S. tin Expotionof the C II A P. I: tioned in thefecond Interpretationof the words, excluding the LordChrilt from being. diresly in the Oracle, upon thatexpreffon, ifhefin againJtme; for thole words re- lating to the moral dutyof Solomon, in that wherein he was a Type ofChrift, namely theRule and Adminiliration of bis Kingdom, maynot atall belong to Chrilt, whowas prefigured by God's inftitution ofthings, andnot in any moral deportment in the ob- fervanceof them. 4. That what is fpoken ofany Type, as it was a Type, and in refpedof its inftitution to be fuch, dothnor really and properly belongunto him, or that which was the Type; but unto him who wasreprefented thereby. For theT}pe it felf, it was enough that there was fome refemblance in it of that whichwas principally intended; the things belongingunto the Anti-type being affirmed of it Analogically, on the account of the relation between them by God's inftitution. Hence that which follows on loch Enun- tiations, doth not at all refpe t, or belong to the-Type, but only to the Anti - type, Thus at theSacrifice of Expiation, thefapeGoat is faid tobear and carry away all the fins ofthepeople into a landnot inhabited; not really, and in the fubitanceofthe matter, but only in an inftituted Reprefentation : for the Lawwas given byMofes, but grace and truth came by J_fus Chrift. Much lets may the things that enfue upon the Lord Chrit's real bearingand takingaway ofour fins, be afcribed to thedevotedbeaft. So is it in thiscafe. The wordsapplied by the Apoltle to prove the Son to have a moreen- colent Name than theAngels, and confequently to be preferred above them, donot at all prove that Solomon of whom they were fpokenmeetly as he was a Type, Gould be efleemed to be preferredaboveall Angels, feting he didonly reprefent him who was fo, and had their wordsfpoken unto him, not abfolutely, but with refpedt unto that Reprefentation. And this removes the fourth Objeilion made in the behalf of theftrff Interpretation, excluding Solomon from bringat all intended in the Prophecy ; forwhat was fpoken ofhim as aType, required not a full accomplifhment in his ownperfor. but only that he fhould reprefent him, who was principallyintended. 5. That there is a two-foldPerpetuity mentioned in the Scripture, the one limited and relative, the other abJòlute ; and both' thefe are applied unto the Kingdom of David. Firft, there was a Perpetuity promifed unto him and his Pofierity in the King- dom, asof thePriefthood toAaron; that is a limited perpetuity, namely, during the continuanceof thetypicalflate and condition ofthat People; whilfttheycontinued, the Rule by right belonged unto the Houle of David. Therewas allo an abftiateperpetuity promifed to the KingdomofDavid, to be tirade good only in the Kingdom and Rule Of the Mefiab; and boththefe kinds ofPerpetuity are expreffed in the fame words, giving their fenfe according asthey.are applied. Ifapplied to the*cep,' ofDavid, ashis Kingdomwas a Type of that ofChrift, they denote the limited Perpetuity before mentiòned, as that which refpeEted an Adjunii ofthe Typical flare of that People, that was to be regulated by it, and commenftrate unto it : but as they were referred to the Kingdom ofChrift reprefented in the other, fo an Abfolute Perpetuity is expreffed in them. Andthis rakesaway the thirdReafon, excludingSolomon from being intended in theft words; the Perpetuity promifed being untohim limitedand bounded. Theft confderations being premifed, I fay, the words mulled on by the Apsjfle, I will be untohim Father, and hefhallbeunto me t, belonged firft and nextly unto Solomon, denoting that fatherly Love Care and Proteétion that God would afford unto him in his Kingdom, fo far forth as Chrift was reprefented by him therein ; which requires not that trhey muftabfolutely , and in all jult confequences from them belong unto the perfonofSolomon: principally therefore they intend Chrift himfeif, expref£ng that eternal unchangeable Love which the Father bore unto him, grounded on theRelation ofFather and Son. The Jews, I confefs, of all others, do fee lead of TYpicalneß in Solomon. But the realen of it is, becaufe that his fin was the Occafion of ruining their carnal earthly Gloryand Wealth, which things alone they loft after. But the thing was doubtlels confeffed by the Churchofold, with whom Paul had to do; and therefore we fee, that the Writer ofthe Bookof the Chronicles, written after the return ofthe People from their Captivity, when Solomon's line was failed, and Zerubbabelof the house ofNathan was Governour amonglt them, yet records again this Promife, as that which looked forward, and was yet to receive its fullaccomplilhrnent in the Lord C'lrriti. And fomeof the Rabbins t'hemfelves tell us, that Solomon becaufe offhis fin had onlythe name ofpeace, God flirting up Adverfaries againli him ; the thing it ltÍfis to be lookedfor underMeftah sen-david. Thi
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=