life, and in the latter, soul. According to Dr. Edwards, it should have the same signification in both passages, and we hesitate not to affirm that it has. Pearce and Newton have so rendered it; but the latter appears not clearly to have understood our Lord's meaning. We beg leave to submit our opinion to Mr. Nisbett's consideration. The predictions of Jesus concerning his future sufferings at Jerusalem had caused some offence to his disciples, who were daily expecting that he would assume the temporal power to which they imagined he was destined. Peter ventured to express the feelings of himself and his fellowdisciples on the occasion. His Master rebuked him, and endeavoured gently to draw off their affections from worldly objects:" Ye see,' said he to them," the hardships which I endure; and if ye continue in my service, these, and more than these, must fall to your share. In some degree ye now partake of my sufferings; but when, by the hands of wicked men, I shall have been removed from you, ye will be exposed to yet greater trials. Seek not to escape then by deserting the cause in which ye have embarked, for this will assuredly bring upon you a greater calamity in the desolation that awaits your country. Continue steadfast in your profession, and though ye attain not to worldly honour, ye will save your lives in that day when your enemies shall miserably perish. The sacrifice ye make may be great; but what does a prudent man value more than life? or what recompence can he receive in this world for the loss of so great a blessing? As ye value your lives, therefore, take up your cross and follow me: for the Son of Man will come with great power to the destruction of the unbelievers, and the security of his friends: and this generation shall not pass away, till he has thus recompensed these two different classes of men, into which the inhabitants of this world. will then be divided,' "Such appears to us the sense of a passage, which we conceive is generally misunderstood." To the above interpretation, and to the reasoning on which it is built, I object on the following grounds: 1st. The rule prescribed by Dr. E. and adopted by Mr. A's. Reviewer, is certainly a very good general rule; but everygeneral rule has its exceptions; and the 28th and 39th verses of the 10th chap. of the same Evangelist, which use indisputably in a different signification, form, I think, in this instance, an exception. The only reply that can be be made is, that the verses are too far apart; but unless the Doctor or the Reviewer had been pleased to limit the distance within which their rule is applicable, I had a right to use my own discretion. 2ndly. The interpretation objected to seems obviously to contradict our Saviour's own declaration at the 9th verse of the 24th chapter. The Reviewers say, "Continue steadfast in your profession [of the gospel] and ye will save your lives."-And again, "As ye value your lives, therefore, take up your cross and follow me." Our Saviour, addressing the same persons, [his disciples] says, "Then [at the destruction of Jerusalem] shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you, &c. sdly. Our Saviour is made to argue on confined principles, altogether unworthy of his enlarged and elevated mind. Even the heathen sages would have been ashamed to instruct their followers to act upon the narrow policy attributed to the great Christian Legislator; and the Reviewer's "prudent man," to whom it was necessary to hold out a prospect of life to keep him to his duty, would cut but a sorry figure contrasted with the "justum and tenacem" of Horace, whom neither death nor tortures could divert from his, 4thly. Our Saviour is made to argue inconclusively; and he who "spake as never man spake," and at the age of 12 disputed with the doctors in the temple, is here exhibited, in respect of his mental powers, in the character of infantine imbecility. "Whosoever, (says he, at v. 25) will lose his life for my sake, shall find it." The words marked by italics certainly imply the promise of an adequate compensation for the loss; yet, according to our Reviewer, he immediately adds (v. 26.) as if to strengthen his argument, " For what is a man profited, if he gain the whole world, and lose his own life; or what shall a man give in exchange for his life?" which as evidently implies that no compensation was adequate to such a sacrifice. 5thly. There is no necessity for departing from the old interpretation. Our Saviour says, (v. 25.) "Whosoever will lose his life for my sake, shall find it." [auty.]—find what? not the life [x] which he lost certainly; but x in a higher and nobler sense, as it signifies a principle of life superior to, and distinct from mere animal existence. Keeping this transition of interpretation in his eye, he then very naturally and very logically iners (v. 25.) "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the. the whole world, and lose his soul, [x in the latter signification] or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [ux in the same sense?] whence it appears, that the old interpretation is the right, even according to the Reviewer's own rule; for rx in the 26th verse is used in the same signification as auri. e.- Lux in the 25th verse, where we have seen it cannot possibly mean mere animal life, but a principle of existence of a higher and nobler kind. If our language, like the Greek, had any one term, by which it could express both ideas, there would be no difficulty, I conceive, in understanding the passage; but from the want of that, I apprehend, has all the obscurity originated. 6thly. If the 27th verse is designed to be interpreted of the day of judgment, which, from its peculiar turn of expression, I verily believe it is, we have an additional argument for the common interpretation of the 26th verse. The 27th verse is as follows, "For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he shall reward every man according to his works." I see but one objection that can be made to this verse being interpreted of the day of judgment; which is this, that the verse following seems hard to be reconciled with such an interpretation, "Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." But it should be remembered, that this is conversation, and conversation is desultory, and ought not to be expected to conform to the rigid rules of written dissertation. Two subjects may in the mind of the speaker connect by a casual word, when the hearer, not being privy to the internal operations of his mind, may see no connection. Something of this sort seems to be the case here: our Saviour having mentioned his coming to administer the affairs of his kingdom at the end of the world, by a sudden transition of the mind, passes to the consideration of the commencement of his reign; as if he had said, "I speak of my power at the end of the world; but my reign will commence even during the life-time of some who are present." I here conclude my remarks; whether I have made myself intelligible, or whether in my attention to the brevis esse laboro, I do not incur the blame of the obscurus fio, your readers will determine; but on the latter supposition, humbly hope they will endeavour to enter into the force their inefficiency. force of my arguments, before they hastily decide upon Wilby, Feb. 23, 1804. ON THE DOUBLE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF PROPHECY. THE EDITORS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S GENTLEMEN, F I have in any way expressed myself disrespectfully work by fanciful conjectures, or by positiveness of opinion relating to points where diffident conjecture only is admissible, I most sincerely ask both his and your pardons, and retract my expressions. There is no reason, however, I apprehend, why I should not state and defend my opinions with modesty and caution; and I trust that you will not deny me the privilege of appealing to you, and to the public, in my own defence. Inspector reprobates several of my general and particular opinions. He condemns the general principle which I hold, that prophecies may be typical, i. e. comprehensive of two or more similar histories predicted in one and the same allegory. To decide this point, we must "speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing things spiritual with spiritual” (1 Cor. ii. 13.)—"interpreting prophecy according to the analogy of Revelation" (Rom, xii. 6.)-none but divine authority must be regarded. I shall therefore endeavour, by scriptural proofs, to prove that several prophecies have more than one accomplishment. I shall begin with Zachariah xii. 10.-St. John asserts the accomplishment of this prophecy (chap. xix. 37.) and yet speaks of it as predicting a future event (Rev. 1. 7. Comp. Zech. xii. 10. and Rev. xvi. 16.) A second proof is to be drawn from Matt. xvi. 64. "Jesus saith unto him, nevertheless I say unto you, From this time shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.' Here is the prophecy of Zachariah and Daniel applied Vol. VI. Churchm. Mag. March, 1804. X by by our Lord to himself at the time of his condemnation, and very properly too, because the foundation of his judicial power was now laid by his endurance of an iniquitous judgment (Isaiah liii. 12.) And yet this is the very event predicted in Matt. xxiv. 30; by which we may learn, that by the temple our Lord designed in one sense his own body (Matt. xxiv. 1 and xxvi. 61.) A third proof is to be drawn from Joel ii, 28. I would intreat the reader to peruse the whole passage to the end of the chapter, and the following chapter also; and then to decide whether the prophecy was completely accomplished at the time to which Acts ii. 16, relates. "Be A fourth proof is to be drawn from Malachy iv. 5, hold I will send you Elijah the prophet," comp. Luke 1. 16, 17. We have here direct proof, that John the Baptist was called Elijah, because the Holy Ghost, which spake by Elijah, spake in the same manner by him. To these direct proofs, numberless indirect ones might be added, for (to use the words of Sir I. Newton, on Daniel, p. 132,) “There is scarce a prophecy in the Old Testament concerning Christ, which doth not, in something or other, relate to his second coming. If divers of the ancients-applied the half week to the times of Antichrist, why may not we, by the same liberty of interpretation, apply the seven weeks to the time when Antichrist shall be destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming?" "The predictions of scripture (says Atterbury, vol. I. Sermon VII. p. 246.) are generally so contrived, as to extend to more than one event; so as to be fulfilled at several times by several steps and degrees of accomplishment." The prophecy which Atterbury had in view, is applied in Rev. xi. 7, &c. (to offer a conjecture) precisely to the same great revolution. Mede himself has explained several prophecies upon my principle. Speaking of the seven churches in Asia, he says, "If we consider their number being seven, which is a number of revolution of times-may it not seem that these seven churches, besides their literal respect, were intended to be as patterns and types of the several ages of the Catholick Church, a principio ad finem; that so these seven churches should prophetically sample unto us a seven-fold successive temper and condition of the whole visible church [Gentile Church] according to the several ages thereof answering to the pattern of the seven churches here?" Dr. H. More has accordingly applied these seven epis tles, |