Christs personall reigne on earth, one thousand yeares with his saints the manner, beginning, and continuation of his reigne clearly proved by many plain texts of Scripture, and the chiefe objections against it fully answered, explaining the 20 Revelations and all other Scripture-prophecies that treat of it : containing a full reply to Mr. Alexander Petrie ... who wrote against ... Israels redemption / by Robert Maton.

The Second rule.

As the Priests were types of Christ in respect of his Priestly-office, so were the Kings of his Kingly office: [ 2] and therefore as the Kings were anointed, so Christ is called David, Ezek. 34.23. (which is exponed Ioh. 10.11.) and typified by Solomon, Psal. 45. And he is said to sit on the Throne of David, & not of Nebuchadnezzar or any other, be∣cause their kingdoms were cursed kingdomes, and were not established on righteousnesse and knowledge of the true God, as David's Throne was: and for this cause when he is said to sit on the Throne of David, it is not to be understood that he had or shall have the same earthly Throne of David, but that which was typified: so Mat. 2. he is called a Nazarite, not that he did use their rites and customes, (for be dranke wine and they did not) but because he was typified by the Nazarite Samson: for he slew more by his death, then by his life, and was severed from all sin and pollution.

Answer.

The anointing of Kings, Priests, and Prophets, was a type of Christ's anointing, and not of his being called David. Which name was given him by God, because he was to be borne of the seed of David, to whom he was promised. And it is because he is the Sonne of David (and not of Nebuchadnezzar, or any other heathen Prince) that he is to fit on David's Throne. And that by his sitting on David's Throne, is meant, his government of that people which

David governed, it is evident: for what need was there, that God should binde him selfe with an oath to David (Acts 2 verse 30.) that he would set Christ upon Davids Throne, if he meant onely, that he would set him upon his owne Throne? Or why may wee not say also, that where it is foretold, that Christ should be the Sonne of David, it is meant onely, that he should be the Sonne of God; as well as say, that where it is foretold, that he should sit on Davids Throne, it is meant onely, that he should sit on God's Throne? And it is as strange a mistake, as any of the rest, to quote the 2. chap. of Mat. to prove, that Christ was called a Nazarite, because he was typified by the Nazarite Samson; for the text saith plainly, that it was because he dwelt with his Father Joseph in the city of Nazareth. And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the Prophets, He shalbe called a Nazarite, verse 23. And lastly, that Christ saved many both in his life and death, the Gospel doth aboundantly declare, but that he slew many, is a tradition, I dare say, never till now heard of amongst Christians. And of such rules as this you might have set downe as many as there are severall types in the Scripture.