clare his generation?-For the tranfgreffion of my people was "he ftricken; and he made his grave with the wicked, and with "the rich in his death when thou fhalt make his foul an offer"ing for fin;-my righteous fervant fhall juftify many, for he shall bear their iniquities:- he was numbered with the tranfgreffors; and he bare the fin of many, and made interceffion for the tranf"greffors." 13. All prophecies of bleffings to the worshipers of the true God, expreffed either as being to happen in the latter days, or in words which imply a lasting duration, are in reafon to be understood, as having reference to the times of the promised kingdom of the Meffiah; of whom it is exprefsly faid, Dan. ix. 24. that he shall "bring "in everlasting righteoufnefs;" and, Dan. vii. 14. that "his domi"nion is an everlasting dominion which fhall not pass away, and "his kingdom that which fhall not be destroyed." Some prophecies of this kind are direct and exprefs. Others, beginning with promises of particular intermediate bleffings, and proceeding with general expreffions more great and lofty than can naturally be applied to the temporal bletting immediately spoken of, are moft reafonably understood to have a perpetual view and regard to that great and general event, in which all God's promifes to his true worhipers do center and terminate; and of which, all intermediate bleffings promifed by God are justly looked upon as beginnings, types, pledges, or earnests. 14. For, fince from the exprefs prophecies before cited of the Meffiah's everlafting kingdom of righteousness, it appears that God had in fact a view to that, as the great and general end of all the difpenfations of providence towards his true worshipers from the beginning; and, 2 Pet. i. 20. “ no prophecy of the fcripture is of "any private interpretation" (that is, the meaning of prophecies is not what perhaps the prophet himself might imagine in his private judgement of the state of things then prefent), because "the prophecy in old time came not by the WILL of man, but holy "men fpake as they were moved by the Holy Ghoft:" there may, therefore, very poffibly and very reasonably be fuppofed to be many prophecies, which, though they may have a prior and immediate reference to fome nearer event, yet by the fpirit of God (whom those prophecies which are exprefs thew to have had a further view) may have been directed to be uttered in fuch words, as may even more properly and more juftly be applied to the great event which providence had in view, than to the intermediate event which God defigned as only a pledge or carneft of the other. For initance: fuppofe thefe words of Daniel, ch. vii. 9, 10. "I beheld "till the thrones were caft down [till the thrones were placed], " and the Ancient of days did fit :-a fiery ftream iffued and came "forth from before him; thousand thoufands miniftered unto him,' "and ten thousand times ten thousand ftood before him; the 66 judgement was fet, and the books were opened?" fuppofe (I fay)* thefe words were spoken concerning "the ilaying of a wild beaft, ver. 11. or "the deftruction of a temporal empire;" yet what reasonable man, who had ever elsewhere met with any notices of a judgement to come, could doubt but the deftruction there fpoken of was therefore expreffed in those words, that it might be understood to be the introduction to the general judgement? The exact and very particular defcription of a refurrection in the 37th of Ezekiel, fuppofing it to be indeed spoken of a temporal restoration of the Jews, yet who can doubt but it was fo worded with defign, to allude to a real resurrection of the dead? The words of Micah, ch. v. 2. Matth. ii. 6. "Thou, Bethlehem, though thou be little "among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee fhall he come "forth unto me, that is to be ruler in Ifrael;' whose goings forth "have been from of old, from everlasting;" fuppofing it poffible they could be spoken of Zorobabel, yet, if afterwards there fhould arife out of Bethlehem one in whom were found all the other prophetic characters of the promised Meffiah, who could doubt but the words were intended either folely or at leaft chiefly of the latter? The words of Jeremy, ch. i. 7. vi. 5. "Babylon hath been a gol"den cup; the nations have drunken of her wine, therefore the "nations are mad: flee out of the midst of Babylon,-be not cut "off in her iniquity :-my people, go ye out of the midft of her, "and deliver ye every man his foul from the fierce anger of the "Lord:" who, that confiders the nature and character of the Babylon in Jeremiah's time, and compares it with the nature and character of the Babylon described by St. John, can doubt but the fpirit which influenced Jeremy, forefaw and intended to allude to that Babylon, which had, Rev. xvii. 4. "a golden cup in her hand, "full of abominations," ver. 2. " and the inhabiters of the earth "have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication," ch. xviii. 3, 4." and the kings of the earth have committed fornica"tion with her :-Come out of her, my people, that ye be not par"takers of her fins, and that ye receive not of her plagues?" Por the words of Jeremy are more strictly applicable to this latter Babelon than to that in his own time. Again: the words of Ifaiah, ch. vii. 14. Matth. i. 23. "Behold, a virgin fhall conceive and "bear a fon, and fhall call his name Immanuel, that is to fay, "God with us :" fuppofing Ifaiah himself could poffibly at that time understand them concerning a fon of his own, concerning a fon to be born of a young woman afterwards, who at the time then present was a virgin; and that his being ftyled Immanuel meant nothing more than that, before this child was grown up, Judah fhould be delived from the then threatened incurfions of Ifrael and Syria (all which, notwithstanding the feeming connexion of the words in the place they ftand, is very difficult to fuppofe); yet if afterwards any perfon, comparing the folemn introduction wherewith the words are brought in, (" Hear ye now, O house of David; is it a fiall thing for you to weary men,, but will ye weary my God alfo? therefore the Lord himself fhall give you a fign; "behold, a virgin fhall conceive &c.") If any one, I fay, com paring this folemn introduction with the promises repeated to the houfe of David in other paffages of the prophets, that there should be born unto them a fon who flfai. ix. 7. Ezek. xxxvii. 25 ) fhould fit upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom for ever, and of the increafe of whofe government and peace there should be no end;" and confidering moreover the character of this promifed fon, that he (Dan. ix. 24.) fhould "finifh tranfgreffion, and “make an end of fins, and make reconciliation for iniquity, and bring in everlasting righteoufnefs:" if a perfon, confidering and comparing these things, fhould in his own days find a fon really born of a virgin, attefted to by numerous miracles, and by God's command named Jefus (which is fynonymous to Immanuel, à Potent Saviour, or God with us), becaufe he (Matth. i. 21,)" fhould fave his people from their fins," that is, (Dan. ix. 24.) should "make reconciliation for iniquity, and bring in everlasting " righteousness :" could fuch a perfon poffibly entertain the leaft doubt, whether God, who fent Ifaiah to repeat the fore-cited words to the houfe of David, did not intend thereby to defcribe, if not wholly and folely, at least chiefly and ultimately, this latter Saviour? In like manner: fuppofe thofe great promifes to David, 2 Sam. vii. 13, 14. 16. concerning" the establishment of the throne of his Son for ever," were by David and by the prophet himself that delivered them, understood (ridia is, as St. Peter fpeaks) concerning Solomon and a fucceffion of kings in his family; yet, when following prophecies clearly and exprefsly declared, that out of the root of Jeffe fhould arife a Meffiah who fhould reign for ever; no reafonable man can doubt, but that the former and lef's clear prophecy was likewife intended of God, and therefore rightly applied by the apoftles of Chrift to the fame purpose. To give but one inftance more: fuppofe the words, Pfal. xvi. 10. "Thou wilt not leave my foul in hell, neither wilt thou fuffer thy Holy One to fee corruption," were by David fpoken concerning himself (which, however, can no way be proved); yet who, that, Acts ii. 30. knew David himself to be a prophet, and that had compared the other prophecies, concerning the branch out of the roots of Jeffe," Ifai. xi. 1, &c, the one fhepherd" of Ifrael, even God's " fervant David," Ezek. xxxvii. 24. who fhould be " their prince for ever," ver. 25. and yet was to be "cut off" before he should "reign for ever;' Dan. ix. 26, Ifai. lii. tot. and that had himself feen (as St, Peter did) and actually converfed with "Chrift rifen from the dead;" who (I fay) in thefe circumftances could poffibly doubt, but that the fpirit of the Lord which fpake by David," 2 Sam. xxiii. 2. intended the forementioned words fhould be understood of, and applied to, Chrift? And the like may be faid concerning fome other prophecies, which are vulgarly fuppofed to be applied typically to Chrift. 15. It is 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 diftinct understanding of the full meaning even of the exprefs 66 exprefs prophecies, much lefs of those which were more obscure and indirect; when both were intended to be only as it were “a "light fhining in a dark place." But thus much is evident, that the Jews, both before and in our Saviour's time, had from these prophecies + a general expectation of a Meffiah, and that this Meffiah was to be, not merely a "temporal" deliverer, but TN, Pater "futuri feculi," the head of the future ftate, as well as of the prefent. Nor does it at all appear that our Lord's difciples, when they (Luke xxiv, 21.) thought he would have redeemed Ifrael, or when they (Acts i6.)" afked if he would at this time restore "again the kingdom to Ifrael; 1 fay, it does not at all appear that they expected MERELY a " temporal" kingdom; but their error was in expecting a prefent, kingdom; and therefore our Lord's anfwer 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 prejudicate notions from the New Teftament writers interpretation or application of prophecies, have (I think) still an univerfal expectation, that the Meffiah fhall be their prince in the future ftate as well as in the prefent.q fuck vid ་ 16. When Jefus Christ, by (John x 25.) the works which he "did in his Father's name," and (John v. 36.) which his Father "gave him to finish," had proved himself to be fent of God (which truth the apoftles likewife confirmed by their teftimony, by their works, and by laying down their lives, not for their opinions, which poffibly erroneous and, euthufiaftic perfons may fometimes fincerely de, but in atteftation to facts of their own knowledge), and it appeared moreover, that there was wanting in him no circumstance, no "fine qua non," no character, appropriated by any of the ancient prophets to the promised Meffiah; he had then a clear right to apply to himself 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. It is not an allegorical application, much lefs an allegorical argument or reasoning. 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 biething was a pledge or beginning. 18. The application of this latter fort of prophecies to Chrift was never by reasonable men urged as being itself a proof that Jefus was the true Meffiah. Nay, the application of the moft direct and exprefs prophecies whatsoever has not of itself the nature of a direct or pofitive proof; but can only be a "fine quà non," an application of certain marks or characters, without which no perfon could be • See above, p. 256, and Prop. VII. § 4. p. 210, 211. Percrebuerat Oriente toto vetus & constans opinio, effe in fatis, ut Judæâ profésti terum potirentur." Sueton. "Pluribus perfuafio inerat, antiquis facerdotum libris contineri, eo ipfo tempore fore, “ ut valefceret * Öriens, profectique Judæâ rerum potirentur.” Tacit. - Possibly from that text in Zechary, ¡òù ¡yw ŭyw thy dõñóv mm 'Avalokiv. LXX. the the promised Meffiah. Many men were of the feed of Abraham, and of the tribe of Juda, and of the family of David, and born in Bethlehem of Judæa, and fuffered, and were cut off; and yet neither any nor all of these characters could prove any man to be the promised Meffiah; but the want of any one of them would prove that any man was not he. The proof of Jefus being the Christ, were, "the works which his Father gave him to finish.” John v. 36. The application of direct and exprefs prophecies to him is nothing but fuch a congruity of marks or characters, as removes all objections by which an adverfary would endeavour to prove that it was not he. Ought not Chrift to have fuffered these things, and to enter into his glory?" Luke xxiv. 26. is not proving from his fufferings, that Jefus was the Chrift; but removing the objection, by which fome were apt to infer from his fufferings, 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 ftand upon the application of prophecies; but the works by which Chrift proved himself to be sent of God 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 a "foundation valid, which is in itself invalid; can never make a "falle inference, true; can never make a prophecy 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 prophetic characters of the Meffiah be applicable to him. And this it is, by which Jesus was proved to be the Christ. 19. From what has been faid concerning the application of indirect prophecies, it is easy to obferve the nature and use of types, and figures, and allegorical manners of fpeaking that these 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 underftanding of it. An inftance or two will make this matter obvious. There is a very remarkable paffage in the epistle to the Galatians, where the apostle himfelfiftyles the thing he is fpeaking of an allegory," Gal. iv. 24; that is, he draws an argument à fimili. The allegory or fimilitude he makes ufe of is not alledged by him as a " proof" of the truth of the doctrine he is afferting, but as a proof of the falfeness and groundleffness 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 |