This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Rev. Patrick Fairbairn, D.D. (University of Edinburgh, 1826) was a minister and theologian of the Free Church of Scotland. He was Principal and Professor of Church History and Exegesis for the Free Church College from its 1856 founding until his death, and was Professor of Theology at the Free Church Theological College in Aberdeen from 1853.
The second volume is less boring than the first one. There are many good observations, but the discussion is often too long-winded. The best part of the book was actually Peter Masters' foreword to the modern reprint where he defends a nuanced approach to typology, which avoids the two extremes of either seeing types around every corner or thinking only what is specifically mentioned in the New Testament as a type of Christ can actually be one.
Not a bad book, but being a 19th century author his writing is quite verbose. He could have covered his topics in a far less onerous fashion (806 pages!) and didn’t seem to cover the topic at hand, which was types.
I was expecting a book about types. I did not get that.
It is more about the theory of types than types themselves. Later in the second book he did get to some types, but seemed to run out of room/time. Perhaps being less verbose in the first 75% would have helped.
I love old books, but there are better resources available for the topic at hand.