« ForrigeFortsæt »
as there is in the two following typical arguments in the Apostolick Constitutions, which Mr. W. deems the most facred of the cononical books of the New Testament? (b) Tythes belong to those who minister to Christ, because tenths of salvation are the firf letter of the name of Jesus, i. e. I, IoTA. Hear; O thou holy catholick Church, who hast receiv'd the Ten Commandments, and hast escap'd the Ten Plagues. Ergo, pay tythes to the Priest. natanes () Let a zvidow who is the altar of God sit at home: for the altar of God never runs about, but is fix'd in one place.
Why cannot Mr. W. as well allow of the force of typical interpretations of prophesies as of the typical arguments of St. BARNABAS, who is one of his canonical authors ? BARNABas's epistle is wholly made up of typical reasoning; of which take this one Specimen. < (k) The Scripture says, that ABRAHAM « circumcisid three hundred and eighteen < men of his house. But what therefore “ was the mystery that was made known
unto him? Mark first the EIGHTEEN, and
next the THREE HUNDRED. For the nu« meral letters of Ten and Eight, are I. H,
(b) Apostol. Constit. l. ?. Ç.25.
“ And those denote Jesus, And because the “ cross was that by which we were to find « grace ; therefore he adds, three hundred ; “ the note of whieh is T (the figure of his “ Cross). Wherefore by two letters he ligni“ fy'd Jesus, and by the third his Cross. He “ who has put the engrafted gift of his doctrine “ within us, knows that I never taught to “ any one a more certain truth." And accordingly this argument was deem'd of fo much weight, that our learned Archbishop tells us, in a note, that (l) many others of the ancient fathers concurrd with BARNABAS in this, and he refers us to authors for proof thereof. • In fine, is there not as much force in typical prophesies as in the typical arguments of St. ClEMENT, another of Mr. W's canonical authors? To say nothing here of St. CLEMENT's history of the PHENIX, which he (m) makes a type of the Resurrection, I desire Mr. W. attentively to .consider the following passage.
“ (n) The fpies gave RAHAB moreover “ a Șign; that she should hang out of her “ house a (0) Scarlet Robe : sewing there“ by, that by the blood of our Lord there
(1) p. 175. . (m) Ib. p. 21, (n) lb. p. 10, 11. (0) Josh. 2. 18.
« should be redemption to all that believe " and hope in God. Ye fee, beloved, how Có there was not only faith, but PROPHESY 6 too in this woman." Which words contain not only a typical argument for christianity, (which was deem'd fo strong as to be (P) apply'd' by many of the fathers to the same purpose), but assert RAHAB to make a prophesy in hanging out the Scarlet Rope. From whence it appears, that types are pro phelies, and that the distinction Mr.* W. would make between them, is groundless and false.
2. Mr. W. (g) says, JEROM was one of the first christian writers now extant, that ever gave such Grange interpretations of these ancient prophesies.. : I find (r) indeed Jerom represented as thinking, that the passages of tħe Old Testament were quoted, susq; deq; in the New Testament. Upon which' account he was necessarily driven' into the allegorical hypotheles. But yet, he seems to me, to have acted liked all others before him, and not to have been one of the first christian writers, now extant, who gave allegorical intere
() Wake, Ib. p.11.
pretations of the prophesies cited in the New Testament. . [1.] First, it is notorious, and has been made (s) appear by others, and is confessed by Mr. W. himself, that the apostles and primitive fathers interpreted the ritual ceremonies of the law, and the historical pasages of the Old Testament, typically: which, as appear'd just now, is interpreting prophesies in that manner. As to the commentaries of the fathers on, and their interpretations of, the Old Testament, they are so wholly allegorical, that it would be difficult to find many passages, not so interpreted, if interpreted at all by them. They were no criticks, and de spis’d 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 so seem to have cited and apply'd the prophesies they take from the Old Testament, that if you consider them as taken from the present Old Testament, it is in a manner impossible to expound or apologize for those applications of the Old pro
phefięs pbesies upon any other foundation, than by the said typical, mystical, secundary, or allegorical way of application, and that: (u) the ancient predi&tions concerning the Mesa SIAS and his character, tho' of re great importance to be easily understood, are (originally) fome of them fo obfcure and doubtful in their designation of perfors, or in their expreljicns, and others of them fo hidden in unsuitable places, and introduc'd upon very remote occafions, in a word, (w) freonid on purpose to be long conceal'd, as to have given a bandle to the introduction of the allegorical bypothefis. 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 (cheme; and, if the original State of the ancient predictions was such, that they were obscure and doubtful in their defignation of persons (that is, that they feem'd as applicable or more applicable to others, than to the Messias,) or bidden inz
(s) Platonisme Devoilé, p. 162— 197.