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 monastick. 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 to assign 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.

6

2. For the manner of the proceeding of the Lord Christ from that tribe, the apostle expresseth it by avatiтaλs, he sprang. Avarsλλ is usually taken in an active sense, to cause to rise,' Matt. v. 45. To o uтou avaтs,' 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 avatoλn, 'the east,' from the rising of the sun. 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. avatoλn iž úlovs, Luke i. 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 other 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. liii. 2. "A rod out of the stem, and a branch out of the roots of Jesse," chap. xi. 1. Hence he is frequently called the branch, and the branch of the Lord, Isa. iv. 2. Jer. xxiii. 5. xxxiii. 15. Zech. iii. 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."

Εις ήν φυλην, with reference unto which tribe,' is, 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 from 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 re

spect 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 aggravates the sin of the people, rather than from the particular prohibition of them, Jer. vii. 31. Wherefore,

Obs. II. Divine revelation gives bounds, positively and nega tively, unto the worship of God.

VER. 15-17.-THAT 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 con firmation 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.

Ven. 15-17.Και περισσότερον ετί κατάδηλον εστιν, ει κατα την όμοιοτητα Μελχισεδέκ ανίσταται ἱερευς έτερος, ός ου κατα νομον εντολης σαςκικής γεγονεν, αλλα κατά δύναμιν ζωής ακατάλυτες. Μαρτυρεί γαρ ότι συ ίερευς εις τον αιώνα κατά την ταξιν Μελχισεδέκ. VER. 15-17.—And it is yet far more evident, for that after the similitude 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."

4. The confirmation of the whole, with the testimony of David-' for he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.'

The manner of the introduction of this argument is emphatical: Και περισσοτερον ετι καταδηλον εστι 6 And it is yet far more evident.'

The conjunctive particle xa connects this consideration unto that foregoing, as of the same nature and tendency.

The thing spoken of is said to be xaradhor. Of what he said before he affirmed that it was godnλov, ver. 14. namely, that our Lord sprang of Judah, evident, manifest, demonstrable;' but this he adds is xaradnλor, which composition of the word strengthens the signification, arguing yet a more open and convincing evidence.

Hence he adds, that it is seorsgor, 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 r, 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 import

ance 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, nagoven and, 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 con.. cerned. And so may other truths be at other seasons. And any of them may be so rendered, by the opposition that at any time.