2, 30. 1, &c. cerning Himfe'f (which however can no way be (1) Acts proved;) yet Who, that (1) knew David himfelf to be a Prophet; and that had compared the Other (2) If. 11, Prophecies, concerning the (2) Branch out of the roots of Jeffe, the (3) One Shepherd of Ifrael, even (3) Ezek. God's (4 Servant David who fhould be their Prince (4) ver.25 for ever, and yet was to be (5) Cut off before he (5)Dan.9, fhould reign for ever; and that had himself seen (as 26. Ii. 535 St Peter did) and actually converfed with Christ risen 37, 24. tot. 23, 2. 2 from the dead; Who (I fay) in these Circumstances (6) 2 Sam. could poffibly doubt, but that (6) the Spirit of the Lord which spake by David, intended the forementi→ oned words fhould be underflood of, and applied to Chrift? And the like may be faid concerning fome Other Prophecies, which are vulgarly fuppofed to be applyed typically to Chrift. 15. 'Tis not agreeable to Reason, or to the Analogy of Scripture, to fuppofe that the Jews before our Saviour's time, could have a Clear and Diftinet Understanding of the Full Meaning even of the Express Prophecies, much lefs of those which were more obfcure and indirect; when Both were intended to be only (1) as (1) See above, pag. 7. Alfo Part II. Prop. VII, § 4. pag. it were a Light Shining in a dark 165. Place. But thus much is evident, that the Jews both before and in our Saviour's time, had from these Prophecies (2) a general expectation of a Meffiah, and that this Meffiah was to be, not merely a " Temporal" Deliverer, but y, Pater futuri Seculi, the Head of the future ftate, as well as of the prefent. Nor (2) Percrebuerat Oriente toto vetus & conftans opinio, effe in fatis, ut Judad profecti rerum potirentur. Sueton. Pluribus perfuafio inerat, antiquis Sacerdotum libris contineri, eò ipfo tempore fore, ut valefceret + Oriens, profectiq; fudaâ rerum potirentur. Tacit. 1 Polibly from that text in Ze chary; id y yw To do does it at all appear that our Lord's μg Avabam. LXX. (3) Luke 24, 21. (4) Acts 1, 6. Difciples, when they (3) thought he would have Redeemed Ifrael, or when they (4) asked if he would at This Time restore again the Kingdom to Ifrael; Ifrael; I fay, it does not at all appear that they expected MERELY a "Temporal" Kingdom; but their Errour was in expecting a Prefent Kingdom; and therefore our Lord's Answer to them, is not concerning the Nature but the Time of the Kingdom. And the modern Jews at this Day, who to be fure have entertained no Prejudicated Notions from the New Teftament Writers interpretation or application of Prophecies; have (I think) ftill an univerfal expectation, that the Meffiah fhall be their Prince in the future State as well as in the prefent. 16. When Jefus Chrift, by (1) the Works which (1) Joh. he did in his Fathers name, and (2) which his Fa- 10, 25. ther gave him to finish, had Proved himself to be (2) Joh. Sent of God; (which Truth the Apoftles likewife 5, 36. confirmed by Their Teftimony, by their Works, and by laying down their Lives, not for their Opinions, which poffibly Erroneous and Enthufiaftick Perfons may fometimes fincerely do, but in Atteftation to Facts of their own Knowledge;) and it appeared moreover, that there was wanting in Him no CircumStance, no fine quâ non, no Character, appropriated by any any of the Antient Prophets to the promifed Meffiab; He had then a clear Right to apply to himfelf All the Prophecies, which either directly spoke of the Meffiah, or which, through any intermediate Events, pointed at him, and were applicable to him. 17. The Application of this latter fort of Prophecies to Chrift, is not Allegorical. "Tis not an allegorical Application, much lefs an allegorical Argument or Reafoning. But they are applied to Him, as being really and intentionally, in the View of Providence, the End and complete Accomplishment of that, whereof the intermediate Blessing was a Pledge or Beginning. 18. The Application of this latter fort of Prophecies to Chrift, was never by reafonable Men urged as being itfelf a Proof that Jefus was the true Melfiah. Nay, the Application of the most direct D 2 and and express Prophecies whatsoever, has not of itself the nature of a direct or pofitive Proof; but can only be a fine quâ non, an Application of certain Marks or Characters, without which no perfon could be the promised Meffiah; an Application of certain Directions or Defcriptions, to be made use of in the Inquiring after a particular Perfon. Many men were of the Seed of Abraham, and of the Tribe of Juda, and of the Family of David, and born in Bethlehem of Judea, and Suffered, and were cut off; And yet neither Any nor All of these Characters, could prove any man to be the promifed Meffiah; But the Want of any one of them, would prove that any man was not He. The Proof of (1) Joh. 5, Jefus being the Chrift, were (1) the Works which his Fa36. ther gave him to finish. The Application of direct and exprefs Prophecies to him, is nothing but such a Congruity of Marks or Characters, as removes all Objections by which an Adversary would endeavour to prove (2) Luke that it was not He. Ought not Chrift (2) to have suffered these things, and to enter into his Glory? is not Proving from his Sufferings, that Jefus was the Chrift; but removing the Objection, by whichSome were apt to infer from his Sufferings, that he could not poffibly be the Chrift. The Application of indirect Prophecies to him, is only a giving of further Light, from the analogy and conformity of the Old Teftament to the New, by way of Illuftration and Confirmation, to fuch as have been before convinced by the direct Proofs. The Proof therefore of the Truth of Chriftianity, does not stand upon the Application of Prophecies: But the Works by which Chrift profeffed to prove himself to be the expected Meffiah, gave him a Right to apply to himself the Prophecies concerning the Meffiah; And the Marks or Characters of the promised Meffiah, given by the Prophets, were fo many Tefts by which his Claim was to be tried. "Miracles "indeed " can never render 24, 26. a Foundation valid, which is in itself invalid; can "make « make a Prophesy fulfilled, which is not fulfilled; "can never mark out a Meffias, or Jefus for the Meffias, if Both are not marked out in the Old Teftament: "But Miracles can give a man a juft and undeniable Claim to be received as the promised Meffiah, if the prophetick Characters of the Meffiah be applicable to him. And This it is, by which Jefus was proved to be The Chrift. 19. From what has been faid concerning the Application of indirect Prophecies, 'tis eafy to obferve the Nature and Ufe of Types, and Figures, and Allegorical manners of fpeaking: That Thefe, were much lefs intended to be ever alledged for Proofs of the Truth of a Doctrine; and yet, in their proper Place, may afford very great Light and Affiftance towards the right understanding of it. An Inftance or two, will make this matter obvious. There is a very remarkable Paffage in the Epiftle to the Galatians, where the Apostle himself ftyles the thing he is speaking of, an (1) Allegory; that is, he draws an Argument (1) Gai. á fimili. The Allegory or Similitude he makes ufe 4, 24. of, is not alledged by him as a "Proof" of the Truth of the Doctrine he is afferting; but as a Proof of the Falfenefs and Groundlefness of a particular Objection urged by the Unbelieving Jews against it. The Doctrine the Apoftle afferts (both in the Epiftle to the Romans, and in This to the Galatians,) is; that Chriftians of the Gentiles, who imitate the Faith and Obedience of Abraham, (being circumcifed with the circumcifion of Chrift, Col. 2, 11,) are equally capable of being admitted to the Benefit of God's Promises to his People, as the Jews of the literal Circumcifion, who were lineally defcended from that Patriarch. In oppofition to this, the Jews alleged, that fince to the Ifraelites confeffedly (2) per- (2) Rom. tained the Adoption, and the Glory, and the Cove- 9, 4. nants, and the Giving of the Law, and the Service of God, and the Promifes; fince Theirs confeffedly were the the Fathers or Patriarchs, to whom all the Promifes of God were originally made; it could not poffibly be true, nor confiftent with the Promises of God. made to their Fathers, that these Ifraelites who had been all along the peculiar people or Church of God, fhould at laft be rejected for not receiving the Gofpel; and that Believers from among the Gentiles of all Nations, fhould be received in Their ftead. Now in Reply to this Objection, the Apostle argues with the greatest Juftnefs and Strength, from the Analogy of a like cafe acknowledged by Themselves, in which the Reafon of the thing was the fame; even from the Analogy of God's Method and Manner of proceeding, in the giving of Thofe very Original Promifes to the Patriarchs, upon which This Prejudice of the (1) Gal. Jews was founded. (2) Tell me, fays he, ye that de4, 21, &c. fire to be under the Law, do ye not hear the Law? That is, Will ye not attend to the Analogy of God's Method of proceeding, in Thofe Very Promises on which ye depend? For it is written, that Abraham had Two Sons, the one by a Bond-maid, the other by a Free Woman: But He who was of the Rond-woman, was born after the Flesh; but he of the free woman, was by Promife: Which things are an Allegory, &c. That is to fay: Even originally, the Promife was not made to All the children of Abraham, but to Ifaac only: Which was, from the Beginning, a very plain declaration, that God did not principally (1) Rom. intend his Promise, to take place in (1) Abraham's 9, 8. Defcendents according to the Flesh; but in those who, by a Faith or Fidelity like His, were in a truer and higher fenfe the Children and Followers of that Great Father of the Faithful. In like manner, and for the fame reason, the Promise was not made (2) to Both the Sons of Ifaac, but to Jacob only: And, among the Pofterity of Jacob, All (3) were (3) Rom not Ifracl, which were Of Ifrael. (4) Gat. yourselves, therefore, faith St Paul, who are fo de (2) Rom. 9, 10. 4, 21. What ye (4) firous |