admits not of it, either in the fenfe of the Exprefs Characters before us, or in their time of accomplishment, as we fhall foon fee, any more than it doth in the plain, and natural conftruction of the words. For as I oblerve, Secondly, Thele Express Characters in their plain fenfe in the Prophecy had not, for that they could not have their accomplishment in the perfons of the Meffiah, or John the Baptift, or the Apostles. For the fenfe in which the Character of the One week, and the former Character of the Half part thereof are fuppos'd to have been fulfilled by thofe Parties, is both by Dr. Prideaux, and Mr. L. taken in a figurative fenfe: Whereas the fenfe of the Prophecy here is plainly not figurative, but litteral. But First, I urge against the figurative acceptance of thefe exprefs Characters, their Inaccomplishment therein by the Parties fuppos'd to have accomplished them. First, As to the Character of the One week, viz. the making a firm Covenant with many, as the faid Covenant is fuppos'd both by Dr. Prideaux, and Mr. L. to have been the Covenant of the Gospel confirm'd with many of the Jews by John the Baptift first, and after by the Meffiah himself, as in Dr. Prideaux's Hypothefis, or by the Meffiah and his Apoftles, as in Mr. Lancaster's. For even allowing that the word Covenant here were the GospelCovenant (tho' as it will evidently appear anon the predicted Covenant could not be fuch Covenant) yet, as to Dr. Prideaux's Hypothefis, how he could fuppofe the accomplishment of this Express Character even in this fenfe thereof in the perfon of John the Baptift, in truth I fee not. For if I apprehend his meaning here, he should have understood that by receiving the Baptifm of John, one undertook the conditions of, and was entitled to the benefits of the Chriftian Covenant. This, or fome fuch like meaning there must be in John's confirming the Covenant of the Gospel to the giving us any colour of Accomplishment of this Express Character of the One week in this fenfe of it. But if this be the meaning here, the contrary appears as by St. Paul's practice at Ephefus, [Acts xix.] where thofe who had been baptiz'd unto John's baptifm, [ver. 3.] were after baptiz'd in the name of the Lord Jefus [ver. 5:] So alfo by Aquila, and Prifcilla their treating with Apollos, who needed to have expounded unto him the way of God, (or the Christian Faith) more perfectly, because he had hitherto known only the baptifm of John. Acts xviii. 25, 26.]---I add, that John himself was fo far from confirming the Chriftian Covenant, that he was declar'd by our bleffed Saviour to be not one of the Golpel State, or Kingdom of Heaven, as it is faid in Matt. xi. 11. He that is leaft in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than He. Belides, As I have formerly fhewn (x), fuch imagin'd Accomplishment of this Express Character in this figurative fense thereof (~) Vide p. 184, & comes comes fhort of it, as the true fifteenth Year of the reign of Tiberius in which John came preaching, doth not really correfpond with the first year of the fingle week, or feventieth Week of this Prophecy, even in Dr. Prideaux's (y) own Hypothefis thereof. But wherefore after all, fhould the prophetick Covenant be interpreted the Covenant of the Gospel, as it is in both the Hypothefes now immediately before us ----The Original word (z) is of general fignification, and denoteth only at large a Covenant. And what immediate Covenant is here meant, as to that we cannot otherwise be surely guided than by the Context. But the grand Purpose thereof being as we have already obferv'd, and as we shall fee more fully anon, all of it giv'n in a litteral fenfe fetting forth the final Deftruction of Jerufalem, therefore the Covenant here predicted to be confirm'd, muft neceffarily be fuppos'd as giv'n alfo in a fense relating to the faid grand Purpose of this One week, and the more distinguished Half part thereof. Confequently the Covenant to be confirm'd in this Week could not poffibly be the Gofpel Covenant. And therefore Mr. L. hath as ineffectually referr'd the accomplishment of this Express Character to the Meffiah, and his Apostles, as Dr. Prideaux to the Meffiah in the perfon of John the Baptift firft, and after that in his own perfon. Even because it appears that the Covenant here predicted to be confirm'd could be no more the Gospel Covenant, than, as it before appear'd, their Parties accomplishing were, or could be any of them the Parties here predicted to accomplish. Nor, Secondly, Had the next prophetick Character in this Week, or the former of the two Characters of the Half part thereof, viz. the Caufing Sacrifice, and Oblation to cease, its accomplishment in the death of the Meffiah. For the Sacrifice and Oblation of the Temple at Jerufalem can be faid to have ceafed there only VIRTUALLY, and to ALL EFFICACY at the death of Chrift, as Dr. Prideaux (a) and Mr. L. (b) have both of them told us that they did. And Dr. Prideaux (c) hath alfo told us very truly that the Virtue, and Propitiation of this One Sacrifice bath fufficed for all ever fince. We moft readily allow it. We allow alfo in his words (d), that in the death of Chrift the Sacrifices of the Temple were all abfolutely, and finally extinguished for ever, fo far forth I mean (e) as to any obligation upon Believers, and after his Refurrection his (f) Commiffion gave rife to the Chriftian Church. But, as we fhall be presently convinced, 'tis not the fufficiency of Chrift's meritorious Sacrifice of himself S 2 () As it is inconfiftent with his own declar'd Chronologer's Sure Guide, Ptolemy's Canon, as formerly shewn. (≈) ♬ (ver. 27) Fædus, Pactum. (a) Con. Hift p. 294. 1. 3, &c. (b) Chr. Eff. p. 116. (c) Con. Hift. p: 293, fub fine. (d) Ib! (e) And if Dr. Prideaux meant it otherwife, the fact of their continuance is against him, as they did not actually cafe 'till Chrifti 70. (f) Matt. xxviii. 19, 29, himself on the Cross that we are here concern'd with; nor with the ceafing of the Jewish Sacrifices, as to Virtue and Efficacy, and Obligation, but with a litteral ceafing of the Sacrifices of the Temple. The Practice is one thing, the Obligation is another. But the Prophecy plainly refers us to the practice of Offering, because it being reftrained to the Temple, it must alfo be reftrained to the continuance of the Temple. And it appears (g) that for fome Years after the death of Chrift the Jews continued as a People and Nation in their City, offering Sacrifices in the Temple, even 'till an end was put to all Sacrifice, and Oblation at Jerufalem, with the Destruction of the City, and Temple. As to the Third Character of this One Week, or the latter of the two Characters of the Half Part thereof, I am prevented from faying any thing as to the Inaccomplishment of that in a figurative Sense: for 'tis not fuppofed to have been accomplished otherwife_than in the Letter of it both by Dr. Prideaux, and Mr. L. alfo. I may therefore proceed to fhew, Secondly, Against the figurative Senfe, and fuppos'd accomplishment therein of the two preceding Characters, viz. that of the Beginning of the One Week, and the former of the two Characters of the latter half Part thereof, that the Senfe of the Prophecy in all of them is plainly not figurative, but litteral. For Firft, The Senfe of the exprefs Character of the first seven Weeks of this Prophecy, viz. of rebuilding the Wall, and Streets of Jerufalem being litteral, as I have formerly fhewn, fo alfo must be neceffarily the fenfe of thefe Characters of the Seventieth, or Last Week equally determined upon Jerufalem. For in all reafon the Prophecy ought to be received in the Letter of it alike in both Periods. As therefore the determined Restoration of Jerufalem in the beginning of thefe Weeks was literally predicted, and fulfilled in the first Period of them, fo no less her final Destruction in the end of them, in the accomplishment of the exprefs Characters of the laft Period of them, or the One Week, and more diftinguifhed HALF PART of it. But Secondly, We have, I think, an undeniable Proof here of the litteral Senfe of all the express Characters now before us in the confeffed (b) litteral Senfe and Accomplishment of the laft of them. This furely puts it out of Difpute, that the preceding Characters which stand along with it in One and the fame Week, and efpecially the Character of caufing Sacrifice and Oblation to cease, which ftands with it immediately as a joint Character of the Half part of this Week, fhould alfo be meant in the fame litteral Senfe. This neceffarily determines a litteral Senfe equally to all of them. The (b) Both (g) From Fofephus, who hath told us very particularly when the Daily Sacrifice of the Temple ceafed to be offer'd. [See Chrifti 70 in the Table annex'd.] by Dr. Prid. and Mr. L. as we shall fee prefently. The learned Dr. Prideaux well knew (i) that this exprefs Character was certainly meant in a litteral Senfe. And therefore he knew not how poffibly to bring this, as before he had brought the preceding Characters in their imagin'd figurative Senfe, to have their affign'd accomplishment in the Meffiah. He was therefore conftrain'd to give it its litteral accomplishment by the Meffiah's future People the Romans (k) long after. And this neceffarily occafion'd his filently paffing over this SOLEMN (1) Character in his Expofition of this Week, and the two preceding Characters in it, without any the leaft notice of this: As if it were not at all concern'd with the predicted Half Part of this One Week- But is not here one great Objection against Dr. Prideaux's Hypothefis in this part of it, viz. that it drops this latter Character of the diftinguished Half Part of the Seventieth Week of this Prophecy?-----And is not fuch DROPPING of the faid exprefs Character a tacit Acknowledgment, as I just now obferv'd, First, That as this Character is to be understood in a litteral Senfe, for it had confeffedly no other than a litteral Accomplishment, fo muft the two preceding Characters be understood likewife? And, Secondly, That as this Character was also confeffedly fulfilled by the Romans, (the Meffiah's future People) the next preceding Relative, fo likewise those other two preceding Characters fhould equally refer to the faid Party, and were accordingly to have their accomplishment by them?- : And thefe particulars equally concern Mr. L. as Dr. Prideaux. For in his Hypothefis (m), though this express Chara&er be referr'd to the Meffiah, yet the immediate Accomplishment of it is not af fign'd to him for Mr. L. makes the Meffiah to fulfil this, not as in the two preceding Characters, in a figurative, but in a litteral Senfe; not perfonally, but by his future People the Romans: the Meffiah ruling, prefiding over, or influencing an Army of Idolaters, viz. the Romans bearing in their Enfigns the Images of their Gods : as are Mr. Lancafter's Words there (x). But as this Matter of Fact was confeffedly in the Destruction of Ferufalem by the Roman Army in both thefe Hypothefes, it was alfo confeffedly in the Year of the V. E. of Chrift 70. But in both alfo the two preceding Characters are fuppos'd to have been accomplished a great many Years before (o). Therefore as I am to fhew Thirdly, The feveral express Characters of this One Week had not in either of these Hypothefes their real accomplishment in point of the here predicted time for their refpective accomplishment. S 3 To (i) From our Lord's referring [Mat. xxiv. 15. Mark xiii. 14.] his Difciples to the accomplishment of this exprefs Character in the final Destruction of ferufalem; as Dr. Prid. himself understood it. [Con. Hift. p. 295 in fine.] () Viz. in Chrifti 70, under Titus begirting Jerufalem with their Enfigns, the ABOMINATION of DESOLATION, &c. [ib.] (1) For fo our blefled Lord's immediate Notice of it moft furely made it. [See Grotius in Mat. xxiv. 15.] (m) P.6. (n) P.7. (0) Viz. either in Chrifti 33, as in Dr. Prideaux's Hypothefis; or in Chrifti 36, as in Mr. Lanc ifter's: As we shall see more particularly prefendy. To ftate the matter clearly in thefe Hypothefes in point of time, the Accomplishment of the feveral exprefs Characters of the One Week, and latter Half Part thereof will stand Exprefs Characters of the One Week. In Dr. PRIDEAUX's thus, 1. The Meffiah by John the Baptist began (p) to confirm 2. The Meffiah began to caufe Sacrifice and Oblation to 2. He caus'd Sacrifice, and Oblation to cease finally, and for? 29 70 3. The Roman Armies caufed the Abomination of Defolation (the latter of the two exprefs Characters of the latter Half Part of this Week) to ftand in the Holy Place (s) in the deftruction of Jerufalem by Titus, In The Accomplishment of the faid exprefs Characters in our present View will Express Characters of the One Week, &c. In Mr. LANCASTER'S Hypothesis stand thus, 1. The Seventieth Week began (t) In The Meffiah in the beginning thereof entring on his Mi- 2. In the middle of it by an Act peculiar to himself, viz. } NÆV Chr. 33 1. The Seventieth Week ended, the Meffiah having from 3. The Meffiah brought over a Wing of Abominations, (p) Con. Hift. Vol. II. in Tab. 70 Now (9) Ib. (s) Ib. p. 295, 296. |