when it shall be thought fit by those that are the Judges of what is fit in such cases I shall now only endeavour to prepare the way by shewing that which the Reverend and Learned Dr. M. is forced to deny at any rate as being utterly inconsistent with his own and the common Hypothesis viz. That the Vision of the fourth and fifth Chapters of the Revelation is properly a Prophecy and consequently that the design of the fifth Chapter is not to represent God's giving to his Son the Revelation That the fourth and fifth Chapters of the Revelation are a Prophecy This appears so plainly from the Preface that the Spirit himself has prefixt to them that one would think it impossible for any Man to be mistaken in this Point After this I looked says St. John Chap. iv 1. and behold a Door was opened in Heaven And the first Voice which I heard was as it were of a Trumpet talking with me saying Come up hither and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter Is not this as plain an Indication as can be desired that the things which St. John was now about to see were things to come and consequently that the seeing of those things is prophesying But what were those things which the Voice shewed him What can they be if not those which immediately follow of which St. John gives this Relation ver 2 3 c. And immediately says he I was in the Spirit and behold a Throne was set in Heaven and one sat on the Throne c. And round about the Throne were four and twenty Elders sitting c. and out of the Throne proceeded Lightnings and Thundrings and Voices And there were seven Lamps of Fire burning before the Throne c. And in the midst of the Throne and round about the Throne were four Beasts c. who rest not day and night saying Holy Holy Holy c. And when those Beasts magnify him that sate on the Throne the four and twenty Elders with profound humility give God the Glory of the Works of his Creation Then in the fifth Chapter he proceeds to tell us how that the Sitter on the Throne had a Book in his right-hand written within and on the back-side sealed with seven Seals Whereupon a strong Angel is seen proclaiming with a loud Voice Who is worthy to open the Book c. vers 1 2. None in the whole World is found worthy vers 3. Wherefore St. John weeps ver 4. One of the Elders comforts him ver 5. Whereupon St. John espies in the midst of the Throne a Lamb standing as if it had been slain c. ver 6. who came and took the Book out of the right-hand of him that sate on the Throne ver 7. Upon which the said Beasts and Elders fall down before the Lamb and sing a Song to him congratulating his taking the Book and opening the Seals ver 8 9 10. Then the Prophet hears the Voice of many Angels round about the Throne and the Beasts and the Elders applauding the Lamb ver 11 12. And next he hears no less than every Creature in Heaven Earth Sea and under the Earth giving Blessing Honour Glory and Power to him that sitteth on the Throne and to the Lamb. The four Beasts saying Amen and the Elders doing most profound reverence also ver 12 13. Then he proceeds in Chap. vi 1 2 c. to tell us what he saw in the Book when the Lamb had opened it And I saw says St. John when the Lamb opened one of the Seals and I heard as it were the noise of Thunder one of the four Beasts saying Come and see And I saw and behold a white Horse and he that sat on him had a Bow c. And in like manner he goes on describing what he saw at the opening of each Sea. Now the thing which I affirm is this That whether the things which St. John saw in the Book be a Prophecy of future things or not yet it must needs be that the many other things which he saw and heard before the opening of the Book are a Prophecy The reason is plain because those words of the Voice Chap. 4.1 I will shew thee things that must be hereafter do most plainly and immediately affect the things which he saw in the fourth and fifth Chapters but not those things which he saw in the Book Chap. 6. Nor does this only appear from the order of Narration but also from the reason and nature of the the thing it self For those words of the Voice Come up hither and I will shew thee things that must be hereafter must necessarily refer to the things which the Voice shew'd him viz. those things which he saw by virtue of his being call'd up into Heaven which things are plainly the Throne with the Sitter on it together with the other things afore-spoken of But as for the things that were contained in the Book he was not shew'd them by the Voice but by the Lamb that opened the Book and the Beasts that called him to see them as appears most evidently from Rev. 6.1 2 c. Besides the Title of things that must be hereafter is not adequate to the Visions of the sealed Book whose Events even according to Dr. M's own Exposition begin as soon as those of the Epistolar Prophecy As therefore the Title to the Epistolar Prophecy is things that are and things that must be hereafter Rev. 1.19 because as the Doctor truly affirms the Epistles concern the state of the Church then present as well as that which was to come why should not the Prophecy of the sealed Book have the same Title since the reason in all points is the same So plain is it every way that those words of the Voice Come up hither and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter respect not the Visions of the Book Chap. 6. but those that immediately follow the said words in Chap. 4.2 3 c. viz. the Vision of the Throne and the rest that follow If therefore the Vision of the Throne with the Sitter on it the Elders and Beasts praising him the Book in the Sitter's Right-hand the strong Angels proclaiming c. I say if these things be not some of those which the Voice points at Vers 1. telling the Prophet he would shew him things that must come to pass hereafter it will be impossible to prove that any part of the Revelation is a Prophecy Come up hither says the Voice and I will shew thee things that must be hereafter And immediately says the Prophet I was in the Spirit and saw such and such things And are not they the things then which the Voice said he would shew him Which things since the Voice says they are future things or things that must be hereafter it is plain the Vision of them is a Prophecy But notwithstanding this mighty Evidence of Truth the Reverend Dr. M. is pleased to express his
Wonder in his Paralipomena Prophetica Chap. xxi that any Man of Wit and Parts and Learning should be so heedless and grosly mistaken as to make it a Prophecy properly so called c. Whereas he that has but the least judgment in the World must needs see if he will not wilfully wink that the Spirit himself stiles it a Vision of things to come And therefore if the Spirit speaks properly the Vision is properly a Prophecy But let us hear what that Learned Person urges in defence of his own Opinion Now the substance of what he alledges in the said Chapter is this That the Vision of the fourth and fifth Chapters of the Revelation is no more a Prophecy than that in Ezekiel the first to which also it is very like in many respects as that of Ezekiel is to the glorious Representation of the God of Israel made to Moses and the Elders in the Mount Exod. xxiv wherefore as neither that which Ezekiel or Moses saw was a Prophecy So neither is it likely that that which St. John saw is a Prophecy It is only or chiefly intended for an Introductory Vision to the Prophecy of the sealed Book which begins Chap. 6.1 a thing usual with the Prophets as may be seen Isa 6.1 2. c. Ezek. 1. Daniel 10.5 c. and no more a Prophecy than those in Isaiah Ezekiel or Daniel are intimating the Divine Inspiration of John in writing those Prophecies and setting forth that in pompous and magnificent Expressions which is noted in a more vulgar stile Rev. 1.1 viz. That God gave his Son the Revelation To this I answer It is here taken for granted that the Vision which Moses and Ezekiel saw in the places afore-cited is not a Prophecy which ought to be clearly proved before any stress can be laid upon it But suppose it to be no Prophecy for I cannot spare time for cavilling will it thence follow that the Vision of Rev. iv v. is no Prophecy only because in some things it agrees with that Vision of Ezekiel i. e. it seems to borrow some of its Types from thence Are not all Interpereters generally agreed that the Types in the Revelation are mostly borrowed from Stories Rites and Constitutions of the Jewish Church and taken out of the Old Testament as well the Historical as Prophetical Parts of it and yet no Man denies it to be a Prophecy For Example do not both Mr. Mede and your self also in several Particulars resemble the Prophecy of the Woman Rev. xii 1 c. to the History of the Children of Israel in Egypt and coming out of it Exod. i. and in the following Chapter And yet you never doubt of its being a Prophecy ere the more for that But further There is a vast difference between the Vision of Ezekiel and Moses and that of St. John Rev. iv v. in that this latter is entitled by the Spirit himself a Vision of things that must be hereafter Now if these or the like words be not prefix'd to that Vision of Ezekiel Moses or that of Daniel either aforementioned how can it be thought good reasoning to say those Visions are no Prophecies therefore this is none I expected the Doctor should have clear'd this point viz. the Argument hitherto insisted on from those obvious words Come up hither and I will shew thee things that must be hereafter which are the most apposite in the World to prove the Vision immediately subsequent to be a Prophecy but I find not the least notice taken of it But because the Doctor insists much upon its being an Introductory Vision to those of the sealed Book as if it could be no Prophecy if it were an Introductory Vision I answer by granting it to be an Introductory Vision indeed but no otherwise Introductory than the Prophecy of the Sealed-Book introduces that of the Trumpets Chap. viii or than that does the Prophecy of the Opened-Book as the Doctor loves to call it Chap. xi 1 c. Or than the Vision of the Vials Chap. xvi introduces that of the Beast Chap. xvii As one History may introduce another so one Prophecy may introduce another What should hinder But now If by an Introductory Vision be meant a Preface there is no other such as I see than that of Chap. iv 1. where the Voice calls St. John to him saying Come up hither and I will shew thee things that must be hereafter This I say is all the Preface that I can find for in the very next Verse begins an account of the things themselves which the Voice promis'd to shew him viz. a Prophetical Representation of a glorious Church with a particular Description in the likeness of an History of the Beginning Progress and Accomplishment of the Opening of a certain Book whose Contents are particularly described Chap. vi and those that follow So that here is Prophetia in Prophetiâ i. e. the Prophecy of the Book it self contained in the Prophetical Relation of the opening of it As if it had been said thus Hereafter shall arise a Church like that described Rev. iv wherein a certain Book shall be open'd by the Lamb in such manner and circumstances as are described Chap. v. containing such and such things as are said to have been seen in it in the sixth and following Chapters Now in such manner of speech as this who does not see that the Description of the Church and the manner of opening the Book is introductory of the things contained in the Book and yet is as properly a Prophecy as that contained in the Book is To which Prophetical History of the opening of this Book those words Come up hither and I will shew thee things that must be hereafter is the only Preface By which and by his adding immediately after that he was immediately in the Spirit upon the speaking of these words to him St. John's Divine Inspiration in writing this Prophecy is sufficiently intimated But whereas the Learned Doctor further asserts That the fifth Chapter is added for the setting forth of that in more pompous and magnificent Expressions which is done but in a vulgar stile Rev. i. 1. that God gave his Son the Revelation this being a Stone that most Interpreters have stumbled at I endeavoured to remove it by demanding several things the attentive Consideration of which would give great light to this whole matter in dispute And the Doctor has done me the honour to set down the Queries themselves as he had them from me in Manuscript with his Answers to them in the 34th Chapter of his Paralipomena Which Answers tho I am not at all satisfied with unless it be that I am much the more confirm'd by them in my former Opinion Yet I shall not here bestow that needless pains of shewing the insufficiency of them For so long as that Assertion stands good which I have been hitherto proving viz. That the fourth and fifth Chapters of the Revelation are a
Prophecy of things to come to pass hereafter it cannot be that they should be taken up in setting forth God's giving to his Son the Revelation which was done before Notwithstanding Sir if you do not think that I have clear'd this Point sufficiently yet if you desire it I will make it my next business God willing to give you all the satisfaction I can by shewing one by one that my Queries or Objections do still remain in their full force notwithstanding all that you have said to them But I would not willingly engage so deep against a Person for whom I have so singular an esteem And as for that which I have here ventur'd upon I desire your Pardon with your most candid and charitable Interpretation of it FINIS II. That by opening the sealed Book Rev. v. is meant Explaining it And that by the Throne there is meant a Throne of God on Earth and not in the highest Heaven HAving prov'd in the former Sheet That the Vision of the fourth and fifth Chapters of the Revelation is properly a Prophecy of things that were to come to pass after the exhibiting of it to St. John notwithstanding what has been alledg'd to the contrary by the Learned Dr. H. M. I proceed now to shew concerning the other Points in dispute between us First That by that Phrase of opening the sealed Book so often us'd Rev. v. is meant or prefigur'd the explaining of it Secondly That by the Throne Rev. iv 2 c. is prefigur'd some Throne of God on Earth and not his Throne in the highest Heaven First That by opening the Sealed Book is meant or prefigur'd the explaining of it For the truth of this Proposition I appealed to the constant and unquestionable use of that Phrase of opening a Sealed Book where-ever it occurs throughout the Scripture As Dan. ix 24. Seal up the Vision viz. that it be not opened and xii 4. Seal the Book even to the time of the end Also by the sealed Book Isa xxix 11. is meant a Book which no Man could open or understand Also that opening of Prophecies signifies explaining them appears from Luke xxiv 32. where Christ is said to have opened the Scriptures and Acts xvii 3. St. Paul is said to have opened and alledg'd viz. out of the Prophecies of the Scripture that Christ must needs have suffer'd Whence the Argument is plain That if by Sealing a Prophecy be constantly meant in Scripture concealing the Sense of it so that altho it be written and in every Man's Hand yet none knows what it means and if on the other side by opening a Prophecy consider'd as sealed or mysterious be constantly meant explaining it it is all the reason in the World that it should be so expounded in the place we are upon as it is in all other places To this the Doctor answers in the xxxiii Chap. of his Par. Prophetica by distinguishing between opening a Book and opening a Text. To open a Book is to unclasp it to open the Text is to explain it And thus it is one thing to open a sealed Book where the Prophecy is and another to open a sealed Prophecy which is evident from Luke iv 17. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sometimes signifies to explain signifies only to open a Book of Prophecies or to expose the Writing to view which says the Doctor is the case here of the seven-sealed Book as appears from Rev. vi where the opening of the Seals is exemplified and the meaning shew'd to be only the exhibiting to John so many particular Visions but not the explaining of those Visions Reply 1. The Lamb is said Rev. vi not barely to have opened the Book but to have opened the Seals of it Now the Seals of a Book are always upon the Text for we no where read of a Book sealed any otherwise than in respect to the mysteriousness of it The Seals of a Book are not such as may be broken with the Finger or cut off with a Knife or mall'd with an Hammer if the seven Epistles indeed had been said to have been sealed we might have had more reason to have fancied them such but which yield only to the judgment and understanding of the pious Reader through the assistance of the Spirit of God. And this the Doctor grants while he shews himself very willing but as little able to produce one instance to the contrary But now if the Seals be always upon the Text then the Lamb 's opening of the Seals in the Vision must needs figure the opening of the Text which the Doctor grants to be explaining the sense of it And since I have before proved the Vision to be a Prophecy it appears from hence that it is a Prophecy concerning the explaining of the sealed Book in which the Lamb opening the Seals to St. John and shewing him the inside Writing is a Type of Christ or of his Church that should afterwards explain the meaning of it to the Faithful 2. The Doctor in his Apoc. Apocalypseos on Rev. v. 1. grants the Seals of the Book to signify its Arcana and whereas the Book is said to have been written within and on the back-side the Doctor there expounds the inside Writing to be the inward Sense of the Book in opposition to the literal sense which is the back-side writing Whence it must undeniably follow That to open the Seals of the Book so that the inside-writing may be seen is to shew the inward sense of it or which is all one to explain it Wherefore as to what the Doctor says of the Lamb 's opening the Seals Rev. vi that it is only the exhibiting certain Visions to St. John but not explaining them from whence he peremptorily concludes that whatever in other places may be meant by opening the Seals of a Book it cannot be understood here of explaining it I answer The Doctor to maintain a literal sense of this Phrase of opening a sealed Book the sense which he is so zealous against in other cases is pleas'd to make himself extremely ignorant in a point of ordinary cognizance For why I beseech you Sir may not Christ's explaining the inward sense of this Book at some time or other to his Servants be fore-signified by the Lamb 's opening the Seals of it in the Vision and shewing the inside-writing of it to St. John The Doctor grants the Lamb to represent Christ St. John to represent the People of God upon Rev. v. 4. he grants the inside-writing of the Book to signify the inward sense of it in the place a little afore quoted What is it then that he denies Why tho he grants all this singly yet he denies when put together that the Lamb 's opening the Seals and shewing the inside-writing to St. John signifies Christ's explaining at some time or other to his People the inward Sense of the Book Which how unreasonable a thing it is I leave to the judgment of any impartial
that the true reason of St. John's weeping was because no Man in this World was found at that time worthy to open the Book and therefore Christ is not excepted because not concern'd as being not in this World. And thus are those great Absurdities easily avoided which must needs follow upon making the Sitter on the Throne to be God Almighty and the Heaven here spoken of the highest Heaven which can by no means be allow'd to be the sense of this Prophecy 5. The Sitter on the Throne appears to be a Man and not God in his own Person from the description that is given of him Rev. iv 3. where he is said to be to look on like a Jasper and a Sardine Stone whereas God Almighty in his own Person no Man hath seen at any time 1 Tim. vi 16. nor can see Is it not therefore very absurd to imagine the Invisible God to be describ'd by telling us what He looks like But now if we conceive the Sitter on the Throne to be some Representative of God as a King or the like it would be very proper to describe him by the likeness of his Appearance and to say that such an one was to look on like a Jasper and a Sardine Stone would be the properest Description of any For as much as such Persons are wont to appear upon their Thrones in such Ornaments Object That Hymn Holy holy holy Lord God Almighty c. cannot be sung to any Creature which yet is sung to the Sitter on the Throne Rev. iv 8. Also the Sitter on the Throne is said to Live for ever and ever and such Worship and Adoration is paid to him as cannot be given to a Creature without Idolatry To this purpose it is Objected by the Doctor in the xxxiii Chap. of his Paralipom Prophetica I answer It is a mistake in the Doctor to say that that Hymn Holy holy holy Lord God Almighty c. is said to be directed to the Sitter on the Throne Whereas the Text it self has only these words And they rest not day and night saying without expressing to whom 't is said leaving us thereby to understand that it is said only to the B. Trinity Holy holy holy c. The next Verse indeed makes mention of giving Glory to the Sitter on the Throne but then the words of that Doxology are only these Thou art worthy O Lord to receive Glory and Honour and Power for thou hast Created all things and for thy Pleasure they are and were Created Rev. iv 11. But is it lawful then to use such Expressions as these to any Representative of God Answ It is as lawful to use them to a Representative of God as to use them to a God that looks like a Jasper and a Sardine Stone For can any thing that in its own Nature and Person looks like a Jasper and a Sardine Stone be the God that liveth for ever and ever in a proper literal sense And there is an improper Analogical Sense wherein a King may be said to live for ever and ever as well as a Man may be call'd Good or Wise or Holy. For we know our Saviour says expresly that there is none good but God and yet in a reserv'd sense we commonly call Men good too without any offence or fault at all The like may be said of calling Men wise and holy c. And why may not as well the title of Living for ever and ever be attributed to a King For it is certain that there is or shall be a Kingdom in this World that shall last for ever and ever Dan. ii 44. vii 27. Rev. xi 15. xxii 5. And it is as certain that the several Kings of any Kingdom ruling successively one after another are represented in Prophecy but as one King as may be seen in many places of the viii Chap. of Daniel and in Rev. xvii 10 c. and is confest by all Interpreters Whence it follows that as the Kingdom it self is said to continue for ever so the King of it may as well be said to live for ever in what sense the one may be said the other may be said also But here it is to be observ'd yet farther that I do not say that the Sitter on the Throne is not God but that it is not God in his own Person but describ'd according as He is pleas'd to exhibit himself glorious in some Earthly Prince As when with respect to his delivering his People out of Egypt God is describ'd as having a mighty Hand and a stretched-out Arm not that God in his own Person has any bodily Parts but this is spoken with respect to Moses whose Hand and Arm God made use of in that Work making his Hand Mighty and the stretching-out of his Arm to do Wonders So that in effect the Sitter on the Throne is God and the King too or God working in and by the King who is here consider'd only as God's Instrument in the Work for which thanks is given to them both as one in being given to the Sitter on the Throne Wherefore the Doxology given to the Sitter on the Throne together with the other expressions of Devotion therewith mentioned is so to be understood as being only by Analogy or Mystery applicable to the Visible Sitter that look'd like a Jasper and a Sardine Stone but properly and literally to God Almighty the Invisible Co-sessor and Director of him But the Doctor further urges in the place afore-quoted that there is no ground for making two Sitters on the Throne Answ If there be ground for making the Sitter on the Throne a good King there must be the same for making God to sit with him by his Invisible Assistance and Direction So that in making the Sitter on the Throne to be a King directed by God sitting with him I make indeed no more than one Sitter on the Throne according as One is taken in the holy Scriptures sive hundred times as where we are forbidden to have more Masters than One and the like And indeed if the Spirit has vouchsafed to say of every ordinary Believer that he is one with God and Christ How glorious and indissoluble is the Union between God and a good King whom he vouchsafes to make his Instrument in the Delivering or Protecting of his Church So that the making of God and the King to be the Sitter on the Throne is so far from making two Sitters that he could not be a good King unless God were suppos'd to sit with him But were it not Idolatry in People to worship God by any Visible Representative of his sitting in the midst of them according to the description in Rev. iv where is one sitting visibly in the midst of the Throne with four 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or living Creatures and twenty four Elders round about him Answ As to the Vision there can be no Idolatry in that because it is but a Vision and
Reader It is therefore to me one of the greatest Wonders in the World that the Doctor who cries up the Apocalyps for a Book so throughly symbolical that he will by no means allow Hail-stones or Earthquakes to be interpreted literally See Par Proph. Chap. xlviii p. 444. should be here so stiff for the literal sense of opening the Seals of a Prophetick Book which as God would have it has no literal sense at all But certainly one would be surpriz'd who has heard to what a degree the Doctor both derides and pities R.H. of Salisbury Epilogue to Apoc. Apocalypseos p. 297. for doting on the literal sense of the Apocalypse to sind him caught in the same snare himself and become as zealous an R. H ian as the Gentleman he oppos'd even in a Type or Symbol which is never known to have been us'd in such a sense For a further Confirmation of the Sense of which Phrase I will instance but in one plain case which we have Dan. xii 4. where the Prophet is commanded to seal the Book even to the time of the end For if opening the Seals of a Book be no more than exposing the bare words without sense to view how can the Book of Daniel be said to have been sealed to the time of the end when the words of it have been visible from the time of his receiving them If you say That opening the Seals of a Book may signify only exposing the bare words tho not in that place of Daniel I desire but what is very fair That you would shew me then some other place where the Phrase signifies what you contend or else confess that you have err'd about it But if it could be shew'd which I believe can never be that opening the Seals of a Book is somewhere found to have a literal sense yet such a sense not only would be dissonant from the stile and genius of the Apocalypse but in the Vision we are now upon impossible to be true For in the literal sense the Seals were open'd by the Lamb in the presence of St. John 1600 Years ago at the time of his seeing this Vision whereas I have before manifestly proved this Vision to be a Prophecy of things that were to come to pass after From whence it follows that the Representations made to St. John in it whereof that of opening the sealed Book is the most insisted on of any are meerly symbolical and to be consider'd only as Images of those future things Moreover there are two other things which make the literal sense of the Seals open'd in St. John's time impossible One is That no such loud Proclamation was ever heard before that opening as is expresly said to have been made before the true opening of them Rev. v. 2. I saw says the Prophet a strong Angel proclaiming with a loud voice Who is worthy to open the Book and to loose the Seals of it And this Proclamation is represented as made in the hearing of all the World as plainly appears from the Return given in upon it in the next Verse viz. That no Man in Heaven in Earth or under the Earth was able to open the Book c. Whence we may certainly conclude that if no Man living in St. John's time did ever hear any such Proclamation made then was not that which is meant by opening of the Seals transacted in St. John's time For it seems very absurd to infer that no Man was able to open the Book because upon loud or publick Proclamation made no Man appear'd to do it if no Man then in being ever heard the Proclamation To this Dr. M. answers That the Proclamation was never made but only in Vision Par. Proph. Chap. xxxiv Resp ad prim And he there also gives this reason why it was not needful to be fulfill'd because the Vision is Dramatical i. e. in the nature of a Stage-play And he explains his Sentiments of the Vision yet more clearly Chap. xxi p. 189. lin 19. where speaking with respect to the Vision in Rev. iv v. he tells us that it is the priviledg of the Angelical Kingdom that they can exhibit Prophetical Shows or Plays when we Mortals can exhibit only Historical Ones So that according to this account the ivth and vth Chapters of the Revelation are a Play or Show exhibited by the Angelical Kingdom and for that reason there needs be no completion of them To this I reply 1. That I have prov'd those Chapters to be as much a Prophecy as any part of the Revelation can be prov'd to be and that from the clear Testimony of the Spirit himself who has prefix'd the Title of Things that must be hereafter to them 2. If Rev. iv v. be a Play that was really acted in Heaven I desire to be inform'd 1. Who acted the Sitter on the Throne and the slain Lamb which are the chief Parts in it The Doctor tells us Par. Proph. Chap. xxxiv about the beginning that by the Sitter on the Throne is meant God and by the slain Lamb Christ Jesus But it were absurd to say either that they act Plays or that any Creature acts their Parts Therefore the Vision is not Dramatical 2. It is manifest that those under the Earth by whom the Doctor on the place understands Wizards c. have a part in this Play too as may be seen Rev. v. 3 13. But none of the Angels in Heaven could have such a part put upon them therefore the Vision is not a Play acted by Angels but like other Visions prefigurative of things to come But now as to the reason why there needs be no completion of this Vision viz. because it is Dramatical this is so far from being a reason of it that if it were true it would be a good reason for the quite contrary For 1. How can this be a Prophetical Show or Play as the Doctor calls it if it be not to be fulfill'd in some real thing to come 2. It is the nature of all Plays to represent real things so far is it from all reason to imagine a Play acted by Angels to be only a Fiction as the Proclamation we speak of must needs be if it were never made nor to be made but only in the Vision 3. If the Vision of the Angel proclaiming needs not to be punctually fulfill'd as being a part of a Dramatical Vision since it is certain and confest by the Doctor himself that the Vision of the opening the Seals whereof that of the Angel proclaiming is part reaches to the end of Rev. xi It will follow that from the first mention of the opening of the Seals Rev. v. to the end of the whole Relation of it Rev. xi the Visions are Dramatical and therefore need no punctual Completion So that the Doctor has bestow'd a great deal of pains to little purpose in interpreting the Visions of the Book Rev. vi when it may be alledg'd that they were