prophecies are faid to be involved; and in particular, how came it to pafs, that they may not be as well explained, before the completion, as after it [g]: which yet is conftantly denied by writers on this fubject, and, even, by your own principles, cannot be fuppofed?" To this objection, I fhall not reply by faying, That the ftyle of the prophets, though intelligible, yet requires much practice in the interpreter to unfold its meaning; for that is the cafe of many other arts and fciences, which yet are generally understood: nor, that the fymbolic terms are frequently capable of several fenfes, which must needs perplex the interpretation; for there is no common language, in which the plaineft words do not frequently admit the fame difference of construction, which yet creates no great difficulty to those who attend closely to the [g] See this objection urged by Mr. Collins in his Grounds and Reafons, &c. p. 220. Lond. 1737. fcope of a writer: I fhall not therefore, I fay, amuse you with these evafive answers, but reply, directly to the purpose of your inquiry, by obferving, "That there are several methods, or, if you will, artifices, by which the inspired writers, under the cover of a fymbolic expreffion, and fometimes even without it, might effectually conceal their meaning, before the completion of a prophecy, though the language, in which they write, be clearly explicable on fixed and stated rules." 1. When the prophecy is of remote events, the subject is frequently not announced, or announced only in general terms. Thus, an earthquake is defcribed -a mountain is faid to be thrown down a ftar, to fall from heaven; and so in numberless other inftances. Now, an ‚ earthquake, in hieroglyphic language, denotes a revolution in government; a mountain, is the fymbol of a kingdom, or capital city; a ftar, of a prince, or great man: but of of what government, of what kingdom, of what prince, the prophet fpeaks, we are not told, and are frequently unable to find out, till a full coincidence of all circumstances, in the event, difclofes the fecret. 2. The prophetic terms are not only figurative, but fometimes, and in no common degree, hyperbolical (of which the reafon will be given hereafter), fo that nothing but the event can determine the true fize and value of them. This feems to have been the cafe of those prophecies in the Old Teftament, which defcribe the tranquillity and felicity of Chrift's kingdom; and may poffibly be the case of those prophecies in the New, which respect the Millennium. 3. It being the genius of the prophetic ftyle to be ænigmatical, this caft is fometimes purposely given to it, even when the expreffion is moft plain and direct, Thus Jeremiah prophefies of Zedekiah, king of Judah, that he should be delivered H 3 vered into the hands of the king of Babylon, that his eyes should behold the eyes of the king of Babylon, and that he should go to Babylon [b]. Ezekiel, prophefying of the fame prince, fays, that he should go to Babylon, but that he should not fee it, though he should die there [i]. Now Jofephus tells us, that the apparent inconfiftency of these two prophecies determined Zedekiah to believe neither of them. Yet both were strictly and punctually fulfilled. 4. Laftly, the chief difficulty of all lies in a circumftance, not much obferved by interpreters, and, from the nature of it, not obfervable, till after the event; I mean, in a mixed ufe of the plain and figured style: fo that the prophetic defcriptions are fometimes literal, even when they appear moft figurative; and fometimes, again, they are highly figurative, when they appear moft plain. [] Jeremiah xxxiv. 3. An An inftance of literal expreffion, under the mafk of figurative, occurs in the prophet Nahum, who predicts the overthrow of Nineveh in these words With an over-running flood he will make an ut→ ter end of the place thereof, [Nahum i. 8.] An over-running flood, is the hieroglyphic fymbol of defolation by a victorious enemy : and in this highly figurative fenfe, an interpreter of the prophecy would, in all likelihood, understand the expreffion. But the event fhewed the fenfe to be literal: that city being taken, as we know from history, by means of an inundation. Of figurative expreffion, under the form of literal, take the following inftance from a prophecy of Chrift himself; who fays to the Jews, Destroy this temple, and I will raife it up in three days, [John i, 19.] It was natural enough for the Jews to understand our Lord as fpeaking of the temple at Jerufalem; the rather, as this term had not been, and, I think, could not be, applied to any perfon, before H 4' Jefus : |