« ForrigeFortsæt »
rinfuitable places, and introduc'd upon remote occasions (that is, that by their context they seem'd not to bear the sense put upon them by the apostles) and thereby gave å handlo for the allegorical (cheme : what is so natural, as to suppose, from the said present and original state, the allegorical scheme to be the scheme 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 quotationis in the evangelists are taken out of those prophesies, which by evident circumstances belong to any other person, but the Mefias. Whereby he owns, or, at least distrusts, that some of the quotations in the Evangelists are taken out of prophesies, which by cvident circumstances belong to some other perfons, than the Messias. And confequently, he must suppose those quctations out of the propheses to be typically apply'd; the very nature of typical application lying, in applying passages, which in their literal
(x) Ib. p. 45.
and obvious fense, belong to one person, to another.
Again he says, () Much the greatest part of those propbefies, which are alledgʻd by the evangelifs, are plainly and certainly meant of the Messias. Which implies, that Some of the quotations alledg'd 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 (2) of the quotations taken out of the Old Testament by the evangelists, do better and more literally agree to the Messias than to those of whom they are ordinarily expounded, and have COMMONLY fome one or more charakters, which will agree to no others but him. Which is a confession against himself, and in favour of the allegorical scheme. For if the prophesies cited agree to others, tho' not so well nor so literally, as to the Messias, and have not ALWAYS some character, which will agree to none but him ; then those prophesies do agree to others, and can, with certainty, be only urg'd tppically.
He says, there are (a) quotations which do seem by the coherence of thcir places in
(y) Ib. p. 48.
the Old Testament to belong to others than the Messias; nay, are contrary to the coberence, 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 mistake their literal meaning in the application of them, so, 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.
He seems to allow St. Paul argu'd typically from the scripture-propbefies in these words; (b) I do not, says he, undertake to account for all the quotations of St. Paul, out of the Old Testament in his epiftles, (that is, he does not undertake to show that they are literally apply'd); not only because bis Ayle is peculiar, and be together with his fellow-worker St. BARNABAS did, more than all the rest of the apostles, make use of allegorical notions and interpretations, then own'd among the Jews;
(b) p. 43.
but also because Few or none of his quotations of this nature are taken from the fcripture-prophesies, but GENERALLY either from the histories or ceremonies contain'd in the Old Testament. For if some 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. Pauli
Mr. W. is reduc'd to great (c) 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 (c) in relation to the slaughter of the children in Bethlehem, by his scheme; he denies that quotation to be a prophesy (tho' St. MATTHEW cites the words of Jeremy as fulfill d; which is the very term he uses in relation to all the prophesies cited by, him) alledging, that it is a poétick description or lamentation fulfilld oc verify'd. Which is, at the bottom actually running into the allegorical or typical hypothesis, that he pretends to: avoid and to dread. For what is a poetick"description fulfill d, but a tyliv, 21 Ünie wiadomienie pical
pical prophefy fulfill d? And why does he call the quotation in question a poetick defcription, but because it is a most manifest description of another fact, and not of that fact, for which it was cited; wherein confifts the very nature of an allegorical quotation. The quotations made from the Old Testament, and said to be fulfilld in the New, had some of them, perhaps, no meaning in the minds of the prophets, who fometimes (f) understood not what they meant themselves : and all the quotations, as far as we can understand them, seem to have as remote a sense given them from the prophets words, as the quotation in question ; which sense would have had no foundation, had not the inspir'd apostles put that
sense upon them; nay, many of those quo· tations would seem not to be prophesies, did
not the apostles say, they were fulfill.d, or prophesies fulfilld." This being the Case of the quotations made by the apostles, they are faid by the learned to be typically or allegorically apply'd by them: Now this is also the case of the quotation, which Mr.:W. calls a poetick description fulfill d. It consists of words, which as they ftand in JEREMY., bear a different literal sense from
(f) Ib. p. 78.