of a critical examination of the writings of the prophets by the common use of language, and fuppofing the prophets to use common words in a peculiar and enigmatical fenfe, and most remote from vulgar acceptation, and making that remote-enigmatical fense to be the literal fenfe, are guilty of the highest abfurdity imaginable. For they not only put a fenfe upon the prophet's words, which is remote from the literal sense (where in they fo far concur with the allegorists); but proceeding by rules contrary to all use of language and to common fenfe, they put a fenfe upon the words fubverfive of the true literal fenfe; whereby properly speaking they are no interpreters at all, or rather worse than none, being mere indulgers of fancy. And there has never been a typist, mystist, or allegorist (no, not BURMAN or ALTING, OF ALLIX, or the great COCCEIUS himself, all celebrated for putting remote allegorical fenfes on the Old Teftament) that have exceeded Mr. W. in extravagancy: who, for example, finds (r) the deftruction of Ferufalem by the Romans in the four first verfes of the 29th of ISAIAH; the (s) deftruction of the Turks at Armageddon in the R 3 four (r) Whifton's Effay on the Revelations, p. 303, 312. (s) Ib. p. 361, 563. four next verfes; the fame () deftruction of Ferufalem by the Romans, in the first 20 verfes of the 24th chapter; the (u) reftoration of the Jews to their own country, in the 23d verfe of that chapter; and, what is ftill more extravagant, the (w) deftruction of the Turks, &c. in verfes 17-23 of the fame chapter, whereby the fame verfes have, according to him, at the fame time feveral remote-abfurd-pretended-literal meanings: tho' ISAIAH's view and intention in all thefe places have no obfcurity or difficulty in them, and do moft plainly relate to the great ravage the Affyrian army fhould make in Judea, and of the deftruction of that army. And Mr. W. to support this hypothefis of fuch remote-literal meaning, is forc'd to reprefent the prophets, as the most incoherent and (x) abrupt writers imaginable, and to break their feveral books, whofe parts are connected and depend on each other, into independent prophefies; for did he confider them as authors having the leaft conpection in their writings, that connection would limit their fenfe to fome very obvious mat (1) Ib. p. 303, 310. (*) p. 322, 325. (w) p. 361, 362. 2 (x) Whifton's Lect. p. 67. See also his Collection of Scripture-Propheftes at the end of his Effay on the Revela matters, and take away all colour for fuch increase of prophefies, and for the chimerical meaning he puts upon those his fictitious prophefies. He endeavours (y) to fupport his hypothefis by faying, If the prophefics are allow'd to have more than one event in view at the fame time, we can never be fatiffy'd, but they have as many as any vifionary pleafes; and fo inftead of being capable of a direct and plain expofition to the fatisfaction of the judicious, will be liable to the foolish application of fanciful and enthufiaftick men. As if his method which, as has appear'd, fubjects the prophefies to the very fame kind of chimerical meanings, and often to the very fame meanings with the allegorifts, was lefs abfurd, because every fingle vifionary can have but one fuch chimerical meaning at a time, or exercise but one (z) extravagant liberty of As to his fayfancy or of interpretation. ing, (a) that if this double intention in prophefies be allow'd by us chriftians, we lofe all the real advantages as to the proof of our common chriftianity; and, befides, expofe ourselves to the infults of Jews and R 4 Infi (y) Whifton's Lect. p. 15. (2) Ib. Effay on the Revelation, P: 24. Infidels in our difcourfes with them: I anfwer, how can he hope lefs to expose himfelf to Jews and Infidels than the allegorifts, by putting the fame remote meaning on the prophefies with them under the notion of that remote meaning being the literal meaning? Will not, nay must not the Jews and Infidels fee each of their meanings to be equally remote from the true literal meaning, by what ever names their meaning is call'd? And by confequence, must they not reject with equal contempt the enigmaticalliteral meaning of Mr. W. as well as the allegorical meaning of others? And will not they in a particular manner infult, when they find him (b) changing and altering the holy bible, according to his pleasure, in order to avoid the fcheme of a double fenfe of prophefics, and to introduce his own cover'd, myfti- ' cal, enigmatical-literal scheme. I know he pretends in behalf of his fcheme; that there is a peculiar (c) prophetick language; and that the words of the prophets, tho' not understood according to their common fenfe, or in the fame fenfe as in any other difcourfes, have yet a fingle, fix'd, and determinate fignification. And he and others 2 fup (b) Allix's Rem. on Whifton's Papers, p. 7. (c) Whifton's Boyl. Lect. and Effay on the Revelation of St. John. fuppofe, that they have in divers refpects found out the certain rules of that language; in virtue of which they pretend to be no less pofitive in their interpretations of certain prophefies, than if they were hiftorical paffages, wherein words are used in their common fenfe. And it must be confefs'd, that many prophefies explain'd and apply'd, according to thofe rules, to certain past events, have such an agreement to thofe events, as to occafion many to think those prophefies rightly explain'd, and even to (d) excufe fome difagreement between the prophefies and the events, as a defect only in the explainers. But fuch agreement ought to carry no real conviction along with it. For the reafon of fuch agreement is plainly this, that the explainers have had both the prophefies and events lying for a long time before them, with a view to make them accord. In confequence whereof, they have by mending and piecing of systems, and varying and changing ideas to words, found out the most plausible meanings poffible for certain words in the prophefies, in order to apply thofe prophefies to the events they would have to be intended in them. For nothing is easier than for artful and learned men to make accommoda tions, (d) Nichols's Conf. with a Theift, Vol. 3. p. 107. |