique.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes highlights the deliberate contrast at the heart of the argument: the Messiah is spoken of as a priest, yet he belonged to the tribe of Judah, which the Law barred from any altar service. The apostle takes this as an undisputed fact about Jesus, making the point that his priesthood must be of a different order.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
Commentator stresses that Christ belongs to Judah, a tribe from which no one ever served as priest at the altar. This underscores that his priesthood comes from a completely different order than the Levitical one established by the law.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill stresses that the one spoken of here is Christ, not Melchizedek. Christ belongs to Judah, a tribe from which no man ever lawfully served at the altar. Uzziah of that tribe tried but was punished for his unlawful intrusion.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB highlights that the Greek word for "pertaineth" means "hath partaken of," and its perfect tense emphasizes Christ's humanity continues even now. The word "another" specifies a different tribe from Levi, confirming that a change of law accompanies this new priesthood.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry argues that the Levitical priesthood could not bring perfection, which is why a change was necessary. Christ's priesthood, patterned after Melchisedec, is permanent and based on the power of an endless life, making Him fully able to save those who draw near to God through His ongoing intercession.
Vincent's Word Studies Evangelical 1887
Vincent highlights that the Greek phrase translated as "pertaineth to another tribe" means not merely a different tribe but one distinct from those set apart for priestly service. He notes that the law required priests from Aaron's order, so a priesthood from a different tribe necessarily sets the law aside, since no one from that tribe ever served at the altar.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley emphasizes that the priesthood has clearly shifted not only from one order to another but from one tribe to another. Jesus belongs to Judah, a tribe the Law never allowed to serve at the altar. This underlines how thoroughly the old system has been replaced.