ment personages there were some things in which Christ and his mystical

command.

body the church were delineated, and that these things were admitted by his opponents: otherwise his argument would be inconclusive. Hence it follows, that Isaac, and other persons mentioned in the Old Testament, of whom there is no typical or spiritual signification given in the Scriptures, in express terms, were types of Christ in many things that happened to them, or were performed by them. In like manner, St. Paul shows (1 Cor. ix. 9. 10.) that the precept in Deut. xxv. 4. relative to the muzzling of oxen, has a higher spiritual meaning than is suggested by the mere letter of the Such are the most important criteria, by which to ascertain whether a passage may require a spiritual interpretation, or not. But although these rules will afford essential assistance in enabling us to determine this point, it is another and equally important question, in what manner that interpretation is to be regulated.

In the consideration of this topic, it will be sufficient to remark, that the general principles already laid down,' with respect to the figurative and allegorical interpretation of the Scriptures, are applicable to the spiritual exposition of the Sacred Writings. It only remains to add, that all mystical or spiritual interpretations must be such as really illustrate, not obscure or perplex the subject. Agreeably to the sound maxim adopted by divines, they must not be made the foundation of articles of faith, but must be offered only to explain or confirm what is elsewhere more clearly revealed; and above all, they must on no account or pretext whatever be sought after in matters of little moment.

In the spiritual interpretation of Scripture, there are two extremes to be avoided, viz. on the one hand, that we do not restrict such interpretation within too narrow limits; and, on the other hand, that we do not seek for mystical meanings in every passage, to the exclusion of its literal and common sense, when that sense is sufficiently clear and intelligible. The latter of these two extremes is that to which men have in every age been most liable. Hence it is that we find instances of it in the more ancient Jewish doctors, especially in Philo, and among many of the fathers, as Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, and others, and particularly in Origen, who appears to have derived his system of allegorizing the Sacred Writings from the school of Plato. Nor are modern expositors altogether free from these extravagancies.3

In these strictures, the author trusts he shall not be charged with improperly censuring "that fair and sober accommodation of the historical and parabolical parts to present times and circumstances, or to the elucidation of either the doctrines or precepts of Christianity, which is sanctioned by the word of God;" and which he has attempted to illustrate in the preceding criteria for ascertaining the mystical or spiritual meaning of the Scriptures. Such an accommodation, it is justly remarked, is perfectly allowable, and may be highly useful; and in some cases it is absolutely necessary. "Let every truly pious man, however, be aware of the danger of extending this principle beyond its natural and obvious application; Test he should wander himself, and lead others also astray from that clearly traced and wellbeaten path in which we are assured that even a wayfaring man though a fool should not err.' Let no temptations, which vanity, a desire of popularity, or the more specious, but equally fallacious, plea of usefulness may present, seduce him from his tried way. On the contrary, let him adhere with jealous care to the plain and unforced dictates of the word of God; lest, by departing from the simplicity of the Gospel, he should inadvertently contribute to the adulteration of Christianity, and to the consequent injury which must thence arise to the spiritual interest of his fellow-creatures."

IV. APPLICATION of the preceding principles to the spi ritual interpretation of the Miracles recorded in the New Testament.

Although (as we have already observed) the design of miracles' is to mark the divine interposition, yet, when perusing the miracles recorded in the Sacred Writings, we are not to lose sight of the moral and religious instruction concealed under them, and especially under the miracles performed by our Saviour. "All his miracles," indeed, "were undoubtedly so many testimonies that he was sent from God: but they were much more than this, for they were all of such a kind, and attended with such circumstances, as give us an insight into the spiritual state of man, and the great work of his salvation."" They were significant emblems of his designs, and figures aptly representing the benefits to be conferred by him upon mankind, and had in them a spiritual

sense.

1 See Chapter I. Sections I. III. and IV. pp. 355-358. and 361-366, supra. "Est regula theologorum, sensum mysticum non esse argumentati Thus, he cast out evil spirits, who, by the Divine Provirum, hoc est, non suppeditare firma ac solida argumenta, quibus dogmata dence, were permitted to exert themselves at that time, and to fidei inædificentur." Rambach, Inst. Herm. Sacr. pp. 72, 73. 3 Thus, Cocceius represented the entire history of the Old Testament possess many persons. By this act he showed that he came to as a mirror, which held forth an accurate view of the transactions and destroy the empire of Satan, and seemed to foretell that, whereevents that were to happen in the church under the New Testament dissoever his doctrine should prevail, idolatry and vice should be pensation, to the end of the world. He further affirmed, that by far the greatest part of the ancient prophecies foretold Christ's ministry and medi- put to flight.-He gave sight to the blind, a miracle well suiting ation, together with the rise, progress, and revolutions of the church, not him who brought immortality to light, and taught truth to an only under the figure of persons and transactions, but in a literal manner, ignorant world. and by the sense of the words used in these predictions. And he laid it Lucem caliganti reddidit mundo, applied by down as a fundamental rule of interpretation that the words and phrases Quintus Curtius to a Roman emperor, can be strictly applied to of Scripture are to be understood in EVERY SENSE of which they are suscepti Christ, and to him alone. No prophet ever did this miracle before ble: or, in other words, that they signify in effect every thing which they him, as none ever made the religious discoveries which he made. can signify. (Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, vol. v. p. 360. et seq. edit. 1808.) These opinions have not been without their advocates in this coun- Our Saviour himself leads us to this observation, and sets his try; and if our limits permitted, we could adduce numerous instances of miracle in the same view, saying, upon that occasion, I am the evident misinterpretations of the Scriptures which have been occasioned by the adoption of them: one or two, however, must suffice. Thus, the light of the world; I am come into this world, that they which Ten Commandments, or Moral Law, as they are usually termed, which see not might see. He cured the deaf, and the dumb, and the the most pious and learned men in every age of the Christian church have lame, and the infirm, and cleansed the lepers, and healed all considered to be rules or precepts for regulating the manners or conduct of men. both towards God and towards one another, have been referred to manner of sicknesses, to show at the same time that he was the Jesus Christ, under the mistaken idea that they may be read with a new physician of souls, which have their diseases corresponding in interest by believers! (See an exposition of the Ten Commandments on the above principle, if such a perversion of sense and reason may be so some manner to those of the body, and are deaf, and dumb, and called, in the Bible Magazine, vol. iv. pp. 13, 14.) In like manner the first impotent, and paralytic, and leprous in the spiritual sense.—He psalm, which, it is generally admitted, describes the respective happiness fed the hungry multitudes by a miracle, which aptly represented and misery of the pious and the wicked, according to the Cocceian hypo- his heavenly doctrine, and the Gospel preached to the poor, and thesis, has been applied to the Saviour of the world, in whom alone all the characters of goodness are made to centre, without any reference to its which he himself so explains, saying,-1 am the living bread moral import! An ordinary reader, who peruses Isa. iv. 1., would natu- which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, rally suppose that the prophet was predicting the calamities that should befall the impenitently wicked Jews, previously to the Babylonish capti he shall live for ever.-He raised the dead, a miracle peculiarly vity: which calamities he represents to be so great that seren tromen shall suiting him, who at the last day should call forth all mankind to take hold of one man, that is, use importunity to be married, and that upon appear before him; and, therefore, when he raised Lazarus he the hard and unusual conditions of maintaining themselves. But this simple and literal meaning of the passage, agreeably to the rule that the words uttered those majestic words: I am the resurrection and the of Scripture signify every thing which they can signify, has been distorted life; he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he beyond measure; and, because in the subsequent verses of this chapter live. He performed some miracles upon persons who were not the prophet makes a transition to evangelical times, this first verse has been made to mean the rapid conversion of mankind to the Christian faith; the of his own nation, and it was ordered by Divine Providence, seven women are the converted persons, and the one man is Jesus Christ! A simple reference to the context and subject-matter of the prophecy would

have shown that this verse properly belonged to the third chapter, and had • Christian Observer for 1805, vol. iv. p. 133. The two preceding pages no reference whatever to Gospel times. On the absurdity of the exposi- of this journal contain some admirable remarks on the evils of spirituali tion just noticed, it is needless to make any comment. It is surpassed onlyzing the Sacred Writings too much. The same topic is also further noticed by the reveries of a modern writer on the Continent, who has pushed the in volume xvi. for 1817, p. 319. et seq. Many important observations on the Cocceian hypothesis to the utmost bounds. According to his scheme, the history and abuses of spiritual interpretation will be found in the late Rev. incest of Lot and his daughters was permitted, only to be a sign of the J. J. Conybeare's Bampton Lectures for 1824. The whole of Bishop Horne's salvation which the world was afterwards to receive from Jesus Christ; and Preface to his Commentary on the Psalms is equally worthy of perusal for Joshua the son of Nun signifies the same thing as Jesus the son of Man!!! its excellent observations on the same question. The misapplication and Kanne's Christus im Alten Testament, that is, Christ in the Old Testament, abuse of spiritual interpretation are also pointed out by Bishop Vannilor Inquiries concerning the Adumbrations and Delineations of the Messiah. dert, Bampton Lectures, p. 211. et seq. Nürnberg, 1818, 2 vols. 8vo. (Mélanges de Religion, de Morale, et de Critique Sacrée, published at Nismes, tome i. pp. 159, 160.)

The nature and evidence of miracles are discussed in this volume, pp. 93-119.

that these persons, as the centurion, the Syrophoenician woman, the Samaritan leper, should show a greater degree of faith and of gratitude than the Jews to whom the same favours were granted. This was an indication that the Gospel would be more readily received by the Gentiles than by the Jews, and this our Saviour intimates, saying when he had commended the centurion's faith, Many shall come from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south, and shall sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into utter darkness. It were easy to adduce other instances, but the preceding will suffice to establish the rule, especially as the spiritual import of the Christian miracles is particularly considered by every writer that has expressly illustrated them, but by no one with more sobriety than by Dr. Jortin, to whom we are indebted for most of the preceding illustrations.'

SECTION III.

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF TYPES.

I. Nature of a type.-II. Different species of types.-1. Legal types.-2. Prophetical types.-3. Historical types.-III. Rules for the interpretation of types.-IV. Remarks on the interpretation of symbols.

I. A TYPE, in its primary and literal meaning, simply denotes a rough draught, or less accurate model, from which a more perfect image is made; but, in the sacred or theological sense of the term, a type may be defined to be a symbol of something future and distant, or an example prepared and evidently designed by God to prefigure that future thing. What is thus prefigured is called the antitype.2

1. The first characteristic of a type is its ADUMBRATION OF

THE THING TYPIFIED.

One thing may adumbrate another, either in something which it has in common with the other; as the Jewish victims by their death represented Christ, who in the fulness of time was to die for mankind, or in a symbol of some property possessed by the other; as the images of the cherubim, placed in the inner sanctuary of the temple, beautifully represented the celerity of the angels of heaven, not indeed by any celerity of their own, but by wings of curious contrivance, which exhibited an appropriate symbol of swiftness, or in any other way, in which the thing representing can be compared with the thing represented; as Melchisedec the priest of the Most High God represented Jesus Christ our priest. For though Melchisedec was not an eternal priest, yet the sacred writers have attributed to him a slender and shadowy appearance of eternity, by not mentioning the genealogy of the parents, the birth or death of so illustrious a man, as they commonly do in the case of other eminent persons, but under the divine direction concealing all these particulars.

2. The next requisite to constitute a type is, THAT IT BE PREPARED AND DESIGNED BY GOD TO REPRESENT ITS ANTITYPE.3 This forms the distinction between a type and a simile; for many things are compared to others, which they were not made to resemble, for the purpose of representing them. For, though it is said that "all flesh is grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass" (1 Pet. i. 24.), no one can consider the tenuity of grass as a type of human weakness, or the flower of grass as a type of human glory. The same remark must be applied also to a metaphor, or that species of simile in which one thing is called by the name of another; for, though Herod from his cunning is called a fox (Luke xiii. 32.), and Judah for his courage a lion's whelp (Gen. xlix. 9.), yet no one supposes foxes to be types of Herod, or young lions types of Judah.

Those institutions of Moses, which partook of the nature of types, are called "a shadow of things to come" (Col. ii. 17.); and those things which happened unto the fathers for types are said to have been written for our admonition, "upon whom the ends of the world are come." (1 Cor. x. 1. 11.) In the same sense the Mosaic law, which abounded with numerous types, is declared to have had "a shadow of good things to come." (Heb. x. 1.) And those things which by the command of God were formerly transacted in the tabernacle, are described as prefiguring what was afterwards to be done in the heavenly sanctuary. (Heb. ix. 11, 12. 23, 24.) Hence it appears, that a type and a symbol differ from each other as a genus and species. The term symbol is equally applicable to that which represents a thing, past, present, or future; whereas the object represented by a type is invariably future. So that all the rites which signified to the Jews any virtues that they were to practise, ought to be called symbols rather than types; and those rites, if there were any, which were divinely appointed to represent things both present and future, may be regarded as both symbols and types;-symbols, as denoting things present; and types, as indicating things future.

4. We may further remark, that a type differs from a parable, in being grounded on a matter of fact, not on a fictitious narrative, but is much of the same nature in actions, or things and persons, as an allegory is in words; though allegories are frequently so plain, that it is scarcely possible for any man to mistake them; and thus it is, in many cases, with respect to types.

Where, indeed, there is only one type or resemblance, it is in some instances not so easily discernible; but where several circumstances concur, it is scarcely possible not to perceive the agreement subsisting between the type and the antitype. Thus, the ark was a type of baptism; the land of Canaan, of heaven; the elevation of the brazen serpent, and the prophet Jonah, of our Saviour's crucifixion and resurrection.

II. In the examination of the Sacred Writings, three SPECIES of types present themselves to our consideration; viz. Legal Types, or those contained in the Mosaic law; Prophetical Types, and Historical Types.

1. LEGAL TYPES.-It evidently appears, from comparing the history and economy of Moses with the whole of the New Tes tament, that the ritual law was typical of the Messiah and of Gospel blessings; and this point has been so clearly established by the great apostle of the Gentiles in his Epistle to the Hebrews, that it will suffice to adduce a very few examples, to show the nature of Legal Types.

Thus, the entire constitution, and offerings of the Levitical priesthood, typically prefigured Christ the great high-priest (Heb. v. vii. viii.); and especially the ceremonies observed on the great day of atonement. (Lev. xvi. with Heb. ix. throughout, and x. 1-22.) So, the passover and the paschal lamb typified the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Exod. xii. 3. et seq. with John xix. 36. and 1 Cor. v. 7.): so, the feast of Pentecost, which commemorated the giving of the law on Mount Sinai (Exod. xix. xx.), prefigured the effusion of the Holy Spirit on the apostles, who were thus enabled to promulgate the Gospel throughout the then known world. (Acts ii. 1-11.) And it has been conjectured that the feast of tabernacles typifies the final restoration of the Jews. In like manner, the privileges of the Jews were types of those enjoyed by all true Christians; "for their relation to God as his people, signified by the name Israelite (Rom. ix. 4.), prefigured the more honourable relation, in which believers, the true Israel, stand to God.-Their adoption as the sons of God, and the privileges they were entitled to by that adoption, were types of believers being made partakers of the divine nature by the renewing of the Holy Ghost, and of their title to the inheritance of heaven.-The residence of the glory, first in the tabernacle and then in the temple, was a figure of the residence of God by his Spirit in the Christian church, His temple on earth, and of His eternal residence in that church brought to perfection in heaven.-The covenant with Abraham was the new or Gospel covenant, the blessings of which were typified by the temporal blessings promised to him and to his shippers of the true God, were separated from the idolatrous nations, was natural seed; and the covenant at Sinai, whereby the Israelites, as the wor an emblem of the final separation of the righteous from the wicked.-In the giving of the law, and the formation of the Israelites into a nation or community, was represented the formation of a city of the living God, and of the general assembly of the church of the first-born.-Lastly, the heavenly given to the Israelites by God's promise."

3. Our definition of a type includes also, that the OBJECT country, the habitation of the righteous, was typified by Canaan, a country

REPRESENTED BY IT IS SOMETHING FUTURE.

1 See Dr. Jortin's Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. pp. 267-275. (24 edit.) See also Dr. Dodd's Discourses on the Miracles of the New Testament, and Dr. Collyer's Lectures on Scripture Miracles.

Outram de Sacrificiis, lib. i. c. 18. or p. 215. of Mr. Allen's accurate translation. This work is of singular value to the divinity student; as af fording, in a comparatively small compass, one of the most masterly vindications of the vicarious atonement of Christ that ever was published. "It is essential," observes Bp. Vanmildert, "to a type, in the scriptural acceptation of the term, that there should be a competent evidence of the divine intention in the correspondence between it and the antitype,-a matter not left to the imagination of the expositor to discover, but resting on some solid proof from Scripture itself, that this was really the case." Bampton Lectures, p. 239.

2. PROPHETICAL TYPES are those, by which the divinely inspired prophets prefigured or signified things either present or future, by means of external symbols.

Of this description is the prophet Isaiah's going naked (that is, without his prophetic garment) and barefoot (Isa. xx. 2.), to prefigure the fatal destruction of the Egyptians and Ethiopians.-The hiding of a girdle in a rock on the banks of the Euphrates, which, on being subsequently taken thence, proved to be rotten, to denote the destruction which would

By Bp. Elrington (formerly Provost of Trinity College, Dublin). See the grounds of this conjecture ably supported in Dr. Graves's Lectures on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. pp. 393-395. notes.

Dr. Macknight on Rom. ix. 4. note 1.

speedily befall the abandoned and ungrateful Jewish people (Jer. xiii. 1-7. compared with the following verses):-the abstaining from marriage (Jer. xvi. 2.), mourning (ver. 5.), and feasting (ver. 8.), to indicate the woful calamities denounced by Jehovah against his people for their sins. Similar calamities are prefigured by breaking a potter's vessel. (Jer. xviii. 2--10.) By making bonds and yokes (Jer. xxvii. 1-8.) is prefigured the subjugation of the kings of Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, Tyre, and Sidon, by Nebuchadnezzar; and in like manner, Agabus's binding his own hands with Paul's girdle intimated the apostle's captivity at Jerusalem. (Acts xxi. 10,11.)1| To this class of types may be referred prophetical and typical visions of future events: some of these have their interpretation annexed: as Jeremiah's vision of the almond tree and a seething pot (Jer. i. 11-16.), Ezekiel's vision of the resurrection of dry bones (Ezek. xxxvii.), with many similar instances recorded in the Sacred Writings. Other typical visions, however, will in all probability be explained only by their actual accomplishment; as Ezekiel's vision of the temple and holy city (ch. xl. to the end), and especially the Revelation of Saint John: which will then be most clear and intelligible when the whole is fulfilled; as we can now plainly read the calling of the Gentiles in many parts of the Old Testament, which seemed so strange a thing, before it was accomplished, even to those who were well acquainted with the writings of the prophets. See an instance of this in Acts xi. 1-18.

3. HISTORICAL TYPES are the characters, actions, and fortunes of some eminent persons recorded in the Old Testament, so ordered by Divine Providence as to be exact prefigurations of the characters, actions, and fortunes, of future persons who should arise under the Gospel dispensation.

In some instances, the persons whose characters and actions prefigured future events, were declared by Jehovah himself to be typical, long before the events which they prefigured came to pass: these have been termed innate, or natural historical types; and these may be safely ad mitted. But inferred types, or those in which typical persons were not known to be such, until after the things which they typified had actually happened (and which can only be consequentially ascertained to be such by probabilities supposed to be agreeable to the analogy of faith), cannot be too carefully avoided, notwithstanding they have the sanction of some eminent expositors, because they are not supported by the authority of the inspired writers of the New Testament.2

|

priest of the Most High God. The same great adversary of the Protestants (in his Treatise de Laicis) in like manner discovered that their secession under Luther "was typified by the secession of the ten tribes under Jeroboam; while the Lutherans, with equal reason, retorted that Jeroboam was a type of the Pope, and that the secession of Israel from Judah typi fied, not the secession of the Protestants under Luther, but the secession of the church of Rome from primitive Christianity. But, to whichever of the two events the secession under Jeroboam may be supposed the most similar (if similarity exist there at all beyond the mere act of secession), we have no authority for pronouncing it a type of either. We have no proof of previous design and of preordained connection between the subjects of comparison; we have no proof that the secession of the Israel ites under Jeroboam was designed to prefigure any other secession what ever." From the same inattention to considering the necessarily evident relation between the type and the antitype, the Hebrew monarch Saul, whose name is by interpretation Death, has been made a type of the moral law, which Saint Paul terms the "ministration of death." (2 Cor. iii. 7.) In like manner, the period, which elapsed between the anointing of David and the death of Saul, has been made to typify the time of Christ's ministry upon earth!! And the long war between the house of Saul and the house of David (2 Sam. iii. 1), in which David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Suul weaker and weaker, has been represented as strikingly portrayed in the lengthened contests between the righteousness of faith and that of works so often alluded to in the epistles, especially in those addressed to the Romans and Galatians!!!"

It were no difficult task to adduce numerous similar examples of abuse in the interpretation of types; but the preceding will suffice to show the danger of falling into it, and the necessity of confining our attention to the strict relation between the type and the antitype. In further illustration of this canon it may be remarked, that in expounding typical passages two points should be always kept in mind, viz.

(1.) The TYPE must in the first instance be explained according to its literal sense; and if any part of it appear to be obscure, such obscurity must be removed: as in the history of Jonah, who was swallowed by a great fish, and cast ashore on the third day.

(2.) The ANALOGY between the thing prefiguring and the thing prefigured must be soberly shown in all its parts.

The criteria for ascertaining this analogy are to be found solely in the Sacred Writings themselves; for whenever the Holy Spirit refers any thing to analogy, either expressly or by implication, there we may rest assured that such analogy was designed by God. But further than this we cannot safely go.

to the Hebrews, in which the ritual and sacrifices of the Old Testament

III. From the preceding remarks and statements it will be obvious, that great caution is necessary in the INterpretaTION OF TYPES; for unless we have the authority of the sacred writers themselves for it, we cannot conclude with certainty that this or that person or thing, which is mentioned in the Old Testament, is a type of Christ on account of the resemblance which we may perceive between them: but we may admit it as probable. "Whatever persons or things recorded in the Old Testament were expressly declared by Christ, or by his apostles, to have been designed as prefigurations of persons or things relating to the New Testament, such persons or things so recorded in the former are types of the persons or things with which they are compared in the latter. But if we assert, that a person or thing was designed to prefigure another person or thing, where no such prefigura-cable to Christ. (Heb. vii. 27.) Again, the Mosaic priesthood is (vii. Is) tion has been declared by divine authority, we make an assertion for which we neither have, nor can have, the slightest foundation. And even when comparisons are instituted in the New Testament between antecedent and subsequent persons or things, we must be careful to distinguish the examples, where a comparison is instituted merely for the sake of illustration, from the examples where such a connection is declared, as exists in the relation of a type to its antitype." In the interpretation of types, therefore,

993

1. There must be a fit application of the Type to the Antitype. "To constitute one thing the type of another, as the term is generally understood in reference to Scripture, something more is wanted than mere resemblance. The former must not only resemble the latter, but must have been designed to resemble the latter. It must have been so designed in its original institution. It must have been designed as something preparatory to the latter. The type, as well as the antitype, must have been preordained; and they must have been preordained as constituent parts of the saine general scheme of Divine Providence. It is this previous design and this preordained connection, which constitute the relation of type and antitype. Where these qualities fail, where the previous design and the preordained connection are wanting, the relation between any two things, however similar in themselves, is not the relation of type to antitype." In further explanation of this canon, it may be remarked, that in a type every circumstance is far from being typical, as in a parable there are several incidents, which are not to be considered as parts of the parable, nor to be insisted upon as such. From not considering the evident relation which ought to subsist between the type and the antitype, some fanciful expositors, under pretence that the tabernacle of Moses was a figure of the church or of heaven, have converted even the very boards and nails of it into types. Thus Cardinal Bellarmines found the mass to be typified by Melchisedec's bringing forth bread and wine, he being a

1 Other examples of, and observations on, prophetical types, may be
seen in Dr. Nares's Warburtonian Lectures on the Prophecies concerning
the Messiah, pp. 70-86. 117-125.
2 The subject of historical types is copiously (but in some respects fan
cifully) elucidated by Huet in his Demonstratio Evangelica, cap. 170. vol. ii.
pp. 1056-1074. Amst. 1680; and by Dr. Macknight in his Essay on the
right Interpretation of the Language of Scripture, in vol. iv. or ví. (4to. or
8vo.) of his translation of the Apostolical Epistles, Essay viii. sect. 1-5.
The interpretation of types, generally, is vindicated by Alber, against the
modern neologian divines on the Continent, in his Institutiones Herme
neuticæ Nov. Test. vol. i. pp. 63-85.

Bishop Marsh's Lectures, part iii. p. 115.
De Missa, lib. i. c. 9.

Ibid. part iii. p. 113.

2. There is often more in the Type than in the Antitype. God designed one person or thing in the Old Testament to be a type or shadow of things to come, not in all things, but only in respect to some per ticular thing or things: hence we find many things in the type that are inapplicable to the antitype. The use of this canon is shown in the Epistle are fairly accommodated to Jesus Christ the antitype, although there are many things in that priesthood which do not accord. Thus the priest was to offer sacrifice for his own sins (Heb. v. 3.), which is in no respect appa weak and unprofitable, neither of which characters can be applied to the Redeemer, who continueth ever, and hath an unchangeable priesthood. (vii. 24, 25.)

3. Frequently there is more in the Antitype than in the Type.

The reason of this canon is the same as that of the preceding rule: for, there is necessarily more in the antitype than can be found in the type as no single type can express the life and particular actions of Christ, itself; so that one type must signify one thing, and another type another thing. Thus, one goat could not typify Christ both in his death and resur rection; therefore two were appointed (Lev. xvi. 7.), one of which was offered, and prefigured his "full, perfect, and sufficient atonement;" while the other, which was dismissed, typified his triumph over death and the grave. In like manner, Moses was a type of Christ as a Deliverer, or Saviour, in bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt, and Joshua, in bringing them into Canaan, which was a type of heaven,--the true country

of all sincere Christians.

4. The wicked, as such, are NOT to be made Types of Christ.

For how can a thing, which is bad in itself, prefigure or typify a thing that is good? Yet, for want of attending to this obvious and almost selfevident proposition, some expositors have interpreted the adultery of David, and the incest of Amnon, as typical of the Messiah! and the oak on which Absalom was suspended by the hair of the head has been made a type of the cross of Christ! It is not, however, to be denied, that the punishments of some malefactors are accommodated to Christ as an anti type. Thus, Deut. xxi. 23. is by Saint Paul accommodated typically to him, Gal. iii. 13. Jonah, we have already observed, was a type of Christ, by his continuance three days and three nights in the belly of a great fish: but the point of resemblance is to be sought, not in his being there as the punishment of his disobedience to the divine command, but in his coming forth, at the expiration of that time, alive, and in perfect vigour; which coming forth prefigured the resurrection of Christ.

5. In Types and Antitypes, an enallage or change sometimes takes place; as when the thing prefigured assumes the name of the Type or figure; and, on the contrary, when the Type of the thing represented assumes the name of the Antitype.

nent type of him. So, the Christian church is sometimes called Mount

Sion and Jerusalem (Gal. iv. 26. Heb. xii. 22. Rev. xxi. 2.), because these

places were types of her.

Of the second kind of enallage we have instances:-1. In prophetical types, in which the name of a person or thing, properly agreeing with the antitype, and for which the type was proposed, is given to any one: as in Isa. vii. 3. and viii. 1-3. So, the wife of the prophet Hosea, and his legitimate children, are by the cominand of Jehovah termed a wife of whoredoms, and children of whoredoms (Hos. i. 2.), on account of the Israelites, who were the antitype, and were guilty of spiritual whoredom or adultery. See Hos. i. 4. 6. 9.-2. In historical types, as when hanging was called in the Old Testament the curse of the Lord, because it was made a type of Christ, who was made a curse for our sins, as the apostle Paul argues in 6. That we may not fall into extremes, in the interpretation of Types, we must, in every instance, proceed cautiously, with fear and trembling," lest we imagine mysteries to exist

Gal. iii. 13.

Of the first kind of enallage we have examples in Ezek. xxxiv. 23. xxxvii. the picture was not drawn to express merely the thing itself, 24, 25. and Hos. iii. 5. ; in which descriptions of Messiah's kingdom he is but something else, which was, or was conceived to be, styled David: because as he was prefigured by David in many respects, so he was to descend from him. In like manner Christ is called a lamb analogous to it. This more complex and ingenious form of (John i. 29. 36. and Rev. xix. 7. 9.), because the paschal lamb was an emi-picture-writing was much practised by the Egyptians, and is that which we know by the name of Hieroglyphics."3 It has been doubted whether symbolical language should be referred to figurative or spiritual interpretation: in the former case, it would have occupied a place in the discussior. respecting the figurative language of Scripture; but, on consideration, it will appear that it is most nearly allied to spiritual interpretation. For a symbol differs from a type in this respect, that the former represents something past or present, while a type represents something future. The images of the cherubim over the propitiatory were symbols; the commanded sacrifice of Isaac was given for a type; the sabread and wine in the last supper also were symbols. The crifices of the law were types. has remarked, symbols and types agree in their genus, that So far, Bishop Warburton they are equally representations, but in their species they differ widely. It is not required, he further observes, that the symbol should partake of the nature of the thing represented: the cherubim shadowed out the celerity of angels, but not by any physical celerity of their own; the bread and wine shadowed out the body and blood of Christ, but not by any change in the elements. But types being, on the contrary, representations of things future, and so partaking of the nature of prophecy, were to convey information concerning the nature of the antitypes, or of the things represented; which they could not do but by the exhibition of their own nature. And hence we recollect, that the command to offer Isaac, being the command to offer a real sacrifice, the death and sufferings of Christ, thereby represented, were a real sacrifice.4

where none were ever intended.

No mystical or typical sense, therefore, ought to be put upon a plain passage of Scripture, the meaning of which is obvious and natural; unless it be evident from some other part of Scripture that the place is to be understood in a double sense. When Paul says (Gal. iii. 24. Col. ii. 17.) that the law was a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ, and a shadow of things to come, we must instantly acknowledge that the ceremonial law in general was a type of the mysteries of the Gospel. Nothing can be more contrary to that sober judgment which is so strenuously urged by the apostle (Rom. xii. 3.), than to seek for types where there are not the small est marks or traces of any; and that, too, by contradicting the plain and literal meaning of Scripture, and not unfrequently in direct opposition to common sense. "Should not the prudence and moderation of Christ and his apostles in this respect be imitated? Is it not pretending to be wiser than they were, to look for mysteries where they designed none? How unreasonable is it to lay an useless weight on the consciences of Christians, and to bear down the true and revealed, under the unwieldly burden of traditional mysteries!"

IV. Closely connected with the interpretation of types is the expounding of SYMBOLS; which, though often confounded with them, are nevertheless widely different in their nature. By symbols we mean "certain representative marks, rather than express pictures; or, if pictures, such as were at the time characters, and, besides presenting to the eye the resemblance of a particular object, suggested a general idea to the mind As when a horn was made to denote strength, an eye and sceptre, majesty, and in numberless such instances; where

5

As the same rules, which regulate the general interpretation of the tropes and figures occurring in the Scriptures, are equally applicable to the interpretation of symbols, it will be sufficient to refer to a former part of this volume, in which that topic is particularly discussed. Much light will also be thrown upon the symbolical language of Scripture, by a careful collation of the writings of the prophets with each other; for "the symbolical language of the prophets is almost a science in itself. None can fully comprehend the depth, 1 Beausobre's Introduction to the New Testament. (Bishop Watson's sublimity, and force of their writings, who are not thoroughly Tracts, vol. iii. p. 140.) In the preceding observations on the interpretation of types, the anthor has chiefly been indebted to Glassii Philologia Sacra, acquainted with the peculiar and appropriate imagery they lib. ii. part i. tract ii. sect. iv. col. 442-472., which has been unaccountably were accustomed to use. This is the main key to many of omitted by Prof. Dathe in his otherwise truly valuable edition of that work; the prophecies; and, without knowing how to apply it, the Langii Hermeneutica Sacra, pp. 97-119.; J. E. Pfeiffer, Inst. Herm. Sacr. pp 775-795.; Viser, Hermeneutica Sacra Novi Testamenti, part ii. pp. 184 interpreter will often in vain essay to discover their hidden 188. The subject of types is particularly considered and ably illustrated treasures." Lastly, the diligent comparison of the New in Dr. Outram de Sacrificiis, particularly lib. i. cap. 18. and lib. ii. c. 7. (pp. Testament with the Old will essentially contribute to illustrate 217-228. 361-334. of Mr. Allen's translation already noticed); Mr. Faber's Hore Mosaicæ, vol. ii. pp. 40-173.; Bishop Chandler's Defence of Christi- the symbolical phraseology of the prophets. For instance, anity from the Prophecies of the Old Testament, &c. chap. iii.; and Mr. we learn what is intended by the water promised to the IsraWilson's popular Inquiry into the Doctrine of Scripture Types, Edin-elites in Isa. xliv. 3., and to which the thirsty are invited in burgh, 1823. Svo. But the fullest view of this subject is stated by Dr. Graves to be found in the Rev. Samuel Mather's work on the Figures and Types of

the Old Testament. Dublin, 1683, 4to.

2 Before an alphabet was invented, and what we call literary writing was formed into an art, men had no way to record their conceptions, or to convey them to others at a distance, but by setting down the figures and tropes of such things as were the objects of their contemplation. Hence, the way of writing in picture was as universal, and almost as early, as the way of speaking in metaphor; and from the same reason, the necessity of the thing. In process of time, and through many successive improvements, this rude and simple mode of picture-writing was succeeded by that of symbols, or was enlarged at least and enriched by it. Bishop Hurd's Introduction to the Study of the Prophecies, serm. ix. (Works, vol. v. p. 233.

ch. lv. 1., from John iv. 10. and vii. 37-39.; where it is
wards to be dispensed."
explained of the Holy Spirit and his gifts which were after-

Bishop Hurd's Introduction to the Study of the Prophecies, serm. ix.
(Works, vol. v. p. 239.)
⚫ Divine Legation of Moses, book ix. ch. ii. (Works, vol. vi. p. 289. 8vo.

edit.)

See pp. 355-358. supra.

Bp. Vanmildert's Lectures, p. 240.

See a Concise Dictionary of the Symbolical Language of Prophecy, infra, Vol. II. Index II. pp. 457. et seq.

CHAPTER IV.

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE

SECTION I.

GENERAL RULES FOR ASCERTAINING THE SENSE OF THE PROPHETIC WRITINGS.

PROPHECY, or the prediction of future events, is justly considered as the highest evidence that can be given, of supernatural communion with the Deity. The force of the argument from prophecy, for proving the divine inspiration of the sacred records, has already been exhibited; and the cavils of objectors, from its alleged obscurity, has been obviated.' Difficulties, it is readily admitted, do exist in understanding the prophetic writings: but these are either owing to our ignorance of history and of the Scriptures, or because the prophecies themselves are yet unfulfilled. The latter can only be understood when the events foretold have actually been accomplished: but the former class of difficulties may be removed in many, if not in all cases; and the knowledge, sense, and meaning of the prophets may, in a considerable degree, be attained by prayer, reading, and meditation, and by comparing Scripture with Scripture, especially with the writings of the New Testament, and particularly with the book of the Revelation. With this view, the following general rules will be found useful in investigating the sense and meaning of the prophecies, as well as their accomplish

I. As not any prophecy of Scripture is of self-interpretation, (2 Pet. i. 20.), or is its own interpreter, "the sense of the pro-to the family of David, from whose posterity their kings sprung, and the phecy is to be sought in the events of the world, and in the harmony of the prophetic writings, rather than in the bare terms of any single prediction."s

In the consideration of this canon, the following circumstances should be carefully attended to:

(1.) Consider well the times when the several prophets flourished, in what place and under what kings they uttered their predictions, the duration of their prophetic ministry, and their personal rank and condition, and, lastly, whatever can be known respecting their life and transactions.

These particulars, indeed, cannot in every instance be ascertained, the circumstances relating to many of the prophets being very obscure: but, where they can be known, it is necessary to attend to them, as this will materially contribute to the right understanding of the prophetic writings. Thus, in order to understand correctly the prophecy of Isaiah, we should make ourselves acquainted with the state and condition of the people of Israel under the kings Amaziah, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. With this view, the books of Kings (2. xiv.--xxi.) and 2 Chron. (xvi.-xxii.) ought to be repeatedly perused and studied; because they contain an accurate view of the state of those tunes.

(2.) The situation of the particular places, of which the prophets speak, must also be kept in mind, as well as that of the neighbouring places: there being in the prophetic writings frequent allusions to the situation and ancient names of