6. The same is the state of things with reference unto sacrifices. There is, as was said before, a relation between them and the
SECT.6,7.] - PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST. 19
priesthood. Hence is that saying in Bereshith Rabba: }2 nams yin3 ;—* As is the altar for sacrifice, so are the priests that belong unto it.” And by sacrifices in this inquiry, we understand those that are properly so: for that which is proper in every kind is first; nor is there any place for that which is improper or metaphorical, unless something proper from whence the denomination is taken have preceded, for in allusion thereunto doth the metaphor consist. Now, the first possible instance in this matter being in the state about which we inquire, there must be proper sacrifices therein, or none at all; for nothing went before with respect whereunto any thing might be so called, as now our spiritual worship and service are, with allusion unto them under the old testament.
And concerning those sacrifices, we may consider their nature and their end. A sacrifice is M2; that is, Suef, “victima, sacrificium mactatum,’—“a slain or killed offering;” yea, the first proper sig- nification of M3? is “ mactavit, jugulavit, decollavit, occidit,’—* to kill, to slay by the effusion of blood,” and the like. Neither is this signification cast upon it from its affinity unto 120, “ to kill or slay” (the change of » and + being frequent, as in the Chaldee almost perpe- tual), but it is its own native signification: Gen. xxxi.54, N21 3pyy nam, Say we, “ Jacob offered sacrifices.” Junius, “ Mactavit animalia,’— “He slew beasts;” which we allow in the margin, “ He killed beasts.” Targum, NND2) 2py’ D223. D2) is “to kill or slay,” and is constantly so used; and NnD>) is no more but “ mactatio,” “a slaughter;” but because all sacrifices were offered by slaying, it is applied to signify a sacrifice also. So Isa. xxxiv. 6. It is true, there was a covenant made between Jacob and Laban, and covenants were sometimes confirmed by sacrifices, with a feast of the covenanters ensuing thereon; but it is not likely that Jacob and Laban would agree in the same sacrifice, who scarcely owned the same God. It is, therefore, only the provision and entertainment that Jacob made for Laban and his company, for which he slew the cattle, that is in- tended; otherwise the sacrifice would have been mentioned distinctly from the feast. So are these things expressed Exod. xviii. 12. And so "3! is rendered by us “ to kill or slay” absolutely, 1 Sam. xxviii. 24; Deut. xii. 15, 16; 1 Kings xix. 21, i. 9; and so also ought it to be translated Num. xxii. 40, where it is “offered” in our books. Nt, the substantive, is also “ mactatio, jugulatio, occisio:” so Isa, xxxiv. 6; Zeph. i. 7; which James expresseth by ogay7, chap. v. 5. And D2! are absolutely no more than ogéyia, as from the slaughter of the sacrifices the altar is called 72!2. ©4w, also, and Qvofa, do no otherwise signify but “ to sacrifice,” or sacrifice by mac- tation or killing.
7. It is therefore evident that there neither is nor can be any
20 THE ORIGIN OF THE [EXERC. XXVI.
sacrifice, properly so called, but what is made by killing or slaying of the thing sacrificed; and the offerings of inanimate things under the law, as of flour or wine, or the fruits of the earth, were impro- perly so called, in allusion unto or by virtue of their conjunction with them that were properly so. They might be nidiy, “ offerings” or “ascensions,” but 5°21, “ sacrifices,” they were not. And the act of sacrificing doth principally consist in the mactation or slaying of the sacrifices, as shall afterwards be manifested. And whereas the oblation, as it is used to express the general nature of a sacrifice, is commonly apprehended to consist in the actings of the sacrificer after the killing of the sacrifice or victim, it is so far otherwise that it principally consists in bringing of it to be slain, and in the slaying itself, all that follows belonging unto the religious manner of testi- fying faith and obedience thereby. This also discovers the proper and peculiar end of sacrifices, firstly and properly so called, espe- cially such as might prefigure the sacrifice of Christ, unto which our present discourse is confined. All such sacrifices must respect sin, and an atonement to be made for it. There never was, nor ever can be, any other end of the effusion of blood in the service of God. This the nature of the action (“quod in ejus caput sit”) and the whole series of divine institutions in this matter do manifest; for to what end should a man take another creature into his power and possession, which also he might use to his advantage, and, slay- ing it, offer it up unto God, if not to confess a guilt of his own, or somewhat for which he deserved to die, and to represent a commu- tation of the punishment due unto him, by the substitution of an- other in his room and place, according to the will of God? And this casteth all such sacrifices as might be any way prefigurative of the sacrifice of Christ out of the verge of paradise, or state of inno- cency; for as therein there should have been no bloody mactation of our fellow-creatures, so a supposition of sin therein implies an express contradiction.