Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

Apostles declared. This is the Method of the great GROTIUS; whofe Commentaries on the Bible will ever be esteem'd by all those, who defire truly to understand it; notwithftanding the Imputation of fome upon him, that he could neither find the MESSIAS in the Old Teftament, nor the Pope in the New. But the Anti-allegorists, rejecting the Method of GROTIUS, of a critical Examination of the Writings of the Prophets by the common Use of Language, and fuppofing the Prophets to ufe common Words in a peculiar and enigmatical Senfe, and most remote from vulgar Acceptation, and making that remote-enigmatical Senfe to be the literal Senfe, are guilty of the highest Abfurdity imaginable. For they not only put a Senfe upon the Prophets Words, which is remote from the literal Senfe (wherein they fo far concur with the Allegorists); but, proceeding by Rules contrary to all Use of Language and to common Senfe, they put a Senfe upon the Words fubverfive of the true literal Senfe; 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 Typift, Mystist, or Allegorist (no, not BURMAN, or ALTING, or ALLIX, or the great CoCCEIUS himself, all celebrated for putting remote allegorical Senfes on the Old Teftament) that have exceeded Mr. W. in Extravagancy; who, for Example, finds (r) the Destruction of Jerufalem by the Romans in the four firft Verfes of the 29th of ISAIAH

(r) Whiston's Effay on the Revelations, p. 303. 312.
P 3

;

the

the (s) Destruction of the Turks at Armageddon in the four next Verses; the fame (t) Deftruction of ferufalem by the Romans, in the first twenty 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 most plainly relate to the great Ravage the Affyrian Army fhould make in Judæa,, and of the Destruction of that Army. And Mr. W. to fupport this Hypothefis of fuch remote-literal Meaning, is forced 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 Connection in their Writings, that Connection would limit their Senfe to fome very obvious Matter, and take away all Colour for fuch Increase of Prophefies, and for the chimerical Meanings he puts upon those his fictitious Prophefies.

[blocks in formation]

(u) P. 322. 325.

(w) p. 361. 362.

(x) Whifton's Lect. p. 67. See alfo his Collection of ScriptureProphefies at the End of bis Effay on the Revelation.

He

He endeavours (y) to fupport his Hypothefis by faying, If the Prophefies are allow'd to have more than one Event in View at the fame Time, we can never be fatisfied, but they have as many as any Vifionary pleafes; and fo instead. of being capable of a direct and plain Expofition to the Satisfaction of the Judicious, will be lyable 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 Allegorists, was lefs abfurd, because every fingle Vifionary can have but one such chimerical Meaning at a Time, or exercise but one (z) extravagant Liberty of Fancy or of Interpretation. As to his faying, (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 Infidels in our Difcourfes with them; I anfwer how can he hope less to expose himself 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 muft not the Jews and Infidels fee each of their Meanings to be equally remote from the true literal Meaning, by what ever Names their

(y) Whifton's Lect. p. 15.

(z) Ib. Efay on the Revelation, p. 24. (a) Ib. Lectures, p. 16.

P 4

Mean

Meaning is call'd? And, by Confequence, must they not reject with equal Contempt the enigmatical-literal Meaning of Mr. W. as well as the allegorical Meaning of others? And will not they in a particular Manner insult, when they find him (b) changing and altering. the Holy Bible, according to his Pleasure, in Order to avoid the Scheme of a double Senfe of Prophefies, and to introduce his own cover'd myftical enigmatical-literal Scheme.

I know he pretends in behalf of his Scheme; that there is a peculiar (c) prophetick Language; and that the Words of the Prophets, tho' not understood according to their common Senfe, or in the fame Senfe as in any other Difcourfes, have yet a fingle, fix'd, and determinate Signification. And he and others fuppofe, that they have in divers Refpects found cut the certain Rules of that Language; in Virtue of which they pretend to be no lefs pofitive in their Interpretations of certain Prophefies, than if they were hiftorical Paffages, wherein Words are used in their common Senfe. And it must be confefs'd that many Prophefics 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 thofe Prophefies rightly explain'd and even to (d) excufe fome Dif

(b) Allix's Rem. on Whifton's Papers, p. 7.

(c) Whifton's Boyl. Lect. and Effay on the Revelation of St John.

(d) Nichols's Conf. with a Theift. Vol. 3, p. 107..

agreement

agreement between the Prophefies and the Events, as a Defect only in the Explainers.

But fuch Agreement can carry no real Conviction along with it. For the Reason 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 plaufible Meanings poffible for certain Words in the Prophefies, in Order to apply those Prophefies to the Events they would have to be intended in them. For Nothing is easier than for artful and learned Men to make Accomodations, in this Cafe, between Things, to a certain Degree. But perfect Accomodations seem impoffible; and accordingly, no Explications, grounded on the before-mention'd pretended Rules, of any Prophefies exifting before the Events and refer'd to past Events, will perfectly agree to those Events (tho' the pretended Peculiarity of the Language gives the Explainers the utmost Latitude to affign what Ideas they please to Words); as (for an Example) may be seen by the feveral Explications invented in Relation to DANIEL'S Weeks, or any other fuch Prophefies. For as to DANIEL's Weeks; let them understand by Weeks, Weeks of Years (tho' there be no (e) Foundation in the Old Teftament for fuch Ùfe of the Word) or what other Portion of Time

(e) Le Clerc Bibl. Chois. Tom. 15. p. 201.

they

« ForrigeFortsæt »