Billeder på siden

not thought of, but excluded, according to the literal sense of the prophets, by the prophets themselves j which is enthusiastical and absurd to the highest degree,, and criticising and mending authors by rules the most improbable, and inconsistent with all true rules of criticism^ which should lead a man frequently to lessen, but never to multiply, mi~ racks, Mr. W. (j) is himself of opinion, that the miracles themselves reported by St. Athanasius in the Life of St. AnthoNy do both denote their own salshood, and create a suspicion of the integrity of St. Athanasius J tho' he relates them partly from St. Anthony himself partly from the attestation of witnesses, and partly from his own knowledge.

So that I will venture to fay, that a bible restordy according to Mr. Ws Theory, will be a mere Whistonian Bible; a Bible confounding, and not containing the true text of the Old Testament.

In fine, Mr. W. (z) tells us himself, that he finds plain indications of the frequent accommodation of the readings in the New Testament to those of the Scptuagint. Which, if true, seems to render an Essay towards

restoring the true text of the Oi



'ament, in

[ocr errors]

in order to vindicate the apofiolick citations\ a most unaccountable work. For by this account, the true or original apostolick citations are not themselves all known; and if all the present citations are placed according to Mr. JjTs mind in the Old Testament, we shall not hare a true text rejkr'd, but a text frequents "accommodated to the corrupted text of thfc Septuagint, mtroduc'd into the Old Tefta* men£. And the .work of restoring a true Ot genuine text of the Old Testament with respect to the apostolick citations from thence, seems a most impracticable work $ when all the copies of the Old Testament are corrupted with express design to make those citations seem impertinent; and when the citations themselves, as standing in the New Testament, have receiv'd changes and alterations there.

[ocr errors]

Typical or Allegorical reasoning defended against Mr. Whiston j wherein is a di* grejfion that compares together the allegoricalscheme, and Mr. Whiston j literal scheme, and that proves his literal scheme false and absurd.

MR. Whiston (a) condemns so highly the typical or allegorical interpretations of the prophesies cited from the Old in the New Testament, which yet the present state of the Old Testament makes necessary j that rather than come into that weak and en*thujiajiical method, as he calls it, he runs to the supposition of a lost text, of the Old Testament.

i. But yet he (b) justifies typical arguing from the ritual laws of Moses, and from passages of History in the Old Testament, by the example of St. Paul; who (being bred up (c) at the feet of Gamaliel, the great Qi 'Rabbis

- {rtj Whiston'* Effay, p. 92.

(b) Whiston's Boyl. LeB. p. 27,43*

(c) Jenkin'j Aeafonab. of shrift. Rettg. Vol.1, p^t, 322.

Ct/NEus FCep. des Hebr. Vol. t* 1. 3. c. 8« p 379—*

37*- ...
AVrftfw Hist* Clit. du V* Test. p. 964

Rabbi, by whom he was instructed in hebrew literature, and by consequence in all the mysteries of the Jewish Cabala) appears by his writings to be a great proficient in types and allegories, and is esteem'd by some Jews themlelves as a great Mekubal, and profoundly skuTd in the sublime sense of the bible. Indeed, he pretends, (a1) this last to be quite another thing from the odd (typical) application of prophesies. For, fays he, the ancient ceremonial institutions were, as to their principal branches at least, in their own nature {e) Types and Shadows of future good things under the christian dispensation. And several remarkable events and histories of old time, seem to have been particularly recorded for the sake of some future truths and discoveries, which were to be drawn from them. jBut the case of the ancient prophesies, to be allcdgd from the oldscriptures for the ConFirmation of Christianity, is quite of another nature, and of a more nice and exalt consideration.

But how are these things different? For are not the ritual laws of Moses, by being in their own nature types and ihadows of future good things, prophesies? And are not

[ocr errors]

the events and histories of old time, by being recorded for the fake of some future truths and discoveries, which were to be drawn from them, (f) prophesies also? And does not our Saviour himself say so, when he affirms, that the (g) Law prophesies, and that he came to fulfil the Law, as well as the Prophets? And do not Mr. W's prophetical types cmifirm christianity? And may not typical prophesies confirm it in the fame manner?

Mr. W. therefore ought to own, either that our Saviour and St. Paul talk'd weakly and enthusiastically, when they interpreted the ritual laws of Moses, and the passages of history contain'd in the Old Testament (which they look'd on as prophesies) typically j or else to allow the typical and allegorical method of interpreting the passages cited in the New Testament from the pro'phets, which he now calls weak and entbu

sides, as to strength of argument j what is the difference between an allegorical interpretation of a prophesy, and an allegorical interpretation of a law or passage of hiJiory? Is not there ais, much force iq the allegorical interpretation of any prophesy,


excellent and divine. Be

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsæt »