B25425:3767
TroposchemmalogiaTroposchēmalogia
Troposchemmalogia: Tropes and figures; or, A treatise of the metaphors, allegories, and express similitudes, &c. contained in the Bible of the Old and New Testament To which is prefixed, divers arguments to prove the divine authority of the Holy Scriptures wherein also 'tis largely evinced, that by the great whore, mystery Babylon is meant the Papal hierarchy, or present state and church of Rome. Philologia sacra, the second part. Wherein the schemes, or figures in Scripture, are reduced under their proper heads, with a brief explication of each. Together with a treatise of types, parables, &c. with an improvement of them parallel-wise. By B. KTroposchēmalogia: Tropes and figures; or, A treatise of the metaphors, allegories, and express similitudes, &c. contained in the Bible of the Old and New Testament To which is prefixed, divers arguments to prove the divine authority of the Holy Scriptures wherein also 'tis largely evinced, that by the great whore, mystery Babylon is meant the Papal hierarchy, or present state and church of Rome. Philologia sacra, the second part. Wherein the schemes, or figures in Scripture, are reduced under their proper heads, with a brief explication of each. Together with a treatise of types, parables, &c. with an improvement of them parallel-wise. By B. K
London: printed by John Darby, 1682
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Canon V. When there are many partial Types of one and the same Thing, then we are to judge not from one Antitype, but of all jointly taken.
Canon V. When there are many partial Types of one and the same Thing, then we are te judge not from one Antitype, but of all jointly taken.
THE Reason of this Canon depends upon the foregoing Canons. For in as much as the Things of the New Testament are prefigured in the Old, [Greek or Hebrew], at sundry Times, and in divers Manners, Heb. 1.1. Therefore if a right Judgment of the Thing prefigured ought to be made by Types, we must not examine or meditate upon one Type singly, but many of them together. Here Socinus and his Followers err, when he parallels the Redemption and Mediation of Moses, with that purchased and done by Christ. But besides that Moses is here a Type of Christ only with respect to the Thing, (ratione rei) but not (ratione modi) with respect to the Manner, as we said Can. 3. For we may allege that we bring our Judgment according to the Canon concerning our Redemption by Christ, and his Mediatorial Office, not from that single Type of Moses, but from others joined with it. For the Manner of our Redemption, which consists in the appeasing of divine ⟨p. 44⟩Wrath and Satisfaction for our Sins, was more proximately and immediately (though not fully) adumbrated by the Sacrificial Types, chiefly the Scape-Goat, Lev. 16.21. The Red heifer, Numb. 19.2. Nevertheless you are to note here, that the grand Foundation of our Belief in this Point, is not built upon Types, but upon clear Scripture Texts, that unfold the Mystery of our Redemption.