Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

X. The Nature of Allegorical Reasoning farther bewn by Application of it to feveral particular Inftances cited from the Old and urged in the New Teftament 55 XI. An Aufwer to an Objection, that the Allegorical Reafonings of the Apoftles were not defign'd for abfolute Proofs of Chriftianity, but for Proofs AP HOMINEM, to the Jews, who were accuftom'd to that Way of reasoning 71

PART II.

Containing Confiderations on the Scheme, which Mr. WHISTON fets up in Oppofition to the Allegorical Scheme.

I. Mr. Whifton's Scheme reprefented; which con fifts chiefly in maintaining; that the Hebrew and Greek of the Old Teftament agreed in the Times of JESUS and the Apoftles; that the Apofiles cited exactly and argued literally from the Greek or Septuagint Tranflation; and that fince their Times both thefe Copies of the Old Teftament have been corrupted by the Jews, which makes it feem as if the Apostles had not argued literally from the Old Teftament; and in propofing, by various Means, to restore the Text thereof as it food in the Days of JESUS and bis Apostles 87 II. That it is incredible, that the Old Teftament fhould be fo corrupted as Mr. WHISTON afferts

92

III. That to fuppofe the Old Teftament fo corrupted as Mr. WHISTON afferts, is to give up Chriftianity to Fews and Infidels 99 IV. That Mr. WHISTON is not able to restore any prophetical Quotation made out of the Old in the New Teftament, fo as to make That literally ap ply'd, which now feems allegorically apply'd 107

V. That

V. That the Jews have not corrupted the Old. Teftament, in Refpect to the Paffages cited from thence in the New 117 VI. That the Septuagint Verfion was not, in the Days of JESUS and the Apostles, agreeable to the

Hebrew Text 143 VII. That the Samaritan Pentateuch is not an uncorrupt Copy of the Books of Moses, and originally derived from the firft Separation of the ten Tribes themselves in the Days of JEROBOAM 161 VIII. That the Apofiles did not always quote the Septuagint Verfion

182

IX. That the Means, whereby Mr. W. propofes to reftore the true Text of the Old Teftament, in ReSpect to the Citations made from thence in the New, will not reach that End 188 X. Typical or allegorical Reasoning defended against Mr. WHISTON; wherein is a Digreffion that compares together the Allegorical Scheme and Mr. WHISTON'S Literal Scheme, and that proves his Literal Scheme falfe and abfurd 198 XI. That Mr. WHISTON's first Propofition is fubverted by bis Book

The CONCLUSION.

235

[blocks in formation]

THE

GROUNDS and REASONS.

OF THE

Chriftian Religion, &c.

IN A

LETTER to a Divine of North Britain.

Reverend S IR,

Y

OU seem extreamly furprised upon having occafionally heard of Mr. WHISTON's Effay towards reftoring the true Text of the Old Testament; which Title, according to you, implies a moft Anti-Chriftian Paradox, who have always believed, with the greatest Part of Proteftants, that the Text of the Old, as well as New Teftament, has been the peculiar Care of Providence, and conftantly preferved pure and uncorrupted. And I am no less furprised, that you should defire fome Account of B

that

that Book who ; very lately would have thought fuch Curiofity to be an evil Inclination and Temptation of the Devil; who never enquired after any Books written by our Epifcopal Divines, but thofe of Dr. JOHN EDWARDS of Cambridge; and who used to deteft AntiTrinitarian more than Popish Authors, as introducing not only equally dangerous Errors in Doctrine, but the Ufe of Reafon and private Judgment, which utterly fubvert all Church Authority, the fole Foundation of Unity and Uniformity in Matters of Religion.

But, it feems, Curiofity, the Effect of Liberty, Senfe, and Learning, begins to reach even the Divines of Scotland; who, of all Proteftant Divines, are most tenacious of their Orthodoxy; and who are no lefs charm'd with the pure Doctrine and boly Difcipline received from their Ancestors of the Reformation, than we are with the Beauty of Holiness in our Common-Prayer Book, which was firft compofed one hundred and feventy four Years ago by the (a) Aid of the Holy Ghoft, and has, fince that Time, been (b) five times reform'd! and confequently, Theology (than which nothing is more naturally changeable, and which neither Art nor Power, nor Difcipline, could ever long fix or afcertain among Heathens, Jews, Chriftians, or Mahometans) may foon receive a new Form in the Kirk, as it daily does in all other Churches

(a) A& for establishing the Liturgy in the 2d of Edward the Sixth, 1548.

(5) Nichols's Preface to Commentary on the Common-Prayer.

You

« ForrigeFortsæt »