built. The evidence of a revelation is derived from the internal truth it affords, and the external truth, with which it is connected. Types are a part of the internal evidence, and form a segment of the circle, in which Christianity is confined. Yet their evidence is distinct; and though but shadows, they are emblems of important substances, and kept up like prophecy the expectations of the Messiah. Abraham saw the day of Christ and was glad; types and prophecy animated his hopes; and upon the evidence they afforded, he, with the eye of faith, looked forward to the redemption, which, through them, was promised to the world. Still there was no confusion in the evidences; each bore its own testimony, and each substantiated the truth, not only of a partial revelation from God, but of the whole Christian religion.

But what is a type? A type is a rough draught, an emblem, a model, a figure, a representation, a symbol of something future; though in a spiritual sense, the representation must be designed by God to prefigure a future thing'. Thus the Israelites were typical

"A type is a rough draught, a less accurate model, from which a more perfect image or work is made. Types, or typical prophecies, are things, which happened and were done in ancient times, and are recorded in the Old Testament, and which are found afterwards to describe or represent something, which befell our Lord, and which relates to Him and to his Gospel.

of the Christians.

St. Paul thus writes: "Moreover, brethren, I would not, that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat of the same spiritual meat; and did all drink of the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock, that followed them; and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased; for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, (or as the Greek has it, our types or figures, TUTTOL,) to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted." Again, (v. 11,) "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; (or types,) and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." Here we have the express declaration of Scripture; and thus are we authorized in considering the Israelites typical of the Christians. Again, the Lamb which was offered as a sin-offering under the law, was a type of the Lamb, that atoned for sin under

Unless we have the authority of the Scriptures of the New Testament for it, we cannot conclude, with certainty, that this or that person, or this or that thing, mentioned in the Old Testament, is a type of Christ, on account of the resemblance, which we may perceive between them; but we may admit it as probable."-Jortin's Remarks, Vol. i. p. 121, 122.

1 1 Cor. x. 1-6.

the Gospel. Lamb of God.

John the Baptist called Christ the And St. Peter tells Christians, that they are redeemed by the blood of Christ, as of a lamb. Here again we have the authority of Scripture for concluding, that the Lamb sacrificed under the law was a type of Christ. And what could more forcibly keep alive the expectations of the Redeemer, than prophecy and types? Types were expressly and designedly appointed by God to remind the people of the redemption, which He would effect through his Son. Indeed, were all analogy between the type and antitype to be destroyed or discredited, a large portion of the Old Testament would become unintelligible and sealed. Had not the outward form under the old dispensation of remitting sin a further meaning, and one of a more exalted character, it almost would appear unworthy of the direction of Deity. But it shadowed forth the greatest work, that God ever accomplished or humanity could conceive-even the redemption of man by the death of His Son. It figured the great atonement, that required the life of Jesus, which He willingly poured out amid the agonies of the Cross. The representation was lively; the type not to be mistaken.

But there is another consideration with respect to types, equally important and valuable. Types keep

up the connexion of the Testaments, and thereby prove the inspiration of the authors of the several books. By types evidence of truth is added to each. The New Testament substantiates the shadows of the Old, and the Old figures the important realities contained in the New. Distinct as the evidence is, the connexion is determinate and valuable, because it shows the design of the Almighty. The books in the Old and New Testaments were written by different authors, with slight exceptions, and at times far distant, yet they all bear upon the same point; they all intrinsically show inspiration, by the strong connexion between them. The Old Testament is a continued history. Its grand point is to figure the Messiah. Till the delivery of the Gospel it was sealed. Both to the Jews and the Greeks it was incomprehensible. To the one it was foolishness-to the other a stumbling-block. It contained a treasure that was closed from the gaze of the world, valuable as it was inexhaustible. The Gospel was the key, that unlocked the great mysteries of that important treasure house. Thus the one was important to the other, because the one proved the truth of the other. The lock, if we may so simply express ourselves, was of no use without the key, or the key without the lock. The connexion was invaluable. The use of each was indisputable. Both are sealed, unless the one be applied to open the other. The

New Testament contains mere facts, supported by their own internal evidence. The Old veiled prophecies and figures. This is their character apart. But the Bible must be received as a whole. The Scriptures must not be divided or garbled, or an instant destruction fastens upon their contents. We must regard the Old Testament, as containing truths the most important; and the New, as unravelling their mysteries. Types could not have been understood, had not the Gospel explained their meaning. A doubt must have for ever hung upon them, and the mystery would have been incomprehensible.

We make these observations, simply to show the immediate connexion of the Testaments, and the dependency of the one book upon the other. It is this dependency, that establishes the truth of each, and works out the evident design of God, to vouchsafe to his creatures a revelation, which by its own internal evidence establishes its verity; that verity is increased by external evidence.

But, although there is a discernible distinction, and an independent character existing between the Old and New Testaments, the connexion is equally as strong; the mystery cannot be explained or understood by the finite mind. Great indeed is the mystery of Godliness.