2. Further, in interpreting the compositions of the Hebrew bards, it ought not to be forgotten, that the objects of our attention are the productions of poets, and of oriental poets in particular. It is therefore necessary that we should be acquainted with the country in which the poet lived, its situation and peculiarities, and also with the manners of the inhabitants, and the idiom of the language. Oriental poetry abounds with strong expressions, bold metaphors, glowing sentiments, and animated descriptions, portrayed in the most lively colours. Hence the words of the Hebrew poets are neither to be understood in too lax a sense, nor to be interpreted too literally. In the comparisons introduced by them, the point of resemblance between the object of comparison, and the thing with which it is compared, should be examined, but not strained too far: and the force of the personifications, allegories, or other figures that may be introduced, should be fully considered. Above all, it should be recoslected, that as the sacred poets lived in the East, their ideas and manners were totally different from ours, and, consequently, are not to be considered according to our modes of thinking. From inattention to this circunstance, the productions of the Hebrew muse have neither been correctly understood, nor their beauties duly felt and appreciated. The reader will find some hints for the special study of the book of Psalms, in Vol. II. pp. 244, 245., and also a copious analysis of the book of Job, with observations for the better understanding of it, in pp. 235, 236. of the same volume. Ir has been a favourite notion with some divines, that the mystical or spiritual interpretation of the Scriptures had its first origin in the synagogue, and was thence adopted by our Lord and his apostles, when arguing with the Jews: and that from them it was received by the fathers of the Christian church, from whom it has been transmitted to us. The inference deduced by many of these eminently learned men is, that no such interpretation is admissible: while other commentators and critics have exaggerated and carried it to the extreme. But, if the argument against a thing from the possibility of its being abused be inadmissible in questions of a secular nature, it is equally inadmissible in the exposi tion of the Sacred Writings. All our ideas are admitted through the medium of the senses, and consequently refer in the first place to external objects: but no sooner are we convinced that we possess an immaterial soul or spirit, than we find occasion for other terms, or, for want of these, another application of the same terms to a different class of objects; and hence arises the necessity of resorting to figurative and spiritual interpretation. Now, the object of revelation being to make known things which "eye hath not seen nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man to conceive," it seems hardly possible that the human mind should be capable of apprehending them, but through the medium of figurative language or mystical representations. "The foundation of religion and virtue being laid in the mind and heart, the secret dispositions and genuine acts of which are invisible, and known only to a man's self; therefore the powers and operations of the mind can only be expressed in figurative terms and external symbols. The motives also and inducements to practice are spiritual, such as affect men in a way of moral influence, and not of natural efficiency; the principal of which are drawn from the consideration of a future state; and, consequently, these likewise must be represented by allegories and similitudes, taken from things most known and familiar here. And thus we find in Scripture the state of religion illustrated by all the beautiful images we can conceive; in which natural unity, order, and harmony consist, as regulated by the strictest and most exact rules of discipline, taken from those observed in the best ordered temporal government. In the interpretation of places, in which any of these images are contained, the principal regard is to be had to the figurative or spiritual, and not to the literal sense of the words. From not attending to which, have arisen absurd doctrines and inferences, which weak men have endeavoured to establish as Scripture truths; whereas, in the other method of explication, the things are plain and easy to every one's capacity, make the deepest and most lasting impressions upon their minds, and have the greatest influence upon their practice. Of this nature are all the rites and ceremonies prescribed to the Jews, with relation to the external form of religious worship; every one of which was intended to show the obligation or recommend the practice of some moral duty, and was esteemed of no further use The present chapter is abridged from Rambach's Institutiones Herme neutica Sacræ, pp. 67-82 compared with his "Commentatio Hermeneu tica de Sensus Mystici Criteriis ex genuinis principis deducta, necessa riisque cautelis circumscripta." Svo. Jenæ, 1728. than as it produced that effect. And the same may be applied to the rewards and punishments peculiar to the Christian dispensation, which regard a future state. The rewards are set forth by those things, in which the generality of men take their greatest delight, and place their highest satisfaction in this life; and the punishments are such as are inflicted by human laws upon the worst of malefactors; but they can neither of them be understood in the strictly literal sense, but only by way of analogy, and corresponding in the general nature and intention of the thing, though very ferent in kind."2 dif But independently of the able argument à priori, here cited, in favour of the mediate, mystical, or spiritual interpretation of the Scriptures, unless such interpretation be admitted, we cannot avoid one of two great difficulties: for, either we must assert that the multitude of applications, made by Christ and his apostles, are fanciful and unauthorized, and wholly inadequate to prove the points for which they are quoted; or, on the other hand, we must believe that the obvious and natural sense of such passages was never intended, and that it was a mere illusion. The Christian will not assent to the former of these positions; the philosopher and the critic will not readily assent to the latter. It has been erroneously supposed that this mediate, or mystical interpretation of Scrip ture is confined to the New Testament exclusively; we have, however, clear evidence of its adoption by some of the sacred writers of the Old Testament, and a few instances will suffice to prove its existence. 1. In Exod. xxviii. 38. Moses says, that the diadem or plate of gold, worn upon certain solemn festivals upon the high priest's forehead, signified that he bore in a vicarious and typical manner the sin of the holy things, and made an atonement for the imperfection of the Hebrew offerings and sacrifices. 2. In Lev. xxvi. 41. and Deut. x. 16. and xxx. 6., he men tions the circumcision of the heart, which was signified by the circumcision of the flesh. (Compare Jer. iv. 4. vi. 10. and ir. 25, 26. with Exod. vi. 12. 30.) 3. Further, the great lawgiver of the Jews explains the historical and typical import of all their great festivals. Thus, in Exod. xiii. 13. and Num. iii. 12, 13. 44-51. and xviii. 14-16, he shows the twofold meaning of the redemption of their first-born sons, viz beneath the plague inflicted by divine vengeance, and that the first-born that the first-born of the Hebrews were preserved while Egypt groaned sons were formerly consecrated to the priesthood; which being afterwards transferred to the tribe of Levi, the first-born sons were exchanged for the Levites, and were thenceforth to be redeemed. The whole of the sacrificial law showed that the bloody sacrifices morally signified the pu nishment of the person for or by whom they were offered; and that the other sacred rites of the Hebrews should have a symbolical or spiritual import will be obvious to every one, who recollects the frequent use of symbols which obtained in Egypt, from which country Moses brought out the Hebrews. The precepts delivered in the New Testament concerning the sacraments plainly intimate that those very sacred rites were then about to receive their real accomplishment, and their symbolical or spiritual meaning is explained. Dr. John Clarke's Enquiry into the Origin of Evil, in the folio collection of Boyle's Lectures, vol. iii. p. 229. See Bishop Middleton on the Greek Article, p. 580, first edition. 1. See, for instance, Rom. vi. 3—11. Col. ii. 12. 1 Cor. vi. 11. | SOUGHT, WHERE IT IS EVIDENT, FROM certain Criteria, that xi. 23-27. Eph. v. 26. and Tit. iii. 5. In which last passage SUCH MEANING WAS DESIGNED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. baptism (by immersion in water probably) is said to signify not The criteria, by which to ascertain whether there is a only the moral ablution of sin, but also the death and burial of latent spiritual meaning in any passage of Scripture, are two guilty man, and (by his emersion from the water) his resurrec-fold: either they are seated in the text itself, or they are to be tion to a pious and virtuous life; in other words, our death unto found in some other passages. sin, and our obligation to walk in newness of life. The spiritual import of the Lord's supper is self-evident. 2. Lastly, since we learn from the New Testament that some histories, which in themselves convey no peculiar meaning, must be interpreted allegorically or mystically (as Gal. iv. 22-24.), and that persons and things are there evidently types and emblems of the Christian dispensation, and its divine founder, as in Matt. xii. 40. John iii. 14, 15. 1 Cor. x. 4. and Heb. vii. 2, 3. it is plain that the mystical sense ought to be followed in the histories and prophecies of the Old Testament, and especially in such passages as are referred to by the inspired writers of the New Testament; who having given us the key by which to unlock the mystical sense of Scripture, we not only may but ought cautiously and diligently to make use of it. Where the inspired writers themselves direct us to such an interpretation, when otherwise we might not perceive its necessity, then we have an absolute authority for the exposition, which supersedes our own conjectures, and we are not only safe in abiding by that authority, but should be unwarranted in rejecting it. SECTION II. 1. Where the criteria are seated in the text, vestiges of a spiritual meaning are discernible, when things, which are affirmed concerning the person or thing immediately treated of, are so august and illustrious that they cannot in any way be applied to it, in the fullest sense of the words. The word of God is the word of truth: there is nothing superfluous, nothing deficient in it. The writings of the prophets, especially those of Isaiah, abound with instances of this kind. Thus, in the 14th, 40th, 41st, and 49th chapters of that evangelical prophet, the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity is announced in the most lofty and magnificent terms. He describes their way as levelled before them, valleys filled up, mountains reduced to plains, cedars and other shady trees, and fragrant herbs, as springing up to refresh them on their journey, and declares that they shall suffer neither hunger nor thirst during their return. The Jews, thus restored to their native land, he represents as a holy people, chosen by Jehovah, cleansed from all iniquity, and taught by God himself, &c. &c. Now, when we compare this description with the accounts actually given of their return to Palestine, by Ezra and Nehemiah, we do not find any thing corresponding with the events predicted by Isaiah: neither do they represent the manners of the people as reformed, agreeably to the prophet's statement. On the contrary, their profligacy is frequently reproved by Ezra and Nehemiah in the most pointed terms, as well as by the prophet Haggai. In this description, therefore, of their deliverance from captivity, we must look beyond it to that infinitely higher deliverance, which in the fulness of time was accomplished by Jesus Christ: "who by himself once offered, hath thereby made a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and atonement for the sins of the whole world,” and thus “hath opened the kingdom of heaven to all believers." recourse to other passages of Scripture. CANONS FOR THE SPIRITUAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. THE Spiritual Interpretation of the Bible, "like all other good things, is liable to abuse; and that it hath been actually abused, both in ancient and modern days, cannot be denied. He, who shall go about to apply, in this way, any passage, before he hath attained its literal meaning, may say in itself what is pious and true, but foreign to the text from which he endeavoureth to deduce it. St. Jerome, it is well known, when grown older and wiser, lamented that, in the fervours II. Where the spiritual meaning of a text is latent, the Holy of a youthful fancy, he had spiritualized the prophecy of Oba- Spirit (under whose direction the sacred penmen wrote) somediah, before he understood it. And it must be allowed that times clearly and expressly asserts that one thing or person was a due attention to the occasion and scope of the Psalms would divinely constituted or appointed to be a figure or symbol of have pared off many unseemly excrescences, which now deform the commentaries of St. Augustine and other fathersTIMONY OF ETERNAL TRUTH removes and cuts off every ground another thing or person: in which case the INDISPUTABLE TESupon them. But these and other concessions of the same of doubt and uncertainty. kind being made, as they are made very freely, men of sense will consider, that a principle is not therefore to be rejected, because it has been abused; since human errors can never invalidate the truths of God."2 The literal sense, it has been well observed, is, undoubtedly, first in point of nature as well as in order of signification; and consequently, when investigating the meaning of any passage, this must be ascertained before we proceed to search out its mystical import: but the true and genuine mystical or spiritual sense excels the literal in dignity, the latter being only the medium of conveying the former, which is more evidently designed by the Holy Spirit. For instance, in Num. xxi. 8, 9. compared with John iii. 14. the brazen serpent is said to have been lifted up, in order to signify the lifting up of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world; and, consequently, that the type might serve to designate the antitype.3 Though the true spiritual sense of a text is undoubtedly to be most highly esteemed, it by no means follows that we are to look for it in every passage of Scripture; it is not, however, to be inferred that spiritual interpretations are to be rejected, although they should not be clearly expressed. It may be considered as an axiom in sacred hermeneutics, that the SPIRITUAL MEANING OF A PASSAGE IS there only TO BE 1 On the Double Sense of Prophecy, see pp. 390, 391. infra. 2 Bishop Horne's Commentary on the Psalms, vol. i. Preface. (Works, ii. p. x.) The importance, then, of figurative and mystical interpretation can hardly be called in question. The entire neglect of it must, in many cases, greatly vitiate expositions, however otherwise valuable for their eru dition and judgment. In explaining the prophetical writings and the Mosaic ordinances, this defect will be most striking; since, in consequence of it, not only the spirit and force of many passages will almost wholly evaporate, but erroneous conceptions may be formed of their real purport and inten. tion." Bp. Vanmildert's Bampton Lectures, p. 240. Rambach has adduced several instances, which strongly confirm these solid observations, Institut. Herm. Sacr. p. 81. Rambach, Institutiones Hermeneuticæ Sacræ, p. 72. The rock shall find that Melchisedec was a type of Messiah, the great high- III. Sometimes, however, the mystical sense is intimated by the Holy Spirit in a more OBSCURE manner; and without excluding the practice of sober and pious meditation, we are led by various intimations (which require very diligent observation and study) to the knowledge of the spiritual or mystical meaning. This chiefly occurs in the following cases. 1. When the antitype is proposed under figurative names taken from the Old Testament. he is called the last Adam; the first Adam, therefore, was in some respect Thus, in 1 Cor. v. 7. Christ is called the Paschal Lamb:-in 1 Cor. xv. 45. a type or figure of Christ, who in Ezekiel xxxiv. 23. is further called David. In like manner, the kingdom of Antichrist is mentioned under the appellations of Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon, in Rev. xi. 8. and xvi. 19.. 2. When, by a manifest allusion of words and phrases, the Scripture refers one thing to another; or, when the arguments of the inspired writers either plainly intimate it to have a spiritual meaning, or when such meaning is tacitly implied. (1.) Thus, from Isa. ix. 4., which alludes to the victory obtained by Gideon (Judges vii. 22.), we learn that this represents the victory which Christ should obtain by the preaching of the Gospel, as Vitringa has largely shown on this passage. (2.) So, when St. Paul is arguing against the Jews from the types of Sarah, Hagar, Melchisedec, &c. he supposes that in these memorable Old Testa. ment personages there were some things in which Christ and his mystical 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 command. 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 1 See Chapter I. Sections I. III. and IV. pp. 355-358. and 361-366. supra. "Est regula theologorum, sensum mysticum non esse argumentati vum, hoc est, non suppeditare firma ac solida argumenta, quibus dogmata fidei inædificentur." Rambach, Inst. Herm. Sacr. pp. 72, 73. Thus, Cocceius represented the entire history of the Old Testament as a mirror, which held forth an accurate view of the transactions and events that were to happen in the church under the New Testament dispensation, to the end of the world. He further affirmed, that by far the greatest part of the ancient prophecies foretold Christ's ministry and mediation, together with the rise, progress, and revolutions of the church, not only under the figure of persons and transactions, but in a literal manner, and by the sense of the words used in these predictions. And he laid it down as a fundamental rule of interpretation that the words and phrases of Scripture are to be understood in EVERY SENSE of which they are suscepti ble: or, in other words, that they signify in effect every thing which they can signify. (Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, vol. v. p. 360. et seq. edit. 1808.) These opinions have not been without their advocates in this country; and if our limits permitted, we could adduce numerous instances of evident misinterpretations of the Scriptures which have been occasioned by the adoption of them: one or two, however, must suffice. Thus, the Ten Commandinents, or Moral Law, as they are usually termed, which the most pious and learned men in every age of the Christian church have 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 Jesus Christ, under the mistaken idea that they may be read with a new 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 called, in the Bible Magazine, vol. iv. pp. 13, 14.) In like manner the first psalm, which, it is generally admitted, describes the respective happiness and misery of the pious and the wicked, according to the Cocceian hypothesis, 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 moral import! An ordinary reader, who peruses Isa. iv. 1., would natu: rally suppose that the prophet was predicting the calamities that should befall the impenitently wicked Jews, previously to the Babylonish capti vity; which calamities he represents to be so great that seven women shall take hold of one man, that is, use importunity to be married, and that upon the hard and unusual conditions of inaintaining themselves. But this simple and literal meaning of the passage, agreeably to the rule that the words of Scripture signify every thing which they can signify, has been distorted beyond measure; and, because in the subsequent verses of this chapter 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 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 no reference whatever to Gospel times. On the absurdity of the exposition just noticed, it is needless to make any comment. It is surpassed only by the reveries of a modern writer on the Continent, who has pushed the Cocceian hypothesis to the utmost bounds. According to his scheme, the incest of Lot and his daughters was permitted, only to be a sign of the salvation which the world was afterwards to receive from Jesus Christ; and Joshua the son of Nun signifies the same thing as Jesus the son of Man!!! Kanne's Christus im Alten Testament, that is, Christ in the Old Testament, or Inquiries concerning the Adumbrations and Delineations of the Messiah. Nürnberg, 1818, 2 vols. 8vo. (Mélanges de Religion, de Morale, et de Critique Sacrée, published at Nismes, tome i. pp. 159, 160.) 66 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 spiritual 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. Thus, he cast out evil spirits, who, by the Divine Providence, were permitted to exert themselves at that time, and to possess many persons. By this act he showed that he came to destroy the empire of Satan, and seemed to foretell that, where soever his doctrine should prevail, idolatry and vice should be put to flight.-He gave sight to the blind, a miracle well suiting him who brought immortality to light, and taught truth to an ignorant world. Lucem caliganti reddidit mundo, applied by Quintus Curtius to a Roman emperor, can be strictly applied to Christ, and to him alone. No prophet ever did this miracle before him, as none ever made the religious discoveries which he made. Our Saviour himself leads us to this observation, and sets his miracle in the same view, saying, upon that occasion, I am the light of the world; I am come into this world, that they which see not might see. He cured the deaf, and the dumb, and the lame, and the infirm, and cleansed the lepers, and healed all manner of sicknesses, to show at the same time that he was the physician of souls, which have their diseases corresponding in some manner to those of the body, and are deaf, and dumb, and impotent, and paralytic, and leprous in the spiritual sense.-He fed the hungry multitudes by a miracle, which aptly represented his heavenly doctrine, and the Gospel preached to the poor, and which he himself so explains, saying,-1 am the living breas which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.-He raised the dead, a miracle peculiarly suiting him, who at the last day should call forth all mankind to appear before him; and, therefore, when he raised Lazarus he uttered those majestic words: I am the resurrection and the life; he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.-He performed some miracles upon persons who were not of his own nation, and it was ordered by Divine Providence, Christian Observer for 1805, vol. iv. p. 133. The two preceding pages of this journal contain some admirable remarks on the evils of spiritualzing the Sacred Writings too much. The same topic is also further noticed in volume xvi. for 1817, p. 319. et seq. Many important observations on the history and abuses of spiritual interpretation will be found in the late Rev. J. J. Conybeare's Bampton Lectures for 1824. The whole of Bishop Horne's Preface to his Commentary on the Psalms is equally worthy of perusal for its excellent observations on the same question. The misapplication and abuse of spiritual interpretation are also pointed out by Bishop Vanmal dert, Bampton Lectures, p. 241. et seq. 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.1 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. 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 Testament, 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. 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 genea-paschal lamb typified the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Exod. xii. 3. et seq. logy 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. 3. Our definition of a type includes also, that the OBJECT REPRESENTED BY IT IS SOMETHING FUTURE. 1 See Dr. Jortin's Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. pp. 267-275. (2d edit.) See also Dr. Dodd's Discourses on the Miracles of the New Testament, and Dr. Collyer's Lectures on Scripture Miracles. Thus, the entire constitution, and offerings of the Levitical priesthood, typically prefigured Christ the great high priest (Heb. v. vi. 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 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 natural seed; and the covenant at Sinai, whereby the Israelites, as the worshippers of the true God, were separated from the idolatrous nations, was 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 country, the habitation of the righteous, was typified by Canaan, a country given to the Israelites by God's promise."s 2. PROPHETICAL TYPES are those, by which the divinely inspired prophets prefigured or signified things either present or future, by means of external symbols. Outram de Sacrificiis, lib. i. c. 18. or p. 215. of Mr. Allen's accurate Of this description is the prophet Isaiah's going naked (that is, without translation. This work is of singular value to the divinity student; as af his prophetic garment) and barefoot (Isa. xx. 2.), to prefigure the fatal defording, in a comparatively small compass, one of the most masterly vinstruction of the Egyptians and Ethiopians.-The hiding of a girdle in a rock dications of the vicarious atonement of Christ that ever was published. on the banks of the Euphrates, which, on being subsequently taken a "It is essential," observes Bp. Vanmildert, "to a type, in the scriptural thence, proved to be rotten, to denote the destruction which would 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. VOL. I. 3 C 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 inarriage (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 Nebu chadnezzar; 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.) 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 Protestante 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 assured that such analogy was designed by God. But further than this we thing to analogy, either expressly or by implication, there we may rest 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 2. There is often more in the Type than in the Antitype. recorded in the Old Testament were expressly declared by God designed one person or thing in the Old Testament to be a type or Christ, or by his apostles, to have been designed as prefigu- shadow of things to come, not in all things, but only in respect to serie par rations of persons or things relating to the New Testament, ticular thing or things: hence we find many things in the type that are such persons or things so recorded in the former are types of inapplicable to the antitype. The use of this canon is shown in the Epste the persons or things with which they are compared in the are fairly accommodated to Jesus Christ the antitype, although there are latter. But if we assert, that a person or thing was designed many things in that priesthood which do not accord. Thus the priest was to prefigure another person or thing, where no such prefigura-cable to Christ. (Heb. vii. 27.) Again, the Mosaic priesthood is (vh. 15.) to offer sacrifice for his own sins (Heb. v. 3.), which is in no respect app tion has been declared by divine authority, we make an asser-weak and unprofitable, neither of which characters can be applied to the tion for which we neither have, nor can have, the slightest Redeemer, who continueth ever, and hath an unchangeuble priesthood. 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."3 In the interpretation of types, therefore, 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 para ble, 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 fancifully) 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 Hermeneuticæ Nov. Test. vol. i. pp. 63-85. Bishop Marsh's Lectures, part iii. p. 115. Ibid. part iii. p. 113. (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, as no single type can express the life and particular actions of Christ, there is necessarily more in the antitype than can be found in the type 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 disinissed, 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 seif evident 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 en and 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. |