4. God had designed the whole dispensation of the law under that priesthood unto this very end, that it should ‘give the people neither rest nor liberty, but press and urge them to be looking after their full relief in the promised Seed, Gal. iv. 1,2, 11.24. It pressed them with a sense of sin, with a yoke of ceremonious observances, presenting them with the handwriting of ordinances which was against them, Col. ii. 14. It urged their consciences not to seek after rest in or by that state. Here could be no perfection, because there could be no liberty. The zagpyora, or boldness we speak of, is opposed unto all these causes of bondage and fear. It was not the design of God always to keep the church in a state of nonage, and under schoolmasters: he had appointed to set it at liberty in the fulness of time, to take his children nearer unto him, to give them greater evidences of his love, greater assurances of the eternal inheritance, and the use of more liberty and boldness in his presence. But what this παρβηρια of the gospel is, wherein it doth consist, what is included in it, what freedom of spirit, what liberty of speech, what right of access, and boldness of approach unto God, built upon the removal of the law, the communication of the Spirit, the way made into the holiest by the blood of Christ, with other concernments of it, constitutive of gospel perfection, I have already in part declared in our exposition on ch. 1. 5, and must, if God please, yet more largely insist upon it, on ch. x., so that I shall not here further speak unto it.
Fifthly. A clear foresight into a blessed -estate of immortality and glory, with unquestionable evidences and pledges, giving assurance of it, belongs also to thisconsummation. Death was originally threatened as the final issue of sin. And the evidence hereof was received under the Levitical priesthood in the curse of the law. There was indeed a remedy provided against its prevalency in the first promise. For whereas death comprised all the evil that was come, or was to come, on man for sin,’ ‘In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die:’ the promise contained the means of deliverance from it, or it was no promise, tendered no relief unto man in the state whereinto he was fallen. But the people under the law could see but little into the manner and way of its accomplishment, nor had they received any pledge of it, in any one that was dead and lived again soas to die no more. Wherefore their apprehensions of this deliverance were dark, and attended with much fear, which rendered them obnoxious unto bondage. See the exposition on ch. 11. 14, where we have declared the dreadful apprehensions of the Jews concerning death, received by tradition from the fathers. They could not look through the dark shades of death into light, immortality, and glory. See the twofold spirit of the Old and New Testament, with respect unto the apprehensions of death expressed; the one, Job x. 21, 22, the other, 2 Cor. v. 1—4. But there 1s nothing more needful unto the perfect state of the church. Suppose it endowed with all possible privileges in this world, yet if it have not a clear view and prospect, with a blessed assurance of immortality and glory after death, its condition will be dark and uncomfortable. And as this could not be done without bringing in of another priesthood, so by that of Christ’s it is accomplished. For,
1. He himself died as our high priest. He entered into the devouring jaws of death, and that as it was threatened in the curse. And now is the trial to be made. If he who thus ventured on death as threatened in the curse, and that for us, be swallowed up by it, or detained by its power and pains, there is a certain end of all our hopes. Whatever we may arrive unto in this world, death will convey us over into eternal ruin. But if he brake through its power, and have the pains of it removed from him, and do swallow it up into victory, and rise triumphantly into immortality and glory, then is our entrance into them also, even by and after death, secured. And in the resurrection of Christ, the church had the first unquestionable evidence that death might be conquered, that it and the curse might be separated, that there might be a free passage through it into life and immortality. These things originally, and in the first covenant, were inconsistent, nor was the reconciliation of them evident under the Levitical priesthood. But hereby was the veil rent from top to bottom, and the most holy place not made with hands laid open unto believers. See Isa. KRV../3"0:
2. As by his death, resurrection, and entrance into glory, he gave a pledge, example, and evidence unto the church of that in his own person which he had designed for it, so the grounds of it were laid in the expiatory sacrifice which he offered, whereby he took away the curse from death. There was such a close conjunction between death and the curse, such a combination between sin, the law and death, that the breaking of that conjunction, and the dissolving of that combination, was the greatest effect of divine wisdom and grace, which our apostle so triumpheth in, 1 Cor. xv. 54—57. This could no otherwise be brought about, but by his being made a curse in death, or bearing the curse which was in death in our stead, Gal. iii. 13,
3. He hath clearly declared unto the utmost of our capacities in this world, that future state of blessedness and glory, which he will lead all his disciples into. All the concernments hereof under the Levitical priesthood, were represented only under the obscure types and shadows of earthly things. Buthe hath ‘abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,’ 2 Tim. 1.10. He destroyed and abolished him who had the power of death, in taking away the curse from it, Heb. ii. 14. And he abolished death itself in the removal of those dark shades which it cast on immortality and eternal life; and hath opened an abundant entrance into the kingdom of God and glory. He hath unveiled the uncreated beauties of the King of glory, and opened the everlasting doors, to give an insight into those mansions of rest, peace, and blessedness. which are prepared _ for believers in the everlasting enjoyment of God. And these thirgs constitute no small: part of that consummated estate of the church which God designed, and which the Levitical priesthood could no way effect.
Siathly. There is also an especial joy belonging uuto this state. For this kingdom of God is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Neither was this attainable by the Levitical priesthood. Indeed, many of the saints of the Old Testament did greatly rejoice in the Lord, and had the joy of his salvation abiding with them; see Ps. li. 12; Isa. xxv. 9; Hab. i. 17,18. But they had it not by virtue of the Levitical priesthood. Isaiah tells us that the ground of it was the swallowing up of death in victory, xxv. 8, which was no otherwise to be done, but by the-death and resurrection of Christ. It was by an influence of efficacy from the priesthood that was to be introduced that they had their joy; whence Abraham saw the day of Christ, and rejoiced to see it. The prospect of the day of Christ was the sole foundation of all their spiritual joy, that was purely so. But as unto their own present state, they were allowed and called to rejoice in the abundance of temporal things; though the Psalmist, in a spirit of prophecy, prefers the joy arising from the light of God’s countenance in Christ, above all of that sort, Ps. iv. 6, 7. But ordinarily their joy was mixed and allayed with a respect unto temporal things; see Lev. xxii. 39—41; Deut. xii. 11,12, 18, xvi. 11, xxvu. 7. This was the end of their annual festivals. And those who would introduce such festival rejoicings into the gospel state, do so far degenerate into Judaism, as preferring their natural joy in the outward manner of expression, before the spiritual ineffable joys of the gospel. This it is that belongs unto the state thereof; such a joy in the Lord, as carrieth believers with an holy triumph through every condition, even when all outward causes of joy do fail and cease. A joy it is unspeakable, and full of glory, 1 Ῥοί. 1. 8; see John xv. 11; Rom. xv. 13; Jude 24. It is that inexpressible satisfaction, which is wrought in the minds of believers by the Holy Ghost, from an evidence of their interest in the love of God by Christ, with all the fruits of it, present and to come, with a spiritual sense and experience of their value, worth, and excellency. This gives the soul a quiet repose in all its trials, refreshment when it is weary, peace in trouble, and the highest satisfaction in the hardest things that are to be undergone, for the profession of the name of Christ, Rom. v. 1 —d.
Seventhly. Confidence and glorying in the Lord, is also a part of this perfection. This is the flowering, or the effect and fruit of joy; a readiness unto, and the way whereby we do express it. One great design of the gospel is to exclude all boasting, all glorying of any thing of self in religion, Rom. i. 27. Itis by the gospel and the law of faith thereia that men are taught not to boast or glory, neither in outward privileges, nor in moral duties; see Phil. ii. 5—9; Rom. iii. 27, 28, iv. 2. What then is there no glorying left us in the profession of the gospel, no triumph, no exultation of spirit, but we must always be sad and cast down, at best stand but on even terms with our oppositions, and never rejoice over them? Yes, there is a greater and more excellent glorying introduced, than the heart of man on any other account is capable of. But God hath so ordered all things now, that no flesh should glory in his presence, but that he who glorieth should glory in the Lord, 1 Cor. 1, 29, 31. And what is the reason of the foundation hereof? It is this alone, that ‘we are in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption,’ ver. 30. So it was promised of old, that in the Lord, that is, the Lord our righteousness, all the seed of Israel should be justified and glory, Isa. xlv. 25. This is that Kavynua τῆς ελπιδος, which we have opened on, ch. in, 6. 14, whither the reader is referred. It is that triumphant exultation of spirit which ariseth in believers, from their absolutely preferring their interest in heavenly things above things present, so as to contemn and despise whatever is contrary thereunto, however tendered in a way of allurement or rage. et ᾿
In these things and others of the like nature and kind, consists that τελειωσις, Or Consummation of the state of the church as to the per- | sons of the worshippers, which the apostle denies to have been attainable, by or under the Levitical priesthood. The arguments wherewith he confirms his assertion ensue in the verses following, where they must be further considered. But we may not proceed without some observations for our own edification in this matter.
Obs. I. An interest in the gospel consisteth not in an outward profession of it, but in areal participation of those things wherein the perfection of its state doth consist. Men may have a form of godliness, and be utter strangers to the power of it. Multitudes in all ages have made, and do make, a profession of the gospel, who yet have no experience in themselves of the real benefits and advantages wherewith it is accompanied. All that they obtain hereby, is but to deceive their souls into eternal ruin. For they live in some kind of expectation, that in another world they shall obtain rest, and blessedness, and glory by it. But the gospel will do nothing for them hereafter in things eternal, who are not here partakers of its power and fruits in things spiritual.
Obs. II. The preeminence of the gospel state above the legal is spiritual and undiscernible unto a carnal eye. For, 1. It is evident that the principal design of the apostle in all these discourses is, to prove the excellency of the state of the church under the New Testament, in its faith, liberty, and worship, above that of the church under the Old. And, 2. That he doth not in any of them, produce instances of outward pomp, ceremonies, or visible glory, in the confirmation of his assertion. He grants, all the outward institutions and ordinances of the law, insisting on them, their use, and signification in particular; but he opposeth not unto them any outward visible glory in gospel administrations. 3. In 2 Cor. iii. he expressly compares these two administrations of the law and the gospel as unto their excellency and glory. And, first, he acknowledgeth that the administration of the law, in the institution and celebration of it, was glorious, ver. 6—11. But withal he adds, that it had no glory in comparison with that under the New Testament, which doth far excel it. Wherein then doth this glory consist? He tells us it doth so in this, in that it 15 the administration of the Spirit, ver. 8, ‘Tlow shall not the administration of the Spirit be rather glorious?’ He doth not resolve it into outward order, the beauty and pomp of ceremonies and ordinances. In this alone it doth consist, in that the whole dispensation of it is carried on by the grace and gifts of the Spirit; and that they are also administered thereby. ‘This, saith he, is glory and liberty, such as excel all the glories of the old administrations. 5. In this place he sums it up all in this, that the perfection we have treated of was effected by the gospel, and could not be so by the Levitical priesthood, and the whole law of the commandments contained in ordinances. In these spiritual things therefore are we to seek after the glory of the gospel, and its preeminence above the law. And those who suppose they render the dispensation of the gospel glorious, by vying with the law in ceremonies and an. external pomp of worship, as doth the church of Rome, do wholly cross his design. And therefore,
Secondly. This τελείωσις, or perfection, respects the worship of the gospel, as well as the persons of the worshippers, and the grace whereof they are made partakers. God had designed the church unto a more perfect state in point of worship, than it was capable of under the Levitical priesthood. Nor indeed could any man reasonably think, or wisely judge, that he intended the institutions of the law, as the complete ultimate worship and service, that he would require or appoint in this world, seeing our natures, as renewed by grace, are capable of that which is more spiritual and sublime,
Ι. They were in their nature carnal, as our apostle declares, ver. 16, and ix. 10. The subject of them all, the means of their celebration, were carnal things, beneath those pure spiritual acts of the mind and soul, which are of a more noble nature. They consisted in meats and drinks, the blood of bulls and goats, the observance of moons and festivals, in a temple made of wood and stone, gold and silver, things carnal, perishing and transitory. Certainly God, who is a Spirit, and will be worshipped in spirit and in truth, designed at one time or other a worship more suited unto his own nature, though the imposition of these things on the church for a season, was necessary, And as they were carnal, so they might be exactly performed by men of carnal minds, and were so for the most part, in which respect God himself speaks often with a great undervaluation of them; see Ps. 1. 8—13; Isa. i. 11—13. Had not he designed the renovation of our natures into his own image, a new creation of them by Jesus Christ, this carnal worship might have sufficed, and would have been the best we are capable of. But to suppose that he should endow men, as he doth by Christ, witha new spiritual supernatural principle, enabling them unto a more sublime and spiritual worship, it cannot be imagined that he would always bind them up unto those carnal ordinances in their religious service. And the reason is, because they were not a meet and sufficient means for the exercise of that new principle of faith and love which he bestows on believers by Jesus Christ. Yea, to burden them with carnal observances, is a most effectual way to take them off frum its exercise in his service. And so it is at this day; wherever there is a multiplication of outward services and observances, the minds of men are so taken up with bodily exercise about them, as that they cannot attend unto the pure internal actings of faith and love.
2. What by their number and what by their nature, and the manner of exacting of them, they were made a yoke which the people were never able to bear with any joy or satisfaction, Acts xv. 10. And this yoke lay partly in the first place on their consciences, or the inner man. And it consisted principally in two things. 1. The multitude of ceremonies and institutions did perplex them, and gave them no rest. Seeing which way soever they turned themselves, one precept or other, positive or negative, ‘Touch not, taste not, handle not,’ was upon them. 2. The veil that was on them, as to their use, meaning, and end, increased the trouble of this yoke. They could not see unto the end of the things that were to-be done away, because of the veil, nor could apprehend fully the reason of what they did. And it may be easily conceived how great a yoke it was to be bound unto the strict observance of such rites and ceremonies in worship; yea, that the whole of their worship should consist in such things, as those who made use of them did not understand the end and meaning of them. And, 2dly. It lay on their persons from the manner of their imposition; as they were tied up unto days, times, and hours, so their transgression or disobedience made them obnoxious to all sorts of punishments, and excision itself. For they were all bound upon them with a curse; whence ‘ every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward,’ ch. 11. 2, For ‘he that despised Moses’ law, died without mercy,’ ch. x. 28, which they complained of, Num. xvii. 12,13. This put them on continual scrupulous fears, with endless inventions of their own to secure themselves from the guilt of such transgressions. Hence the religion of the Jews at present, is become a monstrous confused heap of vain inventions, and scrupulous observances of their own, to secure themselves, as they suppose, from transgressing any of those which God had given them. Take any one institution of the law, and consider what is the exposition they give of it in their Mishna, by their oral tradition, and it will display the fear and bondage they are in, though the remedy be worse than the disease. Yea, by all their inventions, they did but increase that which they endeavoured to avoid. For they have brought things unto that pass among them, that it is impossible that any one of them should have satisfaction in his conscience, that he hath aright observed any of God’s institutions, although he should suppose that he required nothing of him, but the outward performance of them.
3. Their instructive efficacy, which is the principal end of the ordinances of divine worship, was weak, and no way answered the power and evidence of gospel institutions, ch. x. 1. Therefore was the way of teaching by them intricate, and the way of learning difficult. Hence is that difference which is put between the teachings under the Old Testament and the New. For now it is promised, that men ‘shall not teach every man his brother, and every man his neighbour, saying, Know the Lord,’ as it was of old. The means of instruction were so dark and cloudy, and having only a shadow of the things themselves that were to be taught, and not the very image of them, that it was needful that they should be continually inculcated to keep up the knowledge of the very rudiments of religion. Besides, they had many ordinances, rites, and ceremonies, imposed on them to increase their yoke, whereof they understood nothing but only that it was the sovereign pleasure and will of God, that they should observe them, though they understood not of what use they were. And they were obliged unto no less an exact observance of them, than they were unto that of those which were the clearest and most lightsome.
The best direction they had from them, and by them, was, that indeed there was nothing in them, that is, in their nature or proper efficacy, to produce or procure those good things which they looked for through them, but only pointed unto what was to come. Wherefore they knew, that although they exercised themselves in them with diligence all their days, yet by virtue of them they could never attain what they aimed at; only there was something signified by them, and afterwards to be introduced, that was efficacious of what they looked after. Now, unto the strict observance of these things, were the people obliged under the most severe penalties, and that all the days of their lives. And this increased their bondage. God indeed, by his grace, did influence the minds of true believers among them unto satisfaction in their obedience, helping them to adore that sovereignty and wisdom which they believed in all his institutions. And he gave unto them really the benefits of the good things that were for to come, and that were pretigured by their services. But the state wherein they were by reason of these things was a state of bondage. Nor could any relief be given in this state unto the minds or consciences of men by the Levitical priesthood. For it was itself the principal cause of all these burdens and grievances, in that the administration of all sacred things was committed thereunto.
The apostle takes it here for granted, that God designed a τελείωσις, or state of perfection unto the church; and that as to its worship, as well as unto its faith and obedience. We find by the event, that it answered not the divine wisdom and goodness, to bind up the church during its whole sojourning in this world, unto a worship so carnal, burdensome, so imperfect, so unsuited to express his grace and kindness towards it, or its sense thereof. And who can but pity the woeful condition of the present Jews, who can conceive of no greater blessedness than the restoration of this burdensome service. So true is it what the apostle says, the veil is upon them unto this present day, yea, blindness is on their minds tbat they can see no beauty but only in things carnal, and like their forefathers who preferred the bondage of Egypt, because of their flesh-pots, before all the liberty and blessings of Canaan; so do they their old bondage state, because of some temporal advantages it was attended withal, before the glorious liberty of the sons of God.
In opposition hereunto, there is a worship under the gospel which hath such properties as are constitutive also of this perfection. By gospel worship, I understand the whole way and order of that solemn worship of God, which the Lord Christ hath commanded to be observed in his churches, with all the ordinances and institutions of it, and all the private worship of believers, in their whole access unto God. The internal glory and dignity of this worship must be referred unto its proper place, which is ch. x. 19—22. Here 1 shall only mention some few things, wherein its excellency consists in opposition unto the defects of that under the law, on the account whereof it is constitutive of that evangelical perfection whereof we treat.
First. It is spiritual, which is the subject of the apostle’s discourse, 2 Cor. iii. 6B—9.&e. And it is so ona twofold account. 1. In that it is suited unto the nature of God, so as that thereby he 15 glorified as God. For Ged is a Spirit, and will be worshipped in spirit, which our Saviour asserts to belong unto the gospel state, in opposition unto all the most glorious carnal ordinances and institutions of the law, John iv. 21—24 So is it opposed unto the old worship, as it was carnal. It was that which in and by itself, answered not the nature of God, though commanded for a season; see Ps.1.8—14. 2. Because it is performed merely by the aids, supplies, and assistances of the Spirit, as it hath been at large proved elsewhere.
Secondyl. It is easy and gentle, in opposition unto the burden and insupportable yoke of the old institutions and ordinances. That so are all the commands of Christ unto believers, the whole system of his precepts, whether for moral obedience or worship, himself declares. ‘Take my yoke upon you,’ saith he, ‘and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls; for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light, Matt. xi. 29, 43. So the apostle tells us, that ‘his commandments are not grevious,’ 1 John v. 9. But yet concerning this ease of gospel worship, some things must be observed.
1. As to the persons unto whom it is so easy and pleasant; and it is so only unto them who, being weary and heavy laden, do come unto Christ, that they may have rest, and do learn of him; that is, unto convinced, humbled, converted sinners, that do believe in him. Unto all others, who on mere convictions, or by other means, do take it upon them, it proves an insupportable burden, and that to which they cannot endure to be obliged. Hence the generality of men, although professing the Christian religion, are quickly weary of evangelical worship, and do find out endless inventions of their own, wherewith they are better satisfied in their divine services. Therefore, have they multiplied ceremonies, fond superstitions, and downright idolatries, which they prefer before the purity and simplicity of the worship of the gospel: as itis in the church of Rome. And the reason hereof is, that enmity which is in the minds against the spiritual things, represented and exhibited in evangelical worship. For there being so near an alliance between those things and this worship, they that hate the one, cannot but despise the other. Men of unspiritual minds cannot delight in spiritual worship. It is therefore,
2. Easy unto believers, on the account of that principle wherewith they are acted in all divine things. This is the -new nature, or the new creature in them, wherein their spiritual life doth consist. By this they delight in all spiritual things in the inner man, because they are cognate and suitable thereunto. Weariness may be upon the flesh, but the spirit will be willing. For as the principle of corrupted nature goeth out with delight and vehemency unto objects that are unto its satisfaction, and unto all the means of its conjunction unto them, and union with them; so the principle of grace in the hearts of believers, is carried with delight and fervency unto those spiritual things which are its proper object; and therewithal unto the ways and means of conjunction with them, and union unto them. And this is the proper life and effect of evangelical worship. It is the means whereby grace in the soul is conjoined and united unto grace in the word and _ promises, which renders it easy and pleasant unto believers, so that they delight to be exercised therein.
3. The constant aid they have in and for its performance, if they be not wanting unto themselves, doth entitle it unto this property, The institution of gospel worship is accompanied with the administration of the Spirit, Isa. lix., 21, and he συναντιλαμξανεται, helpeth and assisteth in all the worship of it, as was intimated before.
4. The benefit which they receive by it, renders it easy and pleasant unto them. For all the ordinances of evangelical worship are of that nature, and appointed of God unto that end, so as to excite, increase, and strengthen grace in the worshippers, as also to convey and exhibit a sense of the love and favour of God unto their souls. And in these two things consists the principal interest of all believers in this world, nor have they any design in competition with that of increasing in them. Finding, therefore, how by the diligent attendance unto this worship, they thrive in both parts of their interest, it cannot but be pleasant unto them.
5. The outward rites of it are few, lightsome, easy to be observed, without scrupulous tormenting fears; and they do not, by attendance unto bodily services, divert the mind from that communion with God, of which they are a means.
Thirdly. It is instructive, and that with clearness and evidence of the things which we are to know and learn. This was a great part of the imperfection of legai institutions, that they taught the things which they signified and represented obscurely, and the mind of God in them was not learned but with much difficulty, no small part of their obedience consisting in a resignation of their understandings unto God’s sovereignty, as to the use and the end of the things wherein they were exercised in his worship. But all the ordinances and institutions of the gospel, do give light into, and exhibit the things” themselves unto the minds and faith of believers. Hereon they discern the reasons and grounds of their use and benefit; whence our whole worship is called our reasonable service, Rom. xii. 1. Thus, in the preaching of the word, Jesus Christ is evidently.set forth crucified among us, Gal. iii. 1, not darkly represented in types and shadows. And in the sacrament of the supper, we do plainly show forth his death until he come, | Cor. xi. 26. And the like may be said of all other evangelical institutions. And the principal reason hereof is, because they do not represent or shadow things to come, no, nor yet things absent, as did those of old; but they really represent and exnibit spiritual things, Christ and the benefits of his mediation unto our souls. And in the observance of them, we are not kept at a distance, but have an admission unto the holy place not made with hands, because Christ, who is the minister of that holy sanctuary, is in them, and by them, really present unto the souls of believers. Two other things mentioned before concerning this worship, namely, its relation unto Christ, _ as our high priest, and our access in it unto the holy place, the throne of grace, must be spoken unto at large elsewhere.
This is a brief declaration of that τελείωσις or ‘ perfection,’ which the apostle denies to have been attainable by the Levitical priesthood. And the grounds of his denial he gives us in the remaining words of the text, which we shall also consider: only we may observe by the way, that,
Obs. III. To look for glory in evangelical worship from outward ceremonies and carnal ordinances, is to prefer the Levitical priesthood before that of Christ. That which we are to look for in our worship, is a τελειωσις, such a perfection as we are capable of in this world. This the apostle denies unto the Levitical priesthood, and ascribes it unto the priesthood of Christ. But if such a perfection is to be found in ceremonies and ordinances, outwardly pompous and glorious, upon necessity the contrary conclusion must be made and affirmed. But yet so it iscome to pass in the world, that men do order things in their public worship, as if they judged that the pure unmixed worship of the gospel, had no glory in comparison of that of the law, which did excel, and whereunto they do more or less conform themselves. But it is time for us to proceed with our apostle.
Having denied perfection unto the Levitical priesthood, which he lays down in a supposition including a negation, so as to make way for the proof of what he denied; for the further explication of it, and apphication unto his present purpose, he adds the respect that their priesthood had to the law, intending thereby to bring the law itself under ihe same censure of disability and insufficiency.
1. The subject spoken of is ὁ λαος; ‘the people,’ that is in the wilderness, the body of the church, to whom the law and priesthood were given immediately by the ministry of Moses. But after this, the whole posterity of Abraham in their successive ‘generations, were one people with them, and are so esteemed. For a people is still the same: and as a people never dies, till all individuals that belong unto it are cut off; so by this people, the whole church of all ages under the Old Testament is intended.
2. Of this people he says, vevouobernro, ‘they were legalized.’ 'They were also evangelized, as our apostle speaks, ch. iv. 2. They were so in the promise made unto Abraham, and in the many types of Christ and his offices and sacrifice that were instituted among them. Yet were they at the same time so brought under the power of the law, as that they had not the light, liberty, and comfort of the gospel, which we enjoy. Νομοθετειν, is legem ferre, legem sancire, lezem imponere; to ‘make, constitute, impose a law.’ And the passive vopo- θετεισϑαι, when applied unto persons, is leg: latee subjici, or legem latam accipere, to be made ‘subject unto a law;’ to receive the law made to oblige them. So is it used in this place. We have, therefore, not amiss rendered it, ‘ received the law,’ ‘the people received the law.’ But the sense of that expression is regulated by the nature of a law. They so received it, as to be made subject unto it, as to be obliged by it. Other things may be otherwise received; but a law is received by coming under its obligation. They were brought under the power, authority, and obligation of the law. Or because the law was the foundation and instrument of their whole state, both in things sacred and civil, the meaning of the word may be, they were brought into that state and condition whereinto the law disposed them.
This is said to be done, ex’ avry, ‘ under it;’ that is, ἱερωσυνῃ, under that priesthood. But how the people may be said to receive the law under the Levitical priesthood, must be further inquired into. Some think that em in this place, answers unto ὃν in the Hebrew; that is, ‘concerning it.’ And so the meaning of the word is, “ for it was concerning the Levitical priesthood that the people received a command;’ that is, God by his law and command, instituted the Levitical priest - hood among them, and no other, during the times of the Old Testament. According unto this interpretation, it is not the whole law of commandments contained in ordinances that is intended, but the law constituting the Levitical priesthood. This sense is embraced by Slichtingius and Grotius, as it was before them touched on, but rejected by Junius and Piscator. But, although there be no inconveniency in this interpretation, yet I look not on it, as suited unto the design of the apostle in this place. For his intention is to prove, that perfection was not to be obtained by the Levitical priesthood. Unto this end he was to consider that priesthood under all its advantages; for if any of them seem to be omitted, it would weaken his argument; seeing what it could not do under one consideration, 1t might do under another. Now, although it was some commendation of the Levitical priesthood that it was appointed of God, or confirmed by a law, yet was it a far yreater advancement, that therewith the whole law was given, and thereon did depend, as our apostle declares in the next verses.
The introduction of this clause by the particle yap, may be on a double account, which, though different, yet either of them is consistent with this interpretation of the words. 1. It may be used in a way of concession of all the advantages that the Levitical priesthood was accompanied withal; be it, that together with that priesthood, the people also received the law. Or, 2. On the other side, there,is included a reason why perfection was not to be attained by that priesthood; namely, because together with it, the people were brought into bondage under the yoke of the law. Either wav, the whole Jaw is intended. But the most probable reason of the introduction of this clause by that particle, for, was to bring in the whole law into the same argument, that perfection was not attainable by it. This the apostle plainly resumes, ver. 18, 19, concluding, as of the priesthood here, that it made nothing perfect. For it is the same law which made nothing perfect, that was given together with that priesthood, and not that especial command alone, whereby it was instituted.,
There yet remains one difficulty in the words. For the people are said to receive the law under the Levitical priesthood, and therefore, it should scem that that priesthood was established before the giving of the law. But it is certain that the law was given on mount Sinai, before the institution of that priesthood. For Aaron was not called, nor separated unto his office, until after Moses came down from the mount the second time, with the tables renewed after he had broken them, Exod. xl. 12—14. Two things may be applied to the removal of this difficulty. For 1. The people may be said to receive the law under the Levitical priesthood, not with respect unto the order of the giving of the law, but as unto their actual obedience unto it, in the exercise of the things required in it. And so nothing that appertained unto divine worship according to the law, was performed by them until that priesthood was established. And this, as 1 have shown, is the true signification of the word vevouofernro here used. It doth not signify the giving of the law unto them, but their being legalized, or brought under the power of it. Wherefore, although some part of the law was given before the institution of that priesthood, yet the people were not brought into the actual obedience of it, but by virtue thereof. But 2. The apostle in this place hath especial respect unto the law, as” it was the cause and rule of religious worship, of sacrifices, ceremonies, and other ordinances of divine service. For in that part of the law, the Hebrews placed all their hopes of perfection, which the moral law could not give them. And in this respect, the priesthood was given before the law. For, although the moral law was given in the audience of the people before on the mount, and an explication was given of it untu Moses, as 10 was to be applied to the government of that people in judiciary proceedings, commonly called the judicial law, before he came down from the mount, Exod. xxi. xxii. yet as to the system of all religious ceremonies, ordinances of worship, sacrifices of all sorts, and typical institutions, whatever belonged unto the sacred services of the church, the law of it was not given out unto them till after the erection of the tabernacle, and the separation of Aaron and his sons unto the office of the priesthood. Yea, that whole law was given by the voice of God, out of that tabernacle, whereof Aaron was the minister, Lev. i. 1, 2. So that the people in the largest sense may be said to receive the law under that priesthood. Wherefore, the sense of the words is, that together with the priesthood the people received the law of commandments contained in ordinances, which yet effected not, in their conjunction, the end that God designed in his worship. And we may observe that,
Obs. IV. Put all advantages and privileges whatever together, and they will bring nothing to perfection without Jesus Christ. God manifested this in all his revelations and institutions. His revelations from the foundation of the world, were gradual and partial, increasing the light of the knowledge of his glory, from age to age. But put them all together from the first promise, with all expositions of it, and additions unto it, with prophecies of what should afterwards come to _ pass, taking in also the ministry of John the Baptist; yet did they not all of them together, make a perfect revelation of the mind and will of God, as he will be known and worshipped, Heb. i. 1; John i. 18. So also was there great variety in his institutions. Some were of great efficacy and of clearer significancy than others. But all of them put together made nothing perfect. Much more will all the ways that others shall find out to attain righteousness, peace, light, and life before God, come short of rest or perfection.
The last thing considerable in these words, is the reason whereby the apostle proves, that in the judgment of the Holy Ghost himself, perfection was not attainable by the Levitical priesthood. For if it were, what farther need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? The reason in these words is plain and obvious. For after the institution of that priesthood, and after the execution of it in its greatest glory, splendour, and efticaey, a promise is made in the time of David, of another priest, of another order to rise. Hereof there can be no account given, but this alone, that perfection was not attainable by that which was already instituted and executed. For it was a perfection that God aimed to bring his church unto, or the most perfect state in righteousness, peace, liberty, and worship, which it is capable of in this world. And whatever state the church be brought into, it must be by its high priest and the discharge of his office. Now, if this might have been effected by the Levitical priesthood, the rising of another priest was altogether needless and useless. This is that invincible argument whereby the holy apostle utterly overthrows the whole system of the Judaical religion, and takes it out of the way, as we shall see more particularly afterwards. But the expressions used in this reason, must be distinctly considered.
That another priest, isoeve ἕτερος, ‘a priest of another sort.’ Not only a priest who individually was not yet exhibited, but one of another stock and order. A priest that should not be of the tribe of Levi, nor of the order of Aaren as is afterwards explained.
Ανιστασϑαι, ‘to arise; that is, to be called, exalted; to stand up in the execution of that office. To rise up, or to be raised up, is used indefinitely concerning any one that attempts any new work, or is made eminent for any end good or bad. In the latter sense, God is said to raise up Pharaoh to show his power in him, that he might magnify his glorious power in his punishment and destruction, Exod. ix. 16; Rom, 1x. 17. In a good sense with respect unto the call of God, it is used by Deborah, Judg. ν. 7, ‘Until I Deborah arose, until 1 arose a mother in Israel.’ Commonly eyeow and εγείρομαι are used to this purpose, Matt. xi. 11; John vii. 52. ‘To arise, therefore, is to appear and stand up at the call of God, and by his designation, unto the execution or performance of any office or work. So was this other priest’s office, in compliance with the call and appointment of God.
And this priest was thus to arise after the order of Melchisedec. So it is expressly affirmed in the Psalms. And here the apostle takes in the consideration of what he had before discoursed, concerning the greatness of Melchisedec. For he designed uot only to prove the thing itself, which is sufficiently done in the testimony out of the Psalmist; but also to evidence the advantage and benefit of the church by this change. And hereunto the consideration of the greatness of Melchisedec, was singularly subservient, as manifesting the excellency of that priesthood by which the righteousness of the church and its worship was to be consummated.
Lastly. The apostle adds negatively of this other priest who was to rise, by reason of the weakness of the Levitical priesthood, which could not perfect the state of the church, that he was not to be ‘called after the order of Aaron.’.
Καὶ ov κατα την ταξιν Ααρων λεγεσϑαι, ‘and not to be called after the order of Aaron,’ that is in the Psalm where the rising of this priest is declared and foretold; there heis said to be, or denominated a priest after the order of Melehisedec, and nothing is spoken of the order of Aaron. λεγεσϑαι denotes only an external denomination, not an internal call. It is not the same with kaAoupevoc, used by our apostle, ch. v. 4. Καλουμενὸος ὑπο του Θεου, ‘called of God;’ that is, by an effectual call and separation unto office. But it answers to προσαγορευθεις, ch. v. 10, cognominatus, called so by external denomination. For the ~ real call of Christ unto his office by him who said unto him, ‘Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee,’ was such as the call of Melchisedec himself could not represent. Wherefore the call οὗ Christ unto his office, and that of Melchisedec, are nowhere compared. But upon the account of sundry resemblances, insisted on by the apostle in the first verses of this chapter, Christ is called by external denomination, a priest after his order, and is nowhere called so after the order of Aaron. And the reason why the apostle addeth this negative, is evident. For it might be said, that although another priest was foretold to arise, yet this might respect only an extraordinary call unto the same office, and not a call unto an office of another kind or order. Aaron was called by God immediately and in an extraordinary manner; and all his posterity came unto the same office by an ordinary succession: so God promiseth to raise up a priest in a singular manner, 1 Sam. ii. 35, ‘I will raise me up a faithful priest, which shall do according unto that which is in mine heart and in my mind.’ A priest of another order is not here intended, but only the change of the line of succession from the house of Ithamar, unto that of Phinehas, fulfilled in Zadok in the days of Solomon. So a new priest might be raised up, and yet the old legal order and administration be continued. But, saith the apostle, he is not to be of the same order: for the defect of the Levitical priesthood was not only in the persons which he mentions afterwards, but it was in the office itself, which could not bring the church to perfection. And that de facto he was so to be, he proves by this argument negatively from the Scripture, that he is nowhere by the Holy Ghost, said to be of the order of Aaron, but on the contrary, of that of Melchisedec, which is inconsistent therewithal.
And this is the first argument whereby the apostle confirms his principal design, which he particularly strengthens and improves in the verses following.
Mutato sacerdotio, Vul. Lat. translato, Bez. hoc sacerdotio, expressing the article. Syr. ‘ Yea, even as a change was made in the priesthood, so a change was made also in the law,’ not to the mind of the apostle. Ethiop. “1 their law so passed away, their priesthood shall pass away;’ more out of the way than the other,
Ver, 12.—For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change of the law.
In this verse, the apostle evidently declares what he intended by the law in that foregoing, which the people received under the Levitical priesthood. It was the whole law of commandments contained in ordinances, or the whole law of Moses, so far as it was the rule of worship and obedience unto the church.. For that law it is, that followeth the fates of the priesthood.
And herein lieth the stress and moment of the controversy, which the apostle then had with the Jews, and which we have at this day with their unbelieving posterity. For the question was, whether the law of Moses was to be absolutely eternal, the rule of the worship of the church, whilst it was to continue in this world. And it appears that in the preaching of the gospel, that which most provoked the Jews was, that there was inferred thereby a cessation and taking away of Mosaic institutions. This was that which enraged them unto the shedding of the blood of the church, which they were guilty of, after the murder of the Head thereof. For they fell on Stephen, under pretence that he had said that Jesus of Nazareth should destroy the customs which Moses delivered, Acts vi. 14. And this also provoked their rage against our apostle, Acts xxi. 28. Yea, the most of them who were converted to the faith of the gospel, yet continued obstinate in this persuasion, that the law of Moses was yet to continue in force, Acts xxi. 20. And with this opinion, some of them troubled the peace and hindered the edification of the churches, called from among the Gentiles, as hath been at large elsewhere declared. This matter therefore which the apostle now entereth on, was to be managed with care and diligence.
This he enters on in this verse, being a transition from one point to another, having made way for his intentions in the verse foregoing. That which hitherto he hath insisted on in this chapter, is the excellency of the priesthood of Christ, above that of the law, manifested in the representation made of it by Meichisedec. In the pursuit of his argument to that purpose, he proves that the Aaronical priesthood was to be abolished, because after its institution there was a promise of the introduction of another, wherewith it was inconsistent. And _ herein observing the strict conjunction that was between that priesthood and the law, with their mutual dependence on one another, he proves from thence that the law itself was also to be abolished.
Herein therefore lay the principal design of the apostle in this whole epistle. For the law may be looked on under a double consideration. 1. As to what the Jews ‘in that degenerate state of the church obstinately looked for from it. 2. As to what it did really re- quire of them, whilst it stood in force and power. And under both these considerations it was utterly inconsistent with the gospel. _
1. The Jews at that time expected no less from it, than expiation of sin by its sacrifices, and justification by the works of it. It is true, they looked for these things by it unjustly, seeing it promised no such thing, nor was ever ordained to any such purpose; but yet these things they looked for, and were resolved so to do, until the law should be removed out of the way. And it is evident how inconsistent this is with the whole work of the mediation of Christ, which is the sum and substance of the gospel. But suppose they looked not absolutely for atonement and justification by the sacrifices and works of the law, yet the continuance of their observance was repugnant to the gospel. For the Lord Christ, by the one offering of himself, had made perfect atonement for sin, so that the sacrifices of the law could be of no more use or signification. And the continuance of them, wherein there was
-renewed mention of the expiation of sin, did declare that there was not a perfect expiation already made, which overthrows the efficacy and virtue of the sacrifice of Christ. Even as the daily repetition of a sacrifice in the mass continueth to do. Again, whereas the Lord Christ by his obedience and righteousness had fulfilled the law, and ~ was become the end of it for righteousness to them that do believe, the seeking after justification as it were by the works of the law, was wholly repugnant thereunto.
2. And in the next place, the law may be considered as it prescribed a way of worship in its ordinances and institutions, which God doth accept. This the people were indispensably obliged to, whilst the law stood in force. But in the gospel, our Lord Jesus Christ, had now appointed a new spiritual worship, suited to the principles and grace thereof. And these were so inconsistent as that no man could at once serve these two masters.
Wherefore the whole law of Moses, as given to the Jews, whether as used or abused by them, was repugnant to, and inconsistent with the gospel, and the mediation of Christ, especially his priestly office therein declared. Neither did God either design, appoint, or direct that they should be co-existent. If then the law continue in its force, and have power to oblige the consciences of men, and is still so to abide, there is neither room nor place for Christ and his priesthood in the church, nor indeed for the discharge of his other offices. And this opposition between the law and the gospel, works and grace, our own righteousness and that of Christ, our apostle doth not only grant, but ‘vehemently urge in all his epistles, allowing none to suppose that they may have both these strings to their bow. One of them, he is peremptory, that all mankind must betake themselves to. Here the Jews were entangled, and knew not what to do. The greatest part of them adhered to the law, with an utter rejection of the gospel and the Author of it, perishing in their unbelief. Others of them endeavoured to make a composition of these things, and retaining of Moses, they would admit of Christ and the gospel also. And this the Holy Ghost in the apostles did for a while bear withal. But now whereas the whole service of the tabernacle was of itself fallen down, and become as useless, so of no force, its obliging power ceasing in its accomplishment by Christ; and whereas the time was drawing near, wherein God by his providence would utterly remove it, the inconsistency of it with the gospel state of the church was now fully to be declared.
This therefore our apostle grants, that there was such a repugnaney between the law and the gospel, as to the ends of righteousness and divine worship, as that one of them must of necessity be parted withal. Wherefore the whole controversy turning on this hinge, it was highly incumbent on him to manifest and prove, that the law did now cease, according to the appointment of God; and that God had of old designed, foretold, and promised that soit should do, and be abolished, on the introduction of that which was the end and substance of it. And this I look on as the greatest trial the faith of men ever had in the concerns of religion; namely, to believe that God should take away, abolish, and leave as dead and useless, that whole system of solemn worship, which he had appointed in so glorious a manner, and accepted for so many generations. But yet, as we are to acquiesce in the sovereign pleasure of God, made known by revelation against all reasonings of our own whatsoever; so it must be confessed, that faith was greatly bespoken and prepared by the nature, end, and use of all those institutions, which more than intimated, that they were appointed only for a time, and served to introduce a more glorious dispensation of divine wisdom and grace.
The proof therefore of the utter cessation of the law, the apostle enters on by the invincible argument, whose foundation or proposition is laid in this verse, and the especial parts of it are explained, confirmed and vindicated in those that follow. And in his ensuing discourse his principal design is to prove, that the church is so far from being a loser, or disadvantaged by this change, as that she receiveth thereby the highest privilege, and greatest blessing that in this world she is capable of.
In the words of this verse there is a supposition of the change of the priesthood, as that which was proved before, and an inference from thence to a necessity of the change of the law.
Μετατιθεμενης της ἱερωσυνης, “ the priesthood being changed; that is, the priesthood of Levi appointed and exercised under the law. Μετατιθεμενης, translato, mutato; so some read, ‘ transferred,’ ¢ translated;? some ‘changed.’ The former do not reach the whole sense intended. For the office of the priesthood may be transferred from one person to another, from one family to another, yea, front one tribe to another; and yet the priesthood, as to the kind and nature of it, continue the same. This, our apostle afterwards mentions, ver. 13, 14, asa part of his argument to prove the priesthood itself to be changed. But this it doth not absolutely, seeing it is possible that the office may be transferred from one tribe to another, and yet not be changed as toitsnature. But the proof lies in this, that Moses in the institution of the priesthood, made no mention of the tribe of Judah, and therefore, if that office be transferred unto that tribe, it must be of another kind than that before instituted. And on this supposition, that which he intends to prove, follows evidently upon the translation of the priesthood. For all the sacred services and worship which the law required, were so confined, or at least had such respect unto the Levitical priesthood, as that no part of it, no sacred duty could be performed, on a supposition of taking away the priesthood from that tribe and family. For whereas the whole of their worship consisted in the service and sacrifices of the tabernacle, God had appointed, that whosoever did draw nigh unto the performance of any of these services, that was not of the seed of Aaron, should be cut off and destroyed. Wherefore, upon a supposition of the ceasing or changing of the priesthood in that family, the whole law of ordinances became unpracticable, useless, and lost its power; especially seeing there was no provision made in the law itself for a priesthood in any other tribe. Besides, such was the contexture of the law, and such the sanction of it, ‘cursed is he who continueth not in all things written in the law to do them,’ that if any thing be taken out of it, if its order be disturbed, if any alteration be made, or any transgression be dispensed withal, or exempted from the curse, the whole fabric must of necessity fall to the ground.
But yet it is not a mere transferring of the priesthood from one tribe to another, that is here mtended by the apostle. For there is such a change of the priesthood, as there is of the law. But the change of the law was an αθετησις, a “ disannulling’ or abolishing, as is afiirmed, ver. 18. Such, therefore, must the change of the priesthood be, and so it was. The priesthood was changed, in that one kind of it was utterly abolished, and another introduced. So was the Levitical priesthood changed, as that the other priest which came with his office in the room thereof, could not be called or said to be after the order of Aaron, but was of another kind, typed out by Melchisedec. It may therefore be inquired, on what grounds this priesthood was to be so abolished, or how it appears that so it is, and by what means it was actually taken away.
That it was so to be abolished, the apostle proves, 1. Because before the institution of that priesthood, there was another far more excellent, namely, that of Melchisedec. 2. That the Holy Ghost had declared that the introduction of that more excellent priesthood for a season, was to prefigure and represent another priesthood that was afterwards to be established. And this could not be that of Levi, seeing God doth not make use of that which is more excellent to figure or represent that which is inferior thereunto. Another priesthood, therefore, must arise, and be granted unto the church in answer unto that type. 3. That it was impossible that this new priest after the order of Melchisedec, should be consistent with that of Levi, or that it should be continued after that was brought in. For, First. He was to be of another tribe, as he immediately proves. Secondly. Because his priesthood and sacrifice were to be of another kind than that of Levi, which he demonstrates at large in the ensuing chapters. Thirdly. Because on the other hand, the priesthood of Aaron, 1. Could never accomplish and effect the true and proper ends of the priesthood, which the church stood in need of, and without which, it could not be cousummated. And, 2. Was in its own nature, offices, works, and duties, inconsistent with any priesthood, that was not of its own order. It must therefore be abolished.
It may therefore be inquired, how the priesthood was changed, or that of the house of Levi taken away. And I say, as the apostle directs, it was done by the appointment of God. For his introduction of another priest, when it was actually accomplished, had the force of a repealing law. The institution of the former was abrogated thereby, without any other constitution. For as unto its use, it did hence cease of itself. It had no more to do, its work was at an end, and its services were of no advantage to the church: For the sign of what is to come, is set aside, and ceaseth to be a sign, when the thing signified is brought in, Yea, the continuance of it would give ἃ testimony against itself. And as to its right, this new institution of God, applied by his own authority unto it in its proper season, took it away. 2. The application of the authority of God, in the institution of a new priesthood to take away the old, was made by the Holy Ghost, in the revelation of the will of God by the gospel, wherein the ceasing of it was declared. And sundry things may be observed concerning this abolishing of it.
Obs. I. Notwithstanding the great and many provocations of them by whom it was exercised and discharged, yet God took it not away, until it had accomplished the end whereunto it was designed.—Neither the wickedness of the people, nor of the priests themselves, could - provoke the Lord to revoke his institution, until the appointed end of it was come. And it is no small part of the blindness of the present Jews, to think that God would so utterly abolish his own ordinance, as they must acknowledge he hath done, if he would have it to be of any longer use in the church. For sixteen hundred years, they have not had any priest among them, nor is it possible they should according unto the law, if they were actually restored unto their own pretended right in Canaan. For they have utterly lost the distinction of tribes among them, nor can any of them in the least pretend they are of the lineage of the priests. And for any one to usurp that office who is not lineally descended from Aaron, they own to be an abomination. As, therefore, they know not how to look for a Messiah from the tribe of Judah, seeing all sacred genealogy is at an end; no more can they look for a priest of the house of Aaron. Now this end of it, was the bringing in of a better hope, or the promised seed, who, according to the promise, was to come to the second temple, and, therefore, whilst that priesthood continued. 2. God took it not away till he brought in that which was more excellent, glorious, and adyantageous unto the church, namely, the Priesthood of Christ. And if this be not received through their unbelief, they alone are the cause of their being losers by this alteration. 3. In abundant patience and condescension, with respect unto that interest which it had in the conciences of men from his institution, God did not utterly lay it aside in a day, after which, it should be absolutely unlawful to comply with it. But God took it away by degrees, as shall afterwards be declared.
Obs. II. That the efficacy of all ordinances or institutions of worship, depends on the will of God alone—Whilst it was his will that the priesthood should abide in the family of Levi, it was useful and effectual unto all the ends whereunto it was designed. But when he would make an alteration therein, it was in vain for any to look for either benefit or advantage by it. And although we are not now to expect any change in the institutions of divine worship, yet all our expectations from them, are to be resolved into the will of God.
Obs. III. Divine institutions cease not without an express divine abrogation.—Where they are once granted and erected by the authority of God, they can never cease without an express act of the same authority taking of them away. So was it with the institutions of the Aaronical priesthood, as the apostle declares. And this one considera~ tion, is enough to confirm the grant of the initial seal of the covenant unto the present seed of believers, which was once given by God himself, in the way of an institution, and never by him revoked.
Obs. [V. God will never abrogate or take away any institution or ordinance of worship, unto the loss or disadvantage of the church.— He would not remove or abolish the priesthood of Levi, until that which was incomparably more excellent, was introduced and established.
Obs. V. God in his wisdom so ordered all things, that the taking away of the priesthood of the law, gave it its greatest glory. For it ceased not, before it had fuily and absolutely accomplished the endwhereunto it was designed, which is the glory and perfection of any ordinance: even the mediation of Christ himself shall cease, when all the ends of it are fulfilled. And this end of the priesthood was most glorious; namely, the bringing in that of Christ, and therein of the eternal salvation of the church. And what more honourable issue could it come unto? The Jews, by their pretended adherence unto it, are they which cast the highest dishonour upon it; for they own that it is laid aside, at least that it hath been so for sixteen hundred years, and yet neither the end of it effected, nor any thing brought in by it, unto the greater advantage of the church.
The next thing considerable in these words, is the inference which the apostle makes from his assertion and the proof it: ‘there is made of necessity, a change also of the law.’ E& avayxne, ‘of necessity.’ {t is not a note of the necessity of the inference from the proposition in the way of argument, but the necessary dependence of the things mentioned, the one on the other. For whereas the whole administra-~ tion of the law, so far as it concerned the expiation of sin by sacrifices, and the solemn worship of God in the tabernacle or temple, depended absolutely on, and was confined unto the Aaronical priesthood, so as that without it, no one sacrifice could be offered unto God, nor any ordinance of divine worship be observed; that priesthood being abolished and taken out of the way, the law itself of necessity and unavoidably ceaseth and becometh useless. It doth so, 1 say, as unto all the proper ends of it, as a law obligatory unto the duties required in it.
on the change of the priesthood; yet not so, but that there was an act of the will and authority of God on the law itself. God made this change, and he alone could do it; that he would do so, and did so, the apostle proves in this and the verses following. So is the law of commandments contained in ordinances taken out of the way, being nailed unto the cross of Christ, where he left it completely accomplished.
But moreover, the Jaw in its institution was an instructive revelation, and taught many things concerning the nature of sin, its expiation and cleansing; representing, though darkly, good things to come. So it is yet continued as a part of the revealed will of God. And the light of the gospel being brought unto it, we may learn things far more clearly out of it, than ever the Jews of old could do.
And the force of the argument here insisted on by the apostle, against the absolute perpetuity of the law, which was of old, and yet continueth to be the head of the controversy between the Jews and the church of Christ, is so unavoidable, that some of them have been compelled to acknowledge that in the days of the Messiah, legal sacrifices and the rest of their ceremonies, shall cease; though the most of them understand that their cause is given away thereby. And the have no other way to free themselves from this argument of the apostle, but by denying that Melchisedec was a priest, or that it is the Messiah who 15 prophesied of, Ps. cx. which evidences of a desperate cause, and more desperate defenders of it, have been elsewhere convinced of folly. Wherefore, this important argument is confirmed by our apostle in the ensuing verses. And we may see,
Obs. VI. How it is a fruit of the manifold wisdom of God, that it was a great mercy to give the law, and the greater to take it away. And, -
Obs. VII. If under the law the whole worship of God did so depend on the priesthood, and that failing or being taken away, the whole worship of itself was to cease, as being no more acceptable before God; how much more is all worship under the New Testament rejected by him, if there be not a due regard therein unto the Lord Christ, as the only high priest of the church, and to the efficacy of his discharge of that office.
Obs. VIII. It is the highest vanity to pretend use or continuance in the church, frem possession or prescription, or pretended benefit, beauty, order, or advantage, when once the mind of God is declared against it-—The pleas of this kind for the old priesthood and law, excelled all that can be insisted on, with respect unto any other things for which any pretend a veneration in divine worship; yet were they of no validity or effieacy.
cial force of the word μετεσχηκεν, though the substance of the sense be retained. Syr. t-nx, ‘was born’ of another tribe. Particeps fuit, did derive his genealogy from, and so had his especial relation unto another tribe. Προσεσχηκε, ministravit, attendit; Vul. presto fuit. The Ethiopic, ‘And if any one will say so (or as one may say) he placeth another tribe, because they kept not the altar,’ mistaking both the meaning of the design, and sense of the apostle’s words.
Ver. 13.—For he of whom these things are spoken, pertaineth unto another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
The causal conjunction yap, doth not only intimate a pursuit of the foregoing argument, and the confirmation of the supposition whereon it was built, but also an entrance upon the express application of the whole preceding discourse, unto the person of Jesus Christ, the true and only high priest of the church.
1. In the words there is, the subject to be further treated on, described, ep’ ὃν λέγεται ravta. That περι ov, de quo, ‘he concerning whom,’ quem designaverunt hec, ad quem hee pertinent, ‘he who is” designed in all these things,’ “πὸ unto whom they do all belong.’ He with respect unto whom, ταῦτα; ‘these things τ᾿ that is, all that hath been spoken concerning Melchisedee and his priesthood, all things that do naturally follow and ensue thereon. For although sundry of them were spoken first and immediately concerning other persons and things; yet they all belong ultimately and perfectly unto Christ alone, whom they did represent and make way for. And we may observe hence,
Obs. 1. That it is our duty in studying of the Scripture, to inquire diligently after the things which are spoken concerning Jesus Christ, and what is taught of him in them.—This doth our apostle find out, in all that was spoken concerning Melchisedec and the Levitical priesthood. This Jesus himself gives in charge, John v. 39, ‘Search the Scriptures, they are they which testify of me.’ Our principal aim in searching the Scriptures ought to be, that we may find out what they say, and what they testify concerning Christ. And this was the practice of the prophets of old, with respect unto all the revelations which they received, 1 Pet. 1. 10—12. Let the pains and industry, and skill of men in the reading and interpreting of the Scriptures, be what they will, without this design, they will never rightly be understood, nor duly improved. For as those things which concern his person, office, and grace, with the mysteries of the wisdom of God in them all, are the principal subject of them; so all other things which are taught and revealed in them, are never apprehended unto any good end or purpose, unless their relation unto him, and dependence upon him be rightly understood. Some are charged that they esteem of no preaching but that which is concerning the person of Christ, which how false an accusation it is, their preaching and writings do discover. But this they say indeed, that is, some do so, that seeing it is the design of God to gather all things into a head in Christ, that preaching is to little purpose, which doth not, more or less expressly, evidence the relation of all truths and duties unto him.
2. It is added guAne Erepac μετεσχηῆκε, ‘he pertained unto another tribe. To confirm his argument concerning the changing or abolition of the priesthood, the apostle supposeth the distribution of the people into tribes, according unto the number of the sons of Jacob. And as these tribes had a common interest in the church, so some of them had peculiar privileges granted and confirmed unto them by law. So the priesthood was granted, confined, and confirmed unto the tribe of Levi, and unto the family of Aaron in that tribe. And it was so confined thereunto, as that all the rest of the tribes were for ever excluded from any interest therein, and all that belonged unto them incapacitated thereof. But unto one of the tribes, so excluded from an interest in the legal-priesthood, did he belong, of whom these things are spoken. And this I look upon as the principal reason of the distinction of that people into their tribes; namely, that God thereby might provide for their instruction, as to the continuance of the legal worship among them, which could be no longer continued than the priesthood was reserved unto that one tribe, whereunto it was originally granted, μετεσχηκε; See the meaning of the word in our exposition on ch. ii. 14. His share, lot, and. interest lay in another tribe.
3. He describes in general this other tribe whereof he was, by its legal exclusion from all the service of the altar; “ Of which no man eave attendance at the altar.” What tribe that was in particular, he declares in the next verse, showing not only of what tribe he was, but also what it was necessary he should be. Another tribe, ad’ ἧς, ‘ whereof,’ from which none that was genealogized, attended at the altar; that is, had right so to do, or was not forbidden by the law so to do. God doth not reckon that to be done in his service, which he hath not appointed, much less which he hath forbidden. What other inroads were made on the sacerdotal office, we know not; but one of the tribe here intended by the apostle, whereof none was to attend the altar, did draw nigh to offer incense, for which he was rebuked by the high priest, and punished of God, 2 Chron. xxvi. 18. And God exercised the greater severity herein, that the church might understand, that when he introduced and allowed of a priest of another tribe, that old priesthood must of necessity cease and be abolished. ‘ No man gave attendance,’ that is, had right so to do.
That expression, προσεσχήκε τῳ ϑυσιαστηριῳ, ‘attended, waited, on the altar,’ may be a synecdochical description of the whole priestly office, from the principal work and duty belonging thereunto. But I suppose the apostle may not only mclude the priests, unto whom the immediate work of sacrificing at the altar did belong; but all those who attended the services of it, though they could offer neither burnt incense nor sacrifice; that is, all the kevites in their courses. For he so excludes the tribe, whereof he speaks, from the least relation unto the sacerdotal work or office. None of them ever did or might draw near nor minister unto the altar in any sacred services whatsoever. See 1 Cor. ix. 13.
This entrance doth the apostle make into the confirmation of his assertion, that the priesthood was changed, and therewithal the law. For it appears that there was to be a priest, who had no right by the law so to be; seeing he was of that. tribe which the law utterly excluded from any interest in the sacred services of the altar; and much more those which were peculiar unto the Aaronical priests. Thus,
Obs. II. All men’s rights, duties, and privileges in sacred things, are fixed and limited by divine institution. And,
Obs. IIL. Seeing Christ himself had no right to minister at the material altar, the re-introduction of such altars, is inconsistent with the perpetual continuance of his priesthood.
Ver. 14.—The apostle confirms his assertion by a particular application of it unto the person of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The words contain a double assertion. 1. That,our Lord sprang of the tribe of Judah. 2. That of that tribe, Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood. There wants nothing to complete the proof of his argument, but that our Lord was a priest, which he therefore proves in the ensuing verses.
Ver. 14.—For it is evident (or manifest) that our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood.
In the first part of the words, there are two things considerable. The manner of the proposition, or the modification of the assertion, προδηλον eort. The conjunction yap, ‘ for, doth only show that a reason or proof of what was before laid down, is here introduced. And of this he saith, palam est, manifestum, ‘it is manifest, open,’ a thing confessed; evident, as we say, in itself. A thing easy to be proved, but that it is by no man denied. Only whereas δηλον is ‘ manifest’ or evident, προδηλον seems to intimate what was ‘ manifest beforehand;’ aS mpodnAow is ‘to evidence a matter beforehand.’ And this may not only respect, but be confined unto the preceding promises and declaration, that the Messiah should be of the tribe of Judah. But we may consider in general, how this is said to be a thing evident, or manifest in its application unto our Lord Jesus Christ. And,
1. This was included in the faith of believers, who granted him to be the Messiah. For nothing was more plainly promised under the Old Testament, nor more firmly believed by the church, than that the Messiah was to be of the tribe of Judah, and of the family of David. And thus it was προδηλον, ‘ manifest to them beforehand.’ For unto Judah the promise was solemnly confined, Gen. xlix. 8—10, and fre-~ quently reiterated unto David, as I have shown elsewhere. Whoever, therefore, acknowledged our Lord Jesus Christ to be the true Messiah, as all the Hebrews did unto whom our apostle wrote, though the most of them adhered unto the law and to its ceremonies, they must and did grant, that he sprang of the tribe of Judah. And none of the unbelieving Jews made use of this objection, that he was not of the tribe of Judah, which if they could have managed, had absolutely justified them in their unbelief. This was sufficient unto the purpose of the apostle, seeing he proceeded not only on what was granted among them, but firmly believed by them, and not denied by their adversaries.
2. It was in those days manifest by his known genealogy. For by the providence of God, his parents were publicly enrolled of that tribe and of the family of David, in the tax and recoguition of the people appointed by Augustus Cesar, Luke 11, 4. And this was made yet more famous by the cruelty of Herod, seeking his destruction among the children of Bethlehem, Matt. 11. And the genealogies of all families, whilst the Jewish commonwealth continued in any condition, were carefully preserved, because many legal rights’ and constitutions did depend thereon. And this preservation of genealogies was both appointed of God, and fenced with legal rights for this very end, to evidence the accomplishment of his promise in the Messiah. And to this end was his genealogy written and recorded by two of the evangelists, as that whereon the truth of his being the Messiah did much depend.
Sundry of the ancients had an apprehension, that the Lord Christ derived his genealogy both from the tribes of Judah and Levi, in the regal and sacerdotal offices, as he who was to be both King and Priest. And there is a story inserted in Suidas, how in the days of Justinian the Emperor, one Theodosius, a principal patriarch of the Jews, acquainted his friend, one Philip a Christian, how he was enrolled by the priests in their order, as of the lineage of the priests, by the name of Jesus the son of Mary and of God; and that the records thereof were kept by the Jews at Tiberias to that very time. But the whole story is filled with gross effects of ignorance and incredible fables, being only a dream of some superstitious monastic. But the ancients grounded their imagination, on the kindred that was between his mother and Elizabeth the wife of Zechariah the priest, who was the daughter of Aaron, Luke i. 5. But this whole conceit is not only false, but directly contradictory to the scope and argument of the apostle in this place. For the authors of it would have the Lord Christ so to derive his genealogy from the tribe of Levi, as thence to be entitled to the priesthood, which yet could not be, unless he was also proved to be of the family of Aaron. And toassign a priesthood to him as derived from Aaron, is openly contradictory to the apostle in this place, and destructive of his whole design, as also of the true real priesthood of Christ himself; as is evident to any one who reads this chapter. The alliance and kindred that was between the blessed Virgin and Elizabeth, was doubtless by an antecedent intermarriage of those tribes, as Elizabeth’s mother might be sister to the father or grandfather of the holy Virgin. And this was not only lawful between the tribes of Judah and Levi, or the regal and sacerdotal families, whence Jehoshabeath the wife of Jehoiadah, was the daughter of Jehoram the king, 2 Chron. xxii. 11, as some have imagined; but such marriages were usual to, and lawful among all the other tribes, where women had no inheritances of land, which was expressly provided against by a particular law. And this very law of exception doth sufficiently prove the liberty of all others. For the words of it are, ‘Every daughter, that possesseth an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel, shall be wife unto one of the family of the tribe of her father, that the children of Israel may enjoy every one the inheritance of their father,’ Num. xxxvi. 8. Both the express limitation of the law to those who possessed inheritances, and the reason of it for the preservation of the lots of each tribe entire, as ver. 3,4, manifest that all other were at liberty to marry any Israelite, be he of what tribe soever. And thus both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke, one by a legal, the other by a natural line, were both of them from the tribe of Judah and family of David. So,
Obs. I. It pleaseth God to give sufficient evidence unto the accomplishment of his promise.
2. For the manner of the proceeding of the Lord Christ from that - tribe, the apostle expresseth it by avareraXxe, ‘he sprang.’ Ανατελλω is usually taken in an active sense, to ‘cause to rise,’ Matt. v. 45, Tov ἡλιον avrov ανατελλει, ‘he causeth his sun to rise. And sometimes it is used neutrally, for ‘to rise;? and so, as some think, it peculiarly denotes the rising of the sun, in distinction from the other planets. Hence is avaroAn ‘the east,’ from the rising of thesun. So the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is called, the rising of the sun of righteousness with healing in his wings, Mal. iv. 2, avaroAn εξ ὕψους, Luke 1. 78, ‘the day-spring from on high.’ Thus did the Lord Christ arise in the light and glory of the sun, a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of his people Israel. But the word is used also to express othet springings, as of water from a fountain, or a branch from the stock. And so it is said of our Lord Jesus, that he should ‘ grow up as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground,’ Isa. limi. 2. ‘A rod out of the stem, and a branch out of the roots of Jesse,’ ch. xi. 1. Hence he is frequently called the branch, and the branch of the Lord, Isa. iv. 2; Jer. xxni. 5, xxxii. 15; Zech. ii. 8, vi. 12. But the first, which is the most proper sense of the words, is to be regarded; he arose eminently and illustriously from the tribe of Judah.
Having laid down this matter of fact, as that which was evident, and on all hands confessed, he observes upon it, that ‘ of that tribe, Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood.’
Exc nv φυλην, “ with reference unto which. tribe,’ περι ἧς, de qua tribu. Being to prove that the priesthood did no way belong to the tribe of Judah; so that the introduction of a priest of that tribe, must necessarily exclude those of the house of Aaron frem that office, he appeals unto the lawgiver, or rather the law itself. For by Moses, not the person of Moses absolutely is intended; as though these things depended on his authority; but it is his ministry in giving of the law; or his person only as ministerially employed in the declaration of it, that our apostle respects. And it is the law of worship that is under consideration. Moses did record the blessing of Judah, as given him by Jacob, wherein the promise was made unto him, that the Shiloh should come from him,’ Gen. xlix. 10. And this same Shiloh was also to.be a priest. But this was a promise before the law, and not to be accomplished until the expiration of the law, and belonged not unto any institution of the law given by Moses. Wherefore, Moses as the lawgiver, when the office of the priesthood was instituted in the church, and confirmed by especial law or ordinance, spake nothing of it with respect unto the tribe of Judah. For as in the law, the first institution of it was directly confined unto the tribe of Levi, and house of Aaron, so there is not in all the law of Moses, the least intimation that on any occasion in any future generations, it should be translated unto that tribe. Nor was it possible, without the alteration and abolition of the whole law, that any one of that tribe should once be put into the office of the priesthood. The whole worship of God was to cease, rather than that any one of the tribe of Judah should officiate in the office of the priesthood. And this silence of Moses in this matter, the apostle takes to be a sufficient argument to prove that the legal priesthood did not belong, nor could be transferred unto the tribe of Judah. And the grounds hereof are resolved into this general maxim, that whatever is not revealed and appointed in the worship of God, by God himself, is to be considered as nothing, yea, as that which is to be rejected. And such he conceived to be the evidence of this maxim, that he chose rather to argue from the silence of Moses in general, than from the particular prohibition, that none, who was not of the posterity of Aaron, should approach unto the priestly office. So God himself condemneth some instances of false worship, on this ground, that he never appointed them, that they never came into his heart, and thence ageravates the sin of the people, rather than from the particular prohibition of them, Jer. vu. 31. Wherefore,
Obs. II. Divine revelation gives bounds, positively and negatively, unto the worship of God.
Ver. 15—17.—Tuar the Aaronical priesthood was to be changed, and consequently the whole law of ordinances that depended thereon, and that the time wherein this change was to be made was now come, is that which is designed unto confirmation in all this discourse. And it is that truth whereinto our faith of the acceptance of evangelical worship is resolved. For without the removal of the Old, there is no place for the New. This, therefore, the apostle now fully confirms, by a recapitulation of the force and sum of his preceding arguments.
stmililude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, who is made not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of
_ an endless life. For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
There are four things to be considered in these words. 1. The manner of the introduction of this new argument, declaring its especial force, with the weight that the apostle lays upon it,—‘and it is yet far more evident.’
2. The medium or argument itself which he insists upon, which is, that from what he had already proved, there was another priest to arise after the similitude of Melchisedec.
3. The illustration of this argument, in an explication of the ways and means whereby this priest arose, declared both negatively and positively,—‘ who is made not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.’
Hence he adds, that it is περισσοτερον, Magis patet; abundantius manifestum, comparatively with what was said before, of an abundant efficacy for conviction, that whose light nothing can stand against. But we must observe, that the apostle doth not compare the things themselves absolutely with one another, and so determine that one is of a more evident truth than the other; but he compares them only with respect unto the evidence in arguing unto his end. There is more immediate force in this consideration, to prove the cessation of the Levitical priesthood, that another priest was to rise after the similitude of Melchisedec, than was merely in this, that our Lord sprang of the tribe of Judah; but of this afterwards.
And therefore he adds eri, ‘ yet;’ that is, above all that hath been collected from the consideration of Melchisedec, there is yet this uncontrollable evidence unto our purpose remaining. __
The apostle we see lays great weight on this argument, and withal proceeds gradually and distinctly from one thing to another in the whole discourse. It may be we see not why he should insist so much upon, and so narrowly scan all particulars in this matter. For being freed by the gospel from the power of temptations about it, and being of the Gentiles, who were never concerned in it, we cannot be sensible of the just importance of what is under confirmation. The truth is, he hath the greatest argument in hand, that was ever controverted in the church of God, and upon the determination whereof the salvation or ruin of the church did depend. The worship he treated of, was immediately instituted by God himself; and had now continued near fifteen hundred years in the church. All this while it had been the certain rule of God’s acceptance of the people, or of his anger towards them; for whilst they complied with it, his blessing was continually upon them, and the neglect of it was still punished with severity. And the last caution that God had given them, by the ministry of the last prophet he sent unto them, was, that they should ‘abide in the observance of the law of Moses, lest I come (says he) and smite the whole earth with a curse,’ Mal. iv. 6. Besides these, and sundry other things, that were real and pleadable'in the behalf of the Mosaic worship, the Hebrews esteemed it always their great and singular privilege above all other nations, which they would rather die than part withal. And the design of the apostle in this place is to prove, that now utterly unexpectedly unto the church, after so long a season, their whole worship was to be removed, to be used no more, but that another system of ordinances and institutions absolutely new, and inconsistent with it, was to be introduced. And upon the compliance of the Hebrews with this doctrine, or the rejection of it, depended their eternal salvation or destruction.
It was therefore very necessary that the apostle should proceed warily, distinctly, and gradually, omitting no argument that was of force and pleadable in this cause, and that he should not fail to remark in an especial manner on those arguments, which contained an especial evidence and demonstrative force in them, as he doth in this instance. For this introduction of it, ‘and it is yet far more,’ or ‘abundantly more evident,’ is as a hand put in the margin of a writing, calling for a peculiar attendance unto, and consideration of the matter, directed unto. And we may see,
Obs. I. That present truths are earnestly to be pleaded and contended for.—So the apostle Peter would have believers established, ev TH παρουσῃ αληδειᾳ, ‘in the present truth.’ All truth is eternal, and in itself equally subsistent and present unto all ages. But it is especially so either from the great use of it in some seasons, or the great opposition that is made unto it. So this doctrine about the abolition of the Mosaic ceremonies and institutions, with the introduction of a new priesthood and new ordinances of worship, was then the present truth, in the knowledge and confirmation whereof, the church was eternally concerned. And so may other truths be at other seasons. And any of them may be so rendered, by the opposition that at any time is made to them. For God is pleased to exercise and try the faith of the church by heresies, which are fierce, pertinacious, and subtle oppositions made tothe truth. Now none of them, which aim at any consistency in and with themselves, or are of any real danger unto the church, did ever reject all gospel truths, but some general principles they will allow, or they would leave themselves no foundation to stand upon, in their opposition unto others. Those therefore singly opposed by them at any time, as the deity or satisfaction of Christ, justification by faith, and the like, being so opposed, become the present truth of the age, in the instance of adherence whereunto, God will try the faith of his people, and requires that they may be earnestly pleaded for. And this is that which the apostle Jude intends, ver. 5, where he exhorts us, ἐπαγωνίζεσδαι, ‘ to contend,’ ‘strive,’ ‘wrestle,’ with all earnestness and the utmost of our endeavours, for the faith once delivered unto the saints; namely, because of the opposition that was then made unto it. And a truth may come under this qualification, by persecution as well as heretical opposition. Satan is always awake and attentive unto his advantages; and therefore, though he hate all truth, yet doth he not at all times equally attempt upon every thing that is so. But he waiteth to see an inclination in men from their lusts, or prejudices, or interests in this world, against any especial truth, or way of divine worship, which God hath appointed. When he finds things so ready prepared, he falls to his work, and stirs up persecution against it. This makes that truth to be the present truth to be contended for, as that wherein God will try the faith, and obedience, and patience of the church. And the reasons why we ought with all care, diligence, and perseverance, to attend unto the preservation and profession of such truths, are obvious unto all.
Obs. II. Important truths should be strongly confirmed.—Such is that here pleaded by the apostle, and therefore doth he so labour in the confirmation of it. He had undertaken to convince the Hebrews of the cessation of their legal worship, out of their own acknowledged principles. He deals not with them merely by his apostolical authority, and by virtue of the divine revelations of the will of God which himself had received; but he proceeds with them on arguments taken out of the types, institutions, and testimonies of the Old Testament, all which they owned and acknowledged, though without his aid they had not understood the meaning of them. On this supposition, it was necessary for him to plead and press all the arguments from the topic mentioned, which had any cogency in them; and he doth so accordingly.
Obs. III. Arguments that are equally true, may yet on the account of evidence not be equally cogent; yet,'
Obs. IV. In the confirmation of the truth, we may use every help that is true and seasonable, though some of them may be more effectual unto our end than others.—This we are instructed in, by the apostle affirming in this place, that what he now affirms is yet far more evident, And this evidence, as we observed before, may respect either the things themselves, or the efficacy in point of argument. For in themselves, all things under the Old Testament, were typical and significant of what was afterwards to be introduced. So our apostle tells us, that the ministry of Moses consisted in giving testimony to those things which were to be spoken or declared afterwards, ch.1.5. But among them, some were far more clear and evident as to their signification than others were. In the latter sense, the things which he had discoursed about Melchisedec, and his priesthood, were more effectually demonstrative of the change of the Levitical priesthood, than what he had newly observed concerning the rising of our Lord Jesus Christ, not of the tribe of Levi but of Judah, although that had life and evidence also in itself, which is principally intended.
Ku, ‘if,’ is generally taken here not to be a conditional, but a causal conjunction. And so, as many judge, it is used, Rom. viii. 31; 2 Cor. v. 15; 1 Thess. iii. 8; 1 Pet.i. 17. And it is rendereth in our translation by ‘ for,’ ‘ for that another priest;? as Beza rendered it by quod, ‘ because.’ Others by ex eo quod, and siquidem. Syr. ‘And again this is more known by that which he said.’ All take it to be an intimation of a reason proving what is affirmed; and so it doth if, with the Vulgar, we retain si, or siquidem, ‘if so be.’ And it is yet far more evident, ‘if so be that another priest.’
As to the argument in general, we must observe, 1. That the design of the apostle in this place, is not to demonstrate the dignity and eminency of the priesthood of Christ from that of Melchisedec, his type, which he had done before sufficiently; he doth not produce the same words and arguments again unto the same purpose: but that which he aims at is from that testimony, whereby he had proved the dignity of the priesthood of Christ, now also to prove the necessary abolition of the Levitical priesthood. Wherefore, 2. He doth not insist on the whole of the testimony before pleaded, but only on that one thing of another priest, necessarily included therein.
2. The subject spoken of is ἱερευς ἕτερος, that is not merely am, that is, αλλος, alius; as the Syriac understood it, who renders it by smN: but it is "i alienus, that is intended. Every Ἢ was by the law absolutely forbidden to approach unto the priest’s office, or altar, or sacred employment. So ἕτερος, ‘another, in this case, is ‘a stranger,’ one that is not of the house or family of Aaron. And nothing can be more evident, than that the Levitical priesthood, and the whole law of divine worship, must be taken away and abolished then, if it appear that any “i, ἕτερος, or ‘stranger,’ may be admitted into that office; much more, if it were necessary that it should so be. For the law of the priesthood took care of nothing more than that no stranger that was not of the house of Aaron, should be called to that office; see Exod. xxix. 33; Lev. xxi. 10; Num. i. 51, ii. 10. Aaron, and his sons, they shall wait on the priest’s office, max asp aim, ‘and the stranger that cometh nigh, that is to discharge any sacerdotal duty, ‘shall be put to death... And God gave an eminent instance of his severity with respect unto this law in the punishment of Corah, though of the tribe of Levi, for the transgression of it. And he caused a perpetual memorial to be kept of that punishment, to the end they might know, that no stranger that is not of the seed of Aaron should come near to offer incense before the Lord, Num. xvi. 10, And hence our apostle in the next verse observes, that this priest was not to be made after the law of a carnal commandment, seeing his making was a dissolution of that law or commandment. If therefore there must be-
3. His introduction into his office is expressed by avorara:, ‘there ariseth;’ oritur, exoritur. Syr. oxp, Surgit. Vul. Lat. Exurgat, ‘arose,’ in an extraordinary manner, Judges v. 7, ‘ Until I Deborah: arose, 1 arose a mother in Israel;’ that is, by an extraordinary call from God to be a prophetess and a deliverer. Deut. xviii. 18, ‘A prophet will I raise up unto you,’ which was Christ himself. So God ‘raised up a horn of salvation in the house of his servant David,’ Luke i. 69, that is, with an extraordinary power and glory. So was this priest to arise, not springing out of, nor succeeding in any order of priesthood before established. But all things in the law lay against his introduction; and the body of the people in the church, was come unto the highest.
defiance of any such priest. But as God had fore-signified what. he would do, when the time of the reformation of all things should come, so when he performed his word herein, he did it in that manner, with that evidence of his glory and power, as introduced him against all opposition. For when the appointed time is come, wherein the decrees of God shall bring forth, and his counsel be accomplished, all difficulties, though appearing insuperable, shall vanish and disappear, Zech. iv. 6, 7.
4. The nature of his priesthood is declared in its resemblance unto that of Melchisedec, cara τὴν ὁμοιοτητα. The apostle intendeth not to express the words of the Psalmist, ‘mat ὃν, which he constantly renders κατα ταξιν, ‘according unto the order;’? but he respects the whole conformity that was between Melchisedec and our Lord Jesus Christ, in the instances which he had before insisted on. For whereas God had ordered all] things in the Scripture concerning Melchisedec, that he might be αφωμοιωμενος τῳ viw του Θεου, ver. 3, ‘made like unto the Son of God, ‘ he is said to arise, kaS ὁμοιοτητα “ according to the likeness or similitude of Melchisedec.’ For every similitude is mutual; one thing is as like unto another, as that is unto it. This therefore is evident, that there was to be another priest; ἕτερος, not only αλλος, merely ‘another, but ἀλλογενης, ‘one of another stock and race;’ and a priest he was to be after the similitude of Melchisedec, and not so much as after the similitude of Aaron. The arising of Christ in his offices puts an end unto all other things that pretend an usefulness unto the same end with them. When he arose as a king, he did not put an end unto the office and power of kings in the world; but he did so unto the typical kingdoms over the church, as he did to the priesthood by arising as a priest. And when he ariseth spiritually in the hearts and consciences of believers,.an end is put unto all other things, that they might before look for life, or righteousness, or salvation by.