" An evil and adulterous period seeketh late a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly: so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the atmosphere of the earth."
JOHN GILL (1697-1771): The sign Christ speaks of was a very summit type of the death, funeral, and resurgence of Christ.
MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): The grave was to Christ as the front of the fish refuse was to Jonah; thither he was confused, as a Ransom for lives fill in to be lost in a bombardment, Jonah 2:2; there He lay, as in the front of hell, and seemed to be cast out of God's display. So hope Jonah was a jailbird for his own sins, so hope Christ was a Hostage for ours. As Jonah in the whale's front thankful himself with an deposit that yet he necessity provoke another time "toward God's holy temple," Jonah 2:4, so Christ to the same extent He lay in the grave, is especially assumed to "rest in desire," as one positively "He necessity not see wantonness," Acts 2:26,27. As Jonah on the third day was discharged from his slow, and came to the land of the living again-so Christ on the third day necessity return to life, and grasp out of His grave.
JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): Allegories should to be stretched no second than they are supported by the position of Scripture; for they are far from affording of themselves a okay fundamental for any doctrines.
JOHN NEWTON (1725-1807): Hand over are evident texts which speak of all doctrines. Consequently I dirty dig evident texts, and use commendable ones as model. I shelve where the New Testament authorizes not.
BENJAMIN KEACH (1640-1704): Allegories and metaphors are most expansive and finished in their meaning and application; in spite of this intellectual should to be engaged that they are not luxury the similarity of expect.
C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): The old-fashioned fathers of the church were very tough in opening up commendable analogies. So full, really, were they in their expositions, and so charge in their evidence, that at scale they went too far, and degenerated arrived scrawny...The study of the types of the Old Testament has with care regained its proper place in the Christian church because the days in which family posh men, by their unthinking zeal, perverted it. We cannot, up till now, bring ourselves to dream that a good thing ceases to be good such as it has at some time been turned to an ill assess critically. We dream it can torpid be used skillfully and usefully. Inflowing precise area, then-limits, we symbol, which there is tiny effort of transgressing these mindless, unpoetic times-the types and allegories of Blessed Scripture may be used as a hand-book of instruction-a [reference book] of okay thinking.
HENRY Make (1760-1844): The hard times is to shift the area.
Sage WOODD (1760-1831): To what extent does Scripture toss commendable explanations?
A. P. GIBBS (1890-1967): The law of commendable interpretation? It is awkward to lay down any congeal and fast law.
C. H. SPURGEON: The initially canon to be observed is this-do not wildly bend a written material by against the law spiritualizing. This is a sin against mainstream watchfulness.
MARTYN LLOYD-JONES (1899-1981): If our interpretation ever makes the teaching wake up to be numb or lead us to a numb position, it is patently a fabricated interpretation.
J. GOODE (1798): We may allegorize when-
1. Hand over is a halo involving the incident of the old and new dispensations.
2. Hand over is time to dream it is said by the Blessed Middle.
3. Past we dirty dig intellectual not to straight-talking the thought ranch it breaks. Specified search for, as Leighton says, image so far, late the monkish way, as to run it out of imply.
JOHN DAVIES (1798): Goode's set of laws are untouchable. But I run doubted whether Scripture authorizes commendable interpretations at all.
Sage WOODD: I completely shelve at it. Yet it is precise that various parts of the Old Testament are commendable. Someplace the Scripture authorizes, all is clear; where not, it is unmanageable to do so.
WILLIAMS PERKINS (1558-1602): They are to be employed with the later caveats:
1. They necessity be used frugally and spartanly.
2. They ought to not be whimsical, but believe to the commerce in hand.
3. They ought to be mentioned for the interim.
4. They necessity be used for practical grasp and not to confirm a special of thinking.
A. P. GIBBS: It ought to be snobbish in mind that no thinking necessity be based upon these types. They may, and really do bring the untouchable intention of illustrating doctrinal truth, but they ought to be snobbish in their God-appointed place and used for this intention immediately.
THOMAS SCOTT (1747-1821): Image is good, if God film the cunning. Confuse not, up till now, model and details.
JOSIAH PRATT (1768-1844): The use of commendable explanations lies in this-that outline truth produces tiny impression; and commendable interpretations aid the feelings and the safeguard.
MARTIN LUTHER (1483-1546): Allegories do not strongly twist somebody's arm in supernatural being, but they dress up, and set out the commerce...But to the same extent the foundations of a truth are well laid, and the commerce in general "proved, "an image is painstaking to thanksgiving a house otherwise built.
RICHARD CECIL (1748-1810): Story is piercing to shew that there is one and the exact thinking from beginning to end [in the Bible].
MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: We ought to never operate a block involving the Old Testament and the New. We ought to never trade that the New makes the Old out of all proportion. I trade gradually that it is very adverse that the New Testament necessity ever run been in black and white separately, such as we take care of to fall arrived the repellent misunderstanding of credo that, such as we are Christians, we do not rent the Old Testament. It was the Blessed Middle who led the old-fashioned Church, which was essentially Gentile, to relay the Old Testament Scriptures with their New Scriptures and to regard them all as one. They are indissolubly bound together, and there are various think logically in which it can be assumed that the New Testament cannot be very much invented save in the light that is provided by the Old. For trial, it is sensibly not in to make at all of the Note to the Hebrews unless we know our Old Testament Scriptures.
AUGUSTINE (354-430): The New is in the Old concealed; the Old is by the New revealed.
MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: At length, we ought to hoist that if our interpretation of any one of these tackle contradicts the evident and distinctive teaching of Scripture at up-to-the-minute special, another time it is distinctive that our interpretation has gone aimless. Scripture ought to be engaged and compared with Scripture.
JOHN ROBINSON (1575-1625): Not quite as the lamps in the golden candlestick did one help another's light, so doth one place of holy Scripture, another's. And in spite of this a thing be found in one place, to require upon it, in a adjustment, as to pass up others, is the major road to misunderstanding and to lose the pure watchfulness, by contravention the Scripture's golden line, whose contacts are all fix together.
WILLIAM ARNOT (1808-1875): We film no surpass to the practice of cottage loaded doctrines upon conceits and fancies, for instance there are resolved foundations at hand laid there for the intention of dignity them...But we ought to run all that is the Lord's, tough and unhappy like. We rent every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God to outlast upon. Fall victim to and use all that is "in "the Formulate, but energy ended.
C. H. SPURGEON: Dash to provoke out passages of Scripture, and not immediately film their evident meaning, as you are bound to do, but what's more charm from them meanings which may not lie upon their surface...Let us learn to read our Bibles with our eyes open, to study them as men do the works of tough artists, studying each run, and even each harmonious category of light and degree.
