78 An Expofition ofthe CHAP. L that fo hisArgument might proceed ex veils, as well asex orioles, fromwhat wastrue, as upon what wasgranted. This thenwe mull next enquire into. The wholePfalm fay Tome, feems principally, if not only to intend David. He having taken the Hill and Tower of Sisee, and fella it for the feat of his Kingdom ; theNations round about tumultuatedagainff him ; andfome of themas the Milliner prefently engaged in War againtl him for his ruine, zSam. 5.17. To declare how vain all their Attempts ihouldbe, and the certaintyofGods purpofe in raifing him to the Kingdom oflfrael , andfor his prefervationtherein againft all his adverfaries, with the indignationof God againfl them, the Holy Shoff gave out thisPfalm for the com- fortandEftablithment of the Church in the perfwalion of fo great a mercy. And this is borrowed ofRajhi. But fuppofethe Pfalm tohave a farther refpeél than unto David and his temporal Kingdom, and that it doth point at theMega]) under the Type of David, yet then alto what ever is fpoken in it, mull firJllyand properly be undertlood ofDavid. So that if the words unfitted onby the Apollledo prove that the Lord Chritt was made more excellent than theAngels, they prove the fame concerning David alfo, concerning wham theywere fpoken in the firtt place. Anfw. a. There is no cogent Reajon why we fhould acknowledge David and his Kingdom to be at all intended in this Pfalm. The Apofiles we tee apply it unto the Lord Chritt without any mention ofDavid, and that four feveral times ; Twice in the tl£i.,, and twice in this Epjlle. the Jews acknowledge that it belongs unto. the Meab. Befides there are fundry things fpoken in the Pfalm, that could never truly andproperly be applyeduntoDavid. Suchare thePromifer, v. 8, 9. and the In- vitation of all men toput their Trufiand Confidence in him, v. 12. And we have a Rule given us by the Holy Gho)i, that where any thing teems to be fpoken of any one, to whom it doth not properly belong, there the Perfon isnot at all to be under-. flood, but theLordChriJ* himfelf immediately. This Rule Peter gives us in his inter- pretation of the fixteenthPfalm, and his Application of it unto the Lord jefus, Airr 2. 29, 30, 31. So that there is no necelfity to grant that there is any reference in theft words to any Typeat all. Bur, Secondly, Wegrant that David was a TÿpeofChrift, and that as he. was King of the people of Gód. Hencehe isnot only often fignally called theSon ofDavid, but Da- vid alfo, 3er. 3o. 9. Ezek37, 24, 25. Hof ;. 5. And the Throne and Kingdom pro- mifed toDavidfor ever and ever, that it Mouldbeas the Sun, and effablifhedfor ever sr theMoon, Pfal. 89. 36, 37. thatis, whileft the world endures, had no Accompl{'fh- meat but in the Throne and Kingdomof his Son Plus CbriJl. Thus alfo manyother things are faid of him and his Kingdom, which in ProprietyofSpeech can no way be applyed unto him, but as he was a Type ofChrift, and reprefentedhim totheChurch; We may thengrant, as that about which wewill nut contend, that in thisPfalm con_ federationwas hadofDavid and his Kingdom, but not abfolutey, but only as a Type of Cl rift. And hence two things will follow. Fitti, That Come things maybe fpoken in the Pjalm, which no way refpeef theType at all. Forwhen not the Type, but the Perfon or thingfignified is principally aimed at, it is not neceffary that every thing fpoken thereof Ihould be applicable properly un- to the Type it fell ; It being fufficient that there was in the Type fomewhat that bare; a general Refemblance unto him, or that, which was principally intended. So on thecontrary ; where the Type is principallyintended, andanApplication made to the thing fignified only, byway of general Allufion ; there it is not required that all theparticular., afligned unto theType,fhould belong unto,or beaccommodated unto the thing typedout; as we fhall fee in the next Teimony cited by the Apoflle. Hence though ingeneral David, and his Deliverance from trouble, with the Ellablithment of his- Thtone, might be refpeáed in this Pfalm, as an obfcureReprefentation of the Kingdom of Chritt, yet fundry particulars in it, and among them this mentioned by our Apottle, feem tohave no rrJßeît unto him, but direnly and immediately to intend the Mejah. Secondly,If it yet befuppofed that what ishere fpoken , Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee, isalfo to beàpplyed unto David; yet it is not afcribed untohim Ferreted)and abfolutely, but meetlyconfidered as ayype ofChritt: What then is prin-. cipally
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=