of Carthage after the time of these scruples of the Antimillenarians and before the degeneracy of the Church to which the aim of the Apocalypse is applied by Protestants viz. before the year 400 does in its 47th Canon ordain the Book of the Apocalypse to be read in the Church as Canonical Scripture And this Provincial Council is confirmed to oblige the Universal Church both the Greek and Latin by the sixth Synod in Trullo at Constantinople Can. 2. Anno 707. But it was unquestionably a Decree of the Greek Church where the Apocalypse had alone been scrupled But the most authentick Evidence of this is the Authority of the fourth Council of Toledo when it could not possibly be any Interest of the then Ruling Party of the Church to plead for the Apocalypse but might possibly enough endanger the Interest of it because it was about the year 640. after the time that the Protestants Applications of that Book do generally date the degeneracy of the Church of Rome from So that the sense of that Council is the Testimony of an Adversary to the General Consent of the Church about the Tradition of this Book The words of it are these The Authority of many Councils and the Synodical Decrees Concil Toletan 4. Can. 16. about the year 640. of the holy Bishops of Rome have determined the Book of the Apocalypse to have been wrote by John the Evangelist and to be received amongst the Books divinely inspired And because there are many that do not receive it for Authentick and scorn to read it in the Church of God if any one for the future shall refuse to receive it or to read it in the Church in the time of Mass from Easter to Whitsuntide he shall be Excommunicated By this it does appear how the Apocalypse came to lose its authenticalness among the meaner part of the Church It was it seems so disused in the Church that it passed for an useless Book the Interpretations that were given of it were either so fanciful or so little concerning the Times when it was neglected that it passed amongst them for a kind of Book of Dreams in which the Church was not concerned and which none knew the meaning of And this cannot much be wondred at when it is considered how little regard is had to these Revelations even in these days unto which they are by the best Learned amongst us judged to belong in matters of the highest importance for the Church to know But as for that suggestion That Cerinthus was the Author of the Apocalypse which was always the most current ground amongst those who rejected the Authority of it there is assurance enough of the falshood of it out of Irenaeus for he was the Scholar of Polycarp who was the Disciple and Companion of St. John to whom Irenaeus every-where attributes Euseb l. 5. Eccles Histor c. 18. the Apocalypse and writes against Cerinthus and reports from Polycarp the great detestation that St. John had against Cerinthus And how absurd a thing would it be to imagine that Irenaeus after so diligent so long and familiar a conversation with Polycarp the Companion of St. John as he particularly mentions of himself should make the Apostle to be the Author Lib. 3. contra Haeres cap. 3. of a Book which was really wrote by his worst Adversary to propagate his Errors Whatever was the true reason of the rejection of the Authority of this Prophecy it is certain That no Book of Scripture has had a more express and unexceptionable Tradition of its Apostolical Authority since it was confirmed by the Testimony of two Learned Martyrs soon after the writing of it who also had searched into all the Copies of it and were confirmed in it by those who were conversant with the Apostle himself that wrote it and that in the very times that it was scrupled it was believed to be Authentical by all the Eminently-learned Fathers of those days and that after the times that it had been scrupled it was owned by the General Consent of the Christian Church This I thought fit to premise for the full satisfaction of those that are altogether sceptical in the first foundation of these Interpretations But the Romanists whose whole concern it is to make every thing in this kind dubious do agree with all other Christian Churches in the World at this time about the unquestionableness of the Canonical Authority of this part of the New Testament And now it may appear to be our Duty and Concern to enquire with diligence after the best understanding that we can get of this Prophecy when we consider what pressing Motives there are to it more in this Book than in any other Book of Scripture beside In the beginning Blessed is he that readeth Rev. 1. 3. 13. 9. and they that hear the words of this Prophecy And again If any man have an ear let him hear And the matter of it is said to be The Revelation that God gave unto Jesus Christ to shew Chap. 1. 1. unto his Servants And that whosoever should add to or take Chap. 22. 18 19. from the words of this Book above any other should have the plagues of God added to him or his part of Eternal Life taken away The First BOOK THE Uniform Constant Notion Of the Term of THE BEAST All over the REVELATIONS CHAP. I. The Ground of the Method here used The first Proposition That Babylon is the City of Rome in an Antichristian and Idolatrous Reign Scruples moved against it The Demonstration of it from the Text confirmed by General Consent NOne could be more disposed to the common prejudices against the study of the Revelations than I was at the time that I first engaged in those things I had till then been so almost wholly confin'd to such Enquiries as are the closest Exercise of Ratiocination upon clear and sure grounds That I was come to have a natural aversion against all such loose Conjectures as the Interpretations of those Visions are generally reputed to be But Mr. Mede's Synchronisms and his offers at Demonstration in them which I lighted on by chance some years since in a solitary retirement did tempt my curiosity to enquire What could be the ground of such a confidence in one of so known a Character for a cautious and imparial Judgment in Scriptural Rev. XVII Expositions At the first cursory view of his performance I was extremely surprized to see such fair grounds of a clear Explication about so intricate and obscure a Subject And tho' upon a more critical examination of the strength of them I found most of his Synchronisms far short of a close and cogent proof in them yet I could not but think that the Subject might be capable of a more certain determination to the Conclusion that he aimed at I did thereupon set my self upon a particular search after a closer demonstration of that Application that he had made
the judging the Dead v. 18. cap. 11. Apoc. which Grotius and those of Alcasar's way interpret of the time of Rome-Heathen cannot be fulfilled before the time of the last Judgment Comment in cap. 10. Apocal. Numer 20. The Censures of both the Two former Opinions by the most eminent of the Romish Interpreters may very reasonably plead an excuse for a Third advanced in their stead by the Protestants and that is this That the Beast in general is the Roman Empire but when taken for the Eighth King is The Present Ruling Power of the Roman Church That the Seven Heads of the Beast are Seven successive Changes of Roman Government That the Sixth of them said to be in being at the time of the Vision is the Imperial Government The change of that into another form the Rev. 17. 10. Seventh King And the next to that The Antichristian Soveraignty of the Roman Church is the Eighth which is of the Seven And therefore the Three Years v. 11. and an half so often mentioned by Months and Days must be so many Prophetical Years as there are days in that Period according to the Examples that there are in Scripture to take a Day for a Year in a Prophetical Sense For this they seem to have all the Premises which are the main foundation of their Conclusion from the opinions of the Roman Interpreters themselves The General Notion of the Beast for the Roman Empire they have from Alcasar Bellarmine c. to whom agree Grotius and Dr. Hammond As also their acceptation of the Seven Heads for Roman Governours from the same Their making the Seven Heads to be so many successive Lines of Roman Sovereigns each of which contains under it a long Succession of single persons of the same sort is according to Alcasar's Notion of the Heads And Ribera tho he makes them not Roman Heads yet contends much for In cap. 13. Apoc. sect 2. their being Seven general sorts of Sovereign Power each of which contains under it a succession of many In cap. 17. Apoc. num 15. single Rulers of that kind according to all the known Examples of Daniel and other places of Scripture And then since the Prophecy says of one of these Kings viz. the Sixth That he was in being at the time of the Vision that could be no other sort of Sovereign Power that contained a Succession of many single Persons under it but the Imperial Government of the Romans And the determining of this does thereupon make it necessary that the rest of the Heads or Kings should be other Titles of the Government of Rome And what then can be pitched upon for this end with more reason than those other Changes of the Government of Rome which are frequently recorded by the Roman Authors Kings Consuls c. Whatever were the Five first Kings yet it is less dubious that that which is called the Beast must be the next Change of Roman Government but one to the Imperial that was in Rule at the time of the Vision And the Roman History does assure us That there has been at least Two such Changes since that time and that therefore The Beast must be somewhere in being at this present in the Ruling Power of the City of Rome because he is described to continue with Babylon and the Seven Hills to the Universal Kingdom of Christ Therefore do they conclude That it must be the present Ruling Power of the Church of Rome because it is described to be a Roman-Church-Power and it cannot possibly be any where else than there THE HEADS OF THE BOOKS BOOK I. THE Uniform Notion of The Beast all over the Revelation BOOK II. The Constant Signification of A Beast and its Parts all over Daniel BOOK III. The Particular Signification of The Beast and its Parts in the Revelations BOOK IV. The Application of the Characters of The Beast ERRATA These necessary to be Corrected before the reading of the Book PAge 23. l. 27. for it the reade it The. p. 105. l. 17. r. pag. 102. So also p. 107. l. 5. item l. 22. r. the same p. 108. l. 30. r. pag. 107. And l. 35. no full point p. 130. l pen. r. Prop. 7. p. 141. l. 12. for and with the Seventh King r. revived p. 180. l. 11. r. Corol. 2. Prop. 8. p. 192. l. ult r. pag. 157 158. In the Marg. r. chap. 4. lib. 3. p. 206. l. ult and p. 207. l. 10. for 140. r. above 40. p. 211. l. 27. dele twice p. 245. l. 28. r. Prop. 25. l. 30. r. Prop. 26. So also p. 247. l. 3. p. 270. l. 12. r. 261. Appendix p. 19. l. 9. a full stop l. 10. to be continued with l. 11. p. 26. l. ult for never r. after Notes of References necessary to be Corrected before reading P. 138. l. 20. strike outa. p. 139. l. 1. strike outb. p. 142. l. 36. r. a Consuls p. 143. l. 2. for c r.b. l. 4. for d r.c. p. 158. l. 16. The Note e to be set the line before the Notes following e are anticipated in the References as far asl. And p. 165. l. 14. r. e Panciroll and l. 23. for e r. f c. p. 190. l. 17. r. this Chapter p. 219. l. 12. r. Note s. p. 242. in the Marg. r. Note 5 6 on Chap. 7. Lib. 3. p. 259. The Notes are right but p. 266. the Notes answering them are postponed for g r. h for h r. i c. to the end p. 278. l. 8 9. r. Notes on the 4th Chapter p. 286. l. 23. r. m Paullus bb sup p. 311. l. 6 7. Notes bb cc transposed in the References p. 315. P. 313. l. 2. r. Note b on the 5th Chapter p. 315. l. 35. r. Note c on the 5th Chapter p. 316. l. 8. r. Note m. l. 17. r. Note l on the 5th Chapter Lib. 4. p. 317. l. 10. r. Ch. 5. l. 22. Notes b c d e on Chap. 4. and Note a Chap. 5. Lib. 4. l. 23. r. Chap. 4. l. 24. r. Notes i l on Chap. 4. and i on Chap. 5. Lib. 4. Other Faults less Considerable P. 81. l. 36. for by some r. by Him p. 116. l. 23. strike out possible to be p. 132. r. in the Marg. Chap. 6. Lib. 3. ibid. l. 23. to Nation add or his Western and Eastern Empire p. 143. l. 6. dele part last p. 149. r. Chap. 2. Lib. 1. p. 172. r. Epagomenae and elsewhere p. 180. l. 6. to Prop. 6. add Prop. 7. p. 238. l. 11. r. five days and a quarter l. 14. r. Roman years p. 251. l. 16. no full point p. 288. l. 14. r. Romijith Latinos Proper Names and Latin Quotations sometimes mistaken THE Introduction Concerning the Authority of the Apocalypse which is shewn to be unquestionable THE Book of the Revelations is acknowledged by all contending Parties to be the only distinct Prophecy that we have of the successive fortunes of the Christian Church from its first
Settlement to the end of the world This they all agree in for the matter and scope of the whole Book tho' they infinitely differ about the Explication of the several parts of it And there cannot be a greater invitation to engage the curiosity of any that are concerned for Useful and Important Truths than that Consideration The great variety of the apprehensions of Interpreters about these things ought not to discourage mens hopes of a clear Interpretation more than the same differences amongst them about almost every other Book of Scripture For it will be found that they do almost as generally agree about the first Grounds of the Interpretation of these Visions as about other Books of Scripture that seem to be less mystical The Language of Prophecy already explained by accomplishments is in these things as sure a Rule of Interpretation as the more common Language of Scripture is for the other Books of it that are more plain And those that seem the most impartial in these things Mr. Mede B p. Usher Dr. More are very confident that there are plain grounds upon that foundation to build a demonstrative Evidence of the Sense of the chief design of these Visions upon With this encouragement it will be first enquired What sure grounds there are for the certainty of the Apostolical Authority of this Book as the only foundation of all satisfaction that can possibly be had from the clearest Interpretation of it There are two ways by which the Authority of any Book of Scripture is secured to us The First An Universal Tradition concerning it in the first Times of the Church soon after the writing of it And the Other The Determination of the Universal Church concerning it after some doubts and scruples concerning it And by both these ways of assurance is the Authority of the Apocalypse secured Two of the first Writers after the writing of the Apocalypse were Justin Martyr and Irenaeus Justin Martyr was contemporary with those who knew the Apostle whose Name it bears Anno 160. and that conversed with him and He in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew pag. 308. quotes the Apostle St. John about the Thousand Years under the Name of A certain man amongst them who was one of the twelve Apostles of Christ speaking of that matter in the Revelation which was given him which all know to be the Subject of the 20th Chapter of the Apocalypse And accordingly does Eusebius l. 4. c. 18. Eccl. Hist quote Justin Martyr as attributing the Apocalypse to the Apostle St. John But Irenaeus does the most satisfactorily put an end to all Controversie about this in his time and Irenaeus was contemporary with Justin Martyr And to assure us of the truth of what he affirms he says he had it from Polycarp whose diligent Auditor Lib. 3. contra Haeres cap. 3. he was and Polycarp was a Disciple of St. John himself and died a Martyr and so secures the truth of his Testimony But Irenaeus his Testimony concerning the Apocalypse is most full in his fifth book contra Haeres sect ult where speaking of the Number of Antichrist he says That that Number was in all the ancient and approved Copies and that he had it also confirmed to him by those who had seen St. John face to face There can hardly be given a more unquestionable or more particular Testimony concerning the true Author of a Book at any distance from the time that it was wrote in than this is Here is a particular search after all the Copies of it soon after the writing of it with the concurrent Testimony of those who knew the Author himself And further to shew the utter unlikelihood of any falsification of the Name of the Author of it a little after speaking of the Name of Antichrist Knowing this says he that if his Name Lib. 5. sect ult were to have been openly known at this present time it would certainly have been expressed by him who saw the Revelation for it is not long ago since he saw it but almost in this present Age at the latter-end of the Reign of Domitian The little distance betwixt the time of Irenaeus and the time of the writing this Book together with the care that he took to look into all the various Copies of it and the Traditions of the Ear-witnesses of the Apostle about it and the confirmation of his own Testimony in all this by dying a Martyr himself does silence all scruples about the Apostolical Authority of this Book But yet about 100 years after the time of Irenaeus Dionysius of Lib. 2. Alexandria in his Disputes against the Millenaries of his time does affirm That many of his Predecessors did reject this Book But then he says It was because they saw it obscure and full of too gross ignorance about the Millenarian state not from any new knowledge they had got of the forgery of it And their grounds were so small for it that tho' he was the chief Head of the Anti-millinarian Party yet he says he believed it to be divinely inspired Tho' from the difference of the Style of it from that of the Gospel and Epistles of John the Evangelist he judged it to be wrote by some other John contemporary with him And yet there are some expressions in the Revelations so peculiar to the Gospel and Epistles of John the Evangelist and used by no other Apostle that it must be either He himself or a very near Friend of his that must be the Author of them such as are The Lamb The Word The bearing record or witness of the Word They that pierced him shall see him The Testimony of Jesus Christ He that overcometh As I received of my Father c. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely and Let him that is athirst come And whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely Which are all expressions peculiar to the Gospel and Epistles of St. John St. Jerem indeed says That the Greek Church rejected the Authority of it But as Baronius well observes about it An. 96. St. Jerom must necessarily mean that only of the meaner and lower part of the Greek Church For as he there shews almost every one of the Greek Fathers does quote it under the Name of St. John the Apostle And Eusebius who relates the dissent of some of the Ancients about it and was the most eminent Antiquary of the Greek Church does name Justin Martyr Irenaeus Melito of Sardis Theophilus Antiochenus Origen Dionysius Alexandrinus the chief Writers of the Greek Church before him as Asserters of the Apostolical Authority of this Book If we go to the Judgment of after-Ages we have the Universal Consent of the Christian Church for the Canonical Authority of the Apocalypse after it had been scrupled by some which is the other way of assuring the right Tradition of a Canonical Book The third Council
Beast and of the parts of it signifying Dominion from the frequent use of those Schemes in Daniel The business of the Third Book is to apply these general Notions to The Beast in the Revelations and to the parts of it And from the known signification of that Head of The Beast which in the Prophecy is said to reign at the time of the Vision and from the immediate Succession of the other two Reigns after it to determine the time of that particular state of The Beast which is by way of eminency called The Beast alone by it self and the Eighth King and which is the Great Subject of these Visions And then the Explication of all the Uncouth Characters of The Beast is the last Finishing-work of this Design in the Fourth Book And this may give the Reader a distinct and comprehensive view of my whole Design at once and of the Order of my Method towards it CHAP. V. Rev. XVII The distinct Notion of The Beast enquired into The Fourth Proposition Every one of the Eight Kings is one of those called the Seven in general Rev. 17. 10 11. The Eighth King one of Seven that were past revived The Fifth Proposition Every one of the Eight Kings is one of the Seven Heads The Beast is The Beast under the Last Head The Sixth Proposition with its Corollaries The Seventh Proposition The Beast is a Sovereign Power of Rome in its Idolatrous Antichristian State THE foundation of all satisfaction about the certain time of that Idolatrous Reign of Rome that is signified by Babylon does seem to depend wholly upon the means that are offered from the Angel's Explication to determine the time of the Reign of The Beast which appears all over the Prophecy with that City as its inseparable Companion There seems to be no other means left to fix that particular time but the Succession of the Heads of The Beast the three last Reigns of which seem to be on purpose singled out from the general sum of the other five and to be distinctly mentioned one after another for no other end but to direct us from the knowledge of the first of the three said then to be in Rule when these words were spoken and so might easily be known to determine the particular time of The Beast who is made to be the next Reign but one after that Ruling-Power which was then in present possession But before any thing can be well setled upon this bottom the use of the Term of The Beast must be first sufficiently cleared For it seems to have an ambiguous Signification in it which may defeat all our hopes of fixing it to any determinate meaning Sometimes it seems to signify a thing common to all the Seven Heads when it is represented as the common Subject of them all in their several successive Reigns and sometimes it seems to signify nothing but one of its Heads in distinction to all the rest Wherefore it seems to be the first thing that is to be enquired after Whether there can be any determinate and fixed signification setled upon the use of this Expression And the fear of mistaking in so fundamental a Point made me think it necessary to be very cautious of every step I made in it and to have a distinct comprehension of it before I setled my self upon it For this purpose I found it requisite to begin with this Proposition as the ground of all that was to follow Every one of the Eight Kings reckon'd up in order Rev. 17. Proposit 4. 10 11. is one of those called the Seven Kings in general v. 10. Nothing can well be more plainly signified than this in the Text after this manner They are Seven Kings Five are fallen one Rev. 17. 10 11. is and the other is not yet come and when he cometh must continue a short space and the Eighth is of the Seven What can more plainly signify the parting the whole sum of the Seven Kings mentioned just before into five and one and the other and an Eighth which is one of those Seven For who would ever understand those words otherwise than in this plain sense They are Seven Kings Five of which Seven are fallen One of them is the other of the Seven is not yet come c. And there is an Eighth who yet is one of those Seven before mentioned So that every one of the Eight is one of the Seven and therefore can there be but Seven Kings in all This indeed seems to be so very plain and necessary that it may be wondered why it should not be rather suppos'd than endeavoured to be proved since there seems to be no manner of ground for a doubt about it but only upon the account of the Eighth King who yet to make all clear is said expresly to be an Eighth which was one of the Seven and is so granted to be without dispute But yet it was thought needful to secure this by these Reflexions upon it because there is a considerable Authority against it in defence of a particular Hypothesis That which is alledged from the Text to make it capable of another sense is * Dr. More Vol. 1. p. 647. Brightman in V. 10. c. 17. Apoc. That the 7th King in the Order is called the other and not the 7th and that therefore he may be a King of a different nature from those Seven Kings which are said to be the Seven Heads because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek signifies sometimes a thing of another nature And that to make up the number of those Seven Kings that are the Seven Heads the 8th is said to be one of those Seven But it is plain enough that the other in that place denotes no new quality in the 7th King but only refers to the signification of the number of the King just before him who is called one And that King is called one by a very proper and familiar way of Speech without any ground for the least mystery in it such as this following would now be accounted The Seven Heads are Seven Kings five are past one is at this present after which would very naturally follow and the other is not yet come That is the other of the seven which is an usual and ordinary way of speaking if not more proper than to say five are past the sixth is at present and the seventh is not yet come And certainly the 7th would in the latter Example appear to be nothing but one of the seven Kings who had at first been called the seven Heads When with this we consider there is mention here made of an 8th Can any thing be more manifest than that the other just before it is as certainly the 7th as if it had been expresly so called and that the one before that is the same with the 6th And then of what can they possibly be the Sixth or the Seventh but of those Seven Kings which were just
here be suggested That this would make the Coming of Christ in Glory and his Kingdom of Glory here upon Earth to be but a momentary thing only during the time of the Day of Judgment whereas he is represented in several places as reigning here in Glory with his Saints for a considerable time after the end of Antichrist But Mr. Mede has given this Answer to that That according to the Notion of the Day of Judgment among the Jews from whom the New Testament did borrow it it was taken for a continuance of time for 1000 years together But all that need be regarded for the present purpose in hand is That it is agreed by All Parties That the beginning of the Judgment of the Dead properly so called is not till the second Coming of Christ in Glory By this are we assured now at last That The Beast which killed the two Witnesses Rev. 11. 7. is the same time of Roman Rule with the Beast in the other Chapters Prop. 12. For first This Beast in the 11th Chapter hath one of the most peculiar distinguishing Characters of that Beast viz. The Beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit which is the very same Character with that of the Beast in the 17th Chapter v. 8. in just the same peculiar phrase And the same Character has that Beast in the 13th Chapter in another different expression indeed but of the same signification viz. That it did rise out of the Sea for the Sea is very ordinarily called in the Septuagint which the Greek of the New Testament does generally conform to by the same name of the Abyss which is here rendred the bottomless pit When therefore we see in the Chapters after this 11th Chapter the mention of a Beast that is to ascend out of the bottomless pit which is made his peculiar Character to distinguish him from other states of him under the succession of his Heads and that here there is the same peculiar description of such a Beast with the name of THE Beast that ascendeth c. which plainly refers us to the same Character of a Beast somewhere else mentioned It must certainly be the same with that Beast or else there is no ground to believe a thing to be the same at two several mentions of it tho' it has the same peculiar Character in both places and a Note of reference in one of them to confine it to the same thing that had been before mentioned which in this case would be a violation of all the first Three Rules which have been judged to be the surest ground for any Interrpetation 2. Besides they both end at the expiration of the same space of time of 42 months or the 1260 days of the Witnesses in Sackcloth which is the same state in both because it is the last state of them both The Beast in the 11th Chapter is also described to end just before a glorious Reign of Christ in the 7th Trumpet which is accompanied with a Judgment of the Dead So also does the Beast in the 19th Chapter come to an end just before a Reign of Christ which is accompanied with the Judgment of the Dead chap. 20. And is not this a very good ground to be confident that they are both the same Beast when they are said to end at the expiration of the same peculiar space of time and at the beginning of just the same kind of peculiar Reign of Christ over all the world and for ever and ever and that is accompanied with the Judgment of the Dead For since they are thus found from these Circumstances to be contemporary how can a Beast with so peculiar Characters that are the same in the other and at the same time be supposed to be quite another thing In both the mentions of the Beasts we also find them warring against the same Martyrs or Witnesses of God and Christ and in both overcoming them and being overcome by them c. From hence may very safely be determined That The Beast is to continue till the beginning of an Vniversal and Eternal Corollary Reign of Christ over the Kingdoms of this World These four last Conclusions have also the Consent of many of the most eminent Interpreters a RIbera about the 15th verse of the 11th Chapter in his Discourse upon Chap. 10. num 20. Caecus est qui non videt c. He is blind that does not see that these things cannot be but after the ruin of Antichrist and at the time of the Judgment Malvenda de Antichristo pag. 226. No man of sense can doubt but that the Beast in the 11th and 13th Chapters is the same Beast of the Church of Rome Thus then do we find at last That the term of the Beast does signifie one and the same particular state of his Reign in all the several Chapters where it is mentioned And from the last proof of this in the 11th Chapter it appears That the Account of the last end of the Beast there is before the Account of his first rise in the 13th Chapter and so mentioned in the 11th Chapter as a thing that was afterwards to appear Which does sufficiently assure us THAT the Order of the things in this Prophecy is many times transposed The Second BOOK THE Constant Uniform Signification OF A BEAST And its PARTS All over DANIEL CHAP. I. The Prophecy of Daniel the clearest Rule for the signification of A Beast and its Ruling Parts Porphyry's Objection against the Authority of it The greatest Confirmation of the plainness of the Predictions in it The Authority of the Book Daniel proved The 13th Proposition The Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th of Daniel a Kingdom of Christ Jesus The singularity of Grotius 's Notion of the Son of Man in that place judged to be Blasphemy by the Sanhedrim WE have now our prospect very much enlarged Dan. VII by a multitude of known Marks of the Beast which is found to be the same particular state of one of its Heads from the first mention of him in Chap. 11. to the last end of his History in Chapter 20. by which he is described to us in all his lineaments with his Rise his Mark his Actions and his End and with a great many of his Assistants and Dependants And I think I could make unquestionable to any that were impartial and considerate enough that one may come to a very satisfactory determination from hence about the particular knowledge of him But because I would continue firm to my first design of carrying on the proof all along in so full and convincing a manner as should be able to satisfie the most sceptical scruples it will be much more useful to consult the Prophecy of Daniel for the constant signification of the mystical Phrases that are made use of all over these Visions in the Revelations for there is a great deal more evidence of the determinate signification of a Beast
in general and of the Heads and Horns and Actions of a Beast in that Prophecy There are a multitude of Instances there of the constant use of these figures in one and the same determinate Notion and it is generally agreed That St. John by the like expressions in the Revelations does every-where allude to them as the Original Copy of his Figures and as a Nomenclator to explain the meaning of them See References in the 5th Chapter There is also this further advantage in the Prophetical Usages of the mystical Expressions in Daniel That there is the concurrence of almost all Interpreters in the particular signification of them who yet differ from one another about the signification of the same Expressions in the Revelations And as I found this to be of very great effect for the silencing of mine own Scruples so is it the most certainly satisfactory method for the generality of the World The Prophecies of Daniel have indeed that advantage above CONSENT any other Mystical Writings of that nature that the things foretold in them are so plainly described That all who have considered them have in all Ages till this latter generally agreed about their Interpretation One or two Instances to the contrary in the space of so many Ages will be no material exception against it by Rule the 4th Porphyrie the Philosopher who is the first that is said to be of a different mind from the rest yet gives such a reason for his confining the date and matter of these Prophesies to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes as does unquestionably confirm the clearness S. Hierom. Prooem in Dan. of his Expressions in all his Visions St. Jerom acquaints us that his reason for it was Because it seemed plain to him That the Author must have lived about the times of Epiphanes from the distinct Account he gives us in the 11th Chapter of the Successions and Actions of the Syrian and Egyptian Kings under the names of the King of the North and of the King of the South till the time of Epiphanes And so he will have it to be an History of what is past and not a Prophecy of things to come Could there be a greater Testimony of the clearness of Prophetical Expressions than to see a profest Enemy to it acknowledge it to be so very plain that he could not believe it to be Cathol Expos Eccles in Apoc. Tanta enim dictorum fides fuit c. For the things were so plainly fulfilled that to Unbelievers he seemed not to have foretold things to come but to have related things before past and done any thing but an History of things past As for his suspicion of the Authority of it that is as satisfactorily answered as need be 1. By our Saviour's owning the Prophecy Matth. 24. 15. Which to Christians is an undeniable proof though it could not be so to an Infidel 2. Josephus who lived about the time of Christ not two hundred years after Antiochus Epiphanes does own the Prophecy of Daniel for the most considerable of any that they had and relates of it That it was shown to Alexander the Great by Jaddus the High-Priest upon the account of the 8th Chapter which did plainly foretel his Conquest of the Persian And that this was owned by Alexander and rewarded with many great Privileges to the Jews particularly that of being Tax-free every seventh year which no question remained to Josephus's Age as the publick Memorial of that Action What an unaccountable Forgery would that be which should be able to impose so strangely upon one of the most Learned Antiquaries in that Age and make him take a Writing concerning his own Nation not Two hundred years old for an Ancient Writing of Five hundred years standing 3. Especially when we consider that it had been long received into the Jewish Canon of Scripture in Josephus's days and had been constantly used in Greek Translations in their Synagogues as appears by our Saviour's Quotations which is impossible for a forged Book not much above One hundred years old to have been After this assurance Porphyry's suspicion that it was an History of things seen by the Writer of it is as great a confirmation as can be desired of the clearness of Daniel's meaning in his Prophetical Descriptions in some parts of his Visions And the general concurrence of almost all Interpreters about the determinate sense of the rest is proof enough of the plainness of his Expressions in all For what can give one a plainer ground to presume that it is easie to arrive at a perfect knowledge of the signification of the Mystical Schemes of a Prophecy than first to see it accused by an Enemy of having been wrote after the things were done only upon the account of the clearness of the terms that are used to express them And next to see all Interpreters of the most different Parties and Interests unanimously agreed upon the particular Application of them This is an encouragement sufficient to make one hope for the fullest satisfaction from the Visions of Daniel concerning the constant signification of the same Mystical Terms in both Prophecies In order to which The first thing that it is the most necessary to be resolved about as the general Basis of all that is to follow is this Proposition That the Kingdom of the Son of Man in Daniel the 7th v. 13 Proposit 13. 14. is some Kingdom of Christ Jesus upon Earth 1. That it is some Kingdom upon Earth is manifest from v. 27. where it is said that it is the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole Heaven 2. That it is the Kingdom of our Jesus is as certain as it is that our Jesus was the true Messias For there is no name of the Messias any-where so peculiarly owned by Christ as this name of the Son of Man is all over the Gospel And as by the note of reference joined with it it must refer to some use of that name in some places of the Old Testament where it is before mentioned so do we find St. Matthew 24. 30. what place of the Old Testament that is For our Saviour does there join that name of his with the very same Circumstances that it is mentioned with here in Daniel In that place of St. Matthew and in all the other Gospels beside in his Prophecy of his coming he calls it the coming of the Son of Man in the clouds of Heaven with power and great glory which is just the same with that in the 7th of Daniel about the coming of the Son of Man in the clouds of Heaven and his waving an Vniversal Kingdom given him at the time of that Judgment when there were infinite multitudes of Angels attending It is most certain from our Saviour's Examination before the High-Priest That it was the commonly received Opinion of all men in those days That the name of the Son of Man in those circumstances of his appearance that
names of Beasts and Horns are often mentioned amonst the other Prophets for that purpose But that which takes away all the fear of the unintelligibleness of these Figures is the explication that is given by name of the Beasts and their Horns in the 8th Chapter which is by all acknowledged to be very manifestly determined and is a clear instance of the general signification of those mystical Terms in all other parts of the Prophecy besides From hence it was that there has been so unanimous an agreement amongst the Interpreters of all former Ages concerning the particular Kingdoms that are signified by Daniel's Figures which in all reason ought therefore to determine all Interpreters to the search of the constant signification of Beast and their parts in all those places to fix the notion of the Beast and its Heads and Horns in the Revelations For the Book of Daniel is without any controversie owned by all to be the place to which those uncouth Figures in the Revelations do refer and from whence most of the peculiar Phrases for such things are transcribed And from an attentive consideration of all the Figures of Beasts and their parts in Daniel one may observe the constant uniform signification of them to be according to this following Proposition In all the Figures of Beasts in the Prophecy of Daniel Prop. 16. 1. By the Beast in general as the common subject of its Heads or Horns is signified a Ruling Nation or People 2. By the Horns and Heads of a Beast the several kinds of Supream Government in that Nation 3. And if they be described to come after one another they signify so many successive kinds of setled Government over the same Kingdom 4. But if they be described to be in Rule all at the same time they signify so many distinct Sovereignties or Kingdoms of one and the same Ruling People 5. And in both these kinds do the several Heads or Horns signify the setled continuance of that Successive Government or divided Kingdom to their last end To make the proof of this the more full and to shew how Dan. VIII uniform and constant to it self this Prophecy is in all its Figures and that it may appear that there is one constant and determinate signification in the use of them I will prove by an induction of all the particular Instances That this is a property in common to all the Prophetical Figures of this Book which signify Kingdoms as The Beasts every-where do That by every such Figure in general as the common subject of its parts is to be understood the Rule of some particular Nation or People and by the parts and divisions of the same kind in it that are said to denote Dominion is meant the Supreme Government of that Kingdom And if they be said to come after one another they do denote the Successions of them in the same state But if they be said to be all in Rule at the same time they signify so many divided Kingdoms in that Nation or People This general proof from the uniform signification of all Figures and their parts will give us the more assurance of the common use of all these Prophetical Schemes and so does make the Conclusions about any of the particular Instances contained under it so much the stronger and the more undoubted Now there are Ten whole Figures in Daniel which are interpreted to signify Kingdoms there and they all confirm that general Observation As may be seen by the particular Instances The Two Figures in the 8th Chapter concerning the Ram Daniel VIII and the He Goat are of the most known signification of any because of the particular Interpretation that is there given of them and therefore it will be the most convenient to begin with them The Ram with its two Horns is said to be the Kings of Media v. 20. and Persia which does very plainly determine it to signify a multitude in the notion of it The Kings of Media and Persia cannot possibly signify one single person only or only the person of Darius conquered by Alexander though that Conquest seems to be the main thing there described The Ram therefore said with his two Horns to be the Kings of Media and Persia must signify a succession of Ruling Powers in that Dominion since there was but one King of that Dominion at one time And then the two Horns being joined with the single mention of the Ram and there being mentioned but just two sorts of Kings viz. of Media and Persia that are said to be signified by the Ram with his two Horns what can be plainer than that the Ram under each of these two Horns does signify each of those two sorts of Kings For an Horn does very commonly signify in Scripture the Ruling or Commanding Power of the thing with which it is joined And the Ram being the same common subject of both the Horns since the two Horns are found to be the two kinds of Kings the Ram of which they are the Horns must be the Kingdom of Media and Persia of which they are the Kings or which is the same the Ram must be the common Ruling Nation of the Medes and Persians of which the Horns are the Kings For since the Ram with them is said in the whole to be the Kings of Media and Persia and since his Horns are now found to be the Kings in that expression the remaining signification for the Ram as the common subject of both of them must be that which remains of what the whole is said to signify and that is Media and Persia or the Ruling Nation of the Medes and Persians And though there were two different Lines of Kings in that Dominion first the Median Line and then the Persian as they are represented by two different Horns yet was the Dominion always counted one and the same common Kingdom and both the Nations were always joined together as one united People Thus in the time of the Median Rule the Laws of that common Kingdom are called the Laws of the Medes and Persians thrice in one Chapter Dan. 6. And again in the time of the Persian Rule all over the Book of Esther is that one Kingdom called Persia and Media But then to shew the Successions of the two different sorts of Ruling Powers in this one Kingdom the two Horns of the Ram are mentioned with this Remark That which came up last was v. 3. the highest which shews that they succeeded after one another And the last of the two Horns being the last of the two Kings that they are both said to be must be that which is last mentioned in the Interpretation or the King of the Persian Line which might well be represented by an higher Horn than the Median Line just before it because of the encrease of the Conquests of the Persian Monarchy from the time of Cyrus so as to have the Title of the Great King all over the
time There seems to be no manner of doubt but that they are all the same Four in both Chapters For otherwise there would have been a plain ground laid down for a delusion in this Chapter also about the most momentous things that can concern the Church of God as has been observed And therefore do we find an unanimous Consent amongst all sorts of CONSENT Interpreters That whatsoever these Four Kingdoms be in particular yet that they must certainly be the same Kingdoms in both Chapters Thus are we at last come to find not only that the Five Kingdoms in each Chapter are the same particular Kingdoms but also what they all are by name And thereby is it manifest that the names of The Beast in general does signify a Ruling Nation and that the parts of A Beast signifying Dominion does denote the Supream Powers of that Nation which if they be represented as existing all at a time do signify the division of that Empire into so many Sovereignties as we see in the Ten Horns of the Fourth Beast in the 7th Chapter according to the Proposition at first laid down CHAP. VII Dan. II VII Objections against the making the Third Kingdom in the 2 d and 7th of Daniel the whole time of one Ruling Nation answered IT is unanimously agreed amongst the Interpreters of all Parties and Interests That the Four Kingdoms in the 2d and 7th Chapters of Daniel are the same particular Kingdoms how differing soever they are from one another in the particular applications of them It is also as generally agreed amongst them that the two first of these Kingdoms in each Chapter are the Babylonian and Persian Monarchies But about the Third Kingdom in each Chapter though acknowledged to be the Scheme of one and the same Dominion there is not the same consent for the particular application of it At the first mention of a difference one would be apt to admire what should make any one sceptical in this matter who affirms the other Two before this Third to be known Kingdoms and that all the Four do immediately succeed one another as has been observed to be acknowledged by all Parties For all that seems needful to be done for such an ones satisfaction is to desire him to enquire what Kingdom it was of the same kind and nature with the Babylonian and Persian Monarchy acknowledged to be the first and second that came immediately after the Second of these Kingdoms or the Persian Monarchy Since the Second is granted by all to be the Persian Monarchy from the time of its first great appearance in the World at its Conquest of the Babylonian who would not forthwith conclude that the Third must be that whole Monarchy which subdued the Persian and succeeded in its room that is the whole Graecian Monarchy This being the natural and obvious determination about it and according to the common Rule of reading the sense of all other places of Scripture that is from the known use of them in the Context it would be imagined that there must certainly be some very great appearing necessity that could make Grotius and some others of this last Age to judge the Third Kingdom in both Chapters to be of quite another nature than those before it were especially since it is against the sense of all the Ancients who have been found from St. Jerom to have been generally agreed in making this Third as well as all the rest to be the Successive Rule of an whole Nation The Opinion of these Innovators about the Third Kingdom is That it is the single Reign of Alexander the Great and that the Fourth Kingdom in both Chapters is the division of the Greek Monarchy amongst his Ten Captains immediately after him The Reasons that they rely upon for this new Opinion against all the seeming Absurdities that attend it are chiefly these that follow 1. Because if the Third Kingdom in the 2d and 7th of Daniel were the whole Greek Monarchy then the Fourth must be the Roman which conquered the Graecians and then the Kingdom of the Son of Man Chap. 7. which comes after the Fourth Kingdom there must not begin till after the end of all Roman Dominion upon Earth and this is supposed to give too great an advantage to the Jews to conclude that Christ Jesus at his first appearance could not be the King Messias or the Son of Man in his Kingdom For he died about the beginning of the Roman Monarchy after the compleat Conquest of the Graecian 2. This Objection will be thought to be much strengthened from the Prophecies that our Saviour and his Apostles have given out about the time of the coming of the Son of Man which seems to represent it to be the advancement of the Christian Church in the World by the destruction of the Jews its Enemies in that very Age when those Prophecies were delivered and therefore could not agree with the coming of the Son of Man in the 7th of Daniel if the Fourth Kingdom there before the Kingdom of the Son of Man were the Roman Monarchy 3. Again If the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel were the Roman Monarchy then the Little Horn in that Kingdom would be the same with the Beast in the Revelations as appears from the exact agreement of the Characters of them both compared together But it is thought impossible that the Little Horn and the Beast in the Revelations should be the same For the Little Horn was Dan. VIII not to arise till the Fourth Kingdom was broken into Ten Kingdoms Three of which it was to subdue Dan. 7. 8. Whereas the time of the Beast in the Revelations must necessarily have been soon after that that Prophecy was given which was long before any such division of the Roman Empire It is said both at the beginning and at the end of the Book That the time of those Rev. 1. 1 3. things was at hand and that they should shortly come to pass and should shortly be done And to make this unquestionable The Rev. 22. 6 7 10. Prophet is commanded at the end of the Prophecy not to seal the Saying of the Prophecy of that Book because the time was at hand 4. It is most agreeable to the Event and to the other parts of the Prophecy of Daniel to make the Fourth Kingdom to be the Graecian Monarchy in the time of Alexander's Successors For it has Ten Kings arising out of it to signify that variety of Kingdoms that his Captains did set up after his death And after these Ten is there a Little Horn represented almost every way the same in every Character of it with the Little Horn in the 8th Chapter which all agree to be Antiochus Epiphanes one of the Successors of Alexander's Captains 1. In the first of these Reasons there is nothing to force a Answer man against what is but the most probable sense of the words much less what has seemed to be the
People into Civil and Ecclesiastical Persons the King and the High-Priest especially where the Church of God is which is the present Case As this does go along with all well-ordered Societies so it is exemplified in two of the Instances here referred to out of the Old Testament Or 2. The Church may here be represented by Two upon the account of the known peculiar Character of the Christian Church in distinction to that of the Jews all over the New Testament where it is every-where represented as one Church made up of Jews and Gentiles one Common Society with those two great constituent Parts in it upon the account of which it was originally called the Catholick Church Thus do we find †St. Paul almost continually insisting upon this Two-fold distinction in the Church and the chief ground of Rom. 3. 30. 4. 16. 9. 24. 10. 12. 11. 17. 15. 8 9. 1 Cor. 1. 24. 7. 18 19. Gal. 27. 8. 4. 22 24. 6. 15 16. Ephes 3. 6 9. all his earnest Motives to Unity and Mutual Communion for the making the Christian Church but one thing is that all the World both Jews and Gentiles are but one Church of Christ As Ephes 2. 14 15 16 17 18. and Chap. 3. 6. and Chap. 4. 1 2 3 4 5 6. And this is every-where represented by him as the great Mystery of God in the bringing the Gentiles to be one Church with the Jews Ephes 1. 9. 3. 3 9. Colos 1. 26 27. This Book of the Apocalypse does also generally run upon that distinction As Chap. 5. 5. The number of the Jewish Elders gathered out of all Nations And Chap. 7. 4 9. The 144000 out of the Jewish Tribes but figuratively taken and the Great Multitude of all Nations So also Chap. 14. 1 6. The 144000 and all Nations and Kindreds and Tongues and People And Chap. 19. 4 6. The 24 Elders represent the Jewish part and the Voice of the Great Multitude the Gentiles though both figuratively And the Church is every-where set forth as the Jewish Temple or Synagogue set open to all people This also we find every-where foretold in the Old Testament as the peculiar distinction of the Church of the Messiah from that of the Jews That it should be the Church of both Jews and Gentiles And this does our Saviour also make the distinguishing Badge of his Church For this reason did he make choice of Baptism to be the Initial Rite of all Nations into his Church which by the Jews had always before been made the distinguishing Rite Matth. 8. 11. 21. 43. 22. 9. 24. 14. John 11. 52. betwixt themselves and the Gentile Proselites He also upon the same account ordered the Memorial of his own Death to be the Communion-Feast or the common Union of Jews and Gentiles in his Church or the Communion of Saints of all kinds instead of the Paschal Lamb which was the distinguishing Ceremony of the Religion of the Jews from all the rest of the World besides And thus also does he himself signify his Church to be One Fold made up of two sorts of Sheep John 10. 16. But this does most eminently appear in the History of the Actions of the Apostles after Jesus had committed the sole management of his Church to them The chief Subject of the Book of their Acts is to set forth this new appearance of the Christian Church with these Two different kinds of Members in it Indeed this twofold distinction of the Members of the Christian Church had its foundation in the known division of the whole World into those two general Parts of it Jews and Gentiles both always before and at the time of the writing this Prophecy And this distinction was always preserved in memory by the frame of the Jewish Temple and its distinction of the two Courts of the Jews and Gentiles and so seems to be the most likely to be here referred to because the most obvious and commonly known division of the Church of God into Two But what strength soever this Account of their being called Two may seem to have yet the demonstration of their real nature in general before given does not at all depend upon it This is intended only for a probable illustration of that Character And since by the discovery of their Nature they must represent the whole Christian Church for many Ages there must be some reference in this Character of it to some twofold division of the Christian Church which must distinguish it from the Jewish and none was better known for such than that which has been here pitched upon not that of the Old and New Testament nor that of the Churches of the Waldenses and Albigenses which some would have that number to refer to a THUS does Ribera interpret the three days and an half in Chap. 11. v. 9. that they signify that the Tyranny of Anti-christ shall not be continued above three years and an half according to that of Ezek. 4. I have given thee a day for a year Though afterwards upon the 20th Chapter of the Apocalypse he does in express terms contradict this very Interpretation When ever says he did Lyranus see a day taken for a year And though in Ezekiel God said I have given thee a day for a year yet what ground is this to take a day for a year in Scripture Alcasar also upon the 2 d verse Chap. 11. Apocalypse does determine That the 42 months and the 1260 days must necessarily be taken in a mystical and not in a literal sense Notatione quarta in vers 2. And they both agree with Bellarmin l. 3. de Pont. c. 8. that the 42 months and three years and an half must be understood according to the Caldaick Account CHAP. VI. Rev. XIII The 25th Proposition The Second Beast Rev. 13. an Vniversal Church-Head distinct from the First The 26th Proposition The Beast A Secular Head confederated with an Vniversal Church-Head but distinct from Him The Second Beast a succession of many single Persons The Beast and the False Prophet are the present Secular and Ecclesiastical Roman Heads or the Imperial and Papal Power Objections answered THere have been sufficient grounds of Assurance given that the Beast is really in being at this present time It is in the next place necessary to enquire after those Characters of him that do distinguish him from all other Sovereign Powers upon Earth The greatest difficulty in this Affair arises from the great resemblance that there seems to be betwixt the First and the Second v. 1 11. Beast in the 13th Chapter of the Revelations For they are described as two distinct Sovereign Powers in one and the same Roman Dominion The Second Beast is said to exercise all the power v. 12. of the First Beast before him And therefore do we find these two Beasts confounded together by many of the best esteemed Interpreters It may then be
power who are the executioners of the Sentence All that the Civil power does in it is but to follow the commands of the Church and to strike the last stroke only which is all that can make them be said to have an hand in it And thô it must be confessed that the Secular part in it is that which does the most effectually persuade to the worship of the Beast yet it is plain That the Church is the principal Agent in that also because they overawe the Civil Power into compliances with them which does very naturally answer the power of the Image in the Prophecy to cause all those who would not worship it to be killed The False-prophet is the Head of this Image and so is the chief manager of this Church-Tyranny and therefore is it accordingly said of him That he spake like a Dragon or like that Red Dragon in the 12th Chapter just before and found to be the Devil raging against the followers of the Lamb. If any one should question a COrnelius à Lapide in c. 13. Apoc. v. 11. The Two Horns according to Josephus Acosta l. 2. De temporibus Noviss c. 17. are the Ensigns of the Episcopal Dignity viz. the Mitre or the Episcopal Crown It should seem therefore by this That this false Prophet should be some Apostate Bishop a great pretender to Religion It is not therefore the Mitre but some Mitred Apostate that is here set out who shall treacherously abuse these Horns of Christ the Lamb to propagate the Party of Antichrist And before when he had reckon'd up the several opinions about the 2 d Beast In the fourth place says he the best opinion is that of Irenaeus Tertullian Ribera Viega and others who by this Beast understand some Eminent Pastor of the Church the forerunner and Preacher up of Antichrist Viegas in c. 13. Apoc. v. 11. after the mention of the opinion of others But Andreas Caesariensis and Irenaeus to me seem to have been much more in the right who understand by the 2d Beast some Eminent Preacher the â—â—â—erunner of Antichrist The Armour-bearer of Antichrist as Irenaeus whether so dreadful a character of a Beast speaking like a Dragon or like the Devil can belong to a Christian Bishop of so great eminency in the Church of Christ as the Bishop of Rome is he may easily be satisfied if he considers that by his description he ought to be nothing less than such a person For that he must be the Head of a Roman Church extended over all the World has been shown from his Character of being a Church-Head over the same extent of dominion that the Beast did Rule in For he exercised all the power of the Beast And then that he must have the show of the chief Head of the Christian Church appears from his having Two Horns like a Lamb. For the signification of a Lamb all over the Book of the Revelations is nothing but the person of Christ It would indeed have a more plain reference to the other mentions of that word if it were said like THE Lamb. But we have Grotius's Authority for it upon this place which in Criticisme is of the best account when Impartial That nothing is more ordinary in Scripture then to b Ribera upon this place of the Apocalypse after he had pleaded for the indefinite signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the absence of the Article concludes But yet this which I have said of Articles is not always observed by the Greeks Alcasar upon the same The Article is wanting and yet it is an allusion to the Lamb Cap. 5. omit the Article of reference before a word which should denote its relation to the former mentions of it where yet the sense does shew it to be necessary to be understood It appears then from the description of him that he must be as it were c Malvenda de Antichristo pag. 348. quotes Irenaeus for making Antichrist a pretender to be Christ upon Earth And Lactantius affirming that he should falsly pretend himself to be Christ And pag. 349. says That it is the consent of the Fathers That Antichrist shall take away Idols And shall set himself up in the Temple of God as Antiochus Epiphanes had his own Image put into the Temple at Jerusalem who yet Worshipped his own Country Gods and obtruded them upon the Jews He contends indeed That the Temple of God in which Antichrist must sit is the Temple of Jerusalem But Pererius the Jesuit upon the 7th of Daniel quotes Theodoret Damascene and others of the Fathers Interpreting it of the Christian Church For that says he is the only true Temple of God And then Antichrist must be like Christ the Head of the Church And pag. 351. Malvenda shows how Antichrist shall pretend himself to be true God according to the agreeing sense of the Fathers viz. As Nebuchadnezzar Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar the latter of which did certainly do no more than order himself a like worship with the gods And Antiochus Epiphanes who is made the Type of Antichrist did set up the Statue of Jupiter Olympius in the Temple as well as his own And is said by Malvenda to have Consecrated the Temple of Jerusalem to Jupiter Olympius and the Temple on Mount Gerizim to Jupiter Hospitalis It is not therefore necessary according to Malvenda that Antichrist should set himself up as the one supreme God or Christ Irenaeus pag. 483. Edit Erasmi de Antichristo Of whom the Apostle in the 2d Epistle to the Thessalonians He shall sit in the Temple enendeavouring to show himself to be Christ Bellarmin also says Lib. 1. de Pontif. cap. 1. That by the common agreement of all Christians Antichrist is understood to be some Eminent False Christ a Vice-Christ or pretend to be the Vicar of Christ which is the same as both of them are also the same with an Antichrist Besides this Beast thus described in one place with Two Horns like a Lamb in the other Chapters is called the False Prophet To acquaint us that the Horns of the Lamb were but the outward show of the Christian Spirit So that if we put these two Characters of him together and then add the other of his speaking like a Dragon and consider that the name of a Dragon is very ordinary in this Book and that it every where else relates to the representation of the Devil in the 12th Chapter just before this as a raging Red Bloody Dragon What can more manifestly denote him to be A False Prophet in Sheeps cloathing but inwardly a Ravenous wolf How could this have been more clearly expressed in a Prophecy where the Lamb and the Dragon are in a very peculiar manner and very commonly restrained to signifie Christ and the Devil And what could more openly show us the difference betwixt the Dragon in the 12th Chapter and the Beast in the 13th thô both enemies to the Christian
that the Roman Church has set up for the Orthodox way of interpreting Scripture in the second Session of the Council of Trent Can. 3. viz. That none should presume to interpret Scripture against the unanimous Consent of the Fathers By which we have the Approbation of the chief Adversary in our present Case for the soundness of any thing that has this Authority for it and the mouths of all its Members are hereby stopped from opposing that which is so confirmed For a clearer satisfaction in this I will give the Tradition of it from the several Writers in every Century of the first Ages after Christ But for those that may account that either tedious or uncertain it will be sufficient to hear what the Modern Authors of all Parties have delivered as the common Consent of the Ancients As for the Judgment of the most Learned of the Roman Church it has been particularly shewn in the Preface to my Judgments of God upon the Roman Church Second Part That their best Commentators Malvenda Viega Alcasar Pererius do with a great deal of Heat and Zeal affirm That All find it unquestionable both Jews and Christians That it is commonly agreed upon by all that profess the Name of Christ That it is the common Road and the King's High-way That it is the common Opinion of the Learned That all do interpret it so viz. That the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel is the Roman Empire and look upon it as a perfect madness and to shew ones felf void of sense to think otherwise Gaspar Sanctius gives a remarkable reason to this purpose why it is needless to name any of the Ancients of this Opinion and that is Because there is no Body that says otherwise And this Testimony of the Romanists is so much the more unquestionable because they can make no advantage of it by affirming it but on the contrary do thereby grant the main Foundation of their Adversaries Applications of the Revelations to their Church which makes their Judgment about the Consent of the Ancients in this appear to be clear and impartial Mr. Mede may be more reasonably suspected of partiality because of his particular engagements in the Interpretations of the Apocalypse but yet never do we find his Integrity questioned for misrepresenting the Opinions of the Authors that he quotes And thus does he speak of the Application of the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th of Daniel pag. 964. This has been the constant Tradition of the Church since the Apostles days to this last saeculum and was of the Church of the Jews before and at our Saviour's time viz. That it was the Roman Empire Rabbi Abarbenel's Testimony is sufficient for the Consent of the Comment in Dan. Pag. 42. Col. 1. Jewish Writers being known to be one of the most Learned of their Nation Our Masters says he are right in THEIR TRADITION That the Fourth Beast does signifie the Roman Emperours whereby it appears to have been the common Tradition of the Learned Jews Here then have we the most impartial Judgment of the Learned Moderns of All Parties Jews and Christians That both the Ancient Fathers and the Ancient Rabbi's are all unanimous in this Interpretation of the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel But the most authentick Testimony of the Consent of the Ancients in this is that of St. Jerom who is known to have been the most curious and diligent in his search into the Writings of the Learned in his time as appears from his Book De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis In his Explication of the 7th Chapter of Daniel after he had animadverted upon Porphyry's Opinion as a perfect madness who would have the Fourth Beast to be a part of the Grecian Monarchy he concludes thus Let us therefore affirm that which ALL ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS have delivered to us That about the end of the World when the Kingdom of the Romans is to be destroyed there shall be Ten Kings who shall divide the Roman Empire amongst themselves and there shall arise after them an eleventh small King c. Where we see plainly that by the Beast its self was universally understood the Roman Empire This he affirms to have been an Universal Tradition of Church-writers before him And what is there almost in the whole Body of our Religion that has a more Authentick Testimony of being an unquestionable Tradition of the Vniversal Church And this is further confirmed by the general Custom of the Christians in the first Ages to pray for the Safety of the Roman Empire lest the Ruin of that should bring on the times of Antichrist and the end of the world as Tertullian does affirm of them in that known place of his Apology and Lactantius Theophylact St. Jerome and Oecumenius are cited by Bellarmin in confirmation Lib. 3. De Pontif. Cap. 5. of the same general Custom of the Church in After-times And it is apparent from all the mentions of Antichrist amongst the Fathers That they make him to be the same with the Little Horn of the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel which shews that they made the Fourth Beast to be certainly after the time of the Greek Monarchy because the end of it with the Little Horn was to bring on the end of the World Therefore does Erasmus in his Comment upon cap. 29. lib. 20. Augustin ad Marcellin reckon up Lactantius with St. Jerom to affirm That all Writers had agreed in that Opinion That the times of Antichrist was to be after the division of the Roman Empire as it is set out by the Ten Kings and Little Horn of the Fourth Beast These Testimonies about the general Sense of the Ancients of all Churches about this Point may seem to be a sufficient proof of their Judgments about it But because some of late very * eminent for Learning and Ingenuity have fancied another Interpretation of the Fourth Beast and especially because one of them †as much famed for an Antiquary as any of them has positively affirmed it to be the general Judgment of the Ancients That the Fourth Beast is quite another thing than the Romans it may be more satisfactory to set down here the Tradition of every Century of the Christian Church concerning this almost ever since the Romans came to be that Fourth Beast at their Conquest of the Greek Monarchy CHAP. II. The particular Tradition of the Consent of the Ancients in every Century since the time of Christ in their Application of the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel to the Reign of the Romans FIRST CENTURY THE Chaldee Paraphrast on the Prophets is the most ancient Evidence but Scripture what was the current Opinion of the times near our Saviour about the Four Monarchies of Daniel for he both lived about those times and his Exposition was always reverenced by the Jews as of so unquestionable Authority that none ever dared to contradict it says Lyranus in Comment on cap. 8. Isai
represented by the False Prophet cannot be the same thing with that which is called the Beast viz. Because the Beast is really nothing but an Head of the Beast which by consequence the 6th Chap. 3. does denote Prop. 6. a Civil Power of the Romans whereas the False Prophet is described as an Ecclesiastical Power employed in the service of that Civil Power See Revelat. 13 12 14. But yet they might very well agree That the Beast and the False Prophet might be used promiscuously to signify the really distinct Actions of one another because they were joined together in one Confederacy And the names of any Confederates or Partners in any thing are commonly used to express the Actions of one another in the common Design So Primasius upon the 13th of the Revelations concerning them both Both of them says he are every-where to be understood in conjunction And presently after It is manifest that both the Beasts are one and the same body of men and exercise the same wicked Worship so that the First is said to fight for the false Shows of the Second Thus I have drawn down the Consequences of the General Consent of the Ancients to mine own particular Opinion concerning the first date of the Rise of the Beast and the particular Roman Power that is now signified by that Term. But that which is to be observed for the General Confirmation of the Conclusion in which almost all Protestants agree in is That if it be sure as may appear from the 4th Query That the Sixth Head of the Beast is the Imperial Government at the time of the Vision then there need nothing be granted to prove the Beast and the False Prophet to be the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power of Rome at this present but only to demonstrate from History That there has certainly been two Changes of the Sovereign Power of the Romans since the time of St. John For they did agree That Antichrist from his first appearance must continue 4th Agreement Chap. 3. 3d Agreement this Chap. till the Second Coming of Christ and that the next Change of the Sovereignty of the Romans but one after the time of the Vision must be the Eighth King or the Beast and Antichrist And therefore at the beginning of the last of those two Changes of the Government of the Romans since the time of St. John must the Kingdom of Antichrist have begun whensoever that does appear from History to have happened And whatsoever the Fathers have delivered contrary to this concerning the Time Times and half a Time of the Beast as but three years and an half must have been acknowledged by them to contradict their General Agreements in other things more plain and from Experience which they often mention as the only means to determine the meaning of some Mystical Expressions that regarded future Times they would have learnt that those Times were necessarily to be understood in a Mystical Sense and not as they ordinarily signify according to the frequent Examples in Scripture of such a Mystical Signification of parts of See Corol. 1. Prop. 23. Rule 2. time and the true Rule of Interpretation in such like Cases For a clearer satisfaction about the contrariety and inconsistency of some of the particular Opinions of the Fathers with the Conclusions in which they agree with the Unanimous Judgment of the rest it may be convenient to inquire into the grounds or reasons of their Paradoxical Fancies about the Beast in the Revelations which contradicted the General Agreement about the signification of A Beast and its Ruling Parts in the Prophecy of Daniel For this purpose it is in the first place to be considered That it is a true Observation of the Learned Grotius That the Reason why the Apocalypse was not added at first to the rest of the Books In Praefat. ad Apocal. of the New Testament which did afterwards give ground for questioning the Canonical Authority of it was That it did so openly point at the Roman Government as the great Enemy of God that it lay concealed in a few hands amongst the Christians of the first times for fear of exasperating the Romans against them This does St. Chrysostome and Augustine make to be the ground why St. Paul spoke so mysteriously about the Roman Empire in In 2. Ep. Thess his Prophecy about Antichrist 2 Thess 2. 6. when he says And now ye know what doth withhold the Reason they give for it is That if the Apostle had openly named the Romans they would have accounted him and all the Faithful very pestilent Members of their Government This fear of the then Ruling Power together with the Professions of their ignorance of the application of the Characters of Antichrist because they look'd upon their times as not at all concerned in those things may be very reasonably judged to be the cause of the little care that the Fathers took to be wary in the Interpretations that they gave of this Book For they esteemed it to be both a dangerous study and also relating to things that they could not well judge of and also to future times in which they should not share And might therefore as Chrysostome and Augustine do expresly say bring themselves unnecessarily into great danger And Jerom in his Answer to 11. q. ad Algasiam and Primasius upon 2 Thess 2. 6. to the same purpose This Account may the more easily be allowed from the general neglect of the Book of the Apocalypse even in this Age to which the chief things in Mr. Mede Bp. Usher c. it are by the severest Examiners of the Sense of Scripture judged to belong so as to be even laid aside out of the Calendar for * Homilies of the Church of England p. 69 and p. 316. the daily readings of Scripture by Protestants themselves †who nevertheless do give the present Church of Rome the name of Babylon It is then no great wonder That Irenaeus and Hippolytus and some other of the Fathers whilst the Roman Government continued Pagan should be so willing to make the Beast in general to be the World and the Seven Heads of it to be seven Wicked Ages of the World as the sum or Recapitulation as Irenaeus calls it of all the Apostate times For in that way the Sixth Head said in the Prophecy to be then in being was not more applied to the Romans than to all the other Wicked Nations in the World at that time and the last Head called the Beast would not concern the then Roman Empire because it was not to come till after the end of that present Reigning Age. And their willingness to take this safe way might make them easie to be satisfied with such small grounds as these for it viz. 1. That the Beast in the Revelations is signified Chap. 13. 2. to 1. Dan. 2. 40. and 7. 7 23. contain all the Four Beasts of the 7th of Daniel in his own
a BIshop Andrews p. 234. Respons ad Bellarm. Apolog. speaking of Saint John in the Revelations He borrows that way of speaking from Daniel of whom he is almost every-where an Imitator And immediately after Vix enim reperias apud Joannem c. You shall scarce find a Phrase in the Revelations of St. John that is not taken out of Daniel or some other Prophet Bellarmin l. 3. de Pontif. c. 5. Jum vero Daniel c. Now Daniel in the 7th Chapter of that Prophecy does very clearly describe the same Four Kingdoms by Four Beasts that is the same with those Four in his 2d Chapter and which are the same Four Beasts that are mentioned in the Description of The Beast of the Revelations Blas Viega in cap. 13. Apoc. v. 1 2. Sciendum est Danieli cap. 7 c. It is to be considered that there was a Vision like to this shown to Daniel in the 7th Chapter of that Prophecy where the business is about Antichrist upon the Explication of which this Vision of ours here does depend See Mr. Medes Discourse Regnum quartum Danielis est Regnum Romanorum Alcasar sect 3. cap. 13. Apoc. v. 1. Marina Bestia cap. 13. Apoc. Evidenter respicit quartam Bestiam Danielis cap. 7. c. The Beast that arose out of the Sea cap. 13. Revel does evidently relate to the Fourth Beast in the 7th Chapter of Daniel Quae etiam quatuor Regna sive Imperia sc in 7o. cap. Dan. dubium non est in statuà illâ Danielis cap. 2. 31. praefigurata fuisse Bestiam Apocalypticam continere in se tres priores Monarchias quas dicitur apud Danielem devorasse Which Four Kingdoms or Empires viz. in the 7th Chapter of Daniel are unquestionably foretold in the Statue cap. 2. 31. And The Beast in the Revalations does contain in it or is there described to be made up of these three Monarchies which it is said in Daniel to have devoured Idem in cap. 12. Apoc. v. 3. de 10. Cornibus Non aliud fundamentum c. There needs no other foundation for the Interpretation but only to look out a conformable Explication of it with that of the Ten Horns of the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel by which it is evident that it signifies the Roman Empire See the References to the Third Chapter Lib. 2. Note a. especially Malvenda and Ribera consent of Interpreters of all Parties That the Terms of the Beast and his Heads and Horns and most of his Characters had a very unquestionable reference to the frequent use of them about the same kind of Subject in the Prophet Daniel But I was extremely surprized to find also That by the same Unanimous agreement of all the Considerable Interpreters of all Ages excepting only some few of this last Age it was granted That the Terms of Beasts and their Heads or Horns and indeed all other Figures and their parts signifying Dominion as it is here in these Visions had but one constant uniform Signification in general all over the Prophecy of Daniel and that also in great variety of Instances And withal That by the concurrent agreement of those few also that differed from the rest there needed nothing more to prove such a constant uniform Signification of these Figures but only this viz. That The Fourth Beast or Kingdom in the 7th Chapter of Daniel was the Roman Monarchy This gave me very confident hopes of fixing the same kind of mystical Terms in the Visions of the Apocalyps to setled Notions and certain Definitions and thereby of coming to some assurance about those things notwithstanding all the ambiguous and various acceptations of the Expressions in which they were conveyed which I accounted well worth all the closest application of my thoughts as a thing of the most useful importance to the World for the clear determination of the aim of this Prophecy as well as for mine own particular satisfaction and benefit I have therefore for this end endeavoured to demonstrate the constant uniform acceptation of the Schemes of A Beast and its parts all over Daniel And this requiring the certain knowledge of the Interpretation of the Fourth Beast or Kingdom in the Seventh Chapter of Daniel and the determinate application of that relying chiefly upon the determination of the undoubted signification of the Kingdom of the Son of Man that succeeds that Fourth Kingdom These make up the Demonstration of the design of the Second Book from the Intrinsick Arguments of the Prophecy of Daniel it self But the clearest proof of the signification of the Fourth Beast in Daniel is the exact agreement of it with The Beast in the Revelations And that also in some such peculiar Characters amongst the rest as are impossible to belong to more than one and the same Kingdom and to the same time of that Kingdom This therefore is added to the other Evidences that are drawn from the Prophecy of Daniel it self as a most undoubted confirmation That the Fourth Beast or Kingdom in Daniel is the Kingdom of the Romans Who indeed would not be ready to conclude with himself before ever he comes to examine the grounds that there is for it That so general an agreement of all the differing Parties of Interpreters for so many Ages as has been observed about Mystical Expressions where there is so great a scope for Fancy to expatiate in must certainly have very plain and express grounds for it in the Prophetical Writings and very obvious to common observation And this is another considerable thing to fortify the assurance that the strength of the Proof it self does offer But the Characters in which The Beast in the Revelations does so exactly agree with those of the Fourth Beast in Daniel and which are the surest Proof That that Beast in Daniel must be the Kingdom of the Romans are fetched from several distinct Shews of the Apocalyptick Beast in several Chapters And these several Shows are by some Learned Men judged to be the Shows of different Beasts whereas the proof of the exact agreement of The Beast in Daniel with that in the Revelations from the several Characters of those different Shows does suppose it to be but one and the same Beast in all those Chapters This made it necessary to settle the notion of The Beast in the 17th Chapter of the Revelations and to shew that all the mentions of that which is called The Beast in all the other Chapters are but so many Accounts of that one and the same particular state of The Beast that it is found in in the 17th Chapter And that therefore all the several Characters of The Beast in those several Chapters are but the Characters of one and the same thing And this it was requisite to prefix in the First Book before all other reasonings that are fetched from the nature of that Beast in the following Discourses After the determination of the constant and setled signification of a
Head seem to be so wholly intent upon the Charge of Antichristianism upon the Church Most Protestants of Rome that they neglect all known and acknowledged Examples of the difference of the Heads of Beasts to fix their Charge And to hold to it they are forced to wrest the natural and plain sense of the 10th verse of the 17th Chapter of the Revelations and to find out some far fetched Criticisms to make it good As the making of the 7th of those Seven Kings that are said to be the seven Heads to be none of those Heads And Dr. More 648. as the making 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to denote the Seventh King to be quite different from the rest does appear to be See Prop. 4. They are also forced to make the wounded and the healed Mr. Mede Head to be two distinct Heads of the seven which is contrary to the plain Expressions of the Prophecy which mention it to be seen but as one and the same Head wounded and healed and is also contrary to the common acceptation of a Head wounded and healed which can be but one Head Others of them are forced to make the Seventh King and the Eighth to be the same thing and for that end to transpose the latter end of the 10th verse and to make it come after the Monsieur Jurieu Accomp des Prophecies pag. 190. 2d Edit Most Protestants beginning of the 11th contrary to the natural order of the Text. Those that would fix all the Charge of the Beast and the False Prophet upon the Papal Power only are forced to make nothing of the plain Characters by which they are distinguished from one another when named together nor of the Change of the name of the Civil Government of the Romans at the fall of the Western Empire though that was the only difference betwixt the first six Heads of the Beast according to their own Opinion For the first six Heads were all of the same Religion that is Pagans And upon this account is it that most of them are forced to make the first appearance of the Beast to be of a very uncertain date that is according to their fancy about the first great appearance of the Papal Power which cannot well be fixed Whereas the first Rise of the Beast must have been a very visible and remarkable Change of the Supream Power of Rome from that which was the 7th Ruling Power of it to the 8th called the Beast It is upon this account that some of those who incline to the former Opinion and yet do plainly see that the Beast must be a Change of the form of the Civil Power of the Empire do therefore make the Ten Kings with the Papal Power to be the Beast that is the Eighth King or last Ruling Head But what Prop. 6. an absurdity do they fly to in this when it is manifest that the Ten Kings were the Ten Horns and none of the Seven Heads Others of them indeed defer the Rise of this Papal Beast to that manifest Change of the Imperial Power at the fall of the Western Empire in Augustulus as the end of the true Christian Emperors who are their Seventh King but then they are forced to make nothing of the succeeding Sovereign Power of the Italian Kings of Rome who were as Absolute Sovereigns of it notwithstanding their Royal Seat at Ravenna as any of the Western Emperors had been from the time of Honorius who first made Ravenna the Imperial Seat They are also forced to pass over the Change of the Regal and Imperial Power of Rome to the pure Imperial Government at the recovery of Rome by Justinian as of no account for a new Head though they must own the Eastern Emperors to have been as much Sovereigns of Rome at this Re-conquest of it as the Western were before the loss of it and when they were the acknowledged Sixth Head This appears from the Power of the Eastern Emperors Exarchs after the recovery of the West The Fourth BOOK THE Application of the Characters OF THE BEAST In the REVELATIONS CHAP. I. The force of the Applications of the Characters of the Rev. XIII Beast to confirm the first date of his Reign A Caution to those who have taken up with a former Hypothesis The uncouth Composition of the Beast of the Parts of a Lyon of a Leopard and of a Bear applied to an absolute exactness The Rising of the Beast out of the Sea The Continuance of his Reign for 42 Months AFTER the more close and demonstrative way of proof that has been made use of to determine the particular nature and first Rise of the Beast It will much confirm the knowledge that is now had of him to see how easie and natural the Application of all the other Circumstances of his History will appear to be upon this foundation And this may serve for an additional proof à posteriori as the Demonstrations of the principles of natural things by their causes are much strengthned by their perfect agreement with all the effects that we can apply them to or with all that experience does teach us of them But yet it must always be remembred That though the Application of an Instance or two should seem to be something harsh or forced That no man ought for that to question the former Conclusions unless upon a new examination he can find them less necessary than they did at first appear No man ought to doubt of a plain and manifest truth because he sees it to be seemingly inconsistent with some other Conclusions that are deduced from it which are not so plain and necessary I know not of any such harshness in any of the Applications that I am now going to make but rather think them so well agreeing with the Characters of the Text that they are enough to surprize one into an admiration of the Congruity of them But I interpose this as a convenient Caution to those who may find a convincing evidence in the proof of the maint Point to which the Applications are fixed but by reason of some prejudices and long use of a former Hypothesis may not think some of the Applications so well fitted to the Prophecy as they will imagine their own to be For this will be apt to make them judge many things which to all others would appear very tolerable at least to be harsh and uncouth to them To begin then with the figure and composition of the Beast It is said to be in the several parts of it like a Lyon a Leopard Rev. 13. 2. and a Bear which do manifestly refer to its being the Fourth Beast in the 7th Chapter of Daniel which is there represented immediately after the account of the Three Kingdoms shown by v. 7 23. those Three Beasts and is said to have devoured them And those Three Beasts are agreed to be the Babylonian Persian and Book the IId Graecian Monarchies The
Beast here is represented as consisting of these Kingdoms as the parts of his Body which if it has any reference to the Roman State at the particular Rise of the Beast with Justinian must signify That it should be that particular Roman Power which was in possession of Greece Babylon and Persia or that part of Asia which belonged to the Babylonians and Persians And then it does very clearly signify That the Rise of the Beast should be at the advancement of the Eastern Empire to the Government of Rome And does not that suit well enough with Justinian's Conquest of Italy This would tempt one to be very confident That this was designed as a very plain Character to know the Rise of the Beast by since there is no such mention of any of the Parts of these Beasts in the Dragon in the Chapter just before which yet is the same kind of Figure with this and is known to signify the Roman Chap. 12. State a long time after that it had been in possession of Greece and Asia And one would be very apt to judge That what is represented as particular to the Beast in the 13th Chapter and was omitted in the Dragon which yet is known to be the Roman Empire must be added as a mark of distinction of the one from the other But if others will have this mark of the Three Beasts to belong to the general nature of the Beast as it signifies the Roman Conquest at its first appearance after the destruction of the Greek Monarchy it will not prejudice my Opinion It is enough to show That as this Beast does signify the particular state of it under its last Ruling Head So this character of the Parts of it does most exactly agree with that which I make to be the last Ruling Head at its first Rise in distinction to all other states of the Beast The rising of the Beast out of the Sea is known to signify that it Rev. 13. 1. should arise out of great Commotions and by great Wars and Tumults For so are many Waters interpreted by the Angel himself to signify in this Prophecy chap. 17. 15. Multitudes and Peoples Isa 8. 7. 17. 12. Jer. 46. 8. and Tongues and Nations which being added to the nature of those Waters in the Sea do determine it to signify great commotions of those Multitudes and Nations And certainly this does very well suit with that strange bustle which Justinian made in the World by his Wars with the Goths and Vandals and Persians and with his Conquests of those People at his taking possession of the Western Empire The ascending of the Beast out of the Bottomless Pit Rev. 17. 8. is the same thing as the Sea is usually called by the name of the Abyss in Scripture which is the word here used for the Bottomless Pit I could never meet with any satisfactory Account from any other Hypothesis concerning the date of the first appearance of the Beast why the whole time of its continuance both in Daniel Dan. 7. 25. Rev. 13. 5. Chap. 12. 14. and the Revelations should be expressed by a Time Times and half a time or 4â— Months which is the same Coroll 2. Prop. 24. For one would be apt to conclude that a ALcasar Notat 4. ad v. 2. cap. 11. All the Persecutions of the Church are set out by three years and an half Three days and an half refer to a Week And on chap. 12. We have seen that by 1260 days are signified three years and an half according to the Graecian and Jewish Account We have also there seen that the space of three years and an half is to be taken mystically and that by it is signified in the middle of a week of seven years the three and an half in that expression must have a reference to some seven as the whole number of it Three years and an half is in it self so precise and unusual a determination of the whole time of a thing and the whole number seven so commonly used in the Old and New Testament to signify the whole of things of the same kind that it must be thought to be very likely to be here referred to especially when it is also considered That the number seven is very frequently in use all over the Book of the Apocalypse Alcasar has observed that it is made use of there no less than forty times Epist Dedicat. Comment in Apocalyp The three years and an half of the preaching of Christ to which these three years and an half are said to allude are also in the 9th Chapter of Daniel last verse made to be a reference to half a week of years With this it is also to be observed That the other two famous Prophecies concerning the Captivities of the Jewish Church which is every-where made the scheme of the Christian Church The first about the 70 years Captivity by Jeremiah and the other of the 70 weeks Captivity till the time of the Messias which is mentioned with the former in the 9th Chapter of Daniel They both have the number seven for their denominator and common measure And from Jacob's seven years service for Gen. 29. Chap. 21. 2. Leah and Rachel and from the Liberty of an Hebrew Servant at the end of seven years It appears that the space of seven years was the known space of time for servitude amongst the Jews where the Prophecies were delivered And the seven years that we are now enquiring after to fix the half of them to must be some seven years of the Bondage of the Church though with some lightsome intervals As this does make it very likely That the Time Times and an half of the Tyranny of the Little Horn or Beast over the Church of God does certainly refer to some whole number of seven Times so is it now worth the enquiring to what particular seven Prophetical Times they are referred This difficulty in the way that I have found my self determined to by the Prophecy is easily resolved For if the first appearance of the Beast be at Justinian's Conquest of Italy the Time Times and half of the Beast in the Revelations and Little Horn of the Beast in Daniel are just as long a space of time as it was from the first beginning of the Captivity of the Jews under the Assyrians who were much the same Kingdom with the Babylonians in the 9th year of the Reign of Hosea to the time of Justinian For that Captivity of the Ten Tribes by Salmanasar was in Petav. Rat. Temp. part 1. l. 2. cap. 2. in Ezechia Part. 2. l. 1. c. 4. in fine the 3993d year of the Julian Period and 720 years before Christ If to this be added the Year of our Lord when Belisarius carried Vitiges the King of the Italian Goths in triumph with him to Justinian which was Anno Dom. 540 there will be just the same number of 1260 years to the