Jonathan Edwards · 316 of 409

XII. TYPES OF THE MESSIAH · Part 9

Again there is clear proof, that the legal sacrifices were types of the great sacrifice of the Messiah in Dan. ix. 24. “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy;” taken together with ver. 27. “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week shall he cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease.” What is translated in ver. 24. “And to make an end of sins,” might have been translated, “He shall seal up the sin-offerings.” The word translated sins in the original is Chattaoth, the very same word that is made use of in the law of Moses, to signify sin-offerings. So that the word might as well be translated sin-offerings here as there. And it is the more likely, that sin-offerings should be meant here, because the word is in the plural number; whereas if what was intended was the same with iniquity in the clause preceding, and transgression in the clause following, thus varying the expression for eloquence sake, it would be more likely this word would have been in the singular number as those are. And besides it is the more likely that the word signifies sin-offerings, because it is evident that this text is a prophecy of the sacrifice that the Messiah should offer for sin. In the next words it is said, “He shall make reconciliation for iniquity.” The word rendered reconciliation (as has been already observed) signifies expiation by sacrifice; it being the same that is so often rendered atonement in the law of Moses, when speaking of sacrifices for sin. But what argues yet more strongly that this should have been translated, he shall make an end, or seal up, sin-offerings, is, that in the 24th verse there seems to be a reference to what had been said before in this verse, when it is said, In the midst of the week, or in the half of the week, he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease. In the 24th verse it had been said, that the sacrifices or sin-offerings should be made an end of or sealed up in seventy weeks; and the 25th, 26th. and 27th. verses are evidently exegetical of that 24th, to explain how the anointed Holy One or Messiah should make atonement for iniquity, and seal up the sin-offering and sacrifices in seventy weeks, viz. from the commandment to build Jerusalem there should be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks, that is, 69 weeks, and then in the remaining week he should establish the covenant with many, and in the half of the week he should make the sacrifice and oblation to cease, or make an end of the sin-offerings, as was said before. Now let us mind the expression; the word translated make an end, in the original is he shall seal up. “He shall seal up the sin-offerings.” It is the very same word that is used in the following clause concerning vision and prophecy. “He shall seal up the vision and prophecy.” The same word being thus used twice in like manner, in different clauses of the same sentence, once concerning the vision and prophecy, and the other time concerning the sin-offering, there is all reason to understand it in both places in the same sense. But the plain meaning of that clause, to seal up the vision and prophecy, is this; then shall be accomplished the grand event so often exhibited by the prophecies of the prophets, and so often represented and signified by the visions which they saw, and so the vision and prophecy shall be finished and brought to their grand accomplishment; that which they ultimately aimed at. Then shall be fulfilled the sum of what was signified in the vision and prophecy. (Ezek. xxviii. 12. “Thou sealest up the sum full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.”) So when in the same sentence it is said, to seal up the sin-offerings, and make atonement for iniquity, we must in a like sense understand it thus, to offer that grand sacrifice or atonement for iniquity, that is so much exhibited and represented by the sin-offerings. So that the sin-offerings shall be made to cease, their design being obtained and finished, that grand event, that great and true atonement for sin, which was aimed at in them, and which they all signified and represented, being now accomplished.

Again it is evident, that the priests of old, in their office of offering sacrifices, were types of the Messiah in offering his sacrifice: otherwise there is no truth in that prophecy that God declares in so solemn a manner, and confirms with an oath, in Jer. xxxiii. 18. “Neither shall the priests, the Levites, want a man before me to offer burnt-offerings, and to kindle meat-offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.” See how solemnly this is confirmed and sworn to, in the following words. Unless this be fulfilled in the true sacrifice or atonement, which the Messiah offers, and in the accomplishment of that prophecy of the Messiah, Psal. cx. “The Lord hath sworn and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek;” it is not fulfilled at all; and is neither agreeable to fact nor to other prophecies. Unless this prophecy be fulfilled thus, it is not agreeable to fact. For the priests and Levites have had no man literally to offer sacrifices literally, for a much longer time than ever they had a man to offer sacrifices. And it is not agreeable to other prophecies, particularly that fore-mentioned, Dan. ix. 24, 27. That speaks of the Messiah’s causing the sacrifice and oblation to cease; and sealing them up, which is directly contrary to this prophecy of Jeremiah xxxiii. if this latter be understood literally. For this very prophecy of Jeremiah is evidently a prophecy of the Messiah. See ver. 15. “I will cause the branch of righteousness to grow up to David.” So that upon this supposition Jeremiah foretells the Messiah’s abundantly confirming the priests and Levites in their business of offering sacrifice and oblation, so as to perpetuate it for ever; and Daniel foretells his finishing the business wholly, sealing it up and making it to cease. And it is elsewhere foretold that there should be no temple made with hands, no ark, no sacrifices of beasts, in the Messiah’s times.

From what has been now observed of the prophecies foretelling that the Messiah should abolish the legal sacrifices, it is manifest that whenever the prophecies of the Messiah’s times do speak of sacrifices then to be offered, they are to be understood mystically, i. e. of spiritual things typified by the sacrifices, as Isa. xix. 31. lx. 7. Ezek. xi. 40, 41. Mal. i. 11.

The blood of the legal sacrifices is called the blood of the covenant by Moses, Exod. xxiv. 8. “And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.” But God calls the blood of the Messiah the blood of the covenant that he had made with this people, or the blood of their covenant. Zech. ix. 11. “As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein there is no water.” It is evident that the blood of the Messiah is that blood by which, the church will be redeemed, when the Messiah comes, which is the time here spoken of. See ver. 9. foregoing, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh,” &c. Therefore, as both these, viz. the blood of the legal sacrifices, and the blood of the Messiah, are called the blood of the church’s covenant, it is manifest that one is represented by the other. The same sacrifices must be intended in that prophecy of the Messiah’s times, Ps. 1. 5. “Gather my saints together, those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.” Thus plain it is that the legal sacrifices were types of the Messiah, the great sacrifice and true atonement for sin, and were appointed as such. And by some things that have been already observed, it is also manifest that their legal purifications were types of that spiritual purity that should be by the Messiah, and the sweet incense a type of that which is spiritual and truly sweet to God. And concerning the incense, I further observe, that spiritual things are expressly compared to it in the Old Testament, Ps. cxli. 2. “Let my prayer be set forth before thee as incense, and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.” And the Messiah is expressly compared to a cloud of incense; Cant. iii. 6. White and beautiful garments were appointed the priests by the law of Moses. These garments on the priests are expressly spoken of as representing something in the Messiah, and particularly are there spoken of as representing righteousness. Again, the righteousness of the Messiah is compared to beautiful garments, Isa. lxi. 10. “He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with his ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.” Job xxix. 14. “I put on righteousness, and it clothed me.” God is represented as clothed with a garment white as snow. Dan. vii. 7. And the Messiah appears to Daniel clothed in linen. Dan. x. 5, 6. and xii. 7. Spiritual purity is represented by the colour white. Isa. i. 18. “Though thy sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow.” Dan. xii. 10. “Many shall be purified and made white.” The high priest had broidered garments: such are spoken of as representing righteousness. Ezek. xvi. 9, 10. “Then I washed thee with water; I thoroughly washed away thy blood from thee; and I anointed thee with oil. I clothed thee also with broidered work and I girded thee about with fine linen.”

It is manifest that the legal uncleannesses were types of sin, they are said to be an abomination to the Lord. Yea, they are called sin in the law of the sin-offering. Lev. vi. 6-8. and xiv. 13, 14, 19, 22, 24, 25, 53. xv. 30. Moral impurities seem to be represented by legal impurities, Hag. ii. 11-14. One thing that was a legal pollution, was blood. This is made use of by the prophets to represent sin. Ezek. xvi. 6. “When I saw thee polluted in thy blood.” So 9, 22. Isa. i. 18. “Though your sins be as scarlet and red like crimson.” Chap. iv. 4. “When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning.”

One kind of legal uncleanness was through menstruous blood. Moral or spiritual pollution is compared to this. Isa. lxiv. 6. “All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags,” or menstruous clothes, as it might have been rendered. The leprosy was one kind of legal uncleanness. Sin seems to be compared to this, in Isa. i. 6. “From the sole of the foot even unto the head, there is no soundness in it, but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores.”

The legal purifications by washing the hands in the laver, and other parts of the body in water, is what a spiritual cleansing from sin is compared to. Ps. xxvi. 6. “I will wash my hands in innocency, and so will I compass thine altar;” alluding to the priests washing their hands at the laver before they compassed God’s altar. Zech. xiii. 1. “In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.” Ps. li. 2. “Wash me from my iniquity; cleanse me from my sin.” Isa. i. 16. “Wash ye, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings.” Jer. iv. 14. “Wash thy heart from wickedness.” Prov. xxx. 12. “There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not cleansed from their filthiness.” Isa. iv. 4. “When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion.” Ezek. xvi. 4. “Neither wast thou washed in water.” Ver. 9. “Then washed I thee in water.” Ezek. xxxvi. 25. “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean from all your filthiness.”

That the anointing under the law typified something spiritual, is confirmed by this, that what is spiritual is called anointing. Ezek. xvi. 9. “I anointed thee with oil.” It is an argument that those officers that were anointed, were types of the Messiah, that his name is Messiah, or the anointed. The holy anointing oil represented the Spirit of God, because the Holy Spirit is represented by holy anointing oil. Zech. iv. 2-6, 12. and Isa. lxi. 1. “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me.” By which last words it may also be confirmed, that the anointing of the officers of the Jewish church represented the spiritual anointing of the Messiah.

Something spiritual that shall be in the Messiah’s times is compared to the wine of the drink-offering. Zech. ix. 15. “They shall drink and make a noise as through wine. They shall be filled like bowls and as the corners of the altar.”

We have the testimony of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, that the golden candlestick with its bowl on the top and its seven lamps, and oil for the lamps, is a representation of the church of the Messiah. Zech. iv. taken with the preceding chapter.

The sanctuary or temple was a type of heaven, as may be argued from this, that heaven is called in the Old Testament his dwelling-place, his holy habitation, his sanctuary, and his temple. 1 Kings viii. 30. “Hear thou in heaven thy dwelling-place.” So 39, 43, 49. 2 Chron. vi. 21, 30, 39.; and 2 Chron. xxx. 27.; and Ps. xxxiii. 13, 14. “The Lord looketh from heaven, he beholdeth all the sons of men; from the place of his habitation he looketh on all the inhabitants of the earth.” Isa. lxiii. 15. “Look down from heaven, and behold from the habitation of thy holiness and thy glory.” Jer. xxv. 30. “The Lord shall roar from on high, and utter his voice from his holy habitation.” Deut. xxvi. 15. “Look down from thy holy habitation.” Ps. lxviii. 4, 5. “Sing unto the Lord; sing praises unto his name; extol him that rideth on the heavens by his name Jah. A judge of the widows is God in his “holy habitation.” Ps. cii. 19. “For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary, from heaven did the Lord behold the earth.” Ps. xi. 4. “The Lord is in his holy temple; the Lord’s throne is in heaven.”

That the great, costly, or precious stories that were the foundation of the temple, spoken of 1 Kings v. 19.; and of Solomon’s house, chap. vii. 10. represented the Messiah, is confirmed by Isa. xxviii. 16. Ps. cxviii. 22. Zech. iii. 9. and iv. 7.

It is a confirmation that the frame of the tabernacle and temple were typical, from the agreement there is between it, and the visions under which God sometimes manifested himself. The mercy-seat with the cherubims is called the chariot of the cherubims. 1 Chron. xxviii. 18.; agreeable to the vision that Ezekiel had of God riding in a chariot drawn by cherubims. Ezekiel’s vision of the chariot of the cherubims was also agreeable with the frame of the chariot, in which the lavers were set, and represented as drawn by lions, oxen, and cherubim; agreeable to the shapes of Ezekiel’s living creatures. See 1 Kings vii. 27-39.

But a very great and clear evidence, that the city of Jerusalem, the holy city and the temple in all its parts and measures, and its various appendages and utensils, with all its officers, services, sacrifices, and ceremonies, and so all things appertaining to the ceremonial law, and indeed many things appertaining to the civil state of the people as divided into twelve tribes, were typical of things appertaining to the Messiah and his church and kingdom, is that these things are evidently made use of as such, in a very particular manner in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel; that we have an account of the nine last chapters of his prophecy. These there mentioned, which are the same which were in Israel under the law of Moses, are mentioned as resemblances, figures, or symbolical representations of spiritual things. So that God has in these chapters determined, that these things are figures, symbols, or types representing the things of the Messiah’s kingdom, because here he plainly makes use of them as such.

It is no argument, that the things that have been treated of were not designed as types of the Messiah, and things pertaining to his kingdom, that God, when he instituted them, did not expressly declare them to be so. For there is no more necessity of supposing that all types signifying future events, when given should be explained, than that all visions and prophecies signifying future events should be explained. The things that were exhibited in visions, were truly a sort of types of future events; as Abraham’s smoking furnace and burning lamp, which was not explained nor expressly declared to represent any thing future. The twelve fountains and threescore and ten palm-trees at Elim, were evidently types of the twelve tribes, and threescore and ten elders; but yet it is not expressly said so. The like might be observed of Jacob’s taking Esau by the heel at his birth, and God’s making Eve of Adam’s rib, and Moses’s rod’s swallowing up the magicians’ rods, and many other things.

Corollary. Seeing it is thus abundantly evident by the Old Testament itself, that the things of the Old Testament were typical of the Messiah, and things appertaining to him, hence a great and most convincing argument may be drawn that Jesus is the Messiah; seeing there is so wonderful a correspondence, and evident, manifold, and great agreement between him and his gospel, and those types of the Old Testament. And as it is so plain by the Old Testament, that the ancient state of things amongst the Jews was all typical of the Messiah, and the Jews themselves acknowledge it: So it is a great argument, that Jesus and his kingdom were the end and antitype of these things, because presently after he comes and sets up his kingdom, God puts a total and final end to that typical state of the Jews, and all things appertaining to it, blots out all those types at once, and wipes them clean away, and poured the utmost contempt upon them, and covered them with the most dreadful darkness, and utterly destroyed, as by one great fatal and final blow, that whole typical world, and has now continued their abolition for so many ages, much longer than he did their existence, and has followed all that reject the antitype, and will cleave to the types, with so awful and continual a curse, and all this agreeably to the prophecies of what God would do, when the Messiah, this great antitype, was come.

That typical representations were looked upon by God as no trifling matters, but things of great importance, as is manifest in that it is spoken of in Scripture as a matter of such importance, that Christ’s body should not see corruption before it was raised.

It was common for names to be given by a spirit of prophecy. (See Owen on Heb. vii. 2. p. 112.)

We have reason to suppose, that very many things in the Old Testament are intended as types, seeing it is manifest in some instances, that so very minute circumstances were so ordered, such as the negative circumstances of the story of Melchizedek, there being no mention made of his father or mother, of his birth or death.

That all things, even to the least circumstance, prescribed by God about the tabernacle, and its services, were types of heavenly things, appears by the apostle’s manner of arguing, (Heb. viii. 5.) from those words of God to Moses, “See that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.” And if they were all types, they were all for our instruction; and if they were for our instruction, then we must endeavour to understand them, even those of them that are no where explained in Scripture.

Heb. ix. 3-5. The apostle there mentioning the ark, mercy-seat, tables of the covenant, the golden censer, pot of manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, concludes thus, “Of which I cannot now speak particularly,” i. e. I cannot now explain particularly the design of those things, and tell you particularly what evangelical and heavenly things were represented thereby; which proves evidently, that many things in the tabernacle were typical, and intended to represent to God’s people evangelical things, which signification is not explained to us in Scripture.

The Jews of old seemed to look on the redemption from Egypt as a type of the redemption which should be accomplished by the Messiah. (See Pool’s Synopsis on Exod. xii. 14.)

It is an evidence that legal uncleanness was a type of sin, that it is in effect called sin. (See Pool’s Synopsis on Lev. xii. 8.)

That the temporal things of the Old Testament were types of the spiritual things of the New. (See Pool’s Synopsis on 2 Sam. ii. 10.)

An objection is raised from the abuse that will be made of this doctrine of types. Answer. I do not know that the types of Scripture are more abused by people that are enthusiastic and of teeming imagination, than the visionary representations of the book of Revelation; and yet none make that an objection against all attempts to understand and interpret that book. We have as good warrant from the word of God to suppose the whole ceremonial law to be given in order to a figurative representing and signifying spiritual and evangelical things to mankind, as we have to suppose that prophetical representations are to represent and signify the events designed by them, and therefore have as good reason to endeavour to interpret them.

The principles of human nature render types a fit method of instruction. It tends to enlighten and illustrate, and to convey instruction with impression, conviction, and pleasure, and to help the memory. These things are confirmed by man’s natural delight in the imitative arts, in painting, poetry, fables, metaphorical language and dramatic performances. This disposition appears early in children.

This may be observed concerning types in general, that not only the things of the Old Testament are typical; for this is but one part of the typical world. The system of created beings may be divided into two parts, the typical world, and the antitypical world. The inferior and carnal, i. e. the more external and transitory part of the universe, that part of it which is inchoative, imperfect, and subservient, is typical of the superior, more spiritual, perfect, and durable part of it, which is the end, and as it were the substance and consummation, of the other. Thus the material and natural world is typical of the moral, spiritual, and intelligent world, or the city of God. And many things in the world of mankind, as to their external and worldly state, are typical of things pertaining to the city and kingdom of God: as many things in the state of the ancient Greeks, and Romans, &c. And those things belonging to the city of God, which belong to its more imperfect, carnal, inchoative, transient, and preparatory state, are typical of those things which belong to its more spiritual, perfect, and durable state; as things belonging to the state of the church under the Old Testament were typical of things belonging to the church and kingdom of God under the New Testament. The external works of Christ were typical of his spiritual works. The ordinances of the external worship of the Christian church are typical of things belonging to its heavenly state.

The manner of the apostle’s expressing himself in Gal. iv. 21, 22. will clearly prove that Abraham’s two sons, and their mothers, and mount Sinai, and mount Sion, were intended to be types of those things he mentions; which is a great confirmation that the history of the Old Testament in general is intended to be typical of spiritual things. The apostle’s manner of speaking seems to imply, that it might well be expected of God, that his people should understand such like things as representations of divine things, and receive particular instruction exhibited in them, even before they are particularly explained to them by God by a new revelation.