Six Discourses on the Miracles of Our Saviour, and Defences of His DiscoursesWoolston, Thomas
Religion
Six Discourses on the Miracles of Our Saviour, and Defences of His Discourses
Woolston, Thomas
Gibson, Edmund, 1669-1748; Jesus Christ -- Miracles -- Early works to 1800; Smalbroke, Richard, 1672-1749
from the Words of _Christ_, and the Practice of the Apostle, to keep
on in the allegorical Method, till an Harmony between the Prophecy and
its Accomplishment was made most clear.
The _Bishop_ says in this his _Third Chapter_ of his _Vindication_,
"That the Fathers and I have abusively cited this Passage of St.
_Paul_, _The Letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth Life_, in
Justification of our mystical Expositions;" whereupon the _Bishop_
gave us a large Explication out of his own Head, on that whole Verse;
which (because of the Shallowness of my own Pate, or the Confusion of
the Bishop's) I don't understand, and much question, whether the
_Bishop_ understands himself. However, I will here paraphrastically
give my _Readers_ the easy, plain, and intelligible Sense of the
Fathers and my self on that whole Verse[398] thus, _Who hath made us
able Ministers of the New Testament, not of the Letter_ [that is, not
of the literal Sense of the Law and the Prophets, which is the _Old_
Testament] _but of the Spirit_, [that is, of the spiritual Sense of
the Law and the Prophets, which is the _New_ Testament] _for_ [as the
Testimony of _Jesus_, according to St. _John_, is the Spirit of
Prophecy, so] _the Letter_ [that is, the literal Sense of the Law and
Prophets] _killeth_ [that is, nulls the Testimony of _Jesus_ which is
in them] _but the Spirit_ [that is, the spiritual Sense of the Law and
Prophets] _giveth Life_ [to their prophetical Testimony.] This is most
certainly the Sense of the Fathers on this Text; and I believe the
_Bishop_ will not gainsay it, tho' he may dislike it. Hence the
Fathers, when they spoke _properly_ and not _vulgarly_, call'd the
spiritual Sense of the Law and the Prophets, the[399] _New Testament_,
and asserted that there was or would be such an Agreement between the
_Old_ and _New_ Testament; that is, between the Testament of the
_Letter_, and the Testament of the _Spirit_ of the Scriptures, as that
there would not be[400] one Tittle in the _one_, that would not be
consonantly fulfilled in the _other_; and so far as I already
apprehend this Harmony between these two Testaments, of the _Letter_,
and of the _Spirit_, I must needs say with _Origen_[401] that it's
_pleasant and ravishing to behold and contemplate it_, and hope in a
short time to make the Bishop of St. _David_'s a Partaker of the same
Pleasure. The same right Notion had the Fathers of the _Gospel_ of
_Christ_, which they have of the _New Testament_. _Vulgarly_ speaking,
the Writings of the Evangelists, and of the Apostles, were call'd the
_Gospel_ of _Christ_: But properly speaking, Christ's _spiritual
Accomplishment_ of the Law was the _Gospel_: Hence is the Meaning of
their frequent saying, "That under the Law the Gospel was vail'd, and
under the Gospel the Law was reveal'd." Hence they said, "That those
Men had nothing of the _Gospel_, who understood not the Spirit of the
_Law_." Hence they said, "The Gospel was hid to those, who had the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account