[107]. αντιτυπος.
[108]. See Psal. lxii. the title, compared with the subject-matter of the Psalm, which speaks of Christ in the person of Solomon.
[109]. See Vol. I. pages 53-56.
[110]. The first, he and his followers call, Oeconomia promissionis, or, ante-legalis; the second, Oeconomia legalis; the third, Oeconomia evangelica.
[111]. Minus plena, or minus vera.
[112]. For the proof of this, they often refer to that scripture in Rom. iii. 25. in which it is said, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, to declare his righteousness, for the remission of sins that are past, through, or after, the forbearance, of God, which they suppose to contain an intimation of the privilege which the gospel-church enjoyed, namely, remission of sins; whereas, under the legal dispensation, there was nothing else apprehended by them, but the forbearance of God: so that the Old Testament-church had παρεσιν αμαρτιων; the New Testament church, αφεσιν; and they all suppose, that they looked upon Christ as Fide-jussor, and not Expromissor, which are terms used in the civil law; the former of which signifies a person’s undertaking to be a surety, and, at the same time, leaving the creditor at his liberty to exact the debt, either of him, or the debtor himself; whereas, Expromissor, signifies, a person’s undertaking to be a surety, in so full and large a sense, as that, by virtue hereof, the debtor is discharged. Therefore, since they did not, so clearly, know that God would discharge them, by virtue of Christ’s undertaking to be a Surety, but concluded that he might exact the debt, either of him, or them; this was the foundation of that terror and bondage, which they were perpetually subject to.
[113]. See Page 379. Vol. I.
[114]. See Quest. xliv.
[115]. See Vol. I. Page 243.
[116]. See Quest. ix, x, xi.