was the first-born of Jacob by Rachel. See I Chron. v. I, 2.

As this might have been made a precedent among the polygamous Jews, and what had been an act of justice in Jacob, made use of to justify an indulgence of undue partiality for one wife before another, to the disherifon of the first-born, and to the overturning the facred rights he was invefted with, as a type or figure of Him that was to come-who, as the great antitype, is ftyled, "the firft-born of every "creature." Col. i. 15.-therefore this law seems to have been made, and ftands as an irrefragable proof of the lawfulness of polygamy; because it stands as a proof, not only of the allowed practice of it, but of the legiti macy of the issue in the fight of GOD; which is evinced to demonftration in the above cafe of Jofeph, who could not have inherited the right of the first-born, on any other principle.

Simeon was the next fon of Leah, but could not take the inheritance, not being the firstborn of his mother-but Jofeph was, and therefore, as the only legitimate heir, took the birth-right, on the difherifon of Reuben the firft-born of Leah.

But farther. To fay that polygamy is finful (for if it ever was it certainly is, and if ever it was not it certainly is not, unless fome pofitive law hath made an alteration, or unless good and evil change their nature by length of time, like the fashion of our cloaths) is to VOL. I. make

I

make GOD the author of fin; for * not to forbid that which is evil, but even to countenance and promote it, and this uniformly for ages together, is being fo far the author of it, and acceffary to it in the highest degree. -And fhall we dare to fay, or even to think, that this is chargeable on HIM who is of purer eyes than to behold evil, and who cannot look on iniquity? Hab. i. 13. GOD forbid!

When He is upbraiding DAVID, by the prophet Nathan, for his ingratitude towards His Almighty benefactor, (2 Sam. xii.) He does it in the following terms: ver. 8. I GAVE THEE thy mafter's house, and thy

MASTER'S

*Puffendorf, b. vi. c. 1. § 16. obferves, that the Mofaical law was fo far from forbidding this cuftom, that "it feems in several places to suppose it ;" and refers to Deut. xxi. 15. xvii. 16, 17. and 2 Sam. xii. 8.

gra

When Efau met Jacob with his wives and children, he asked who are thofe with thee? and Jacob faid-The children which GOD hath GRACIOUSLY GIVEN thy fervant. Gen. xxxiii. 5. Now, can we fuppofe that GOD'S cious gifts are peculiarly beftowed on acts of rebellion againft His pofitive laws? Yet we must either fuppofe this, or that Jacob's polygamy was no tranfgreffion of the law. See Gen. xxx. 16, 17, 18, another remarkable inftance of God's special bleffing on polygamy.

The mention of Efau reminds me of a remarkable part of his hiftory. He took two wives, both Hittites, idolatreffes-which were a grief of mind unto Ifaac, and to Rebekah. Gen. xxvi. 34, 35. But whence arofe this grief of mind in Efau's parents? Not on account of his polygamy, but because he had married heathen women, as is clear from xxvii. 46: therefore Jacob is fent to PadanAram, that he might not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan, but of his mother's family; and when Efau faw that the daughters of Ganaan pleafed not Ifaac his father, he

went

MASTER'S WIVES INTO THY BOSOM, and I gave thee the house of ISRAEL and JUDAH, and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given thee fuch and fuch things.

Can we fuppofe GOD giving more wives than one into DAVID's bofom, who already had more than one, if it was fin in DAVID to take them? Can we imagine that God should thus tranfgrefs (as it were) His own commandment in one inftance, and yet fo feverely reprove and chaftife DAVID for breaking it in another? Is it not rather plain, from the whole tranfaction, that DAVID committed

מלאך

went and took a wife of the daughters of Ishmael, unto the wives which he had-but we hear of no lamentation of Ifaac and Rebekah, over this fresh act of polygamy. As for Jacob, we read of his return out of Syria with no less than four wives--that when he came to Mahanaim, and heard of Efau's approach, he rose up that night, and took his two wives, and his two women-fervants (called alfo his wives-See Gen. xxx. 4, 9. and his eleven fons, and paffed over the brook Fabbock. Gen. xxxii. 22. And Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him, &c. This man is called N ver. 30. GOD; in Hof. xii. 4. NSD an angel; and ver. 5. the Lord God of Hofs-which, all put together, fhews us, that it was not a mere man, nor created angel, but the angel JEHOVAH-the messenger of the covenant, Mal. iii. 1. who appeared often in an human form under the Old Testament, in token of His future incarnation under the New Teftament, even the man, the GOD-man CHRIST JESUS-He who is represented by commentators as ranking polygamy with adultery, Matt. xix. 9. But what was his conduct towards Jacob ?-Doth He reprove Him for the fin of polygamy, in which he was living? No-He faid, Thy name fhall no more be called Facob, but Ifrael, for as a prince hast thou power with GOD and with men, and haft prevailed-and he BLESSED him there. Comp. Deut. xxvii. 26. and Gal. iii. 10.

mortal fin in taking another living man's wife, but none in taking the widows of the deceafed SAUL? that therefore, though the law of GOD condemned the first, yet it did not condemn the fecond?

This paffage of 2 Sam. xii. 8. is fo conclufive a proof of GoD's allowance of polygamy, that writers on the other fide of the question have not been able to get rid of it, but by a downright corruption of the text.

Inftead of the plain, obvious, and literal meaning of the word pn-which fignifies the " breaft

or bofom, from the throat to the pit of the Stomach," have conftrued it into power, and would tell us that "Gop gave SAUL'S wives "into DAVID's power, as a fovereign, not into his bofom as an husband."

"Take this expreffion in its ftrongest and "most strict fenfe" (fays the late reverend and learned * Dean Delaney, in a book called "Reflections on Polygamy," printed at London, 1737, under the name of Phileleutherus Dublinienfis) as where Sarai tells Abram "that the had given her maid into his bofom,

66

(Gen. xvi. 5.) what more can be meant by it, than that the gave her into his power ?" We have but to look at the whole context of

*This Reverend gentleman is fo candid as to tell us, ." that he has ventured to differ from all the commen66 tators he ever met with, in the sense of every text re"lating to this point,"-i. e. of David's polygamy.-So that, by his own confeffion, he ftands alone, in his interpretation of every text upon the fubject. See Reflections on Polygamy, P. 3.

that

that paffage, and this learned man's question receives a full and explicit anfwer, and his whole argument an abfolute refutation. Gen. xvi. 1. &c. Now SARAI, ABRAM's wife, bare bim no children, and she had an handmaid, an EGYPTIAN, whofe name was HAGAR; and SARAI Said unto ABRAM, Behold now the LORD hath restrained me from bearing, I pray thee GO IN UNTO MY MAID, it may be that I may OBTAIN CHILDREN BY HER. And ABRAM hearkened unto the voice of SARAI: and SARAI, ABRAM's wife, took HAGAR her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to ABRAM to be HIS WIFE (M) and HE WENT IN UNTO HAGAR, and fhe conceived; and when she faw that he had conceived, her mistress was defpifed in her eyes: and SARAI faid unto ABRAM, My wrong be upon thee; I HAVE GIVEN MY MAID INTO THY BOSOM, and when she faw that she had conceived, I was deSpifed in her eyes; the LORD judge between me

The fequel of this chapter feems to afford, to every candid mind, a very conclufive proof, that this propofal of polygamy to Abram by his wife Sarai, was not finful, neither Abram's complying with it in the leaft difpleafing to GOD; for on Hagar's departure from Sarai, on account of hard usage, ver. 6. the angel of the LORD recommends it to her to return, and promifes to multiply her feed exceedingly, that it should not be numbered for multitude tells her he should bear a fon--which promife was fulfilled, ver. 15. Now, for all this to happen, in fupport of, and as a bleffing upon, a polygamous marriage, if fuch marriages were finful, and of course abominable in the eyes of God, is, I freely own, past every notion which I have conceived of the fcripture-character of the holy GoD of Ifrael. See Gen. xvii. 20.