es are numerous, and made by Moses, David, and all the
prophets. (2) They quote or refer to specifically, and thus apply,
quite a number. It is evident that these are Messianic, because so
applied. (3) Since Christ and the apostles designate a large number as
Messianic, we are safe in concluding that others are so that are of
like character. They are infallible judges, and they furnish us a
criterion by which to judge.

It is not true, as claimed, that in order to a Messianic prophecy, the
prophet making it must so understand it at the time. On the contrary,
Peter tells us that they searched diligently to ascertain the things
and the time of them referred to in their own prophecies concerning the
sufferings of the Christ and the glory that was to follow. (See I. Pet.
i. 10-12). They, therefore, did not understand the things or the time
referred to. Since they did not know these, they did not know that the
prophecy referred to the Messiah. The same Peter did not understand
some of his own utterances on the day of Pentecost. His language here
makes the promise of salvation to Gentiles as well as to Jews. But he
did not so understand it till he had a special revelation at Joppa and
the house of Cornelius.

Nor is it true, as claimed, that a Messianic prophecy must have been so
understood by the people before its fulfillment. Many of the Messianic
prophecies were not understood as such in Old Testament times. The
Saviour charged this want of understanding upon His disciples, and told
them that if they had correctly interpreted Moses and the prophets, in
this very respect, they would have known that His death was required by
such prophecies, and they would not have received the story of His
resurrection as an idle tale. Moreover, He charged the Jews that this
failure to understand Messianic prophecies, as such, was the ground of
their not believing on Him. (See John v. 45-47).

In regard to types, which is a feature of prophetic teaching, and a
strong chapter of evidence as to inspiration, Clark Braden says: "There
are but few real types in the Bible; that is, there are but few things
that men devised and acted with the intention of symbolizing or
typifying anything future. There are exceeding few that were devised or
acted with that as their sole object." It would be difficult for one to
crowd more flagrant error into the same space than the above contains,
if he were to make it a specialty. It contains the following posi