SECT. 5, 6.] AND SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 241
as such, and which they were by the light of nature directéd unto. So was it among the Israelites when the twelve original families, being multiplied into so many numerous tribes, were,. by common consent, united into one people or nation, without any polity, rule, or order peculiarly accommodated unto the whole community. This was the condition of that people before the giving of the law, the bonds of this union being consanguinity, agreement in design, out- - ward state in the world with respect unto other nations, all under the conduct of divine Providence unto a certain designed end. In this state there were some that offered sacrifice for the whole people: Exod. xxiv. 4, 5, “ Moses builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen unto the Lorn.” It is probable these young men were the same with those who are called “the priests,” chap. xix. 22, 24, when as yet the office of the priesthood was not erected.
6. There hath been great inquiry who those priests were, or who they were who thus offered sacrifices for families. or greater associa- tions, and by what means they were invested with that privilege. By most it is concluded that they were the first-born of the families and tribes, and that the right of the priesthood before the giving of the law was a branch of the primogeniture. But whatever simili- - tude there may be in what the light of nature directed to and what was after sacredly appointed, yet this opinion will not easily be ad- mitted by them who judge it necessary to resolve the original of the priesthood into a voluntary institution, as that which was to be typical and representative of the priesthood of Christ, which must be an immediate effect and emanation of divine wisdom and grace. Yet some suppose this opinion may be confirmed by the example of Mel- chizedek, who was the first called a priest of God in the world, being [according to them] Shem, the eldest son of Noah. But the whole of this argument is composed of most uncertain conjectures. It is uncertain whether Shem was the eldest son of Noah, and most pro- bable that he was not so; more uncertain whether Melchizedek was ‘Shem or no; yea, it is at the next door to the highest certainty that he was not so. And it is absolutely certain that he was not a priest on any account common to him with others, but by the immediate call or appointment of God; for had it been otherwise, when the Lord Christ was made a priest according to the order of Melchize- dek, he must have been so according to that common order whereof his priesthood was, which is contrary unto his singular call to that office. And if an extraordinary instance may contribute any thing unto satisfaction in this i as, that of Moses is express to the con-
VOL. XIX. 16
242 PREFIGURATIONS OF THE PRIESTHOOD [EXERC. XXXIV.
trary. He was a priest unto God: Ps. xcix. 6, “ Moses and Aaron among his priests.’ And there is not any thing peculiar unto a priest but he discharged it in his own person. Yet was not he the eldest son of Amram his father, but younger than Aaron by three years, who was alive all the while he executed his priesthood. But from these extraordinary instances nothing certain in this ease ean be concluded. Micah afterwards, when he fell off from the law of insti- tution in setting up teraphim and graven images, consecrated 708 123, one of his sons from amongst them, which he thought meet, without regarding the primogeniture, Judges xvii. 5. I have for- merly thought that the MOS DVI] DD, Exod. xix. 22, 24, “The priests which drew nigh to the Lorp,”—which, as was now said, I still suppose and judge to be the same with the young men em- ployed by Moses in the first solemn sacrifice in the wilderness, chap. xxiv. 5,—were the first-born of the families: but I now rather judge that they were persons delegated by common consent, or immediate divine designation, which in that extraordinary dispensation sup- plied the room thereof, to act representatively in the name of the people; for the other opinion is attended with many difficulties, and exposed unto sundry exceptions not to be evaded.
7. The rise of this opinion concerning the office of the priesthood, or peculiar right of sacrificing for themselves and others, being an- nexed unto the primogeniture, is usually taken from the words and fact of Jacob with respect unto Reuben his eldest son: Gen. xlix. 3, 4,
~“ Reuben, thou art my first-born, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power: unstable as water, thou shalt not excel.” The Targums make jointly this interpretation of the words, “Thou hast a threefold right above thy brethren,—xniw121; the primogeniture, the priesthood, and the rule. But seeing thou hast sinned, the primogeniture shall be given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the rule or dominion to Ju- dah.” But their authority, without further evidence, is not sufficient to determine this case. The privileges of the first-born were cer- tainly great from the beginning. There was 732 DVD, a right of primogeniture, founded in the law of nature, determined in the ju- dicial law unto Israel, and generally owned in some degree or other among all nations in the world. The foundation of it is expressed in these words of Jacob, ‘18 MUN) ‘N53 —“ My might, and the be- ginning of my strength;” that is, the spring unto all power and ex- cellency that was to arise out of his posterity. In him it began, and in him was the foundation of it laid. And the same reason is re- peated in the establishment of the law: T7537 DaLID 1 bk MVNA, — He is the beginning of his strength ; his is the right of primoge- niture,” Deut. xxi. 17. Hence this right was confined unto the first-