Billeder på siden

others before him, and not to have been one of the first Christian Writers, now extant, who gave allegorical Interpretations of the Prophes fies cited in the New Testament.

( 1.) First, it is notorious, and has been made (s) appear by others, and is confefs’d by Mr. W. himself, that the Apostles and primitive Fathers interpreted the ritual Ceremonies of the Law, and the historical passages of the Old Testament, typically; which, as appear'd just now, is interpreting Prophenes in that Manner. As to the Commentaries of the Fat thers on, and their interpretations of, the Old Testament, they are so wholly allegorical, that it would be difficult to find many Paffages, not fo interpreted, if interpreted at all by them. They were no Criticks, and despised the literal Sense of the old Testament as low and mean, and imploy'd their Invention to find out fublime Senses thereof. .

(2.) Secondly, Mr. W. (t) says, that the Apostles themselves do fo seem to have cited and apply'd the Prophefies they take from the Old Testament, that if you confider them as taken from the present Old Testament, it is in a Manner impossible to expound or apologize for those Applications of the old Propbefes upon any other Foundation, than by the said typical, myftical, secondary, or allegorical Way of

fs) Platonisme Devoile. p. 162—197.
Simon Hift. Crit. du. V. Telt. p. 97.
Whilton's Lečt. p. 27.
Wake's Prelim. to Genuine Epift. p. 71-75.
(t) Whiston's Elay, p. 92.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Application ; and that (u) the antient Predica tions concerning the MESSIAS and his Character, thoof so great Importance to be easily understood, are (originally) some of them so obfcure and douòtfut in their Designation of Per"fons, or in their Expressions, and others of them so hidden in unsuitable Places, and introduced upon very remote Occahons, in a Word, (w) framed on Purpose to be long conceald, as to have given a Handle to the Introduction of the allegorical Hypothesis. Which two Considerations make it seem a very difficult Matter to lay aside the allegorical Scheme, and not to admit it as the Scheme, by which the Apostles themselves proceeded. For, if the present State of the Old and new Testament, in Respect to the Quotations made from the former in the latter, does admit of no other Scheme to justify their 'Application but the allegorical Scheme ; and, if the original State of the antient Predictions was such, that they were obscure and doubtful in their Dehgnation of Persons ( That is, that they seem'd as applicable or more applicable to others than to the MESSIAS), or bidden in unsuitable Places and introduced upon remote Occasons ( That is, that by their Context they seem'd not to bear the Sense put upon them by the Apostles) and thereby gave a handle for the allegorical Scheme ; what is so natural, as to suppose, from the faid present and original State, the allegorical Scheme to be

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

the Sheme, by which the Apostles made Application of the prophesies they cited from the Old Testament?

But Mr. W. himself seems to me by many particulars, which he advances, to give up his own literal or rational Scheme, and to lay a just Foundation for us to suppose, that the Apostles proceeded on the allegorical Scheme.

He says, (x) Scarce any of the Quotations in the Évangelists are taken out of those Pro-'. pheßes, which by evident Circumstances belong to any other Person but the Mesras. Whereby he owns, or at least distrusts, that some of the Quotations in the Evangelists are taken out of Propheses, which by evident Circumstances belong to some other persons than the MESSIAS. And consequently, he must fuppose those Quotations out of the Propheses to be typically apply'd; the very Nature of typical Application İying, in applying Passages,' which, in their literal and obvious Sense, belong to one Person, to another.

Again he says, (y) Much the greatest Part of those Prophéhes, which are alledged by the Evangelists are plainly and certainly meant of the Messias. Which implies, that some Quotations alledged by the Evangelists are not plainly and certainly meant of the Messias; and, by consequence, that they are, or may be, typically apply'd by the Evangelists.

He says, that several (%) of the Quotations, · taken out of the Old Testament by the E

(*) Ib. p. 45.
(2) Ib. p. 49.

(y) Ib. p. 48.



vangelists, do better and more literally agree to the MESSIAS than to those, of whom they are ordinarily expounded, and have comMONLY some one or more Characters, which will agree to no others but him. Which is a Confefsion against himself, and in Favour of the allegorical Scheme. For if the Prophesies cited agree to others, tho' not lo well nor fo literal ly, as to the MESSIAS, and have not ALWAYS fome Character, which will agree to none but him ; then those Prophefies do agree to others, and can, with certainty, be only urged ty

He says, there are (a) Quotations, which do feem, by the Coherence of their Places in the Old Testament, to belong to others than the Messias ; nay, are contrary to the Coherence, wherein they appear there. Which should make those Quotations seem allegorically apply'd, as being apply'd in a Sense not only seemingly different from, but contrary to, that Sense they bear in the Old Testament. For, as the Apostles could be guilty of no Mistakes, and could not intend to apply those Quotations literally, and yet apply them in a Sense contrary to their literal Meaning, That is, could not miftake their literal Meaning in the Application of them, fo, by not applying them in their true literal Sense, but in a Sense contrary to That, they must, by consequence, intend to apply them in an allegorical Sense.

(a) Ib. p. 51-54


He seems to allow St. Paul argued typically from the Scripture-Prophefies in these Words. (6) I do not, says he, undertake to account for all the Quotations of St. Paul out of the Old Testament in his Epistles ( That is, he does not undertake to show that they are literally apply'd ); not only because his Style is peculiar, and be together with his FellowWorker St. BARNABAS did, more than all the Reft of the Apostles, make use of allegorical Notions and Interpretations, then own' d among the Yews ; but also because few or none of his Quotations of this Nature are taken from the Scripture-Prophesies, but GENERALLY either from the Histories or Ceremonies containd in the Old Testament. For if fome Few of his Quotations are taken from Scripture-Prophefies, and if his Quotations are, but generally, or for the most part, taken from the Histories and Ceremonies recorded in the Old Testament, the Point is yielded with Respect to St. PAUL.

Mr. W. is reduced to great (0) Shifts by his literal or rational Scheme. Not being able to reconcile the (d) Application, made by St. MATTHEW, of a Quotation out of JEREMY (e) in Relation to the Slaughter of the Children in Bethlehem, by his Scheme; he denies that Quotation to be a Prophefy ( tho' St. Mat: THEW cites the Words of JEREMY as fulfill'd; which is the very Term he uses in Relation to

6. 43.
Matt. 2. 17, 18.

() Ib. p. 55, 56.

(a) Jer. 31. 19.


« ForrigeFortsæt »