T Y P
[ 2 ^9 3
TYP
of a Dog, yet it did not deftroy his Hearing 5 tho* for fome time afterwards he receiv'd ftrong Sounds with great Horror : He adds, that Mr. St. Andre affur'd him, that a Patient of his had the Tympanum deftroy'd by an Ulcer, and the Au- ditory Bones caft out, without destroying his Hearing.
TYMPANY, or Tympanites, in Medicine. See Tym- panites.
TYPE, a Copy of a Model 5 or a Figure or Character either engraven or printed. See Model, Character, &c.
The Term Type is lefs in ufe than its Compounds Proto- type and Archetype, which are the Originals that are made without Models. See Prototype, &c.
The Word is form'd from the Greek, tow©-, Figure.
Type is alfb a School Term, much ufed amonp Divines, Signifying a Symbol, Sign, or Figure of fomething to come.
In this Senfe, the Word is commonly ufed with relation to Antitype, AvnwnQ-y which is the Thing itfelfi whereof that is a Type or Figure. See Antitype.
Thus Abraham's Sacrifice, the Pafchal Lamb, l£c. were Types or Figures of our Redemption : The Brazen Serpent was a Type of the Croft, &c,
Thefe Types were not Ample Conformities or Analogies, which the Nature of Things fets on foot between them 5 nor arbitrary Images arifing merely from the cafual Refem- blance of Things $ but there is further requir'd a particular Institution of God to make a Type ; a particular Declara- tion of his that it is fo.
Gale divides Types into hiftorical and prophetical. — The firft are thofe ufed by the Prophets in their Agitations and Virions : The Second, thofe wherein Things done, or Cere- monies inftituted in the Old Teftament, prefigure Chrift, or Things relating to him in the New Teftament.
The ancient Fathers, as well as the modern Criticks, have been greatly divided about the Nature and Ufe of Types, and typical Representations, in the Old Teftament ; and 'tis this makes one of the great Difficulties in underftanding the ancient Prophefies, and in reconciling the new and old Teftament to- gether. See Prophesy.
There is no denying but that there were Types which the divine Wifdom inftituted to be the Shadows and Figures of Things to come : and yet People run into an Excefs that Way : Some looking for Types in every thing 5 like Orjgen, who difcover'd Myfteries in the very Caldrons of the Tabernacle. — One fhould be contented with the more feniible and obvi- ous ones ; nor propofe any without proving them as much as poffible, and (hewing that they were really intended for Types, in order to juftify the Solidity of the Reafoning of the A- poftles, who argu'd from them.
A late Author maintains, that not the Fathers only, but St. 'Paul himfelf was of the Opinion, that " Chriftianity
- ' was all contained in the Old Teftament, was implied in the
«' Jmijb Hiftory and Law ■? both which are to be reputed " Types and Shadows of Chriftianity."-— In order to which, he quotes Hebrews viii. 5. x. 1, and Co. H. 16, 17- — He adds " That the Ritual Laws of Mofes, being in their own
- ( Nature no other than Types and Shadows of future good
" Things, are to be confider'd as having the Effect of Pro- " phefies." - - This is likewife the Senfe of Mr. Whifton and others ; but the fame Author even quotes our Saviour Speaking in behalf of this Typical Reafoning, in that Paffage, Matthew xi. 13, where he affirms, that " The Law " prophefies ; and that he came to fulfil the Law as well as " the Gofpel, Matthews. 17." T)ifcourje of the Grounds and Reafon of the Chriftian Religion.
An ingeniousDivine takes thisOccafion toobferve,that had the Ancients, with the modern Retainers to the typical Way, exprefly defign'd to have expos'd Chriftianity, they could not have done it more effectually than by thus making every thing Types and Prophefies. — "Lis no wonder, he adds, That Atheifts and Deifts feoff at the Credulity of Chriftians, and reject what is Supported by Such Folly and Abfurdity.
Not that he denies the Reality of fuch Things as Types. .-- 'Tis manifest, there were many under the Old Teftament-, fuch were Zacharia's Staves, Beauty and Bands, c. xi. 7, 10, 14 ; fuch was Hofeah's Adulterous Wife, c. i. 2 5 and Such were his Children, v. 4, 6- — The Prophets defign'd by thefe to prefigure future Events 5 but in thefe Inftances the Reader is at once, by the Declaration of the Prophet, made to underftand as much, and not left to his own Con- jectures about them, after the Events are over.
In effect, all that is urged from Scripture for the typical or allegorical Interpretations of theft-wife Law, Hiftory, Cere- monies, £jfc. 'tis afferted, may be let afide, without any Violence to the facred Text, which may be explain'd on more natural and intelligible Principles, and more confiftently with Grammar. See Allegorical.
The Word tut©-, we have obferved, literally denotes no more than a Copy or Impreffion of any thing ; and ac- cordingly, in our Translation, we find it fometimes render'd by SPw, fometimes by Figure, Sometimes by Fafjion, and
fometimes by Formi — Hence, alfo, the Word Is figurative* ly applied to denote a moral Pattern 5 in which Seme it !gg* nifies no more than Example and Similitude.
Again, the Word a,v\(\m^- y in Scripture, Signifies any thing form'd according to a Model or Pattern ; and thus in the Epiftle to the Hebrews, the Tabernacle, and Holy of Holies being made according to the Pattern fhewn to Mofes, are laid to be Antitypes or Figures of the true holy Places. -- In the like Senfe, St. 'Peter Speaking of the Flood and the Ark, whereby Eight Perions were faved, calls Baptifoi an Antitype thereto j by which he express no more "than b. Similitude of Circumflances.
The other Words ufed in Scripture to imply a future Event, prefigured by fome foregoing Act, are-— Tirofc-tyy.*, render'd by Imitation and Example ?■ and aKta, Shadow.
Thislaft Word is frequently uied by St. -Paul, and applied to the Jewifa Law, Ceremonies, Prieft, H£c. which are re- prefented as oniy Shadows of Things to come, or of heavenly Things. 'Tis from fuch general Expreffions, that People were led to miftake theApoftlesDefign in thefe ComparifbnSj, and to afferr, that all the Mofaic Rites were Types of, or defign'd to Signify future Events 5 and that the Gofpel is
to be found in the Pentateuch Whereas St. Paul's Intent
appears no other than to Shew the great Advantage of the Gofpel over the Law in Several Particulars, wherein it has as much Pre-eminence as the Subftance has over the Shadow.
If the Shadow of Things to come, Signify a Prefiguration of future Events, what are thofe Events to which the Jewife New Moons, Col.$u 16. or the Jewtfh Meats and Drinks, have a refpect ? Or, how did the Law of Mofes, made up of Commands about Perfons, Times, Places, and Sacrifices, prefigure a Difpenfation, where regard to Sacri- fices, holy Perfons, Times and Places, are fo far from being enjoyn'd, that they are declared ufelels? Can a particular holy Place in the Law, be defigned a Prefiguration of a State, where all Places are equally Holy ?
Such being the Import of all the Terms ufed in the New Teftament Writers Seeming to imply any Prefiguration of future Events under the Gofpel, we may obferve,
l" That to argue from Types, is only to argue from Ex- amples or Similitudes, and, confequenrly, all Inferences drawn from fuch Reafoning?, are no farther conclu five, than Reafhnings from Similitudes are. — The Intent of Simili- tudes is only to help to convey fome Ideas more clearly or ftrongly j fo that to deduce Confequences from a Simile, or infer any thing from other Parts of the Simile than what are plainly Similar, is abfurd.
2° It cannot be proved rhat the Ceremonies of the Mofaic Law, were ever defign'd to prefigure any future Events in the State of the Mejfiah's Kingdom. —No fuch declared Prefigurations are mention'd in the Writings o£ the Old Tefta- ment ; whatever Notions prevailed among the Writers, who immediately followed. 'Tis granted, that the Apoftles argued from the Rites in the Mofaic Inftitution 5 but it ap- pears to have only been by way of Illuftration and Analogy.
There is certainly a general Likenefs in all the Difpenfa- 1 tions of Providence 5 an Analogy of things in the Natural as well as the Moral World, from which it is eafy arguing by way of Parity, and 'tis very juft and ufual fo to do ; But that one of thefe DiSpenfations was therefore given. to prefignify another that was future, can never be proved, ufi- lefs it be exprefly declared. -- The Land of Promife, w.e know, was to be a Place where the Jews were to enjoy RenY from their Labours ; God likewife did, himfelf, reft the Seventh Day from his Works ; Yet, whoever im'agin'd God's Reft from the Creation to be prefigurative of the Jews Reft in Canaan'? and is it not equally reafomble to fay, that God's Reft on the Seventh Day, prefigured the Entrance of the Jews into Canaan? as to fay, that the Jews Reft in Canaan prefigured the Reft mentioned by T)avid in the Pfalms \
This will equally imply, that all the following Events in the uniform Courfe of God's Government, fimilar to any preceding ones, were defign'd to be prefignified ; in which Senfe, it will readily be owned, that the Reft of the Jews was Typical of the Reft of Chriftijns.
'Tis in the fame manner we are to underftand St. Paul? where he fays, *' That Chrift our Paffover is Sacrificed for " us." And thus we are to underftand John theSaptift, when he calls our Saviour the " Lamb of God." — There was this Similitude of Circumftances, that Chrift was Slain on the fame Day with the Pafchal Lamb ; that he died about the fame time of the Day when the Priefts began their Hillei 5 that not a Bone of the one, or the other was broken. Add, that as the Pafchal Lamb was without Blemifh, fo was Chrift without Sin. —-From thefe and other Circumftances, the Apoftle applied the Term Paffover to Chrift.
Thus, alfo^ are we to account for what St. Paul calls the
Baptifmof the Children of Jfrae.l in the Cloud, and in the
[Yyyj 5ea .
