« ForrigeFortsæt »
4. But, fourthly, the objection will appear. to have no weight or difficulty in it, if it be consider'd, that gentiles, before they could become christians, ought to believe judaism to come from God, and to receive the jewish scriptures as of a divine autority; which, when they had once receiv'd as luch, they were in an equal condition with the Jews of being converted by type and allegory. And consequently, all the typical and allegorical arguments of the apostles from the law, the psalms, the history, and the prophets of the Old Testament, were of equal force to Gentiles as to Jews; among whom they were in effect included with respect to these arguments. Nay, it seems very probable, that the allegorical arguments of the apostles from the old Testament, as being divine and most sublime arguments, and (20) infinitely better than all human reasonings, did of themselves, or with little use of other topicks, convince the gentile-christians at the same time, both of the autority and divinity of the Old
Testament, and of the truth of christianity. Which matter may not perhaps be untruly illustrated by the case of St. Luke. He is judg’d by many learned divines to have been
(w) Bentley's Sermon on Revelation and the Meffias, p. 30.
a gentile convert ; and, being a great companion of St. Paul, was no doubt instructed by him in the Cabala of the Jews, and in the sublime sense of the Old Testament. Accordingly we find St. Luke, in his gofpel, and Afts, representing the grounds of christianity, and arguing for it, in the same typical manner, from the Old Testament, with St. Paul and the other apostles, whó were originally Jews : in which two books he may not untruly be füppos’d, to declare the grounds of his own conviction, and to design to represent those grounds to other Gentiles, as fufficient for their conviction alfo. But the (x) preaching of St. Peter to CORNELIUS puts the matter past dispute. He declares to him that word which had been publisk'd thro' all Judea, that is, the gofpel as founded on the Old Testament, and as preach'd to the Jews. He then gives a relation of the life and actions, and of the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and of his commands to his disciples. And concludes with saying, To Jesus give all the prophets witness, that thro' his name, whofoever believeth in him Jull receive remission af fins. Which is just the same way of arguing used throughout the New Testament to mere Jews.
*(x) A&S 10.37, 38—41, 42, 43.
PART II. Containing Confiderations on the Scheme
pbicb Mr. Whifton sets up in Oppofition to the allegorical Scbeme.
. . I. Mr: Whiston's Scheme represented ; which
confifts chiefly in maintaining ; that the Hebrew and Greek of the old Testament agreed in the times of Jesus and the apostles; that the apostles cited exaxtly and argu'd literally from the Greek or Septuagint Translation, and that since their times both these copies of the Old Testament have been corrupted by the Jews, which makes it seem as if the apoftles had not argu'd literally from the Old Testament; and in proposing, by various means to restore the Text thereof as it ftood in the days of Jesus and his apostles.
M R. WHISTON highly condemns the V allegorical Scheme when used in explaining the prophesies cited out of the Old
in the New Teftament. In his Boylean Le Etures he fays, (a) If a double sense in prophesies be allowe'd by us christians, as to those predi&tions, which were to be fulfill de in our Saviour CHRIST, , and if we own that we can no otherwise neto their completion, than by applying thema secondarily and typically to our Lord, after they had in their firft and primary intention been already plăinly fulfill'd in the times of the Old Testament, we lose all the real advantages of the ancient prophefies, as to the proofs of our common christianity, and take a method which exposes the christian religion to the laughter of infidels. In the book before us, he calls the (6) allegorical scheme weak and enthusiastical, and one of the most ill-grounded and pernicious things that ever was admitted by christians : and he speaks of it, as a great reproach to the gfdpel, and tending to harden the 7 eros in their infidelity; tho' he confesses, that taking the present text of the Old Testament for genuine, it is impollible to expound or apologize for the apostle's application of the prophesies they cite from the Old Testament upon any other foundation : and he particularly calls
I , II
fia) Whiston's Boylean Lectures, p. 16, 20, 29. (6) Whilton's Ejay, &c. p. 92.
the hypotheses or allegorical Icheme discoverd and explain’d by Sureshusius absurd and ridiculous. :
I shall therefore consider, how Mr. Whis: TON mends the matter, and what scheme of things he would set up in the room of what he calls the absurd allegorical scheme; which he owns to be founded on the present text of the Old Testament...
He contends, that the (c) apostles made their quotations out of the Old Testament rightly and truly, from the Septuagint ; which was in their times in vulgar use, and then (d) agreed with the hebreze ; and that as they made exact quotations, so they argu'd jutly and logically from the obvious and literal sense of the faid quotations, as they then stood in the Old Testament : but that fince their times both the Hebrew and Septuagint copies of the Old Testament have been fo greatly (e) corrupted, and so many apparent disorders and dislocations introduc'd therein, so as to occasion many remarkable differences, inconsistencies, and contradictions, between the Old and New Testament, in respect to the words and sense of the quotations made from the Old in the New Testament, all which corruptions of Η 2
(c) Whifton's Ejay, &c. p.12; 16; 87, 176; 78ta 328 (d) 15. p.z. (e) 182, 2031 203 i