Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

knew Nothing of; that this Wisdom and Method of Difcourfe or Reasoning was reveal'd to him and the other Apoftles by God, who alone knew his own fpiritual Meaning; and that the natural Man receives not the fpiritual Sense of Things, for they are foolishness unto him and cannot be known by him, because they are not to be difcern'd by the common Rules of Wisdom. or Philofophy, or Difputing, but are to be difcern'd only by a Man, who has the fecret, fpiritual, or myftical Meaning of Things, or the Rules, by which to find it out, imparted (q) to him by God. In fine, is there the leaft Ground from the literal Senfe in Genefis, to fuppofe (r) ABRAHAM's two Sons, ISAAC and ISHMAEL, fignify'd the two Covenants? Does not St. PAUL himfelf call fuch Interpretation allegorical? And can fuch a fecret, fpiritual Meaning of fo plain a Piece of Hiftory, have any other Foundation than divine difcernment? And what Foundation is there for St. PAUL'S arguing from the Old Teftament, that JESUS fhould (s) rife the third Day, but by an Allegory of JONAS'S being three Days and three Nights in the Whale's Belly? Which Arguments could be no Argument ad Hominem to the Jews, because, as Dr. WHITBY (t) obferves, they maintain'd their Law to be eternal, and had not the least Imagination of two Covenants. So that I look upon all other Methods of Reasoning used by

(9) Acts 26. 22. (r) Gal. 4. 21, &c. (t) Whitby in Gal. 4. v. 21.

G 2

(s) 1 Cor. 15.4.

Philofophers,

Way of arguing,

Philofophers, except that Manner of Reaforing used by the Apostles, and particularly by St. PAUL, to be wholly difcarded, and the allegorical Reasoning to be fet up by them, as the true and only Reasoning proper to bring all Men to the Faith of CHRIST; and the Gentiles were to be wholly beat out of the literal and to argue as became Jews. And the Event of preaching the Gofpel has been fuited to Matters confider'd in this View and Light. For we know, that (u) the Wife did not receive the Gospel at first,, and that they were the latest Converts; which plainly arofe from their ufing Maxims of reasoning and difputing wholly oppofite to thofe of Chriftians; out of all which Maxims they were indeed at length beaten by the fpiritual Reafoners, who have now brought the Wife into the Gospel.

4. But, fourthly, the Objection will appear to have no Weight or Difficulty in it, if it be confider'd, that Gentiles, before they could become Chriftians, ought to believe Judaism to come from God, and to receive the Jewish Scriptures as of divine Authority; which, when they had once received as fuch, they were in an equal Condition with the Jews of being converted by Type and Allegory. And confequently, all the typical and allegorical Arguments of the Apoftles from the Law, the Pfalms, the Hiftory, and the Prophets of the Old Teftament, were of equal Force to

(a) 1 Cor. 1. 26.)

Gentiles

Gentiles as to Jews; among whom they were in Effect included, with Refpect to thefe Arguments. Nay, it seems very probable, that the allegorical Arguments of the Apoftles from the Old Teftament, as being divine and moft fublime Arguments and (w) infinitely better than all human Reasonings, did of themselves, or with litttle Use of other Topicks, convince the Gentile-Chriftians at the fame Time, both of the Authority and Divinity of the Old Testament, and of the Truth of Christianity. Which Matter may not perhaps be untruly illuftrated by the Cafe of St. LUKE. He is judged by many learned Divines to have been a Gentile Convert; and, being a great Companion of St. PAUL, was no doubt inftructed by him in the Cabala of the Jews and in the fublime Senfe of the Old Teftament. Accordingly we find St. LUKE, in his Gofpel, and Acts, reprefenting the Grounds of Christianity, and arguing for it, in the fame typical Manner, from the Old Testament, with St. PAUL and the other Apoftles, who were originally Jews; in which two Books he may not untruly be fuppofed to declare the Grounds of his own Conviction, and to defign to reprefent those Grounds to other Gentiles, as fufficient for their Conviction alfo. But the (x) preaching of St. PETER to CORNELIUS puts the Matter paft difpute. He declares to him that Word, which had been publish'd thro' all Judæa,

(w) Bentley's Sermen on Revelation and the Meffias. p. 30. (x) Acts 10. 37, 38—41, 42, 43,

G 3

That

That is, the Gofpel as founded on the Old Teftament and as preach'd to the Jews. He then gives a Relation of the Life and Actions, and of the Sufferings, Death, and Refurrection of JESUS, and of his Commands to his Difciples. And concludes with faying, To JESUS give all the Prophets Witness, that thro' his Name, whofoever believeth in him fhall receive Remiffion of Sins. Which is just the fame Way of arguing used throughout the New Teftament to mere Jews.

PART

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

Containing Confiderations on the Scheme, which Mr. Whifton fets up in Oppofition to the allegorical Scheme.

I.

Mr. WHISTON'S Scheme reprefented; which confifts chiefly in maintaining; that the Hebrew and Greek of the Old Teftament agreed in the Times of JESUS and the Apoftles; that the Apoftles cited exactly and argued literally from the Greek or Septuagint Tranflation; and that fince their Times both thefe Copies of the Old Teftament have been corrupted by the Jews, which makes it feem as if the Apostles had not argued literally from the Old Teftament; and in propofing, by various Means to restore the Text thereof as it flood in the Days of JESUS and his Apostles.

M

R. WHISTON highly condemns the allegorical Scheme when used in explaining the Prophefies cited out of the Old in the New Teftament. In his Boylean Lectures he says, (a) If a double

(a) Whifton's Boylean Lectures. p. 16. 20. 29.
G 4

Senfe

« ForrigeFortsæt »