A plain and easie calculation of the name, mark, and number of the name of the beast ... humbly presented to the studious observers of Scripture-prophecies, God's works, and the times / by Nathaniel Stephens ... ; whereunto is prefixed, a commendatory epistle, written by Mr. Edm. Calamy.

A plain and easie calculation of the name, mark, and number of the name of the beast ... humbly presented to the studious observers of Scripture-prophecies, God's works, and the times / by Nathaniel Stephens ... ; whereunto is prefixed, a commendatory epistle, written by Mr. Edm. Calamy.

Table of contents

Title page

To the Reader.

TO THE CONSCIENTIOUS READER, Whosoever he be, that hath a Minde given to him to calculate the Times, and to search into the sense of the most admired Book of the Revelation.

THE CONTENTS of the CHAPTERS Of the ensuing TREATISE.

§

A plain EXPOSITION OF THE Number of the Name of the Beast, Revel. 13. vers. 18. CHAP. I. Concerning the Profitableness, and the Use of the Discovery.

CHAP. II. Concerning the Possibility of the Discovery, and how that there are certain Demonstrative Principles to bring the Truth to light.

CHAP. III. That the Name of the Beast is not the word Lateinos, or any other Grammatical word; but the name is, The Universal Power and Headship of the Beast, immediately opposed to the Power, Dominion, and Headship of the Lamb.

CHAP. IV. Concerning the Number of the Name of the Beast; where it is shewed, That the Name or Universal Headship began publickly to be Established under the Emperor Phocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman, as the F•…th Metal Kingdome.

CHAP. V. That the Roman is the Fourth and Last Metal-Kingdom in Daniels Image; and the truth of this is proved against the Positions of Junius, Broughton, Piscator, Dr. Willet, and others.

Junius.

Answer.

Junius.

Answer.

Junius.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Mr Broughton.

Answer.

Piscator.

Answer.

Piscator.

Answer.

Piscator.

Answer.

Polanus.

Answer.

Polanus.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

Mr Hayne.

Answer.

CHAP. VI. That the Beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, is not from the time of Julius, or Augustus Caesar, or from any other vulgar Beginning; but precisely from that instant, when the Church of God came under the Dominion of the Romans, 60 years before the Birth of the Lord, and 666 before the going forth of the Decree, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all the Churches.

ARGUMENT I.

ARGUMENT II.

ARGUMENT III.

ARGUMENT IV.

ARGUMENT V.

CHAP. VII. The whole Process of the Discourse is repeated: That there are 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, to the setting up of the Name, or Vniversal Headship of the Bishop of Rome; And that this is the meaning of the Spirit in the Revelation, when he speaketh of the Name of the Beast, and of the Number of the Name.

CHAP. VIII. The Truth of the Interpretation is proved, from the remarkable Circumstances of the Text it self, Revel. 13. 16, 17, 18.

CHAP. IX. The Truth of the Interpretation is further confirmed, from the scope of the Seventeenth Chapter of the Revelation.

CHAP. X. A List of Fifteen Principles drawn from the main sense of the Prophecy, concerning the Beast, his Name, Mark, and Number; by the Position of which, the present Interpretation is established. Also, the several Expositions of Mr. Potter and other Writers, are brought to Tryall.

CHAP. XI. A brief Description of the Doctrine of S. Paul, 2 Thess. 2. And how he doth fully agree with the present Interpretation.

CHAP. XII. The Application of the whole: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made first, of those things t•…at are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.

CHAP. XIII. Concerning that which is Antichristian by Analogie and 〈◊〉.

CHAP. XIV. What those things are which are 〈◊〉 onely by the position of some Circumstances, as they are truly Christian by the position of others. The Conclusion of the whole.

CHAP. XV. Concerning th•…se things that are not Antichristian, •…ut are onely falsly so called by the Separation.

POSTSCRIPT.

§

[Page]

[Page]

A Plain and Easie CALCULATION Of the NAME, MARK, and NUMBER of the Name Of the BEAST. Wherein these three Points are declared: First, The Name (in the Apocalyptical style) is no other, but the Universal Headship of the Beast, opposed to the Name, Power, and Headship of the Lamb. Secondly, The Number, in the same style, is the Number of Years to the setting up of this Name or Headship; in which respect it is called, The Number of the Name. Thirdly, The Truth of the Exposition is cleared, by agreement of all Particulars, both in the Text, and in the whole Prophecy; and by the Event of things, a sure Interpreter of Prophecy.

Humbly Presented To the studious Observers of Scripture-Prophecies, GOD'S Works, and the Times, By NATHANIEL STEPHENS, Minister of Penny-Drayton in Leicestershire.

Whereunto is prefixed, A Commendatory EPISTLE, written by Mr. Edm. Calamy.

LONDON: Printed by Ia. Cottrel, for Matth: Keynton, at the Fountain; Nath: Heathcoat, at the gilded Acorn, and Hen: Fletcher, at the three gilt Cups in S. Pauls Church-yard, 1656.

To the Reader.

[Page]

[Page]

THat which one faith of the Book of Leviticus, Hier. in Levit. Quot verba, tot mysteria; quot syllaba, tot sacramenta. may be also truly said of the Book of the Revelation, That it contains as many Mysteries as Words, and as many Sacraments as Syllables. Hence it was, that Calvin, P. Martyr, Bucer, Melancthon, and Luther, profess, That they durst not adventure upon the Interpretation of it, because of the difficulty they found in it. Hence it is also, that so many, by adventuring into this Sea, have made Shipwrack not onely of their own Credit, but also of the Truth; and have rather revealed their own weakness, then the meaning of the Revelation. And yet notwithstanding, I dare not but much commend and incourage those that soberly, humbly, diligently and devoutly endeavor to finde out the meaning of this Book; especially when I consider that saying of the holy Ghost, Blessed is he that readeth, and [...] [...]they that hear the words of this Proph [...]y, and keep those things which are written therein.

[Page]Onely I crave leave to suggest, That whosoever will undertake to unfold these heavenly Mysteries, must carefully avoid three Rocks.

1. He must take heed of indulging too much to Fancy: For Fancy is not a sure Foundation to build Divine Interpretations upon. Many men have deceived themselves and others, by trusting too much unto the Luxuriancy of their Fancy. There is a learned man, that makes Eight Chapters (from the 4th to the 12th) to be Predictions of the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, &c. And he pleaseth his Fancy, making the Seals and the Trumpets to agree to this Conceit of his. But if those Visions were presented to Saint John in Domitians time, when he was Banished into Patmos (which was after the Destruction of Jerusalem) then surely this Fancy of his will prove a meer Dream and Delusion. Now that John was banished in Domitians time, and that he then had these Apocalyptical Visions made known to him, is the Opinion of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Eusebius, Hierome, and diversIren. lib. 2. c. 39. l. 3. c. 3. [...]us. l. 3. c. 23. Epiph. Haeres. 51. others. Indeed Epiphanius saith twice, That he was banished in the time of Claudius the Emperour: But Petavius, that Comments upon him, saith, That he was herein greatly mistaken. Paraeus saith, It was [...] Epiphanii, in putting down Claudius for Domitianus. Now to build such No [...]el Interpretations upon a Mistake of Epiphanius, must needs it self be a great Mistake.

2. He must take heed, that he doth not appropriate what is spoken in general concerning the Churches of Christ in the world, unto that particular Church and Nation in which he liveth. This hath been a common Error of many Interpreters. Hence it is, that a learned man makes one of the Angels that poured out the Vials, Rev. 16. [Page] to be Queen Elizabeth; another, The Lord Cecil, Lord Treasurer of England. Hence it is also, that we have been so much deceived in Expounding of the meaning of the two Witnesses, and of their eminent slaughter at the end of their prophesying in Sack-cloth: Every Nation, according to the several Persecutions which it hath been under, labouring to make the eminent slaughter of the Witnesses, to Syncronize with its sad condition. Some say, It is past: Others say, It is yet to come. And if I may be so bold as to interpose my judgement, I should conceive, That the latter of these two Opinions is the truest. For if what this Author not onely saith, but solidly proves, be true, That the Roman Antichrist did not arise till 606 years after Christ: And if Antichrist must reign 1260 years; and if this eminent slaughter must not be till toward the end of the Prophecy of the Witnesses: then it will necessarily follow, That it must be many years before this eminent slaughter will happen.

3. He must take heed, that he be not too peremptory in determining of Times and Seasons; especially of such times which are yet to be fulfilled. Our Saviour Christ saith,Acts 1. 7. It is not for you to know the Times or the Seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. And we finde by sad Experience, That they that have been most confident in defining the time when the Jews shall be converted, and when Antichrist shall be destroyed, have been wofully deceived. One learned man makes the Conversion of the Jews to be in the year 1650: But we have lived to see this bold Assertion confuted. Another will have it to happen 1655; but this also we now know to be false. Another, upon very weak grounds, concludes, That it will be in the year 1656. Another in the year 1665. Such peremptory Assertions and Conclusions, argue great confidence, but [Page] are built upon such weak Foundations, that in the issue it will appear, That they have deceived both themselves and others.

The Reverend and Learned Author of this ensuing Tractate, hath undertaken a great and difficult task; that is, To unriddle not onely the Name and Mark of the Beast, but also the Number of his Name: which he hath performed with so much Modesty, Humility, Industry, and Exquisite Care, that I am much assured, That whosoever will vouchsafe to read what he hath written, though it may be he will not accord with him in all that he saith; yet he will much commend his pains and learning, and bless God for the good he receiveth by it. It cost the Author (no doubt) a great deal of time to compose it: And it is pity that so much pains and study should not be exposed to Publick view. If Renowned and Learned Mr. VINES (to whom this Author was well known, and who had the perusal of this Work) were now alive, it should have had his publick Approbation: But he is now with God. And therefore give me leave in his stead (Christian Reader) to commend it to thy diligent perusal, and to accompany it with my Prayers to God, That that Holy Spirit which at first made known the Revelation unto Saint John, would reveal the meaning of it to thee, and me,

Your Servant in the Work of the LORD, Edm: Calamy.

TO THE CONSCIENTIOUS READER, Whosoever he be, that hath a Minde given to him to calculate the Times, and to search into the sense of the most admired Book of the Revelation.

[Page]

BEfore I come to the Body of the Treatise, it shall not be impertinent to remove a few prejudices in the beginning; and that I may the better be understood, briefly to shew the whole Patern of the Work. When the Spirit doth speak of the Name of the Beast, and the Number thereof, he doth insinuate, that every vulgar understanding is not fit for such a Computation: For, saith [Page] he, Here is wisdome; let him that hath understanding count the Number of the Beast, &c. Now I do not assume to my self such a peculiarity of wisdome above other men; for none hath greater cause to have the consideration of his own unworthiness to be set before him. But because I have had a long time a great inclination to the study of the Prophecies, to compare them with the stories of the Church; and finding the Lords blessing upon mine endeavors, I am the more willing to communicate that to others, which I have found to befor my private satisfaction. I may speak it with modesty, that I have spared no pains, to compare the whole Body of the Prophecy, Period with Period, Time with Time, Vision with Vision. I have perused many Commentaries, both of the Modern and Ancient Times; and used all means convenient for the discovery of Truth. And therefore, though in this kinde of Learning, I will not take it upon me to be [...], yet I may be [...] ▪ though I have not this wisedome, I do profess my self to be the lover and admirer of them that have it.

Now whereas it may be some prejudice, that in this Treatise mention is made of a Fifth Monarchy, and the Reign of Christ upon the Earth: I must needs acknowledge the truth of the Doctrine, rightly stated; but not as the Opinion of the Chiliasts, which doth ordinarily congregate with it, many Heterogeneal Falsities, and Unsavoury Errors. For though there may be cause to maintain the Reign of Christ upon the Earth; yet it is not necessary, to maintain his Visible and Personal Reign: And though there may be cause to defend the Resurrection of the Martyrs slain in all the times of the Beasts Kingdom; yet it is not necessary [Page] to defend their historical, literal, and corporal Resurrection at the beginning of the thousand years. And though with Mr. Brightman and Mr. Forbes, we hold the New Ierusalem to be the glorious state of the Church upon Earth; yet we are far from the riot of their Opinions, who hold that men shall live without Ordinances, without Sin and Misery, in those times.

But if it be further alledged, That they that are for this way, the very best of them have many absurdities: I answer, That Piscator, Alstedius, Mede, and some others, have but generally spoken of the thing, and have not descended to particulars. And as they have had great reason to depart from other interpreters: so have they used great moderation in managing the Point; leaving many things for the discovery of future times. On the other side, for the 1000 years, I would gladly know of them that differ, Where they will seat this period of time? If they will say, That it is the state of the Church in Heaven; then let them shew, what is the Battel of Gog and Magog; and how the Camp of the Saints, and the Beloved City, may be besieged in Heaven. But if they take it for the Reign of Christ upon the Earth; then they must necessarily come to admit one member in this disjunctive: They must say, Either this period of time is already past, or else it is to come: If it be already past; VVhere hath the Church enjoyed these years of her Felicity, and of her rest from Persecutions upon Earth? Adde moreover to all this, That the Reign of Christ for 1000 years, is immediately opposed to the times of the Reign of the Beast; and the Resurrection of the Martyrs, to their death that hath been in all Antichristian times: Those Souls are onely represented [Page] in the figure to live again, that were beheaded for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Iesus; that had not Worshipped the Beast, nor received his Mark, &c. If therefore we will rightly understand the meaning of these things, here is no Visible or Personal Reign, as some do imagine: But when the Gospel of Christ is set up as the Regent-Law among the Nations; then the Lord Christ doth take the Kingdome, and doth begin to Reign. And this (the Lords Name be praised) is begun already, by the Preaching of the Eternal Gospel by Luther and others, Rev. 14. 6, 7. For now whole Nations, Kingdomes, and Commonwealths, have set up the Faith of Christ, as the Religion of the State; when it was persecuted and trodden down before, by the Authority of the Bishop of Rome, and by all States and Governments that did own and submit to him as Head of the Church. And for the Martyrs, I conceive, That here is no li [...]eral and corporeal Resurrection of their Bodies: onely Iohn in the Vision and in the Figure, saw the Souls of them that were Beheaded for the Testimony of Jesus: And the times of the Antichristian Tyranny being ended, he saw their deliverance and emersion from under this kinde of death.

These things I thought good more largely to note, to take off the prejudice of the Millenarian Opinion. Meer necessity doth compel me to maintain, that which I conceive to be a truth of God: And if the matter were rightly stated, I believe here will be nothing found, that will cross the Analogie of the Christian Faith, the Authority of the Magistrate, and the support of the Publick Ministery; but rather it will establish all these things.

[Page]But to come a little more near to the main scope of the present Discourse: Seeing I take 666 to be the Number of years to the setting up of the Name of Universal Headship; in this, perhaps, they may be offended, that are against all Calculation of Prophetical Numbers. But for such a way in general, we have good ground from the Scriptures, both of the Old and New Testament. If any have gone too far in other Points, to determine to a particular year, before the Prophecy hath been fulfilled, and so have been mistaken; in the present case there cannot be the same suspicion of Falshood. VVhen we say, That 666 is the Number of years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast (in which respect it is called the Number of the Name) in this we are on the surer side; because the truth of the thing is already verified and made good, in the experience of the Church. And whereas all the Reformed Churches, and our late Assembly of Divines in their Confession of Faith, Chap. 25. Sect. 6. do place the formality of Antichristianism, in this, as the Bishop of Rome doth make himself Head of the Church, in the place of Christ, the true Head of the Church; and so consequently, is no other but a counter-Christ: In this we agree wi [...]h them; and it is the substance of the ensuing Discourse. And for a particular accommodation of the Text, we will proceed in brief, to shew what understanding we have of those passages that have layen in the dark so long. The Reader, perhaps, will be the better prepared to understand, when he shall have a short Description of the things that shall more largely be delivered afterwards.

First, for the Name of the Beast, the subject of [Page] the Number, I do not take it in the ordinary way, for Lateinos, or any such Grammatical Name: But the Name, in the sense of the Prophecy, is the Power, Headship, and Dominion of the Beast. If there had been a true discovery of the Name in this sense, I may confidently believe, That the Mysterie of the Number had not layen in obscurity all this while.

Secondly, for the time of the manifestation of this Name or Headship, the greater part of Protestant Writers, and in a manner all that have spoken of these things with any solidity, affirm, That it began solemnly, publickly, and by Authority, to be set up in the Decree, under the Emperour Phocas. This was the remarkable time of the rising of the two-horned Beast out of the Earth; and this we say is exactly 666 years, from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome. In which respect, the Number is called, The Number of the Name; that is, the Number that doth decypher, specifie and characterize the Name or Headship, in the most remarkable beginning and edition thereof.

But seeing the great Question will be, concerning the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome; Let us consider the whole Systeme and Body of these Kingdomes, and so proceed by Analogie.

The first is the Babylonian. Now if we enquire where this Kingdome did begin; Not from Nabonasser, not from any Babylonian King immediately ensuing, but from Nebuchadnezzar: For of him it is particularly said, Thou art this Head of Gold, Dan. 2. He first brought the Church of the Iews under the obedience [Page] of the People of Babel; and in him therefore we are to settle the beginning of the Babylonian, as the first Metal-Kingdome.

The second is the Persian. And here also if we examine when this Metal-Kingdome did begin; not simply from that time, when that people began to have a Form of Government; but from that time, as they began to exercise Monarchical Dominion in and over the Continent of the Church. This came to pass in the times of Cyrus; in him therefore the Persian doth commence, as the second Metal-Kingdome.

The third is the Grecian. And if we proceed in the same method, we must not generally and indefinitely look to the times when the people of Greece began to have Rule and Government among them; but when they began their Soveraign Dominion over the People of the Iews. Now this came to pas [...] [...] [...] times of Alexander the Great, who is [...] [...] in [...] particular sense, expresly called The first King, Da [...]. 8. 21. In him then we are to fix the true [...] and beginning of the Grecian, as the third Metal-Kingdome.

The fourth is the Roman. And if we proceed by the same Analogie, it will be easie to finde when that Nation did begin, as the fourth Metal-Kingdome: and here we must not reckon from the time of Iulius or Augustus Caesar, but from that time when the Roman Legions first entred Ierusalem; when they brought the Land of Iudea in subjection; when they erected their Government in those Countreys, which formerly did belong to the House of David; and when in their particular time, they did begin to exercise the [Page] same cruelty and hardness against the people of the Iews, as the Babylonians, Persians, and Grecians had done before, under each of their Empires respectively. Here we are to set the beginning of the Roman, as the fourth Metal-Kingdome. Now this came to pass 60 years before the Birth of the Lord, and 666 before the going forth of the Decree, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all Churches. And so we have the clear meaning of the Text, Let him that hath wisdome, count the Number of the Beast; and he shall finde, That the Number of his Name, Government, and Universal Headship, in the first Institution thereof, is 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome. And therefore 666 is rightly and Apocalyptically called, The Number of the Name. By this Character, the Church in the days of Iohn, and so downward, had they given themselves to subtilty of observation, in the discovery of the Prophetical times; by wisdome some of them, perhaps, might have found out the particular time of the rising of the two-horned Beast out of the Earth; and the time of the first visible appearing of this Name or Headship, set up in the greatest derogation to his Soveraignty and Dominion, that is onely Lord and Head of the Church.

There is one thing in the Text, which if it be attentively considered, will abundantly confirm the truth of the Interpretation. It is expresly said, Let him that hath wisdome, count [...], the Number of the Beast; [...], for it is the Number of a Man. Though there may seem to be great difference between these two; yet in the case we now speak of, they are but one and the same. For as Daniel numbreth the four great Empires and Revolutions of Time, by so [Page] many Regions, Parts and Divisions of the Body of Man: In which regard, it is called [...] The Number of a Man, Dan. 2. So he doth decypher the same Tyrannical Empires, and the same Revolutions of Time, by four great Beasts; in which respect it is called, [...], The Number of the Beast.

To my understanding, the Spirit doth as good as point with the finger to this way of Interpretation. For if it be a duty for him that hath wisdome, to count the Number of the Beast; the Question will be, What Rule shall he number by, that so he may finde out the Account? The Answer is plain, [...], It is the Number of a Man. Let him count by the changes of Empire, and by the Revolutions of Time in Daniels Image; And so the event doth fully answer the Prediction: for from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome, there are exactly 666 years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome.

Onely the followers of Iunius, such as Piscator, Polanus, Willet, Rolloc, Deodate, and others, will say, How can the Number take date from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome, when the Roman is no Metal-Kingdome, but doth begin at the end of all those Kingdomes? To satisfie my own understanding, and the understanding of others, I have bestowed the more pains, to try the force of their Arguments: for either we or they must greatly mistake in the Point. However, let it be true as they affirm, that not the Roman, but the Seleucian, is the fourth & last Metal-Kingdome; then all the Metal-Kingdomes must necessarily determine and expireat the destruction of [Page] the Seleucian. And so, according to the tenor of this Doctrine, we shall have that which will singularly agree with our way of Calculation. For if the account be made from the end of all four Metal-Kingdomes, from the terminus ad quem; in the same series and method of Computation, there will be 666 years to the setting up of the Name or Headship of the Bishop of Rome. And so we shall concord with the Principles of Iunius; and as to the Point in hand, he and we shall facere paria.

This is in brief the understanding which I have, both of the Name of the Beast, and the Number thereof. Now if any shall ask, What proof, or what evidence I have to hold forth the truth of the thing? I answer, The process of the Demonstration, is by Conglobation, and by a full Induction of Singulars; and it is this in effect: Where there is a true correspondence with all the Circumstances of the Text, the most remarkable Passages of the Prophesie, and the Event of things; that is a true Interpretation. But the present is such: Ergo, &c. All the burthen of proof will rest upon the Assumption. I have to this purpose applied it then to all the Circumstances of the Text, Chap. 13. I have compared it with the main drift and scope of the Spirit, Chap. 17. I have examined it by the tenor of the Apostles Doctrine, 2 Thess. 2. And last of all, I have shewed how it doth agree with the several passages in the body of the Prophesie, and with the event of things.

And now, Reader, whosoever thou art, that hast a minde given thee, rightly to calculate the Number of the Beast, I leave it to thee to reade, to meditate, to examine, and to judge of the things that I have written. [Page] If I have anywhere deviated from the Truth, I desire thy brotherly Admonition: And if anywhere it shall please the Lord, to make this Treatise an Instrument of light to thy understanding, know, That thou hast this Treasure brought to thee in an earthen Vessel, that the praise may be of God alone. And so I rest,

Thine in the LORD, N. S.

THE CONTENTS of the CHAPTERS Of the ensuing TREATISE.

[Page]

CHAP. I.

COncerning the Profitableness, and the Use of the Discovery, Pag. 1

CHAP. II.

Concerning the Possibility of the Discovery; and how that there are certain demonstrative Principles to bring the Truth to light, pag. 12

CHAP. III.

That the Name of the Beast is not the word Lateinos, or any other Grammatical word; but the Name is, The Universal Power and Headship of the Beast, immediately opposed [Page] to the Power, Dominion, and Headship of the Lamb, pag. 18

CHAP. IV.

Concerning the Number of the Name of the Beast; where it is shewed, That the Name or Universal Headship began publickly to he Established under the Emperor Phocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdome, pag. 36

CHAP. V.

That the Roman is the Fourth and Last Metal-Kingdome in Daniels Image; and the truth of this is proved against the Positions of Junius, Broughton, Piscator, Dr. Willet, and others, pag. 46

CHAP. VI.

That the Beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdome, is not from the time of Julius, or Augustus Caesar, or from any other [...]ulgar [...]; but precisely from that instant, when the [...] o [...] God came under the Dominion of the Romans, 60 years before the Birth of the Lord, and 666 before the going [...]orth of the Dec [...]ee, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head o [...]r all the Churches, pag. 116

CHAP. VII.

The whole process of the Discourse is repeated: That there are 666 years from the Beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdome, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome; And that this is the meaning of the Spirit in the Revelation, when [Page] he speaketh of the Name of the Beast, and of the Number of the Name, pag. 158

CHAP. VIII.

The Truth of the Interpretation is proved, from the remarkable Circumstances of the Text it self, Revel. 13. 16, 17, 18. pag. 165

CHAP. IX.

The Truth of the Interpretation is further Confirmed, from the scope of the Seventeenth Chapter of the Revelation, pag. 212

CHAP. X.

A List of Fifteen Principles drawn from the main sense of the Prophecy, concerning the Beast, his Name, Mark, and Number; by the Position of which, the present Interpretation is established. Also, the several Expositions of Mr. Potter and other Writers, are brought to Tryal, pag. 219

CHAP. XI.

A brief Description of the Doctrine of S. Paul, 2 Thess. 2. And how he doth fully agree with the present Interpretation, pag. 238

CHAP. XII.

The Application of the whole: Where mention is made first, of those things that are directly Antichristian, pag. 247

CHAP. XIII.

Concerning that which is Antichristian by Analogie and Reduction, pag. 251

[Page]CHAP. XIV.

What these things are which are Antichristian onely by the Position of some Circumstances, as they are truly Christian by the Position of others. The Conclusion of the whole, pag. 277

CHAP. XV.

Concerning those things which are not Antichristian, but are onely falsly so called by the Separation, pag. 291

§

[Page]

There are divers faults to be amended: some are lesser, which we leave to the courtesie of the Reader to pass by; others there are that do more notably mar and deface the sense: which we do desire that he will amend.

Page | Line | For | Reade
94 | 3 | briefly | fully
135 | 23 | be brought | be there brought
142 | 11 | in the fourth | is the fourth
ibid. | 27 | secret | sacred
185 | 29 | seventh Angel | seven Angels
193 | 20 | typical proof | topical proof
216 | 21 | Augustus | Angulus
229 | 12 | to that Government | in that Government

Some Hebrew words are not right printed, pag. 51, 101, 118, 153. The terms in the Conclusion of the first Argument, pag. 117. are misplaced. And so are the words in another expression, pag. 57. lin. 17, 18.

A plain EXPOSITION OF THE Number of the Name of the Beast, Revel. 13. vers. 18.
CHAP. I. Concerning the Profitableness, and the Use of the Discovery.

[Page]

BEfore I come positively to set down the meaning of the Number, and what the Holy Spirit doth hereby particularly intend, it shall be profitable to speak Two things: First, Concerning the Use of the Discovery: Secondly, Concerning the Possibility thereof.

For the Use: It is a matter of some Concernment, that I should treat of this in the beginning; first, out of respect to that Common Maxime, Let all things be [Page] done to Edification. I shall therefore endeavour to let it appear to the Christian Reader, how he may be builded up in the Faith, and how in this Argument he may have matter of Correction, Reproof, and Instruction in Righteousness. I shall do it the rather, because many, in these times, are preoccupated with prejudice. Paraeus in his Commentary upon the Revelation, and in the Preface of the Work, hath these words: Apocalypsin interpretari non est nodos aenigmatum omnium solvere, apices omnes a [...]u fodere, nihil omnino ignorare, vel quid Imago, quid Character, quid Numerus Nominis Bestiae, quid Bestia ipsa, &c. By this it is evident, what the forenamed Interpreter doth judge concerning these Points; to wit, The Beast, the Name, the Mark, & the Number of the Name. He taketh them to be but Punctilio's and Niceties in this kind of Learning. But saving the great worth of so judicious an Author, I shall now endeavour to make good the Contradictory to his Assertion, and shall prove these to be Points very Momentous, and much conducing to the knowledge of the whole Prophecie.

First, If you take the Book of the Revelation in the main Scope, it is for the most part carried on in the Description of the Kingdom of the Beast, in the time of the beginning and continuance of that Kingdom as it standeth in Diametral opposition to the Kingdom of the Lamb, and of his Saints. The Lord Jesus Christ, that sent his Angel of [...]et purpose, to sig [...]e to the Churches things that must shortly come to pass, [...]endeth a great part of the Prophetical Narration in the description of the Beasts Kingdom, and in the delineation of the Name, Mark, and Number; the essential Badges and Characters of the Kingdom. Therefore it must needs be a matter very behooveful to the right understanding of other parts of the Prophecie, to define in the beginning what is signified under these Em [...]ems, or typical Expressions.

Secondly, The holy Spirit speaking of the Image of the Beast, [...] Name, Mark, and the Number of his Name, [...] [...], That i [...] giving worship to the Image, and in [...] [...] [...] Mark, the great sin of the world hath consisted [Page] in these latter times, chap. 13. vers. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Now then if the great sin of the world hath primarily and chiefly consisted in these things, it is a most material Point to finde out what the holy Spirit doth mean by these symbolical and figurative expressions. I cannot mourn for a sin privately in heart, neither can I publickly reprove it in others, but I must first know what the sin is. But that this Idolatry may more fully appear, let us amplifie it by two Circumstances.

First, By the Circumstance of Place, where, and how far it hath been used. And here it is plain, in all the parts of the Dominion of the Beast, none may buy nor sell, but he that worshipeth the Image, and receiveth the Mark. He causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to be subject to his Laws. If you look to the Latitude of the Dominion, the Scripture speaketh of a very large and ample Dominion that the Beast hath. For the Nations were deceived, chap. 20. vers. 3. All the world worshiped the Beast, chap. 13. vers. 8. The Kings of the Earth did also agree to give their power to the Beast, chap. 17. vers. 17. Therefore the Dominion of the Beast must be very great: and by consequent, the sin must be an Oecumenical sin, practised in all the parts and precincts of so large a Dominion. Seeing also it is not the sin of one particular Nation, City, or Church, but in a manner the general and the common Apostacy of the times; therefore it is of great moment to be considered. The sin of Ieroboam is much spoken of in the Scripture, that it was a sin of departure from the true God, and that it continued long after his death: yet for all this, it was only practised within the compass of the Ten Tri [...]es, so long as they continued a Kingdom. But now the worship of the Beast, and the receiving of his Mark, have overspread all Nations in the Christian world; only there have been some faithful Witnesses which have stood for the Truth, and have been slain for the testimonies sake.

Secondly, For the Circumstance of time, how long shall it be that men must worship the Beast and receive his Mark? This must be in all the times of the Kingdom of the second [Page] Beast. For though I do not fully agree with Mr Mede (as may appear by that which I shall afterwards deliver) That the ten-horn'd & the two-horn'd Beast are exact contemporaries in all their times; yet in substance, and in the main, they are said to be of equal continuance. The time of the ten-horn'd Beast is 42 months, or 1260 prophetical dayes, or ordinary years. So then, some small proportion being deducted, this period will be the time also of the two-horned Beast, and of the worlds receiving the Mark and the Image which he made. Therefore seeing this sin shall continue many ages together, it behoveth us to make the more diligent search into the matter. Nebuchadnezzar set up a great Image, as the type of the Babylonian Majesty; he caused all the States of that Empire to come together to the Dedication of the Image; he commanded them all under pain of death to fall down before it: He had a note of distinction also, to discern between the worshipers of the Image, and those that refused that worship. Yet all this was done as it were in an instant of time. But for the Image of the Beast, set up in honour of the Roman Majesty; this hath continued many ages. Here all Nations, Languages, and People are required to worship: here is a penalty laid upon all that shall refuse to yield Obedience to the Command; and here is a mark to distinguish between those that are the Beast's, and those that are none of his. These Tyrannical and Idolatrous practises have continued, by the fore-appointment and counsel of God, for many generations. Therefore considering the largeness of the place, and the long continuance of the time that the world hath sinned, and doth yet continue sinning against Christ in these very things; we may conclude, That it is no nice curiosity to finde what is meant by the Beast, his Name, Mark, and the Number of the Name.

Thirdly, If we consider the grievous Judgements of God denounced against all those that worship the Beast, his Image, and receive his Mark in their Forehead and their Right hand, that they shall drink of the Wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture in the Cup of his Indignation: [Page] Also, that they shall be tormented with fire and brimstone, in the presence of the holy Angels and of the Lamb; and the smoak of their burning shall ascend for ever and ever, chap. 14. vers. 9, 10, 11. The learned Grasserus rightly observeth, That in the whole Canon of Scripture there is nowhere a more terrible judgement threatned, than that which is here denounced against the men that worship the Beast, and receive his Mark. And shall we account it but a curiosity, to finde out the meaning of Christ in these things, in which also the precious Souls of many thousands are so deeply hazarded, and that for ever, to their eternal perdition, if they repent not? Our Saviour fore-seeing the great Calamities that should befal the Church and People of the Iews at the Destruction of Ierusalem, had great tenderness of heart toward them. At the instant of his Suffering, he said, Daughters of Ierusalem, weep not for me, but weep for your selves, and for your Children: For the dayes are coming in which they shall say, Blessed are the barren that do not bear, and the Papps that never gave suck: Luk. 23. 28, 29, 30. Even so at this present day, though the friends and followers of the Church of Rome are the greatest Enemies that we have; yet nevertheless had we the heart of Christ, and did we see the greatness of their sin, and the grievousness of the wrath to come, we would have tender Affections towards them, we would mourn over them with many tears. But how shall we do this, if we our selves do not understand what this sin is, and what judgment the Lord will bring upon them for these things? Therefore it is no idle Speculation to meditate on this subject, which concerneth the sin of the world, and the great judgment of God because of the sin.

Fourthly, If we consider the special Cause of the Martyrdom and the Sufferings of the Saints, it was specially for these things. And therefore in the beginning of the Beasts Kingdom, and Edict was made, That all who would not worship the Image should be put to death, chap. 13. vers. 15. The Victory of the Saints also that stood upon the glassie Sea, mingled with fire, was of them that had overcome the Beast, [Page] his Image, Mark, Name, and the Number of his Name, chap. 15. v. 2, 3. At the beginning of the thousand years also, those Souls sa [...]e upon Thrones, and judgment was given to them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the Word of God, that had not worshiped the Beast, nor received his Mark. We may conclude then, That these were the special Causes of the Martyrs Sufferings in all the times of the Beasts Kingdom, and were the eminent object of their Victory and Crown in the end of the Kingdom. Now shall we think the knowledge of these things to be a nice Speculation? I think that there is nothing more seriously to be thought of; and I believe also that it is the minde of Christ, that we should so judge of the matter.

Fifthly, If we consider the object of the Vials, upon what kind of persons they are poured out. They are poured out upon a People that are distinguished by such Badges and Cognizances as these, That had the Mark of the Beast, and worshipped his Image, chap. 16. vers. 1, 2, 10, 13. Now then, if we would know what the Vials are, and wherein the justice of God doth appear in his pouring forth of them in these times (for these are the times of the Vials) it would be a Point very necessary and material to the opening of this Doctrine, to shew what is meant by the Image of the Beast, and the Mark of his Name: for the Vials, full of the wrath of God, have their several and respective operations upon these kind of men. Therefore it is no matter of light curiosity, to discover what these things are, and what kind of persons are deciphered and set forth under these Characters.

Sixthly, Considering the Promises that are made to the Church, That after the time of the Beasts Kingdom, then the Dragon shall deceive the Nations no more, chap. 20. v. 3. That wherein the Nations have been deceived, in all the times of the Beasts Kingdom, is in the matter of worshipping the Beast, in adoring his Image, and in receiving his Mark; as may appear, chap. 13. v. 13, 14. chap. 20. v. 3. Further, whereas it is said that the two-horned Beast did deceive them that dwell on the Earth, by the means of those [Page] Miracles he had power to do; Here we must not think that this deceiving of the Nations was only at that instant; but he hath deceived them, and doth deceive them, and will deceive them in all the times of his Kingdom. And it is particularly said of the Kings of the Earth, to wit, The deluded Kings, that they shall agree to give their Kingdoms to the Beast, till the words of God shall be fulfilled. When those times are once fulfilled, the Dragon shall deceive the Nations no more. For though he and the Beast are two, yet in this business they are but one. The Dragon deceiveth the Nations by the Beast, the Beast is the Dragons Vice-gerent in deceiving the Nations. When the Beast is destroyed, the Dragon also shall be bound up, that he shall deceive the Nations no more. If we descend to particulars, and enquire wherein the Nations have been deceived, the whole Scope of the Prophecie doth direct us to the worship of the Beast, and to the receiving of his Mark. It is no frivolous study then, to dive into the Sense, and to search into the Meaning of these things, seeing they are the subject-matter of such an universal Delusion. And who can tell when these things shall come to be more clearly known to the Consciences of them which have been formerly seduced? When they shall come also more perfectly and fully to know what the Spirit meaneth by the Name of the Beast, his Mark, and Image, and how they have greatly sinned against Christ in yielding to these things. Who can tell what a mean this may be of their undeceiving? We may probably suppose that the States and Governments of this world may more easily be brought off from their subjection to the Beast, when we shall define the true natural meaning of the Spirit, and lay the definition before the Conscience. In the great Controversies betwixt the See of Rome and other States, it is remarkable what the Champions of that Church do usually propound; they speak much of the stability of that Seat, grounded upon the Promise, Tues Petrus, &c. And in very deed, if we look to experience, how many Kingdoms, how many Churches in the East and in the West have totally perished, and have come to [Page] nothing, when that Church and See hath continued in the greatest Glory, and that for many Ages? Now this being laid as a Foundation, is not here great reason alledged to the Conscience, that the States of Christendom should yet continue their Obedience to the Catholick, Apostolick, Romane See, as they call it? None can deny but That Authority hath been wonderously and miraculosly preserved in all times, and in all changes of time. And for mine own part, I do openly confess, That to me it is a great wonder to see a State o [...] Government to continue so many Ages, and yet to abide one and the same still. But when I read the Scriptures, I find that the Roman Dominion, in the last and Antichristian Edition, must continue a long time, [...]o the admiration of the world. The Caesarean Majesty was to continue some good space of time; and that being cut off, the Antichristian is to be restored, as the wonder of the world. And therefore it is said, That all they whose Names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, shall admire when they behold the Beast, that was, and is not, and yet is, chap. 17. vers. 8. Now then, if we can make it appear what is the meaning of the Spirit in these things, when the Antichristian Kingdom began and how long it must continue; if we can shew what is meant by the Name, Mark, and the Number of the Name, and how all these are applicable to the universal headship of the See of Rome, and to the worlds living in subjection to that headship; if these things can be cleared (as by the Lords assistance I shall endeavour to clear them in the process of this Treatise) I hope that this will not any longer be accounted a fruitless inquiry, which may be the mean (under the grace of God) to redeem the Souls of men from such a thraldom. For, put case you have to do with such a one who placeth a great part of his Religion in yielding subjection to the universal headship of the Bishop of Rome; You shall do much toward his Conviction, when out of the Scriptures in general you shall be able to prove such an Obligation to be contrary to Faith in Christ. And this many worthy Writers have done already. Yet you shall do [Page] more, when out of this particular Scripture you shall be able solidly to prove the Profession of such an Allegiance to be the Mark of the Beast. If they that separate from our Church, and cite that Scripture, Come out of Babylon my People, would first define what Babylon is, and that the Church of England is the Babylon that St. Iohn speaks of, they would carry on their business more demonstratively and Apocalyptically. Till this be done, they do but beat the Air. The same Law may be given to us, when we charge the Roman Catholicks that they are such that receive the Mark of the Beast. To justifie the charge, we should define in the first place what the Beast, his Name, Mark, Image, and the Number of his Name do signifie; and when this is done, we should shew how these things do agree to the head-ship of the Roman Bishop. If there be no performance of this, how can we accuse them of a sin, and we our selves be altogether ignorant what that sin is? Therefore the right determination of these things is no trivial matter, as some imagine.

Seventhly, If we consider the Reign of Christ upon the Earth for 1000 years, to the better understanding of this, it is behoveful for us, first of all to know what is the Reign of the Beast over those that have the Mark, and worship the Image. For it is the Scope of the Spirit to set the Reign of Christ in immediate opposition to the Reign of the Beast. If therefore we can well understand the nature and manner of the Beast's Reigning over those that have his Mark, and worship his Image, we shall be the more able to see the nature of the Reign of Christ. For the knowledge of one contrary doth exceedingly conduce to the knowledge of the other, specially in that Point wherein the contrariety doth stand; and the contrariety between the Lamb and the Beast doth lie in the Soveraignty. Now for the clearing of this Truth, we can prove it from the Scope of the Prophecie, and from the coherence of the Visions. For in the former part of the Prophecie, from the beginning of the 13 chapt. to the end of the 19, it is the Plot of the Spirit to describe the Kingdom of the Beast in its first Institution, in the greatness of its [Page] power, in its cruelty against the Saints, in the time of its continuance, and in other Adjuncts of that Dominion. At the end of the 19 chap. he sheweth how the Beast is cast into the Lake of Fire; and when this is done, he beginneth to [...]peak of the Reign of Christ, and of the Resurrection of the Martyrs. From the whole Scope of the Prophecie it is evident, That the Reign of the Beast is opposed to the Reign of Christ for 1000 years: where the Beast doth make an end, at that instant of time the Reign of Christ doth begin; And where the death of the Martyrs is fully complete, there the Resurrection and emersion out of the Antichristian Death doth immediately ensue.

Now for the Consequents that follow the destruction of the Beast's Kingdom, Iohn tells us, I saw an Angel come down from Heaven, having the Key of the bottomless P [...]t, and a great chain in his hand; and he laid hold on the Dragon, and bound him 1000 years. Further, he did cast him into the bottomless pit, and set a Seal upon him, that he should deceive the Nations no more, chap. 20. vers. 1, 2. Now if the question be put, How, and wherein were the Nations deceived? I Answer, It was in the worship of the Beast, and in receiving his Mark: for it is mentioned in the two last verses of the former Chapter, That the false Prophet deceived them that received the Mark of the Beast, and worshipped his Image. When the Beast was destroyed, then the Dragon was bound up, and so an end was put to the deceiving of the Nations.

By all that hath been spoken, it is evident, That the Reign of the Beast in all his times, is immediately opposed to the thousand years of the Reign of Christ. Therefore, if we would know the nature of the Reign of Christ, in what manner he shall Reign upon the Earth, and how his Martyrs shall Reign with him; it is needful that we should understand what is the Reign of the Beast over those that receive his Mark, and worship his Image. It is needful also, that we should understand the whole Antichrisian time, to be the season of the Death, Sufferings, and Beheading of the Mar [...]yrs for the testimonies sake. When this time is ended, [Page] then there shall be a rising, or a standing up from this Death. The right stating of these things, will prepare the way for the discovery of the 1000 years. And for ought as I can discern, one chief reason wherefore we are so dark in the Apprehension, and confused in the Notion of the Reign of Christ, is this, Because we do not first Expound, and make cleer the Reign of the Beast, what it is, what his Name, Mark, or Image are, nor what is the Number of his Name.

These, and many other Reasons, might be brought to prove the Use and Profit of the Discovery. But to gather up all into one Sum: If any think these things to be a Nicety, [...]et them consider, First, That these are the distinctive Badges of the Beast's Kingdom. Secondly, That the great Sin of the Christian world for many Ages, hath been in worshipping the Image, and receiving the Mark. Thirdly, The grievous Judgements of God denounced against men for these things. Fourthly, The Cause of the Martyrs Sufferings, because they would not worship the Beast, nor receive his Mark. Fifthly, The object of the Vials; they are poured out upon a People distinguished by these Characters. Sixthly, The deceiving of the Nations in the matter of the Mark of the Beast, and the worship of his Image. Seventhly, The Reign of Christ upon the Earth; which will be the more demonstratively understood, by the right Stating of the Reign of the Beast [...]ver those that worship the Image, and receive the Mark. All these Considerations laid together, plainly shew the Use and Profitableness of the Discovery.

Now let us proceed to the second Point, to the Possibility thereof.

CHAP. II. Concerning the Possibility of the Discovery, and how that there are certain Demonstrative Principles to bring the Truth to light.

[Page]

THere are now living in these times many who think that there is no medling with this Prophecie, especially in the matter of the Beast, and the Number of his Name. But I would entreat all such, seriously to ponder in their own hearts, Whether by this Opinion of theirs, they do not secretly accuse the Lord Christ, either for want of Truth, or want of Wisdom. For what man of Truth will call that a Revelation, which is no Revelation at all? And what man of Wisdom will say, Blessed is he that readeth, and keepeth the words of the Prophecie, when there is no possibility to reade it so, as to understand? And particularly, Shall the Lord Jesus give serious warning to his Church and People? shall he shew them so long before-hand the great sin of the world, which shall consist in the worship of the Beast, and in receiving of his Mark; and when all comes to all, shall it be presumption to shew what is the meaning of Christ in these things? To what end were they Revealed, if there be no use of the Revelation at all? and there is no use, if it be so difficult that it cannot possibly be understood. It was a special part of Love in Christ, to send and signifie to his Servants, things that must come shortly to pass. But what part of Love is it, to signifie it in that manner, that they cannot possibly understand what he meaneth?

You will say, It was revealed to some Select ones. I grant that some of the Servants of Christ have a peculiar Gift to understand the Typical Expressions in this Prophecie (as every Member in the Church hath his peculiar Gift dispensed, [Page] to the edification of the whole Body) and therefore they are bound to lay out their Talent this way, for the common good. But what shall we say of them that account it curiosity in any whosoever, to meddle with these studies; and are absolutely for the concealing of these things from the People?

But if it be alledged, That Experience sheweth how they have been deceived, who have bestowed their pains in this kind of study:

I Answer; The same Experience plainly sheweth, That they who have come with a sincere mind to finde out the Truth, to study the whole Body of the Prophecie, to compare Time with Time, Vision with Vision, and the Prophecies with the Stories, have had a good return of their Labours. I may say, without prejudice to those that went before, That Bullinger in his time, Brightman in his time, Grasserus in his time, Mede in his time; each of these have made their several and respective Additions to the clearing of the Prophecie. If we endeavour to carry on the Work where they left it, at least with the same Industry and Fidelity, we may (by the blessing of God) be the instruments of bringing those Mysteries to light that were not discerned in former Ages. And for my part, I do firmly believe, That God will not cease to raise up such, in the times following, as shall clear the things that have layen dark in the Prophecies, and do yet remain hid to us. But for the present, because many think that the Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name are unsearchable Mysteries; let me lay down some Reasons to prove the Possibility and the Evidence of the Discovery.

First, The Name of the Beast, and the Number of his Name, are the Essential Characters of a State or Government obvious to the view of men. It is said of the Writings of S. Paul, that there are many things in them hard to be understood, 2 Pet. 3. 16. There may be good Reason given for this, to wit, The sublimity, and the spiritualness of the matter: for a Natural man, that hath no Experience in his own [Page] heart, how can he judge of the meaning of the Apostle, when he speaketh of the Life of the Spirit, of the leading of the Spirit, of the Comfort of the Spirit, of the putting off of the Old man, and the putting on of the New? When a man hath no experience, how can he understand these things that are so largely spoken of in the Epistle to the Romans? Now it is not so with the Name of the Beast and his Mark; these are the Badges of a Government obvious to the Senses of all men. If there be any difficulty, it lieth only in the typical and figurative way of expression.

Secondly, The Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name are the essential Characters of a State or Government which the Church hath had long experience of for many Ages. For the Monarchical Kingdom of Christ that shall be over Jews and Gentiles in the latter times, though there are many things spoken in the Scriptures concerning this Dominion, yet there are sundry passages hard to be determined, because the event hath not yet shewed the meaning of the Prophecie. Now there is nothing wanting, so far as it concerneth the event, to make known to the Church what is meant by the Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name.

Thirdly, The Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name, are such Characters, that the Church in Being hath the present Experience of. Many things are dark in the Old Prophets, because the Stories of those times are lost to us. The Jews could better understand the meaning of some Prophecies than we can. And I believe, the greatest Knot in Expounding the 70 weeks of Daniel, lieth principally in this, To shew precisely, and determinately, where that Number of Time doth begin. There is an excellent agreement between the Greek Historians about the respective times of the Kings of Persia: But the Knot lyeth in this, Rightly to determine who that Darius was in whose times the Temple was built, and the City repaired. This thing was better known to the ancient Jews than it is to us. But now for the Name of the Beast, the Mark, and the Number of the Name, there is [Page] not the like Reason of darkness in these, because they are in the present experience of men, and the Stories concerning these things are in recent memory.

Fourthly, The Name of the Beast, and the Number of his Name are again and again repeated in several parts of the Prophecie upon sundry occasions. And therefore though one text be dark and obscure, it may be made more clear by comparing it with parallel places. In the Description of the Vintage, we reade that blood came unto the horse bridles a thousand and six hundred furlongs, Rev. 14 20. Now, so far as I apprehend, it is hard to shew what is the Number of Furlongs, seeing no other text doth speak of the Number. But for the Name of the Beast, and the Number of his Name, these are spoken of in divers texts, and therefore we have greater helps to understand the meaning of them: And therefore if this text by it self be hard to be understood, yet it may be made easie, being compared with many other places.

Fifthly, The Name of the Beast, his Mark, Image, and the Number of his Name are so repeated, that their Repetition is in another place, and another manner; and this conduceth very much to the cleering of that which is obscure. The Four Monarchical Kingdoms are somthing darkly set forth under the Type of the Four Metals. To help this matter, the holy Ghost repeateth them again under the Similitude of Four Beasts, chap. 7. Even so, the two-horned Beast that came out of the Earth, which exercised all the power of the tenhorned Beast in his presence, is somthing obscurely delivered, chap. 13. Now, to remedy the Obscurity, the Holy Spirit delivereth the same matter in another manner, chap. 17. There is the same delineation for the substance of the matter; but there a Woman is said to ride a Scarlet-coloured Beast, full of the Names of Blasphemy. Therefore by the Name of the Woman, or the whorish Church, we may finde out the Name of the Beast: Seeing these are so many several forms of Expression of one and the same matter.

Sixthly, The Name of the Beast, and the Number of his [Page] Name, are directly opposed to the Name of the Lamb. It is well observed by Modern Expositors, That in the whole Body of the Prophecie there is a direct Antithesis and Contraposition betwen the Lamb and the Beast; the Kingdom of the Lamb and the Kingdom of the Beast; the followers of the Lamb, and the followers of the Beast: those that have the Name of the Father written in the forehead, and those that have the Mark of the Beast. Therefore, if we can understand what is meant by the Lamb, and those that have his Fathers Name written in their foreheads; we may by these be guided to the knowledge of the Beast, his Name, Mark, and those that have the Number of the Name.

Seventhly, It is expresly said in the Text, Let him that hath Understanding, count the Number of the Beast, &c. These words imply that the matter is not so unsearchable, but by diligent and narrow enquiry, he that hath wisdom may finde out what these things are, and what they signifie. We read of the Number of the 144000 that were sealed in their forehead, chap. 7. But there is no mention made of any such thing, that he that hath Wisdom should count the Number of the sealed ones. The Elect of God, that stand out for his truth in all the times of Antichrists Kingdom, are peculiarly known to himself who they are, and what they be: and therefore he doth not require of any man to finde out the meaning of this Number. But when he speaketh of the Beast, his Name, Number, and the Mark of his Name, the will of the Lord Jesus is, That every man is so concerned, that he should endeavour to find out the natural and genuine sense of these Typical Expressions. And whereas it is said, Let him that hath Wisdom, count the Number of the Beast; the meaning is this, That they that have a peculiar dexterity given them of God, to compare the Prophecies and the Stories together, should do their endeavor to bring the truth to light for the publick good. If any be of that judgement, That this is a Secret that is impenetrable, let him shew the meaning of that Phrase, chap. 17. vers. 9. There the same Expression is used, Here is the Minde that hath Wisdom: the [Page] seven Heads are seven Mountains on which the Woman sitteth. Now all the world knew, or might know, that this is the City of Rome: but because the seven Hills are Parabolically set forth by seven Heads; there is some kinde of wisdom to be used to shew the meaning of the Expression. And so in the present case, when the Spirit speaketh of a Beast, his Name, Mark, and Number, all the wisdom here required, is, to render these things plainly and nakedly, which the Spirit doth decypher Mystically and Figuratively. Now then, to Collect all together into o [...]e Sum: 1. Seeing the Name of the Beast, and the Number, are the Characters of a Government obvious to the senses of men. 2. Seeing also that the Church hath had long Experience of these things. 3. Seeing the Churches Experience is in fresh and recent Memory. 4. Seeing that these Characters are again and again repeated in several places of the Prophecie. 5. Seeing they are repeated in a various and different manner. 6. Because there is an immediate contrariety between the Beast and the Lamb; the Name of the Beast, and the Name of the Lamb. 7. Because the Word it self saith, That it is the duty of him that hath wisdom to calculate the Number. All the forementioned Reasons do plainly shew, That these Matters do carry Demonstration in them; and that there is a possibility to finde out the Name of the Beast, and the Number thereof. And though many, both in these, and in former times, speak of such things, as the ancient Geographers did of the Unhabitableness of the Torrid Zone; yet as Experience hath shewed, that these Regions are well Inhabited; and though the Heat of the Sun be very great, yet there are many Helps for Habitation: So in like manner, though in the present case the Holy Spirit useth a dark and a figurative way of Expression, yet we should not despair of a true Discovery of these Mysteries. Rather, we should consider the many Helps which the Lord hath afforded us to finde out the certainty of his meaning, when he speaketh so seriously to the Churches.

There is a wide Difference to be made between that [Page] Knowledge which is built upon Opinion and Tradition, and that true Scientifical Knowledge founded upon the cleerness of Demonstration. This in the General all will confess; but when we come to Singulars, we are not so prompt to make the Distinction as we should. For it cometh to pass, that in some Subjects, which might be Demonstratively handled, many times we Converse but Probably, and Topically: And that which is more to be considered, in Demonstrative matter, we many times content our selves with a bare conjectural Knowledge, and go no further. So in the present case, touching the Beast, his Name, Mark, and Number, men do only take up with a Topical Knowledge: yet I am perswaded, if they would look to the Principles laid down in the whole Bodie of the Prophecie, they would finde that here is a certain Demonstration to be had, and that they need not go to literal Names, to numeral Letters, to Anagrammatisms, and to such-like uncertainties.

Thus I have passed through the two Prooemial Points: The First, Concerning the Profit and Use of the Discovery: The Second, Concerning the Possibility thereof; and that there are true Principles of Demonstration to Discover the meaning of the Spirit. Now I will come to the Body of the Treatise.

CHAP. III. That the Name of the Beast is not the word Lateinos, or any other Grammatical word; but the name is, The Universal Power and Headship of the Beast, immediately opposed to the Power, Dominion, and Headship of the Lamb.

FOr the carrying on of the whole Work, we will divide the Matter into Two Parts; into that which is Doctrinal, [Page] which concerns the Truth of the thing; and into that which is Practical, which is for Use.

For the Doctrinal Part, We will First handle the Substance of the Interpretation. Secondly, We will prove it by sundry places of Scripture, and by the Harmony of the Prophecie.

For the Truth of the Interpretation, We will First shew what is meant by the Name: Secondly, What is meant by the Number of the Name.

For the Name, It is most necessary that we should begin with the Exposition, what it signifieth: For the right Stating of the Name doth much conduce to the Knowledge of the Number. It is the Number of the Name; and therefore unless we shew what the Name is, we cannot finde out the Number. All true Learning sheweth, That in every Demonstration we are to begin with a right Exposition of the Subject.

And whereas, in a manner, all the Learned, down from the times of Irenaeus, have taken Lateinos for the Name, and the Numeral Letters for the Number of the Name; Herein they have been greatly deceived, as we can prove by many solid Reasons. And some of our own Interpreters also have suspected the vanity of this way. These are the words of Iunius, in his Notes upon the Revelation, Chap. 13. vers. 18.

I am not ignorant (saith he) that men bring other Interpretations of the place; but by their leave, I also have brought my Interpretation to be compared, and that for this reason, specially because to me it seemeth not probable, nor like, That the Number of the Beast, or the Name of the Beast ought so to be taken as the common strain of Interpretors will have it. For (saith he) this Number of the Beast, he (scil. the Beast) teacheth, giveth, and imprinteth, as the publick Note of his own; which Note he highly rateth above others, as the Note of his beloved Ones. Now these Interpretations seem to be so far wide from the Propriety and Condition of this Number, whether we respect the Name Latinus, or Titan, or any such like. For these the Beast doth not teach, give, nor imprint; but with the greatest care forbiddeth them to be [Page] taught, and boldly denieth them. He doth not allow, but disallow them; and those which do so esteem of this Number, he doth persecute with a direful hatred. So far Iunius. Let us now adde the words of Chamier, in his Panstratia, Tom. 2. lib. 17. cap. 8. sect. 5, 6. Truly (saith he) this way of Interpretation (that I may speak freely what I think) seemeth to be far wide from the manner of the Spirit, and to come too neer to the dreams of the Cabalists. Whereas we read in the Sybils Verses, That Iesus is described by 888, this is a bable, and not from the Spirit of God. Secondly, This cannot be the proper Name of one Man, seeing we have formerly shewed the Error of them who will have Antichrist to be one Individual Person. Therefore of necessity it must be either a Name common, or a Name proper to some State: But by what right may the Name of the Beast be called common? and for a Name proper to some particular State, no man hath brought that to Light. Thirdly, It is not said that it is the Number of the Name only, but here is a prohibition to men, That they shall not buy nor sell, that have not the Number of the Name. How this may be understood of that Cabalistical supputation of the Letters, I cannot discern: Neither can I discern how other men may have the Number of the Name. Farther, What is the way of Computing? Is it Hebrew, Greek, or Latin? But it is not the manner of the Latines to count by Letters; therefore it must be a Greek or an Hebrew Name. But how can Antichrist assume such a Name to himself, that is only peculiarly known in the Schools? So far Chamier. I might here recite the words of Danaeus, Mr Forbes, and others; but these Testimonies shall suffice to take away prejudice from me, because I do forsake the ordinary stream of Interpreters, and do look after such a Name of the Beast which is more true. The Work which I have more specially to perform, is positively to prove, That the Name of the Beast is the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome; and by the same Reasons, by, and through which I will disprove Lateinos, I will prove the Universal Headship to be the Name of the Beast. And the Reasons are as followeth:

First, I argue from the main Scope of the Text concerning [Page] the Beast as he is a Monarchical King: and here I say, his Name must necessarily be his Sovereign Power and Headship. The Rabbins have a good Observation, What God himself is, that his Name is. So I may say, What the Beast himself is, that his Name is. The Beast, not only in this Text, but all the Prophecie throughout, is described as a Monarchical King; therefore the Name of the Beast must be his Universal Power and Headship.

Object. Seeing the Name of a thing, person, or State, is of so doubtful a meaning; what warrant is there to take the Name of the Beast for his Sovereign Power and Headship?

Answ. I confess, That the Name of a thing, person, or State, is ambiguously taken. But yet for all this, it is not so Obscure, if we will take the right course to understand the Scripture.

Inst. You will say, The great Question lieth in finding the right course.

Rep. The right course lieth in this, By looking to the main sense in each text respectively; and the main sense will guide the Interpretation.

Let us come to give some Instances out of the Scripture, but more specially out of the Book of the Revelation.

For Instances out of the Scripture; VVe often read of calling upon the Name of the Lord; of trusting in the Name of the Lord. Now is not the calling upon the Name of the Lord, the calling upon God himself? the trusting in the Name of the Lord, the trusting upon the Lord himself? This doth make good that former rule, What the Name of God is, that God himself is. And so by way of Opposition, what the Name of the Beast is, that is the Beast himself. If he be described as a Mighty King, we have cause to take his Name for his Monarchical Power and sovereignty.

Secondly, We often reade in the New Testament of believing in the Name of the Son of God, &c. we do not then look to the Name Jesus, or the Name Christ, as though there were any Vertue or Efficacy in the Letters and Syllables of these Names; but in this case, the sense of each Scripture must [Page] govern. And therefore when the Apostles do Exhort us to believe on the Name of the Son of God, in their sense we are exhorted to believe on the Lord Christ, for pardon of sin, for help in temptation, and for supply in all our wants. We must not look to Letters and syllables, but to the main sense of each Scripture. In like manner, when we reade of the Name of the Beast, and the Saints overcoming his Name, Mark, and the Number of the Name, we are not here to look to the word Lateinos, or any such Grammatical Name; but, according to the sense of the Prophecie, the Name must be taken for the Potency of the Beast, as he is Opposed to the Lamb.

But let us come more largely to shew some particular Instances out of the Book of the Revelation, where the Name of a thing, person, or state is to be expounded, according to the Analogie of the text.

We read that there were with the Lamb 144000, and that they had their Fathers Name written in their Forehead, chap. 14. vers. 1. Now these 144000 are set in direct Opposition to the followers of the Beast; and their Father's Name written in their forehead, is contradistinct to the Mark of the Beast in the forehead, and the right Hand. Now here, s [...]th there is mention made of the Name of the Father, and of his Name written in the forehead of all the followers of the Lamb, shall we think therefore that it is made out of the Alphabet, or that it is a literal Name? Not so: we must look here to the main scope of the text, and accordingly we must render the meaning of the words. They that have their Father's Name written in their forehead, are such who in all the times of Antichrist had consecrated, dedicated, and given themselves up to God the Father, to live in subjection to his Commandements, and to take him as their sovereign Lord; this was the Badge of their outward Profession. By the rule of Opposition, they that had the Name of the Beast were such as did resign their Obedience to him, as to their sovereign Lord: And the submission to this Lordship, was the Badge and Livery of their outward Profession: this is clear from the scope of the text.

[Page]Further, We read chap. 2. vers. 17. To him that overcometh will I give a white Stone, and in the Stone a new Name written, that none can read but he that hath it. Now what is here meant by the Name written? shall we say that it is a Name consisting of Letters and syllables? If we so affirm, we shall have as good foundation for such a Position as they who take Lateinos to be the Name of the Beast. But this is to trifle in a serious matter. Therefore we must have recourse to the forementioned Principle, to wit, The scope of the text. When the Lord Christ promiseth to give to him that overcometh a white stone, and in the stone a Name written; this is nothing else but the inward testimony of the Spirit, by, and through which he sealeth extraordinary Consolations to his Martyrs and Witnesses, in the middest of their sufferings, under the tyrannical States and Governments of the world. Many worthy Expositors take this for the seal of the Spirit that followeth Justification, as may be seen in several late Treatises. But I take it, That the Promise in the text, and so commonly through the whole Prophecie, is immediately made to him that overcometh in the times of Persecution: And therefore these things do more immediately concern the Martyrs; the in-coming of Christ into their hearts, and the divine Consolations which they feel in the Name written, which none can read but they that have it.

Let us go to the meaning of that Promise, Rev. 3. 12. He that overcometh will I make a Pillar in the Temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the Name of my God, and the Name of the City of my God, which is the new Ierusalem, which cometh down from Heaven; and I will write upon him my new Name. In these words, when the Lord Christ promiseth to him that overcometh, That he will write upon him the Name of his God; doth he intend here a writing by Letters and syllables? This cannot be. But, according to the scope of the place, this is the meaning of Christ, That they that overcome, shall have this peculiar testimony given into their hearts, That the Lord is theirs, and that they are his.

[Page]Further, Whereas it is said, I will write upon them the Name of the City of my God: By this he doth mean The true Catholick Church, represented Rev. chap. 21. The scope of the words is this, That he will inroll them into the Number of Citizens, and count them as Members of the true Church, his Mystical Body. And for the truth of the Interpretation, we do chiefly build upon the scope of the text.

But now let us go to other Scriptures, where usually the Name of a thing is taken according to the Analogie of the text. It is said concerning the Church of Sardis, Thou hast a few Names which have not defiled their Garments, and they shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy, Rev. 3. 4. Here then, when it is said, Thou hast a few Names; shall we understand this to be meant of Grammatical Names? This cannot be. The drift of the text is concerning the persons of men and women which did not defile themselves in the times of general Pollution. And so at the destruction of Rome Antichristian, there was a great Earthquake, and there were slain of the Names of men 7000, chap. 11. vers. 13. Now for the Names of men, shall we understand Names consisting of Letters and syllables? What a kind of slaughter would this be? According to the scope of the text, and the manner of the Hebrew expression, we may say, That such a Number of persons were slain in the Earthquake. Adde moreover to this, That the Beast which did carry the Whore was full of the Names of Blasphemy, chap. 17. There is none so void of understanding to imagine, That the Spirit speaketh of such Names that do consist of Letters and syllables. We must here go to the sense of the text which speaketh of his Blasphemy against God. And so the matter is expounded, Rev. 13. He opened his mouth in Blasphemies against God, to Blaspheme his Name, his Tabernacle, and them that dwell in Heaven. These, and the like places laid together, do plainly shew, that the scope of the text must circumscribe and limit the signification of the phrase so often used in this Prophecie. Now if it be so, according to this tenor, we may say, That the Name of the Beast must be expounded according to the Analogie of [Page] the text. His Name then can be no other but his Universal Headship, as a Counter-Christ, emulous of the Dignity of Christ.

But to go to further Instances, we do reade that the deluded Kings were all gathered together into a place called in the Hebrew Harmageddon, Rev. 16. 16. Much ado is made by Expositors about the meaning of the word. Some take it for the Mountain of Delights. Some, for the Hill of the Gospel. Some think there is an Allusion to the slaughter of Iosiah in the valley of Megiddo. And there is a great Difference among them. But for my part, I do believe there can be no other meaning but this, to wit, The destruction of a Troope, or Company: and my Reasons are these; First, It is expresly said, That the Name of the place in the Hebrew is called Harmageddon; that is, The destruction of a Troope: and this Exposition is given by Grasserus, and others. Secondly, That which moveth me so to think, is the subject matter of the text; For the unclean Spirits like Frogs did gather the deluded Kings to Battel, and they brought them into a place called Harmageddon, which in the event proved the place of their destruction. It is well known, That it is the manner of the Hebrews to give Names to several places, in testimony of some famous Actions that have been done in them. And it is as evident, that the Spirit in this Prophecie doth perpetually follow the Hebrew stile. As in the times of the fifth Trumpet, when the Locusts came out of the bottomless pit, they had a King over them, whose Name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon; and in the Greek is Apollyon, chap. 9. Now this Trumper, Mr Brightman, and Mr Mede, do rightly apply to the times of the Sarazens. And because they did in great multitudes everywhere overspread the Territories of the Church, they are therefore compared to Locusts. Now for the Name of their King in the Greek or Hebrew tongues, we are not here so much to look to Letters and syllables, as to the sense of the figurative expression. Mr Mede then, in his Commentary upon the Revelation, doth seem to me to be too Cabalistical, when he doth descant upon the Names of some [Page] Kings formerly amongst the Arabians. We are not to trouble our selves with Letters and syllables. Mahomet is the Head, or King of these Locusts, or rather the Devil acting in, and by him. And too sad experience doth shew that his Name is called in the Hebrew Abaddon, and in the Greek Apollyox. For what is Mahometism, but the waster and destroyer of the Christian Faith? The Name doth answer the nature. In the times of the third Trumpet, we reade, That a great star fell into the third part of the Rivers, and the Name of the star is called Wormwood. Interpreters upon the place do not look so much to a literal star, but it is so called Effectivè, from the Effect, or Operation. By these, and many other places, it is evident, when the Spirit speaketh of a Name, Thing, Person, or State, he doth not aim so much at the bare formality of Letters and syllables, as at the scope of the text. Upon these grounds, if the Beast be a King, or Potentate, his Name is not a Grammatical Name; but, according to the scope of the place, it must necessarily denote his Kingly Power, and Headship.

Let us come to a place mentioned in the Old Testament, which hath been greatly mistaken by the Jewish Rabbins, and by some others; the words are these: The Lord said to Moses, I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, by the Name of God Almighty; but by the Name Iehovah I was not known unto them. Exod. 6. 3. Here great ado is made by the Rabbins aforementioned: they speak much of nomen Tetragrammatum, of the word of four Letters, of the difficulty to pronounce that Name, and of bables more than too many. And what is the reason of all this? they look superficially upon the outward Letter, and neglect the main sense and scope of the place. The main sense is this, That God appeared to Moses, by the Name Iehovah, by, and through which, he did give Existence and Being to his Promises. And yet we are not to take it absolutely, as though the Lord did no way appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob by that Name. This cannot be. We are therefore to take the words in a restrictive meaning, in respect to that particular Promise, that he would [Page] give the Land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed for a Possession, G [...]n. 15. 13, 14. Now in this particular sense, God did not appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, by the Name Iehovah; they never lived so long to see the performance of this promise. They did not see the end of the 400 years Bondage, not the Deliverance out of Egypt, as Moses did. The Lord only did appear to them by the Name of God Alsufficient; they might believe that he was able to perform what he promised. In special relation then to this particular Promise, the Lord saith to Moses, By my Name Iehovah was I not made known to them. If this be so, what a wild race have they run, who have looked only after a Name consisting of Letters and syllables, and have not observed the Truth of God in the performance of his Word? What is this, but to make a Fable of the most important and comfortable Promises that be; to neglect the substance, and to catch at a shadow? And the ground of all this is chiefly from hence; they look to the out-side and shell of a figurative expression, and neglect the natural sense of the text, which in this case should principally rule. In like manner, they who are for the word Lateinos, or for any such like Name, must needs digress as much from the Truth. For it is not to be imagined, that the Name of the Beast is meerly a Name consisting of Letters and syllables; neither can the Mark of the Beast be the Mark of such a Name, according to the sense of the text, and the Analogie of the Prophecie. The Name of the Beast therefore, must be his Universal Power and Headship; and the Mark of the Name, must be the publick Profession of subjection, allegeance, and devotion to that Name, or Headship. And this is clear from the several Instances fore-alledged, where the Name of a person, of a state, of a thing, is alwayes taken with correspondence to the text. But if it be alledged, That it may be so taken in this place for Power and Headship, but it is not absolutely necessary that we should build upon such a sense: I Answer; The Name of the Beast must necessarily be construed and taken for his Power and Headship; because, as a Potentate, he doth confront the Lord [Page] Jesus Christ, the true Head of the Church: this is the scope of the Prophecie, and therefore the Name of the Beast cannot rationally and fairly be taken in any other sense. Paraeus, in his Commentary upon the Romans, doth open the meaning of these words; As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God, Rom. 14. 11. From the misunderstanding of this place, he telleth us, That the superstitious bowing at the Name of Jesus had its first original. And he doth shew the irrationality of that practice: For why (saith he) should men be uncovered? and why should they bow their knee at the Name of Iesus, rather than at the Name of Christ, or at the Name of God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Further, He doth insist upon the greatness of their superstition, when men give worship to Letters and syllables, rather than to the Person himself. And therefore he cometh positively to define what is meant by the Name of Jesus. And so he saith, Nomen Iesu non est vox d [...]ssyllaba, scripta, picta, aut pronunciata; sed persona, Majestas, & imperium Serv [...]toris, cui omnes subjectionem debent. The Name of Iesus is not a word of two Syllables, written, painted, or pronounced; but it is the Person, Majesty, and Dominion of our Saviour, to which all do owe Subjection. So I may say in the present case, That the Name of the Beast, and the Number thereof, is his sovereign Power and Authority, to which all his V [...]stals do yield their subjection; and they have departed from the true meaning of the Spirit, who have looked to the Name Lateinos, and the Numeral Letters of that Name: For the Name is not a word of one, two, three, or four syllables, written, painted, or pronounced; but the Name of the B [...]ast is his Power and Headship, standing in immediate Opposition to the Name or Headship of the Lamb. But if you ask, What certainty there is of this Interpretation? The ground I build upon is the rule of Opposition, and the whole scope of the Prophecie. If we take the Name for a Grammatical Name, what certainty can there be, and who can particularly define what the Name is? Doctor Mayer upon the place, having rejected several Names, and their Calculation by [Page] Numeral Letters, doth thus determine; As long (saith he) as we go this way to work, we shall never be able to Convince the Adversary, there being so many Names that do contain the Number. And for my part, I do believe, That if men will peruse the Greek and Hebrew Lexicons, they shall find many words, which either severally, or joyntly, will make 666, by the calculation of the Numeral Letters. Now, what certainty is in all this? On the contrary, If we take the Name of the Beast for his Universal Power, this doth agree with the Circumstances of the text, with the Analogie of the Prophecie; and there can be no good exception to the contrary.

Now to gather up all into one Sum: Though the Name of a Thing, the Name of a Person, the Name of a Place, the Name of a State, or any such-like, may be ambiguors; yet we may finde out from the scope of the text, that which will determine the ambiguity. If any shall say, That the Name of the Beast may be taken for any thing else as well as for his sovereign power; I yield that it may be so: but if we look to Analogie in the Scripture, it must needs be taken for his sovereignty. As therefore in the like cases, when the Scriptures speak of believing in the Name of the Lord, of the writing of the Name of the new Ierusalem, of the Name of the Lamb, of the Name Abaddon, Apollyon, Harmageddon; of the Name of the Father in the foreheads of the 144000; of the Lords making himself known to Moses by the Name Iehovah; of the Fathers giving to the Son a Name above every Name, that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow: As in these several Scriptures we are not to look after Names consisting of Letters and syllables, but to judge of the Truth according to the scope of the text; So, in the present case, we are not to look after such a Name of the Beast that is meerly literal, but after such a Name that will hold correspondency with the subject matter of the text, and with the nature of the thing it self. If this be so, it is easie to conclude, That the Name of the Beast is no other but his Potency or Headship.

Secondly, We argue from the Condition and Quality of [Page] the Mark. For as à priori we may come to the knowledge of the Mark by the right stating and defining of the Name: So à posteriori, by the knowledge of the Mark we may come to understand what is meant by the Name; seeing that it is called the Mark of the Name: They shall be tormented day and night that receive [...], the Mark of the Name, Rev. 14. 11. I finde that many approved Commentators, who do much differ from the Truth of our interpretation, do willingly agree, That the profession of a Roman Catholick is the Mark of the Name. Now, upon their own grounds, do they not affirm also in sense and substance, That the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome is [...], that Name of the Beast? For what is the profession of a Roman Catholick? Is he not such a one that doth believe, receive, and profess the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome? Take away the Catholicism of the Roman Bishop, the Faith and Profession of a Roman Catholick will be a meer non-ens, or nullity. So then, if this Profession be the Mark of the Name, (as Grasserus, Brightman, Piscator, and other Expositors will have it) I say, upon their own grounds, the Universal Headship must be the Name it self, seeing the profession of a Roman Catholick is [...], the Mark of the Name. And so our Conclusion is proved à posteriori. From the Condition and Quality of the Mark, we may know the nature of the Name.

The third Argument is drawn from the Image, which is Homogeneal and answerable to the Name, in the nature and essence thereof. For the Image of the Beast, I might take it as a thing already sufficiently declared in the Commentaries of the Protestant Writers. In them, it is nothing else but that Expression of the ancient Splendor and Glory of the Roman Majesty, anciently decayed in Rome Imperial, and in the latter times repaired and revived in Rome Papal. The scope of the text sheweth that this is the meaning, and that the Image was made to the Beast which was wounded in one of its Heads, &c. Now then let us say, That the Roman Majesty revived again from the dead, that this is the Image, [Page] how shall the Name Lateinos, or any other such like Name consisting meerly of Letters and syllables, be answerable to such an Image as this? What Equipage or Correspondence can there be between quid nominis, & quid rei? Shall we once imagine that the repair of the Roman Majesty in these latter times is only of a Name that consisteth of Letters and syllables, and such like elements of the Greek and Hebrew Alphabet? Away with such a conceit. But if you take the Name for the Universal Headship, you shall have a Name truly correspondent to the Image and to the Mark. For when the Decree went forth, that the Bishop of Rome should be Universal Head of the Church, then was the ancient Roman Sovereignty repaired in the Popes, which was formerly lost in the Caesars. Here both the Name and the Image are equivalent each to other, and do differ only in a certain consideration. And the Mark also agreeth with both the former, seeing it is but the publick profession of subjection to that Name or Power.

The Fourth Argument is drawn from the Antithesis or Contraposition of the Name of the Lamb to the Name of the Beast. By the description of one Opposite, we may finde out the Nature of the other. For the Name of the Lamb, it is described, Revelation, chap. 19. vers. 16. He hath on his vesture, and on his thigh, a Name written; King of Kings, and Lord of Lords. Here then, in this Scripture, we do not look after a literal Name, but after his Power or Sovereignty, as he is Lord or Head of the Church. We reade also, Phil. 2. 9. Because he humbled himself to the Death of the Cross, God highly exalted him, and gave him a Name above every Name, that at the Name of Iesus every k [...]ee should bow, &c. Here many in darker times have taken this for a literal Name; and therefore it hath been a great use to bow the knee when the Name of Jesus was mentioned. But the ground of the mistake is this; They have not looked to the main scope of the text, and the Nature of the Expression. For the Name in the text is not the word Jesus, consisting of Letters and syllables; but the sublime Power, Authority, Headship, Dominion, and [Page] Sovereign rule, that God the Father did give to his Son after the suffering of Death. And this is so expounded by the Apostle himself in another place; Which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in heavenly places; far above all Principalities, and Powers, and Might, and Dominion, and every Name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come. And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the Church, Eph. 1. 20, 21, 22. Therefore the Name is no other but the Sovereign Power that God the Father did give to his Son the Lord Jesus, as Head of the Church. By the rule of contraries then, the Name of the Beast must needs be his Universal Power and Headship, seeing in all respects he is emulous of the Dignity of the Lamb. By the Nature of the one, we may understand the Nature of the other contrary. If the Name of the Lamb be his Sovereign Dominion, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords; the Name of the Beast, ex adverso, on the other part, must be his Universal Headship over all Lords, and Kings, and earthly Dominions.

The Fifth Argument is drawn from the parallel and resemblance with the Name of the Whore. It is a good Observation of some Modern Interpreters, That the State or Government described chap. 13. under the Type and Similitude of a Beast with two Horns, is again more largely repeated under the resemblance of a Woman, riding upon a Scarlet-coloured Beast, R [...]v. 17. Now seeing there is such a parallel between the descriptions in both Chapters, as to the substance of the matter, let us then more diligently consider what is meant by the Name of the Woman: Upon her Forehead was a Name written, Mysterie, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots, and the Abominations of the Earth, vers. 5. Here, I think, none will be so void of Judgement as to look after a literal Name, and a literal Inscription in the forehead of the Woman. The Name is no other but that Universal Maternity, or Motherhood (as I may so say) of her that professeth herself the Head, or Mother-Church of all the Christian world, but is indeed, and in truth, the Mother of all the Abominations [Page] and Idolatries of the Earth. In like manner, when we reade of the Name of the Beast, we are not to look after a literal Name, (as Lateinos, and the like) but his Nam [...] must be his Universal Paternity, Fatherhood, Power, and Dominion. By the Analogie of one Expression, we may [...]e out the meaning of the other. If the Name of the Great Whore be not a literal and syllabical Name, but in the figure doth only denote her general Motherhood; so proportionably, the N [...] o [...] the Beast is not a literal Name, but in the Trope i [...] [...]oth only signifie his Universal Dominion, and Authority.

If we transfer Matters to Experience, we shall finde the eve [...] of things doth fully Answer these Characters of the Prop [...]ecie. It hath been a general received Maxime, in many Ages together, That out of our Holy Mother, the Church of Rome (as they call it) there is no Salvation to be had; she is the Mother of all true Catholicks, with them that are her Admirers. But in the Scripture-language she is called Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots, and the Abominations of the Earth. So it hath been as generally received, That all are bound to submit to the Authority of our Holy Father the Pope. But this in the Scripture-language is the Name of the Beast, and the Mark of the Name. I think it is not done without the special Wisdom and fore-knowledge of God, that these two things (in which the Christian world should erre so greatly) should be set forth with such remarkable Characters, to draw the admiration of all that read. But leaving these things for a deeper enquire, it is sufficient for my present purpose, to note, that the Name of Mystical Babylon is not a literal Name, but the general Motherhood of that City and Church. So the Name of the Beast, by way of parallel, is not a literal Name, but it is the Universal Headship of the Beast, as Lord and Potenta [...]e.

The Sixth Argument is drawn from the Ground and Reason of the Imperial Edict, chap. 13. vers. 16, 17. He causeth all both small and great, bond and free, to receive a Mark in their Forehead and their right hand; and that none might buy nor sell, [Page] but he that hath the Mark of the Name. Now then, if the Name be a Title or Appellation, that consisteth only of Letters and syllables, how will this redound to the benefit or perfection of the Beasts Kingdom; if men of all Degrees and Orders shall receive a Name, meerly consisting of Numeral Letters and such-like trifles? But if you take the Name for the sovereign Power and Headship, there is nothing more rational and common, than for the Kingdoms of this world to make Laws that all should live in subjection to their Power and Authority. And Experience plainly sheweth, That in all the Kingdoms of the Christian world, stricter Laws have been made for the Preservation of the Dignity of the Catholick, Apostolick, Roman See, (as they call it,) and for the maintenance of the Decrees made by that Authority; than there have been for the support and Defence of their own Communities. Among many, take this one Instance, of the Statute Ex Officio, made here in England in the times of Hen. 4. In which Statute it was provided, That all they should be Burned publickly in the sight of the People, that did maintain, teach, inform, openly or in secret, any thing contrary to the Catholick Faith, and the determination of the Holy Church. And so in the times following, by vertue of this Law, the faithful Martyrs, under the Title of Lollards, have been publickly burned for speaking, preaching, writing, and declaring against the Decrees and Superstitions established by the Authority of the Church of Rome. And it is as plain, That neither the Scripture, nor any Article of the Creed, nor any other Point of the Christian Faith is received among them, but that which is warranted by this Authority. From whence we may easily collect, what is meant by the Law and Injunction of the Beast, That none might buy nor sell, but such only that had the Mark, and the Number of the Name. We are not to take the Name Alphabetically; For, to what end should he command men to receive such a Name as this? But if you take the Name for the Universal Headship, and the Mark for the publick owning of subjection to this Headship, there is great Reason given for the making of such [Page] a Statute; and it is fully proved by the event.

The Seventh Argument is taken from the Essence of the great Antichrist, as he is set forth 2 Thess. 2. For the Pith and Marrow of the Apostle, in this description, is to express the great sublimity of Power that the man of sin should assume to himself, in and over the Church of God. These are the words of the Text; He as God, sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God, vers. 4. From these words we may gather, the Essence of the Antichristian Kingdom lieth in the affectation of a kind of godlike Dominion and Headship, in and over the Church of God. Now then, as the [...]on of God hath merited of his Father to be only Head, and only Lord: So must our subjection be rendered to him without communicability of such a prerogative to any other▪ For though there be gods many, and lords many, there is but one Universal Head, on whom the whole Body of the Church doth depend. In this sense, as the Son hath merited of the Father to be the Supreme Lord, and Head; there is none de jure can be, but himself only. Now then, when Paul in the Thessalonians doth describe the Essence of the Beast's Kingdom, he doth shew that it doth chiefly confist in the Headship and Dominion over the Church. And this is that which Iohn in the Revelation calls the Name of the Beast.

And so far we have gone in the Discovery of the Subject of the Number: We have shewed by many Reasons, That the Name is The Headship of the Beast.

Now we shall in the next Chapter endeavour to Calculate and Compute the Number.

CHAP. IV. Concerning the Number of the Name of the Beast; where it is shewed, That the Name or Universal Headship began publickly to be Established under the Emperor Phocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman, as the F [...]th Metal Kingdome.

[Page]

FOr the carrying on of this Complicate Proposition, we are to make Two things clear: First, That the Name, or Sovereign Dominion of the Beast, began precisely at that time of the Universal Headship under the Emperor Phocas. Secondly, That there is a C [...]in of 666 years from the begining of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal Kingdom, to the Name, or Universal Headship afcre [...]aid.

First, Concerning the E [...]sion of the two-horned Beast out of the Earth, I find a great consent in the Commentaries, Controversies, and Stories of the Church, That the Two-Horned Beast began in the Universal Headship under the Emperor Phocas. Crackan [...]orp, in his Treatise against Spala [...], calleth it the C [...] one of the Building. And in very deed, though many Authors do stiffly maintain, That the Name is the word Lateinos, and that the Number is made out of the Numeral Letters of that Name: yet if you put them upon it to state the Original of the Beast's Kingdom, they do generally in a manner pitch upon the year aforesaid. But we will not depend upon Authority. Therefore to the right computing of [...]he true Apocalyptical time, we will Observe these ensuing Principles.

Principle 1. There must be some particular instant of time when the Antichristian state, Typed by the Beast with Two Horns, had its first visible rising out of the Earth. This is proved from the words of the Text: And I beheld another [Page] Beast coming out of the Earth, and he had Two Horns like the Lamb, and he spake as the Dragon, Rev. 13. 11. And therefore, as there was a certain and determinate time, when the Babylonian Lyon, and the Persian Bear came up out of the Sea; that is, As there was a certain time when the Babylolonian and Persian Monarchies began: so there must be a particular and certain term of time, when the Antichristian Monarchy must come up out of the Earth also. If this be well observed, it will cut off a multitude of super [...]luous Di [...]putes concerning the Infancy, Childhood, Middle age, and other degrees of the Antichristian state. In these points every man may abound in his own Fancy; but sure I am, according to the true Apocalyptical process, there is mention made but of one visible and remarkable beginning of the Two-Horned Beast: And this is at the time of his rising ou [...] of the Earth.

Princ. 2. Secondly, The time of the rising of this Beast must be after the dissipation of the old Empire, and the beginning of the Ten Kings, Typed and Figured by the rising of the Ten-Horned Beast out of the Sea.

There are Two Branches in this Principle.

The First is this, That the time of the beginning of the Two-Horned Beast must needs be placed after the Fall of the Empire. This is clearly proved from the Scope of the 13 and 17 Chapters of the Revelation. Both these Scriptures do pitch upon this, that there must be a taking away of the Imperial Majesty, and a kinde of Chasm, or Intercision of that sovereignty, before the Roman Dominion in the last, the re [...]aired and Antichristian state thereof. In the 13 Chapter it is said, That the Ten-Horned Beast had a wound in one of his heads, vers. 3. What is this wound, but an intercision or cessation of all Roman Majesty in the world, at the rising of the Ten Kings? The Two-Horned beast by his De [...]es did cure the wound, vers. 14, 15. What is this cure, but the renovation of the same Sovereignty in the Popes, which was formerly lost in the Caesars? So in the 17 Chapter it is said, That all the world worshipped the Beast; When they beheld the [Page] Beast that was, is not, and yet is, v. 8. What is meant here, by the Beast that is not? This noteth the total cessation & abrogation of the Roman Majesty at the Fall of the Empire. And, by the Beast that is; This [...]eth the re [...]ing of the Roman Majesty from the Dead, when it was formerly lost in the Caesars. Both Scriptures then do plainly shew, and so doth S. Paul in the Thessalonians, That the Empire must first Fall, before the Antichristian times can begin. They therefore that set the beginning of the Beast's Kingdom at the time of Victor, or at Constantines removing the seat of the Empire to Constantinople; or at the Reign of the Emperor Iul [...]an, or at any other time before the Fall of the Empire: To my understanding they do anticipate the true beginning of the Beast's Kingdom, and do go against the Grounds and Foundations of all true Apocalyptical learning.

The Second Branch of this Principle is this also, That the time of the beginning of the Beast with Two Horns, must be after the rising of the Ten Kings, or the Ten-Horned Beast out of the Sea, chap. 13. vers. 1. For, though the antient Commentators take the first Beast to be the Old Empire, yet the latter Interpreters, (such as Brightman, Peraeus, Mede, and others) do more rightly understand this to be the rising of the Ten Kings out of the ruines of the Empire. And in very deed, if we consider the time of the Beginning of this Beast, it was presently and immediately after the Dragons Flood, scil. after the Inundation of the Barbarous Nations. Secondly, The Manner of the Rising. The Beast had Ten Crowns upon his Horns at the time of his Rising out of the Sea, which noteth the Division of the Roman into Ten inferiour Kingdoms, in that notable change of State. Thirdly, The time of his Continuance. He was to continue 42 Months; and this is the exact time of the Sufferings of the Church under the Antichristian Persecution. These, and many such-like Reasons, do strongly prove, That the Beast with Ten Horns, and his rising out of the Sea, doth Note and decypher, The standing up of the Ten Kings out of the Ruines of the Empire. And here then, The beginning of the [Page] 42 Months, the time of the Reign of this Beast, is set forth by a true Demonstrative Character; and we may not doubt of the certainty thereof.

Further then, If we look to the scope of the Text, the rising of the Beast with Two Horns must needs be after the rising of the Ten-Horned Beast; and so consequently after the standing up of the Ten Kings out of the Ruines of the Empire. And so the Visions will be rightly applyed to their true times. I know nothing of moment which doth contradict this Assertion, but only that which is spoken by Mr Mede in his Apocalyptical Key, Synchronism the second: Where he endeavoureth to shew, That the Ten-horned Beast, and the Beast with Two Horns, are exact Contemporaries in all their times. These are his words; A se invic [...]nt neque ortu suo, neque interitu separantur: quinetiam altera alterius potestatem [...], hoc est in praesentia ipsius administrat. And then he concludes, Quis non vidit illas omni aevo suo necessariò contemporare? But saving the great respect I bear to this Author, I cannot see, first, how this can agree with the scope of the Scripture: Secondly, With the event of things: Thirdly, With the Tenor of his own Doctrine, as he delivereth it elsewhere: Fourthly, With the Body of the best Protestant Expositors, who have spoken most Pro [...]atively concerning the beginning of the Beast's Kingdom.

First, I cannot see how he agreeth with the Scripture. For Iohn saw first a Beast come out of the Sea with seven Heads and ten Horns, and ten Crowns upon his Horns; and after that he saw another second Beast which came out of the Earth with Two Horns. From whence we may easily collect, That the rising of the one, is in order of time before the rising of the other: and therefore they no not ad amussim contemporare ortu suo, they do not exactly agree in the time of their Original.

Secondly, I cannot see how he agrees with the event of things. For at that time, when the Ten Kings arose out of the ruines of the Empire, there was no Roman Sovereignty [Page] in the whole world. For, as we have formerly mentioned, The Beast had a wound in one of his Heads; and therefore there was an intercision and a cessation of that Potency for a time. We yield that the Two-Horned Beast is the Restorer of the Ten-Horned Beast; he cured the wound, and made the Image to speak, and live. It is true, that he revived the Roman Sovereignty from Death to Life: but this reviving was not assoon as the Ten Kings rose out of the Ruines of the Empire.

Thirdly, I cannot see how this agreeth with Mr Mede's own Doctrine: For he saith, Apost. pag. 83. That the Fourth Beast is the Roman Kingdom; the Ten Horns are the Ten Kings that arise out of the dissipation of the Empire; and the little Horn he saith expresly that it must arise after them, pag. 74. For so he will have the Chaldee word to be all one with [...] of the 70; to wit, That the little Horn must arise behind the Ten Horns. Now then, if the Papacie must arise after, and behind the Ten Kings, it is plain, That he doth contemporate with them ortu suo, in his beginning; and that according to Mr Mede's own Principles.

Fourthly, I cannot see how he can agree with the Body of the best Protestant Expositors, who have demonstratively written of the beginning of the Beast's Kingdom. For, as many almost who have spoken of the rising of the Two-Horned Beast out of the Earth, have applied this beginning to the Bishop of Rome, in the times after the Fall of the Empire, when the Decree went forth, That he should be Head over all the Churches.

All the Circumstances of the Text laid together, prove the truth of this Interpetation. We come now to the Third Principle.

Princ. 3. The time of the rising of the second Beast must be so stated, That all the circumstances of the Text may agree to such a beginning. We must not leave the times of the Fall of the Old Empire behind, and so going forward, apply the rising of the Two-Horned Beast to what times we please. No: There is some particular instant of time when the Beast [Page] rose up out of the Earth, when his Name or Universal Headship began. And thi [...] must needs be at the Decree under the Emperor Phocas, when it was determined, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all Churches.

So then, if we lay these Three Principles together; First, That the Beast had a determinate Beginning of his Kingdom. Secondly, That this determinate Beginning was after the Fall of the Empire. Thirdly, That it was after the Fall of the Empire in such times when the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome began first publickly and solemnly to be established. If we put all these Three together, we shall inevitably pi [...]ch upon that time when the Decree went forth, That the Bishop of Rome should be the Head over all Churches. For if we look to the Stories, we shall find, that presently after the Fall of the Empire, the Bishop of Constantinople was to have equal Priviledges with the Bishop of Rome, by the Decree of the Council of Calcedon. Nay further, The Bishop of Constantinople was in a fairer possibility for the Universal Headship than was he of Rome. Only then in the time under the Emperor Phocas the Decree was Enacted, That the Bishop of Rome should be the Head of all Churches. And from that time downward, this hath been a Priviledge perpetually annexed to that Chair. And so then we have the true beginning of the rising of the Two-Horned Beast out of the Earth. And it is rightly and Apocalyptically applied [...]o the times, by the Position of the Three Principles aforenamed.

But here Bellarmine and Baronius deny, That the Universal Headship began in the time of the Emperor Phocas. For, saith Bellarmine, Phocas did not Ordain this by way of a new Institution, but only by way of Declaration of a thing ever before Acknowledged in the Church. In Answer to this, Mornay in his History of the Papacie telleth us, That all Historians down from that time, as Paulus Diaconus, Freculphus, Rhegino, Anastasius, Sabelli [...]us, Blondus, Pomponius Laetus, and others, agree in this beginning. Progress. 22. pag. 118. And for Baronius, he saith, An. 606. Therefore what did Phocas [Page] bestow upon the Roman Church? Nothing truly: Only he did Declare by his Sentence, That the Name of the Oecumenical Bishop was unlawfully Usurped by the Bishop of Constantinople, when it was due, Romanae tantum Ecclesiae, only to the Roman Church. I cannot but admire at the boldness of this great Annalist, that he should go so palpably against the Stories of the Church, and against some chief Records of their own. For if we look a little before, in the times of Gregory the Great, we shall finde that there was a sharp contest betwixt him and the Bishop of Constantinople about the Primacy. For Iohn the Fourth, sirnamed the Easter, Bishop of Constantinople, did begin to assume the Title of Universal Bishop about the year of the Lord 580, 26 years before the matter was determined for the Bishop of Rome. He was the more imboldened to do this, because he saw the Seat of the Empire established at Constantinople, and the City of Rome besieged by the Lombards: And consequently the Bishop of that City brought to a low ebb. Now these attempts of the Bishops of Constantinople, they of Rome did most strongly oppose, but none more than Gregory the Great, as may appear by sundry passages in his Epistles at this very day. In them we find everywhere, that he doth strongly Dispute against the Name and Title of Universal Bishop; and doth say in effect, That it is the Name of the Beast. He doth again and again inculcate, That the Title is new, prophane, contrary to the scope of the Gospel, and the Use of the Church. And whereas Bellarmine and Baronius have this creep-hole, that he did only inveigh against the encroachments of the Bishop of Constantinople; he doth again and again repeat, That none of his Predecessours did ever use such a prophane Title: Nullus decessorum meorum hoc tam profano vocabulo uti consuevit, lib. 4. Epist. 80. But that which is most to our purpo [...]e, he doth everywhere place the formality of Antichristianism in the Universal Headship. And they that affect so to be called, he doth expresly term them the praecursors and fore-runners of Antichrist. To let pass all others, we will recite those words of his, as they are in his sixth Book and thirtieth Epistle to [Page] the Emperor Mauritius; Consider (saith he) that when Antichrist shall call himself God, the matter it self is but small and frivolous, yet most pernitious: If you look to the quality of the word, it consisteth only of two Syllables; but if you regard the weight of iniquity, the matter is very great. For I may boldly say, That whosoever calleth himself, or desireth to be called by others, The Universal Priest, or Bishop, is in his elation of minde, the forerunner of Antichrist. In elatione suâ Antichristum praecurrit. Because in like pride he preferreth himself before others. And in his Fourth Book, Epist. 34. he writeth to Constantia the Empress: Be it far (saith he) that your times should thus be defiled with the Exaltation of one man: and then addeth, In hâc ejus superbiâ quid aliud nisi propinqua ja [...] Antichristi esse tempora designatur? By this Arrogancy what else is portended, but that the time of Antichrist is now at hand? And more fully to Iohn himself, he useth these words, lib. 4. Epist. 38. Tu quid Christo, Universalis scilicet Ecclesiae capiti, in extremi judicii dicturus es examine, qui cuncta ejus membra tibimet conaris Universalis appellatione supponere? What wilt thou answer to Christ, the Head of the Universal Church, in the tryal of the Day of Iudgement, seeing that by this Name Universal thou seekest to inthral the Members of his Bodie to thy self? And that which maketh more to our purpose; he telleth him, That the times concerning the coming of Antichrist begin to be fulfilled, and that there is [...]ow a performance of the Prophecies. Omnia enim quae praedicta sunt fiunt: Rex superbiae prope est, & (quod dici nefas est) sacerdotum est praeparatus exercitus. All Prophecies begin now to be fulfilled, and (that which I dread to speak) the King of Pride is at hand, and an Army of Priests do attend him.

Now for these, and such-like passages between Gregory and Iohn of Constantinople, I cannot think otherwise of them, but that they did happen by the singular Providence of God, to excite the world to look after the Revelation of the man of sin. For, as when our Lord Christ was born at Bethlehem, there was a hurly-burly in Iudaea; the star appeared, the wise men came to Ierusalem, and the whole City was troubled; [Page] What was the end of God in all this, but to stir them up to attention, to look after the Messiah, of whom so much was sooken in the Prophecies? So in the like case, many things being foretold in the writings of the Apostles concerning the coming of Antichrist, when that time should begin to draw near, the Lord was pleased to suffer such a dust to be raised between Constantinople and Rome, to rouze up the spirits of men to examine those things which were foretold in the Scriptures.

In the Book of the Revelation, there is much spoken concerning the Name of the Beast, and the Mark of the Name: Now when this Name or Headship was come to the beginning thereof, Gregory did plainly declare, That the formality of Antichristianism did consist in this Title, and that the Man of sin was then at the doors. And I wish one day his sayings do not strongly witness against all his Successors, who with one joynt consent, down from the year of our Lord 606, have appropriated this Title to themselves, to the great dishonour of Christ, the true Head of the Church.

But if they alledge, That the Bishop of Rome is only a Ministerial head, as Christ's Vicar;

To this I Answer, However they may evade by subtilty of words, indeed and in truth, they have taken for many Ages together the Dignity of Christ, and have made him only the titular Head of the Church. For is it not clear by the Stories, That all doth depend upon the Authority of the Romane See? The credit of Scripture, the interpretation of Scripture, the making of Laws, the abrogation of divine Laws, and all things in a manner have depended upon the Authority of the Roman Bishop. What he would, he hath set up; what he would, he hath plucked down: And when all this is done, is he only a titular Head? Indeed and in [...]uth, the Headship of Christ hath been made but a cypher: and the words of Gregory have been found too true in the event. But for the passages out of him, two things are briefly to be observed:

First, If we go to the 600 years immediately after the [Page] birth of Christ, there was then no Oecumenical Bishop. For though the Man of sin had gone very far, and had made many progressions in the Mysterie of Iniquity; yet the Authority it self was not publickly established in all that time: If it were so, we may believe that Gregory would not have inveighed against that Headship, as he did.

Secondly, In the year of the Lord 606, the Decree was Enacted, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all Churches; which Dignity the whole Succession have enjoyed now above this 1000 years. And that which Gregory did call Antichristian in others, that all his followers have assumed to this very day. Therefore Thuanus, in his 67 Book, doth speak very pithily; Phocas Bonifacio tertio insignes Episcopi Universalis titulos, quos nuper Gregorius in Iohanne Constantinopolitano improbaverat, prolixè attribuit. Phocas did largely ascribe to Boniface the third, those eminent titles of Universal Bishop, which Gregory did lately inveigh against in Iohn of Constantinople.

Now then, to gather all into one sum, we may see how the Prophecies and the Stories of the Church do agree: First, That the two-horned Beast had a determinate time when he rose up out of the Earth. Secondly, That this time is after the rising of the ten-horned Beast, or the ten Kings, out of the ruines of the Empire. Thirdly, It is to be applied to such a time only when the Name and the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome began publickly to be set up. All these three laid together, do necessarily bring us to the Decree of the Headship under the Emperor Phocas. And so we do Conclude, that this is the Number of the Name of the Beast, as it is mentioned in the Prophecie.

Now by what Accompt the Number is 666, we will shew in the Two Chapters following.

CHAP. V. That the Roman is the Fourth and Last Metal-Kingdom in Daniels Image; and the truth of this is proved against the Positions of Junius, Broughton, Piscator, Dr. Willet, and others.

[Page]

FOr the carrying on of our matter, we need not imbark in that great Question, Whether the Roman be the Fourth Metal-Kingdom? Or, Whether the Opinion of Junius and his followers be received? We are sure both wayes to make the Accompt good, That the Name, or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, is 666. The matter is so firmly grounded upon the event.

Let us then proceed according to Iunius his Method: let us say, that the Babylonian is the first Metal-Kingdom, that the Mede-Persian is the second, that the Macedonian in Alexander is the third, that the Seleucian is the fourth. Here according to this Analogie there must be an end of all the four Metal-Kingdoms at the destruction of the Seleucian; when Syria, Iudaea, and all that Oriental tract came under the Obedience of the People of Rome. Now then, if you reckon from the final Conclusion of all the four persecuting Empires, and from the beginning of the Roman, as that Nation did succeed in the Rule over the Church, there will be an exact period of 666 years to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome: And so we do concord with the Principles of Iunius.

But we do not say, That there was a dissolution of all four Metal-Kingdoms, but only a dissolution of the third, and a beginning of the fourth. Now, from the beginning of the Roman, or the fourth Kingdom, we make the accompt.

And for the clearer manifestation of the truth, we will Debate this Point more fully: for it is a ruled case in Daniel [Page] and the Revelation, That one and the same thing is variously repeated, for clearer explication. As for ensample: The Antichristian Kingdom is more obscurely delivered, Revel. 11. Now, if we compare it with the description chap. 13, and chap. 17. all three Scriptures will exceedingly illustrate one and the same truth. And so in the present case, if it can be solidly proved that the fourth Beast in Daniel is the Roman Kingdom, we may safely conclude that the same matter is repeated more largely in the Book of the Revelation. Mr Med [...] speaketh to very good purpose concerning the description of the ten-horn'd Beast, Rev. 13. These are his words; To [...]a autem haec descriptio petita est ex Prophe [...]iâ Danielis, cap. 7. ubi de eâdem agitur quâ hic, Bestiâ Romanâ status novissimi: sed quae ibi Danieli ab Angelo succinctius narrantur, ea hîc Iohanni, (interjectâ quasi explicatione) fusius deducuntur. Comment. Apocal. pag. 190. From which words of his it is clear, that one and the same Roman Dominion, in the last and Antichristian State thereof, is the subject matter of both Scriptures. And so we have a certain and a demonstrative Principle to build upon. For, not only the Book of the Revelation it self will be cleared by comparing one part with another, that which is more dark with that which is more clear; but the times in the 7 of Daniel also will be much illustrated, if we parallel them with the times of the Revelation. Only here will lie the weight of the business, Whether the matter is one and the same in both Prophecies? And it must necessarily be one and the same, if we can solidly prove the ten-horned Beast in Daniel to be the Roman Kingdom. All do agree that the ten-horned Beast in the Revelation is the Roman Kingdom; and if we can make it appear that one and the same Kingdom is described in the seventh of Daniel, this will be as it were a band, or ligament, to couple both Prophecies together, and a mean to expound the one by that conformity which it hath to the other.

But because Iunius, and his followers, and by Name Dr Willet do so strongly insist upon the Point, That the ten-horned Beast in both Prophecies is not one and the same Roman [Page] Kingdom, but one and the same only in Analogie, and similitude of expression: If they can make their words good, I confess that we shall be liable to a great mistake, when we shall take that for really the same, which is only the same in some similitude. Interpreters have gone too far this way, as it is clear by experience. For Parae [...], in the beginning of his Commentary, treating of the Method of the Revelation, doth draw three Observations out of Augustine's 20 Book of the City of God, cap. 17. First, saith he, There are many things darkly delivered in the Prophecie, to exercise the mind of the Reader. Secondly, There are some things delivered more clearly, by the understanding of which, we may discover the other that are more dark, if diligence be used. Thirdly, It doth exceedingly conduce to the unfolding of the Mysteries of this Book, that the same things are repeated in a different way of expression. We do acknowledge that these Observations are of good use; but that some Interpreters, as Paraeus himself in his Commentary, and Lampadius in his [...] upon Sle [...]d in de 4 Imperiis, and some others, have gone too far this way. There is some similitude between the seven Trumpets, and the seven Vials; but the Authors aforenamed have much disturbed the true course of the Apocalyptical times, when they take the Trumpets and the Seals for the same in matter, though they differ in manner. To avoid th [...] Rock, we will first prove the Identity of two Scriptures, and then expound them by way of Parallel.

Upon this Consideration we do now fall upon the Work, to prove the Roman to be the Fourth Kingdom: And if this can be made good, then it will be one and the same Kingdom with that which is mentioned in the Revelation. And so we shall parallel the one by the times of the other Prophecie.

Now let us hear what Iunius, Broughton, Piscator, and other Learned men can alledge to the contrary.

Junius.

There is none that is ignorant how variously the Fourth Kingdom [Page] is interpreted: For some think this place to appertain to the four Monarchies, to continue to the consummation of the world. Others will have the Monarchies here meant to continue to the Kingdom of Christ only; in which Number they have placed the Roman, their Free-state and their Empire being united in one. And truly the former Opinion all the Fathers have followed, being moved, as it is probable, with this expression, There is a God in Heaven that maketh known to the King what shall be in the latter daies, chap. 2. 28. But they have not well observed the meaning of the text: for the Hebrew word doth not signifie that which is last, but that which is latter; or that which cometh after, though it be not simply the last of all.

Answer.

If we observe the Rules laid down by Dr Willet, 1. That the Kingdoms here described, are Monarchical Kingdoms. 2. Monarchical Kingdoms about the Borders of the Church. 3. Such Monarchical Kingdoms where the latter do build themselves upon the ruine of the former. If we observe these Rules, it will be no difficult matter to define the Monarchies what they are, where they begin, and where they make an end. There need be no variety of Opinion in a matter of such common Experience. And in particular, the same Experience sheweth, That the Roman must be the fourth particular Kingdom. As for those Interpreters who will have this Kingdom to expire at the coming of Christ, they do not erre in taking the Roman for the Fourth Kingdom, nor in joyning the Free-State and the Empire in one: but they erre in this, That they end that Monarchy at the Coming of Christ. For this is contrary to Experience, and the Testimony of the Scriptures. For, what shall be the Ten Horns, or the Ten Kings? What shall be the little Horn? What shall be all the other Properties of the Fourth Beast, chap. 7.▪ How shall all these be attributed to the Roman Kingdom, if it End at the Coming of Christ?

For the former Expositors, it is true that all Antiquity in a manner have followed this way, To take the Roman for the [Page] Fourth Kingdom. To which I may adde, Many of the Interpreters of these times, and some eminent in the Knowledge of the Prophetical Scriptures; as Brightman, Grasserus, Mede, and others. But that this should be the principal Ground that moved them to take the Roman for the Fourth Kingdom, because the Lord shewed to Nebuchadnezzar what should come to pass in the last times; this I cannot take to be the prime foundation on which those Expositors do build: To my understanding, this phrase in the latter dayes, or as it is in the Original, [...] in the extremity of dayes; or as Piscator, Polanus, and others will have it, temporibus consequentibus, in the times following: This expression nakedly considered, inforceth nothing at all. Whereas Iacob assembled his Sons together to tell them what should happen to them in the latter dayes: I do in this matter agree with Dr Willet, That he did not assemble them together to tell what should befall them in the end of the world, but in the times immediately following. Yet this Expression is sometimes used to foretel what shall be done in the end of the world. And therefore the Prophet Hosea saith, That the Children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their King; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter dayes: or, as it is in the Original, in the extremity of dayes. There is no doubt to be made but that the Prophet speaketh of the future Call of the Iews that shall be, and of their living under the Reign of Christ; which things are to be finished in [...]e end of the world. And I see no reason but that the Lord might reveal the same things to Daniel, at least the whole order of them, he living after the times of Hosea, being also a man specially chosen of God to be acquainted with the greatest Mysteries concerning the times of the Church. To let pass the ambiguity of the phrase, let us seriously ponder the circumstances of the text. The Lord did reveal to Nebuchadnezzar things that should come to pass in the latter times. But the great Question is in specie, What latter times are here intended? It is confessed by all, That the Monarchical Kingdoms were to continue to the Coming of Christ; and the words of the [Page] text are clear, that the Kingdom of Christ shall begin in the times of these Kingdoms. Now our Saviour was born, his Gospel was preached, and his Kingdom began, when the Earth, and particularly that part of the Earth, was under the Sovereign Dominion of the Romans. To me therefore it is an infallible Reason, That the Roman must be one of the Monarchical Kingdoms, and the Fourth in particular, because the Kingdom of Christ did then begin, when the Earth was under the Authority and Dominion of that People. But let us go on.

Junius.

They which follow the latter Opinion, do well to end Daniel's Prophecie at Christ. But this they ought to consider, that the Lord doth not declare the State of the world universally, but only so far as it concerneth the Iewes and the People of God. And therefore in our judgement we cannot approve it, that the Roman is the Fourth Kingdom.

Answer.

For the Maxime, That the Four Monarchies are described only in relation to the Iewes; I do yield it to be a truth, so far as the Jewes were the only people of God. But when the Gentiles also became his people, the Monarchies are described in relation to them. So then the Metal-Kingdoms are not related to the Jewes only, nor to the Gentiles only, but to the People of God both of Jewes and Gentiles. Among many, this one Argument may be sufficient to clear the Truth of that which we affirm. At the end of these Kingdoms it is mentioned, That the Kingdom, and the Dominion, and the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole Heaven, shall be given to the people of the Saints of the most High, chap. 7. vers. 27. Who are they that are the People of the Saints of the most High? Shall we say, That they are only the People of the Jewes? Then it will follow, That the People of the Jewes only shall Constitute and make up the Kingdom of Christ and his Saints. And how contrary is this to all colour and shew of truth?

[Page]Secondly, Admit it should be granted that in the description of the Metal-Kingdoms, the Lord should only have respect to the People of the Jewes; this doth not exclude the Roman from being one of the Four Kingdoms. For as the Jewes were somtimes under the Babylonians, somtimes under the Persians, somtimes under the Graecians; so sixty years before the Birth of our Lord, they came under the Dominion of the People of Rome, who were the particular Nation and State of whom the Prophet speaketh: The people of the Prince that shall come, shall destroy the City and Sanctuary, Dan. 9. 26. If you Number the times from that instant when the Dominion of the Romans began, you shall finde that there were 130 years to the destruction of Ierusalem by Titus and Vespasian. So long the Jewish Church and Nation were under the Roman Obedience. So then we Conclude, If the Monarchies be Numbred only in relation to the Jewes, the Roman may be one of the Four, as well as the Babylonian, Persian, o [...] Graecian: what should hinder?

Junius.

They that so Number, must of necessity confound the popular State, with the Sovereign Command of one, which is here only mentioned. Neither did the Romans any wayes afflict the Iewes till the times of Cleopatra, or Herod.

Answer.

This is most true, That the Jewes came under the Dominion of the Romans in the times of their Free-State: And therefore in these times we begin the Roman as the Fourth Kingdom. Now whereas it is alledged, that in so doing we do confound the Popular State and the Government by One: To this I Answer, We are not here so much to look after the several forms of Roman Dominion, as upon one whole Roman Kingdom opposed to one Babylonian, to one Persian, to one Graecian going before. The Scripture looketh to Four kinds of People, who in their respective Seasons and Successions, should have absolute Dominion over the Earth, and specially [Page] about the Confines of the Church: according to this Difference we ought to distinguish each Monarchy as the Dominion pass'd from one people to another, and not by the particular forms of Government observed by one people. Therefore it doth fully Answer our purpose, That the Church of the Jewes came under the Dominion and Lordship of the people of Rome 60 years before the Birth of the Lord. Now, what Form of Dominion the Romans then had, is not to our purpose.

Further, Whereas it is said, That the Romans did not afflict the Church of the Jewes till the times of Herod; Give me leave to Argue after the same manner. Cyrus did not afflict the People of the Jewes; Therefore the Persian tyranny did not then begin: Alexander the Great did not persecute the Jewes; Therefore the Graecian Monarchy did not begin in his times. This way of Reasoning is contrary to Scripture and Experience. For, to speak positively, Though Cyrus did not afflict the Church of the Jewes, yet he brought that Church and People within the Verge of the Persian Dominion, which in all its times was a Tyrannical State. So Alexander the Great did not persecute the Church, yet he was the Founder of the Graecian Empire, which in the whole time thereof did more or less afflict the Saints of the Jewish Church. The like may be said of the Romans: though there was no eminent Persecution in the time of their Free-State, yet then the Church was brought within the compass of that Kingdom▪ in which, under which, and by which there were the sorest Persecutions that ever were; as appeareth by the Stories of the Evangel [...]sts, the Acts of the Apostles, and the whole Book of the Revelation. Now let us Consider what is spoken by Mr Broughton.

Mr Broughton.

The Book of Daniel handleth principal points of the Iewes thraldom in Babylon for 70 years, and seven times that space unto Christ's Ascention, and the destruction of the City and Temple: So that Ierusalem surprized by the Chald [...]an, and razed by the Roman, is the limit of the Story.

Answer.

[Page]

If it could be proved, That Ierusalem seized by the Chaldaean, and razed by the Roman, that this is the limit of some of Daniel's Visions, and namely of the 70 weeks, it doth not follow that this is the boundary of all his Visions, and particularly of all the Four Kingdoms typed in the Metals of the Image. I shall endeavour in the process of this Discourse to make it appear that these Kingdoms do continue to the time of the glorious Kingdom of the Saints, Rev. 20. But let us go on.

Mr Broughton.

The Kingdom of Babel is figured by a Tree, touching in height the Heavens, and in breadth the corners of the Earth. Likewise the other Kingdoms a [...]e semblanced to a Ram, and to a Goat, Buck, and both in sundry Horns. And now all the Nations be named that be therein contained.

Answer.

First, For the great Tree, it is not so much a figure of the Babylonian Kingdom, as of the King Nebuchadnezzar in his own personal greatness. For when the Tree was cut down, and Nebuchadnezzar fell, the Babylonian Empire stood. Fo [...] the Kingdoms of Persia and Greece, it is not needful that these two should be all the Nations which Daniel doth Number after the Babylonians. First, How doth this distinguish the Monarchies after the Scripture-difference? The Scripture distinguisheth them according to the change from People to People, chap. 2. vers. 44. chap. 7. vers. 27. If therefore the Babylonians, Persians, Graecians, be all the People, how shall we make Four Monarchies of Three People? Secondly, That of Persia and Greece are again repeated, chap. 8. because they were more summarily described in the former Chapter. For if we look narrowly to the matter, the Seventh Chapter is for the most part taken up in the descrption of the Fourth Kingdom.

Mr Broughton.

[Page]

The Legs of the Image, are the Successors of Alexander in the mightiest Kingdoms, Syria and Egypt.

Answer.

Piscator doth build much upon this Reason; and therefore to avoid repetition, we will defer the Examination thereof till we come to him.

Mr Broughton.

Daniel, chap. 7. vers. 13. One like to the Son of man, &c. The Iewes grant Christ here to be meant: and if we had not deceived them by forging a general Fourth Monarchy, by refusing the plainness of Daniel, they would have come to the Faith long ago.

Answer.

This is a good Caution in the general, and Christian men ought to take heed how they turn all into nice Disputes: Atheistical and gainsaying people will soon take Advantage: Yet for all this, we have sufficient matter to convince the Jew that their Messiah is come, that he is cut off, that the [...]0 weeks of Daniel are at an end, because Ierusalem hath been destroyed long ago; and the 70 weeks do lead us to that fatal destruction.

For our Interpretation that the Roman is the Fourth Monarchy, it is not this that keepeth the Jew in his blindness and unbelief; but rather, it would be a greater stumblingblock in his way, to take the Seleucian for the Fourth Monarchy. Mr Broughton who affirmeth this to be a Fourth Monarchy, how can he make it good, That the Kingdom of Christ was set up in the times of the Seleucian? Suppose a Jew should read in the Gospel written by Saint Matthew, that our Saviour was Born in Bethlem in the times of the Romans; and as the other Evangelists do expresly say, in the times of Augustus Caesar, who caused all the world to be taxed, &c. [Page] Here then, if a Jew should be of the judgement of these Learned men That the Roman is none of the Four Monarchies, and that there was a total dissolution of the Four Metal-Kingdoms before the coming of Christ, and the beginning of the Roman: In this method and way of Interpretation, how can they possibly make good that Scripture forementioned? In the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that shall never be destroyed, Dan. 2. 44. If the Lord will raise up the Kingdom of Christ in the dayes of the Four Metal-Kingdoms, and the Evangelists all with one mouth do say, That the Kingdom was raised up in that time when all was under the power of the Romans, we may safely Conclude, That the Roman must needs be one of the Four Kingdoms; and in particular, the Fourth and the last Kingdom.

And whereas it is alledged, One like the Son of Man came in the clouds of Heaven, vers. 13. We do willingly yield, when the Roman Kingdom, in the last and Antichristian state thereof, shall be brought to a final destruction, then in those times the Kingdom of the Saints shall be set up upon the Earth in the last dayes; and there shall be a Union betwixt Jewes and Gentiles under Christ their King, according to the Scriptures. And though we do not press the strictness of the Letter for a Personal and visible Reign of Christ (as many have done, and many now do) yet I trust that the Jew and the Gentile shall find it true, That both People shall come under the Reign of Christ, when his Gospel shall be the regent Law in the latter dayes. But of this matter somthing more largely afterwards.

Mr Broughton.

I will shew thee what shall be in the latter end of wrath, chap. 8. vers. 21. This place strongly overthroweth their Error, that seign the Roman to be the Fourth Kingdom, meant by the Legs of the Image, seeing the Greeks are the Dealers in the latter end of wrath. And it had been a strange thing that this last vision repeating the former, should neglect the Romans, if they had been spoken of before.

Answer.

[Page]

We have shewed how the former Kingdoms [...] repeated in the latter Vision: we yield that there is a repetiti [...]n of the Monarchical Kingdoms, but not a repetition of them in the full Number. For what a way of Reasoning were this▪ The Babylonian is not reckoned chap. 8. therefore he is none of the Four great Empires mentioned in the Chapter going [...]efore? Let us come to the main Reason which Mr Brought [...] saith, strongly overthroweth their Error who feign the Roman to be the Fourth Kingdom. His Argument is drawn from that Expression, I will shew thee what shall be in the last end of indignation. [...]ll that may be gathered from hence, is this, That the Greeks may be Dealers in the latter end of wrath, if we compare them with the times of Daniel: yet according to this sense, the Romans may be latter than they. Secondly, If we look to the true translation of the word (as Iunius and Piscator have it) the Interpretation must run thus: I will make known to thee what shall be in the extremity [...] of that indignation, when Antiochus shall afflict the Church. And therefore the Angel doth expound what is meant by these words, In the latter end of their Kingdom, when transgressors are come to a full end, a King of fierce countenance shall stand up, vers. 23. So then, according to the true sense, the Greeks are not so much the Dealers in the latter end of wrath, as Antiochus in particular is a Dealer against the Saints in the latter end of the Graecian tyranny. Here then is a plain fallacy, à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simplicitur.

Mr Broughton.

Chap. 12. vers. 1. And at that time shall Michael stand up that standeth for the Children of thy people. When Antiochus, going to War against Parthia, left Lysias behind him to have rooted out the Iews; then Michael stood up. Here the terms of Daniel's People must needs mean the Iewes, and not the troubles of the Christian Church. Now it is evident, That the Holy Iewish Nation was never troubled in their whole State, but in the times [Page] of Antiochus Epiphanes: And therefore it is clear that the Angel speaketh of those dayes. And this one speech might have kept Daniel in his true meaning, that we should not draw him beyond Christ.

Answer.

If [...] may speak what I find by Experience, there is not any one place either in Daniel or the Revelation, that seemeth to me to be more intricate than the Number of time mentioned in this Chapter. It may be the Lord will have the time to lie doubtful, and to be sealed to the time of the end, vers. 4, 9.

However it be, though I cannot positively prove the meaning of the text, yet we may firmly conclude, That the periods of time do lead us to the end of the world; and that they cannot possibly be restrained to the Persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, and to the times of the suffering of the Jews under that tyranny.

But let us look to the Text: By the Children of thy people, we do willingly acknowledge, That the People of the Jewes are here meant. But we do not yield that Mr Broughton doth make a true Deduction from the meaning of these words. He doth infer, That in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes his persecuting the Church, Michael may stand up, because the whole Nation of the Iewes suffered more eminently for Religion in those times. Now here I say, This cannot be the time of the great Tribulation of the Jews, nor the time of the standing up of Michael, seeing the Tribulation here spoken of is after the destruction of the Seleucian Kingdom. For I would gladly know what the Angel doth mean by these words, He shall come to his end, and none shall help him, vers. 45. Is it not clear, by the whole tenor and scope of the text, That he speaketh of the King of the North, or the Seleucian Kingdom? That this Tyranny shall come to its end without help or remedy. And then afterward, (the Seleucian Kingdom being destroyed) the great Calamity shall fall upon the Nation of the Jews in the following times. Secondly, Our [Page] Saviour himself, that best knew the meaning of Daniel's Prophecie, doth expresly speak of the standing up of the Abomination of Desolation mentioned by Daniel the Prophet; he doth speak of the greatest wrath that ever was from the foundation of the world, that it should fall upon the Nation of the Jewes; and that for the Elects sake only those dayes should be shortened. Now then, how doth he apply these Predictions? not to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, which Mr Broughton here speaks of; but (as all the Evangelists do agree) to the last and fatal destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans; Matth. 24. 21, 22. Mar. 13. 14, 15, &c. Luk. 21. 20, 21, &c.

Now, whereas Daniel did put the Question partly out of a desire to pry into these Mysteries, and partly to give information to the Church; he received an Answer sutable to the Question which he did propound. The Question is this: Then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? vers. 8. And the Answer of the Angel is this: From the time that the daily Sacrifice shall be taken away, and the Abomination that maketh Desolate shall be set up, there shall be 1290 daies. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the 1335 dayes. But go thy way till the end be, for thou shalt rest, and stand in the lot at the end of the daies, vers. 11, 12, 13. From the scope of these words, if we take it for granted, That the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation was at the last and fatal destruction of Ierusalem; (for so our Saviour doth expound the words of Daniel) then we do infer, from the destruction of that City there will be 1290 dayes, and then again 1335 dayes to the time of the end: And so we may conclude, That this period of time will not extend only to the times of Christ, but very far beyond his times toward the end of the world.

But it may be alledged, seeing that I undertake to shew the length of the period, How long it shall continue, and the beginning from whence it shall commence; why do not I speak Determinately concerning the time where it shall end?

[Page]I do only so far undertake to speak of the length of this period, to shew that Daniel's Prophecie containeth a great Number of years beyond the destruction of Ierusalem. And this is enough to Confute Mr Broughton, and other Interpreters of this way; though for my part I am not able to determine the Question why it is said 1290 dayes, and then after that, 1335 dayes. There is a special reason of doubling the Number; but yet for the accommodation of the time, I must confess my ignorance. Only for the present purpose, it is enough to say in the general, That there is a great Chain of years to begin after the destruction of Ierusalem; and that the times of Daniel, and the times of the Revelation, do both run parallel together, to the glorious Kingdom of the Saints. But for the true concord of the times, I do profess that I lie in the mire.

Whereas the holy Prophet is commanded to seal and to shut up the Vision, we are not to take this simply, as though there shall be a perpetual inclosure, and an absolute concealment of the sense for ever; but only, that the disclosing is referred to the time of the end. They that shall live neer upon the accomplishment of the Prophecie, upon the borders of the glorious Church, at the times of the Calling of the Jewes, perhaps they shall see that which hath lain hid in the Scriptures for many Ages. Though Daniel was to seal up the Vision for the time present, yet in the latter dayes many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be encreased, vers. 4.

Object. But if it shall be said, That the great Question doth lie in this, From what beginning are we to fetch this period of time, or where is the date thereof? Some place the beginning of these years in Antiochus Epiphanes; some, in the Abomination of the Desolation set up by Iulian the Apostate.

Sol. For the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation, there is no question but that this is meant of the Calamity under the Romans; for so our Saviour doth expound the meaning of the Prophecie: And there is good reason wherefore we should rest in the Authority of such an interpreter. As for the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation by [Page] Iulian the Apostate; I marvel that such a judicious Interpreter as Mr Brightman, should rest upon so groundless a conceit. But as groundless as it is, I find that many men are carried away with his Authority. But first of all, how was Iulian a taker away of the daily Sacrifice? He rather countenanced the Jewes against the Christians, Socrat. lib. 3. Secondly, how can we apply the taking away of the daily Sacrifice to the times of Iulian? and how can we make the accompt by the Abomination of Desolation set up by Iulian, when our Saviour doth speak so plainly of the des [...]ruction of Ierusalem by the Romans? He speaketh in this wise: These be the dayes of Vengeance, that all things that are written, may be fulfilled. And there shall be great distress upon this People, and they shall fall by the edge of the Sword, and shall be led away Captive into all Nations; and Ierusalem shall be troden down of the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, Luk. 21. 22, 23, &c. Here observe, First, our Saviour speaketh of the destruction of Ierusalem, and of the scattering of the Jewes, and of the time of their dispersion. He doth speak of these things as they were foretold in the writings of the old Prophets, That all that is written might be fulfilled. Now where may we conceive these things are written, but in the Prophecie of Daniel? more briefly, chap. 9; and more largely, chap. 12. St. Matthew therefore, when he speaketh of the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans, doth plainly shew that this is but the fulfilling of that which was formerly mentioned in the Prophecie of Daniel, Mat. 24. vers. 14, 15. If this be so, why then should we look after the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation in the times of the Emperor Iulian, when in the Evangelist it is so strictly limited to the destruction of Ierusalem? But let us come to the things themselves; and here in the first place, concerning the wrath that shall be upon the people of the Jewes: it is expresly said, That they shall fall by the edge of the Sword, and that they shall be carried Captive into all Nations. This is the scope of our Saviours words, as we may see in the Story. Now then, doth not Daniel speak of the same things? of a time of trouble for [Page] the Children of his People, such as never was since it was a Nation, vers. 1. And doth he not speak of the scattering of the Holy People, and of the continuance of their dispersion to the time of the end? Secondly, for the time, how long the dispersion shall continue; our Saviour saith, That the Jewes shall be carried Captive into all Nations, and Ierusalem shall be troden under foot till the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled. It is plain then, That the dispersion of the Jews, and the conculcation of the literal Ierusalem, shall last to the fulfilling of the times of the Gentiles. Now then, If we apply this to the Prophecie of Daniel, doth he not speak of the destruction of Ierusalem, and the dispersion of the Holy People, and of the time of the dispersion, how long shall it be to the end of these things? vers. 6. Thirdly, The Evangelist doth begin the time of the dispersion from the destruction of Ierusalem, as from the Epocha and term thereof. And doth not Daniel do the same? Doth he not Number 1290 dayes, the time of the dispersion, from the destruction of Ierusalem? Fourthly, The Evangelist saith, That Ierusalem shall be troden under foot till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. In which words he doth secretly imply, That after the compleating of those times, there shall be a glorious Restoring of that Church and Nation. The words of St. Paul are much to the same effect; When the Fulness of the Gentiles shall come in, all Israel shall be saved, Rom. 11. 25. He speaketh of the Church of the Jewes that shall be in the latter times. And for the particular time, he doth restrain it in this wise, When the Fulness of the Gentiles shall come in: that is, When the Fulness of the Nations shall be brought in to own Christ the Head of the Church, then the Nation of the Jews shall be Called; And so Jewes and Gentiles shall make one People under Christ their Head in the latter dayes. And are not the words of Daniel much to the same purpose? Doth he not say, Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the 1335 dayes, to the glorious Restauration of that Church and Nation?

But yet for a further amplification, let us consider what is spoken Dan. 9. 27. And here we shall find that this doth [Page] parallel the two former Scriptures, and that all three together do speak of the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans, and the continuance of the dispersion of that People after the destruction. These are the words; He shall cause the Sacrifice and the Oblation to cease; and for the overspreading of Abomination, (or as it is in the Margine, with Abominable Armies) he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. In these words, Note, First the Agent, who it is that shall make desolate; The People of Rome, or the Prince of that People who shall come. Secondly, The Action it self; he shall cause the Sacrifice and the Oblation to cease, and shall bring in the Abomination that maketh Desolate. Thirdly, The time when this Action shall begin; to wit, After the cutting off of the Messiah: Then the People of the Prince that shall come, shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary. And so they did, as appeareth by the event. [...]ourthly, For the time of the continuance of the Desolation; it is said, He shall make it desolate even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. He doth not speak of the desolation of Ierusalem only at that [...] [...]nstant, but of the continuance thereof, as the Lord had determined and Decreed it upon that City and People. I [...] is said to be determined, because [...] is precisely cut out, de [...]ned, limited, and circumscribed, as was the period of the 70 weeks, vers. 24. Further, The Prophet Isaiah [...] of the casting away of the Jewes, useth the same expression, as is her [...] used in the text of Daniel. For, (saith he) though thy Peo [...]le of Israel be as the sand of the Sea, yet a [...] of [...] shall return▪ For [...] the consumption [...] [...] the p [...]ecise consummation shall overflow [...] [...], chap. 10. vers. 22, 23. This is spoken of the [...] fata [...] [...]cattering of the Jewish Nation, and the [...] [...] [...] [...] of that dispersion, as the Apostle him [...]elf [...] ex [...]ound, Rom. 9. 27, 28. So then, the text doth not only speak of the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans, but of a certain determinated time of the desolation of that People, how long it shall continue. [Page] Now let us apply all these things to the controverted place, Dan. 12. 11, From t [...]e t [...]me that the daily Sacrifice shall be taken away, and the Ab [...]nation that maketh Des [...]late be set up, there shall be 1290 [...] ▪ What is more natural and consonant to the text, an [...] [...] is more congruous to other Scriptures, than to take the [...] up of the Abomination of Desolation for the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans? And that the 1290 dayes, the time of the dispersion, doth run from that begi [...] [...] ▪ We ha [...]e good reason to take this for an authentick [...] ▪ because Dan [...]el in the 12 Chapter doth more largely repe [...] [...] Desolation by the Romans, which he had more briefly [...] chap. 9. We cannot be perswaded, but that the Prop [...] [...] last Vision, went farther into the times, than he did i [...] [...] going before; at least, he went as far. For [...] is expresly said concerning this last Vision, that the time was long, and for many dayes. The word in the Original is [...] or as Mr Broughton doth well render it, the Army-like-ordered time was great. Piscator upon the place also, doth well observe the same propriety of the phrase; Vide [...]r [...] [...] ess [...] Metaphora, quod in tempore determina [...]o partes convenienti ordine à Deo sunt dispositae sicut Milites in exercitis. T [...]e s [...]emeth here to be a [...]; the parts in this determin [...]te time are so disposed of G [...] Souldiers in an Army. We may then safely conclude, [...] in this last Vision Daniel doth go many [...]-deep into the times, and much deeper than he did in the former Visions. And therefore we may necessarily affirm, That he doth lead us far beyond the times of Christ. On the contrary, If these times end with the Persecution [...] under Antiochus Epiphanes, (for so Mr Broughton and others will have it) how is the time long? and how doth the Lord speak of such notable events that should befal Da [...]iel's People in the last and utmost Rere-ward of time? The destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans, was 230 years after the death of Antiochus Epiphanes: And therefore the Vision of the 70 weeks (if Mr Broughtons interpretation be good) must go farther than this last Vision, by such a Proportion and Number of years. Now, who can possibly [Page] believe this to be true, that readeth the three last Chapters of the Prophecie? Must the whole Narration of all the things there declared end at Antiochus his death?

Now then, to gather all into one sum, we may safely collect, That Daniel in this Vision doth not only lead us to the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romans, but he doth speak also how long the Jewes shall remain under that fatal Dispersion. These things our Saviour, the Apostle St. Paul, Isaiah, and Daniel, all of them do speak: First, of the scattering of the Nation after the destruction of Ierusalem, and of the time of their Dispersion till their Calling again.

If any shall then require me to make good the Chronologie of 1290 dayes, and of 1335 dayes, I must confess that I am here at a loss; and it may be that they who shall come in the Rere-ward of the [...] or the Army-like-ordered time, shall see more. Then perhaps many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be encreased. If I may (to use the words of Mr Fox) vent [...] my Conjectures, I should be willing to proceed in this manner: First, To speak of the time in a Latitude. Secondly, To speak of it more particularly. If we speak of it in some Latitude, and begin the 1290 daies at the destruction of Ierusalem, this period of time will bring us precisely to the year of the Lord 1359: And here, (as Alstedius well observeth in his Chronologie, cap. 6.) the Saints did begin more vigorously to testifie against the Antichristian Idolatries. And in very deed, if we diligently observe the times, with some subtilty of consideration, we shall find, That from the taking of Constantinople, and the destruction of the Greek Empire, in the East, the Languages have been revived, and the Witnesses of Truth have been more effectually raised up in the West; and the light of the Gospel doth more and more encrease. And it is very probable that these things will go on, and never cease till the Kingdom of Christ be set up in its full glory and Monarchical power over Jews and Gentiles.

This I take to be the meaning of the Prophecie, in the general accommodation thereof. But for the more distinct and [Page] particular Application of the times, this (as I have said before) I must leave to them that come after. Now let us proceed to the words of Piscator in his Preface upon the Prophecie of Daniel.

Piscator.

The third Kingdom is not here rightly extended to the Successors of Alexander the Great, so far at least as he is stated the first King of that Kingdom. For though this is done, chap. 8. vers. 21. yet nevertheless, that Prophecie differeth much from this. For the Kingdom of the Greeks figured by the He-goat is there expresly Named, and is divided into the Kingdom of Alexander, (who is resembled by the notable Horn which the He-goat had between his eyes) and the Kingdom of his Successors. So that this of Alexander is clearly to be distinguished, as different from that of the Successors. For it is said, When that Horn was br [...]ken, four stood up for it, or in the place of it; and afterward those four are expresly called one Kingdom, vers. 23. Likewise it is spoken concerning the Kingdom of Alexander, That it should be plucked up, and that it should come to others, and not to his Posterity, Dan. 11. 4.

Answer.

I do not deny but in some sense the Kingdom of Alexander may be distinct from that of his Successors: But [...], Whether in the present case it ou [...]ht to be [...] distinguished. The Kingdoms of Media and Persia, are two distinct Realms, Dan. 8. yet both these make but one silver-Metal. So the Kingdoms of Alexander and his Successors, though they be distinguished, yet in the Notion, Relation, and Distribution of the Kingdoms in the Image, they make but one Brass-metal, or one Empire, typed by the third Beast with four Heads. In this case every Metal signifieth a distinct Kingdom in the fulness thereof. And therefore, as the Golden-Head doth signifie the Babylonian-Kin [...]dom; and the Silver-Breast, the Mede-Persian: So the Brazen-Belly and Thighs, do signifie the whole Graecian Empire. And as in [Page] this Acception the distinct Kingdoms of Media and Persia do not make two, but one Silver-metal: So the Distinct Kingdoms of Alexander and his Successors, do not make divers, but one third Kingdom of Brass. But yet further, If we should ask how every Metal-Kingdom comes to be divided, it must be in relation as each People cometh to have the sovereign Dominion over the Earth; and therefore it is expresly said concerning the Kingdom of Christ, That it shall not be left to other People, chap. 2. 44. And in the end of the seventh Chapter, v. 27. these words are recited, The Kingdom, and Dominion, and the greatness of the Kingdom shall be given to the People of the Saints of the most High: From whence we collect, That the Monarchies are to be distinguished, as the Dominion doth devolve and descend from one People to another, till at last it cometh to the turn of the Saints of the most High, to be the Monarchical people. This being laid as a ground, we may say in the particu [...]ar case alledged by Piscator, That though the Kingdom of Alexander was plucked up by the Roots, and the Kingdoms of his Successors were set up upon his ruines; yet for all this, there was no change of Dominion from People to People. There was only a change from Alexander to his Successors; still one Graecian People had the Empire over the Earth. And to put all out of questi [...]n, That the Spirit doth principally point to the Flux and Passage of the Sovereignty from one People to another, and tha [...] in this case he doth not distinguish the Kingdom of Alexander from that of his Successors; the ground which we have to bui [...]d upon, i [...], The resemblance of the He-goat▪ chap. 8. Now under this similitude, the whole Graecian Empire, both of Alexander, and of his four Successors, they are all comprehended together, as they were formerly set forth under the Type of the Third Beast with four Heads. Now whereas [...] alledgeth, That the He-goat is different from the Third Beast; and that the Prophecie, chap. 8. Habet rationem diversam, a different way of Interpretation: I Answer, The He goat and the Third Beast are all one, so farforth as both are Types of the same Empire, under one and the [Page] same People. And for the Partition of the Greek Kingdom, between Alexander and his Successors; this doth no more hinder the Type of that Kingdom by one Third Beast, then it doth hinder the delineation by one He-goat.

But now to produce some Reasons that Alexander divided from his Successors cannot be the Third Kingdom Typed by the Brass-Metal, or the Third Beast. First, All the Kingdoms were persecuting States, such that did afflict the People of God. But Alexander, if you divide him from his Successors, did not afflict the Church of the Jews, neither were they Persecuted in all the times of his Empire. Secondly, The Metal-Kingdoms are so constituted, that the latter are of a more hard and Tyrannical disposition against the Saints. Now take Alexander, in sensu diviso, take him several from his Successors, how was his Kingdom of more hard disposition against the Saints, than was either Babylon or Persia going before? His Monarchy was but for a few years, and there was no Persecution of the People of the Jews in all his time. Thirdly, The Beast that came up our of the Sea after the Persian Bear, is expresly said to have four Heads, vers. 6. Now take Alexander severally from his Successors, what four Heads, or what four Divisions were there in his Kingdom? For in his time the Beast was so far from having four Heads, that it had no Heads or Divisions at all: Therefore we must necessarily conclude, That the Third Beast doth represent and fig [...]re the Graecian Kingdom, which in a famous revolution of State, became divided into four Parts. Now, whereas the learned Interpreter doth distinguish the Kingdom of Alexander from the Dominion of his Successors, I do yield this to be true: For Alexander being broken off▪ four Kingdoms did stand up out of that Nation. But this is nothing to the purpose. For these several Fractions and Divisions do not hinder the Unity of the Greek Monarchy. If it had been the plot of the Spirit to make a Third Monarchy of Alexander, and a Fourth of his Successors; why doth he use the similitude of one He-goat for the representation of two Monarchies? Why are two Empires set forth under one figure? And whereas he strongly [Page] bindeth upon this, That all Four Successors are expresly called, One Kingdom, vers. 23. Saving the great Worth and Learning of the Author, he is deceived in this Point: For when it is said, In the latter end of their Kingdom, when transgressors are come to the full; a King, of fierce countenance, shall stand up: Now in these words, In the latter end of their Kingdom; this is not only meant of the Kingdom of the Four Successors, contradistinct to the Kingdom of Alexander; but the expression is concerning the whole Kingdom of the Greeks, opposed to that of the Persians. In the description of the He-goat, Four Kingdoms are said to rise up out of that Nation; and in the latter end of their Kingdom (meaning the Greeks, when that People shall have the Sovereignty over the Earth) a King of fierce countenance shall arise. Therefore we conclude, That Alexander, and his Successors together, make but one Greek Empire, under the similitude of one He-goat. Now let us proceed.

Piscator.

By the Fourth Kingdom (which was prefigured by the Ironthighs of the Image) we must understand the Kingdom of the Successors of Alexander the Great. This I have already cleared, by comparing it with the Fourth Beast, chap. 7. To which I now adde another evident collation of chap. 2. vers. 43. with chap. 11. vers. 6. concerning the Feet of the Image (which pertain to the Fourth Kingdom) Daniel speaking to Nebuchadnezzar, thus saith, Whereas thou s [...]west the Iron mixed with miry Clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to the other, even as Iron is not mixed with Clay. Now this very same thing the Angel Gabriel doth declare concerning the Successors of Alexander; to wit, The Seleucidae and the Lagidae, chap. 11. And in the end of the years they shall joyn themselves together; for the King's Daughter of the South shall come to the King of the North, to make an Agreement; but she shall not retain the power of the Arm, neither shall he stand, nor his Arm. From hence it is manifest, by the Fourth Kingdom, Represented by the Feet of the Image, this cannot be understood of the [Page] Roman Empire, seeing it was diverse from that of the Graecians.

Answer.

The Character of the mixture of Marriages drawn from that collation between chap. 2. vers. 43. and chap. 11. vers 6. This, of all others, seemeth to be the grand Argument. But to say the truth, and that upon tryal, I here find that Interpreters do usually build upon Three notable False Principles.

First, They take the Fourth Kingdom as divided in all time; and therefore they look after the interchangable marriages of the Seleucidae and Lagidae to make up the Union. But in this they erre: For the Fourth Kingdom, as long as it is in the Iron-Legs, it is not di [...]ided at all: It is one intire Dominion, and therefore needeth no Uniting by mixture of marriages. The Division beginneth not till you come to the Feet, part of Iron, and part of Clay. But let us hear the words themselves▪ A [...]d the Fourth Kingdom shall be strong as Iron, forasmuch as Iron breaket [...] in p [...]eces, and subdueth all things; and as Iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. So then, the Fourth Kingdom, so long as it is in the Iron-Legs, is more strong than any going before. There arose first a Kingdom of Gold, in all fulness of power [...] an [...] then afterwords, a Kingdom of Silver: and a third [...] Brass, that should rule over all: and then last of all, a Kingdom of Iron, which should break in pieces and su [...]due all the former Metals. But how is this verified in the Fourth Kingdom? The strength and power of the Kingdom was chiefly in the Iron-Legs: when it came to the Feet and Toes, it then became divided; and was partly strong, and [...] broken. If we look narrowly to the words, there is a description of the Fourth Kingdom in the [...] [...]ate thereof. First, It i [...] described as one intire Kingdom ru [...]ing over all the Earth; and so it was in the first times when it was in the Iron▪Legs. Secondly, It is described as a divided Kingdom into many parts; and so it was in its last times in the Feet, part of Iron, [Page] and part of Clay: If this be so, How far doth Piscator, and other Interpreters of his way, depart from the Truth?

First, They make the Fourth, the mightiest Kingdom, to consist meerly of the Fragments and broken pieces of Alexander's Dominion. Secondly, That which is more, They make it a Kingdom broken and divided in all its times; when it became divided in its last times only. Thirdly, They plead the mixture of Marriages between the Seleuc [...]dae and the Lagidae, in the Iron-Legs of the Image: and yet it standeth them upon to prove, That the Fourth Kingdom was divided, when it was in the Iron-Legs. The Scripture saith no such thing, but rather the contrary: as long as it was in the Iron-Legs, it was an absolute, intire, and undivided Kingdom. And therefore where there is no division into pieces, what need is there of mingling to make an Union?

Secondly, They usually take it for granted, That the Fourth Kingdom is divided into two parts; and therefore they mainly insist upon the division between the Seleucidae and the Lagidae. We yield that there is a division in the Feet and Toes of the Image: but how is it proved, That this is a division into Two parts only, and no more? The words of the text are these: The Legs were of Iron, and the Feet part of Iron, and part of Clay. The Chaldee hath it, Out of those parts that w [...]e of Iron, and those parts that were of Clay. The materials of the Feet were Iron and Clay; of these the several parts of the Fourth Kingdom were tempered. But how is it proved, That the Kingdom was divided into Two parts only, and no more? They that build upon this, as upon an undoubted Principle, should first make it appear, That it is so. For, where doth Daniel in his Exposition make mention of any such bipartite State? How can this be proved from his words? For thus it is in the text; Whereas thou sawest the Feet and Toes, part of Potters Clay, and part of Iron; the Kingdom shall be divided: or, (as Iunius rendreth it) R [...]gna erunt divers [...], There shall be diverse Kingdoms. But how is it proved, That the Kingdom is divided only into Two parts, and [Page] that the diverse Kingdoms are only two and no more? Let us refer that matter to that other description, chap. 7. And is there any thing there spoken, to prove the bipartite State of the Fourth Kingdom? For if we must suppose, That the Seleucidae and the Lagidae, are the Two Iron-Legs, or divisions of the Fourth Empire, why is not this repeated again, or somthing to this purpose, in the seventh Chapter? All agree in it, That there is a description of one and the same Kingdom in both texts. Now then, in the seventh Chapter there is no mention made of this division, only there it is said, That Ten Kings or Kingdoms shall arise, and another shall arise up after them. Here it is plainly said, what that Number of Kingdoms is, into which the Fourth Empire shall be divided, scil. into Ten inferiour Realms. These then are the parts of the Fourth Empire that shall mingle themselves with the seed of men in the latter times of that Dominion. There is nothing spoken in the text con [...]erning the bipartite State, nothing concerning the Seleucidae and the Lagidae; but that multiplicity of lesser States in the Feet and Toes of the Image, are here defined and declared to be Ten in Number, the proper Character and print-mark of the Roman Dominion, Rev. 17.

Object. You will say, That the two Legs of the Image do signifie the double state of the Fourth Kingdom; and these are the Seleucidae and the Lagidae.

Sol: This is but a Fancy, as I have formerly proved; for if you look to the Exposition of the text in Daniel's own words, The Fourth Kingdom was so far from being bipartite, that it was not at all partite or divided, as long as it was in the Legs; the division beginning only in the Feet and Toes. But if any stand upon the Analogie and similitude, That therefore the Kingdom must be divided into Two parts, because there are two Legs in the Body of man; I would here know also, by the same method of Interpretation, what is meant by the Knees, the Ancles, and other parts of the Legs? Must we finde out a signification for all these? The Kingdom of Babel is compared to an Head of Gold; must [Page] we look then what is signified by the Eyes, the Nose, the Mouth, the Beard, the Lips, and other parts of the Head; and so apply several significations to the Babylonian Kingdom? This were to trifle in a serious matter. It is a good observation of Dr Willets, That the Image is no Natural, but a voluntary sign; and therefore we are not to seek for a signification beyond the intent of the Type. The intent of the Type, by the Legs of the Image, as by the lowest region and part of the Body of Man, is to set forth the Fourth and last Monarchical Kingdom, and the Fourth and last period of time. We can prove no more by the simili [...]ude, than it will signifie: and here it is plain, That the Two Legs do signifie no more than the Two Thighs, the Two Sides; and these do not signifie the bipartite State of the Third Kingdom.

Thirdly, They take it for a granted Truth, That the twodivided State is the proper Character of the Graecian Kingdom; and therefore they look to the Seleucidae, or Lagidae, as the immediate parts and divisions of that Empire. But herein also they are greatly deceived: For it is plain from chap. 8. That the Graecian is quadri-partite. In a famous change of State, that Empire became divided into Four Kingdoms. The Goat is the Kingdom of Graecia; the Four Horns are Four Kingdoms that shall arise [...] out of that Nation, vers. 22. And this is the reason wherefore the Third Beast is said to have Four Heads, because of the quadri-partite Estate of that Empire. From whence we collect, That Piscator, and other Interpreters that follow his judgement, do erre from the Truth, when they would have the Seleucidae and the Lag [...]dae to be the two parts of the Greek Empire. To speak properly, Neither the Graecian, nor the Roman, can be set forth by this Character, sith the Graecian is described in the Scripture in the nature of a Tetrarchy, or a Kingdom divided into Four parts; and the Roman in the nature of a Decarchy, or a Kingdom divided into ten inferiour Realms. These are the Three False Principles on which Interpreters do usually build, and therefore the interpretation cannot be good that standeth upon such a sandy foundation.

[Page]For the mixture of Marriages, which Piscator calleth Evidentem collationem, an evident collation; I do acknowledge that the mixture of Marriages mentioned chap. 2. is again repeated chap. 11. In the one text it is said, That they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: And in the other, That there is an interchangeable Marriage, one or two, betwixt the Seleucidae and the Lagidae. But what of all this? They that are like in some things, are not altogether the same. If that general rule, Omne simile non est idem, were observed in the Exposition of Daniel and the Revelation, we should have a cleerer sense of some Visions then now we have. But this great Fallacy hath imposed upon Interpreters; they have taken that for the same, which is parallel in some things only. There are some that have gone so far in these times, as that they have taken the little Horn for some late Princes; some, for Mahomet, and some for this, and some for that. Here I confess there may be a similitude in some particulars, and the Allusion may hold in some few Circumstances: But if you go to the whole Body of the notes of the little Horn, and to the scope of the text, here it will be very hard to make good the Assertion. There is a resemblance only between the Marriages, mentioned chap. 2. and chap. 11. But if we go to the main scope, the whole carriage of the text doth plainly shew That the Roman is the Fourth Kingdom; and so conseque [...] ly, the mixture of Marriages, and the mingling [...] the seed of men, must necessarily be in the Roman Kingdom.

And yet further, To satisfie the doubt, They who do look more diligently into the sense of the Prophecie, they find many things in the Graecian, which are but as Types and Figures of some notable events in the Roman Kingdom. Let us take for Instance, the little Horn mentioned in the Eighth of Daniel. Now here all do agree, That Antiochus Epiphanes is the little Horn meant in this Chapter: yet whosoever he is that diligently readeth the words of St. Paul, in 2 Thess. 2. he shall find that the Apostle doth apply many things to the Roman Antichrist, and so doth Iohn in the Revelation, that are here [Page] ascribed to Antiochus Epiphanes. To salve the matter, Interpreters tell us, That Antiochus is the Figure of the Antichrist to come. We may proceed in the same Method, and so we may say, That the interchangeable Marriages between the Seleuc [...]dae and the Lagidae, are but Figures of the future mingling with the seed of men, and of all other means that shall be used to the keeping up of the Roman Kingdom in the last and Antichristian State thereof. But, let us proceed.

Piscator.

The same thing also may be cleerly demonstrated from the words, vers. 34, 35. where Daniel, among many other things, doth speak unto the King; Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the Image upon the Feet that were part of Iron, and part of Clay, and brake them to pieces: And the stone which smote the Image, became a great Mountain, and filled the whole Earth. This Stone Daniel doth expound, vers. 44. to be the Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, and is the Kingdom of Christ: for the Kingdom of Christ began then to fill the whole Earth by the preaching of the Gospel, after the overthrow of those Four Kingdoms, as it is evident from the text. And truly, about the beginning of the Roman Empire, Christ was Born, when Augustus did bear Rule, &c. In the 35 year from his Birth, he sent the holy Spirit from Heaven into the Apostles, with whose Power they being endued, did Preach the Gospel first at Ierusalem to the Iews, and then afterward everywhere in the whole world to the Gentiles, as the Book of the Acts doth testifie. Therefore, sith at the Rising of the Kingdom of Christ, and at his filling the whole Earth, the Fourth Kingdom, prefigured by this Image, was already destroyed: and seeing also that the Roman Empire did continue at that time; it doth necessarily follow, That that Fourth Kingdom cannot any way be understood of the Empire of the Romans.

Answer.

[Page]

That the Stone cut out of the Mountain, is the Kingdom of Christ; to this we freely Assent. But whereas Piscator doth alledge, That all the Four Metal-Kingdoms did expire at the beginning of Christ's Kingdom; this we Deny. Let us consider the words of the text, for they must govern in this case.

First, It is said, concerning the Kingdom represented by the Stone cut out of the Mountain, That in the dayes of these Kingdoms, will the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed. If this be so, it will necessarily follow, That the Roman must be one of the Four Metal-Kingdoms; because our Saviour was Born, his Gospel was Preached, the Gentiles were brought to the Faith, in those times when the Romans had the Sovereign Dominion over the Earth; and particularly over those parts where the Church was seated. The Seleucian Kingdom was destroyed, and all that tract of Land from Euphrates to the Border of Egypt, was wholly brought under the power of the Romans. Therefore, sith the Kingdom of Christ began in the times of the Roman, the Roman must necessarily be the Fourth, and the last Kingdom.

Secondl [...], It is said, That the Stone became a great M [...]untain, and filled the whole Earth. Now, when did thi [...] come to pass? The Kingdom of Christ was weak and small at his In [...]arnation, and in the times immediately following. But after that the Stone smote the Image upon the Feet and Toes, after that he had broken the Roman Kingdom, in the last and Antichristian state thereof; then, and not till then, it became a Mountain, and filled the whole Earth. Now this was not at the Incarnatio [...], but we look for the performance thereof at the setting up of the Majestical Kingdom of Christ; as it is plainly discovered in the whole Book of the Revelation.

Thirdly, It is said, That the Stone smote the Image upon the Feet and Toes, that were part of Iron, and part of Clay. This [Page] sheweth plainly, That the Seleucidae and the Lagidae cannot be the Fourth and the last Metal-Kingdom For the Kingdom of Christ did never so much as touch these Kingdoms. They were all utterly destroyed by the power of the Romans before the Coming of Christ in the Flesh.

Now, if you apply this to the Roman, as to the last of the Four Persecuting Empires, the Kingdom of Christ in these last times must consume the Roman Kingdom, in the Antichristian state thereof, as it is cleer by the whole Book of the Revelation.

Object. But whereas Piscator doth alledge, That the Kingdom of Christ did begin to fill the whole Earth, when the Gentiles far and neer, were brought to the Faith, by the Preachi [...]g of the Apostles.

Sol. I do not Deny, but that the Kingdom of Christ in the Apostles time did then begin to fill the Earth. For the bounds of his Spiritual Kingdom were much enlarged by their travel▪ But what is this to the purpose? The text speaketh plainly of a Monarchical Kingdom; of such a Kingdom (opposed to the Four Monarchies) that shall subdue, and fill the whole Earth. The Apostles Preached the Gospel among all Nations; and by name, Saint Paul filled all places from Ierusalem to Illyricum, with the Gospel of Christ. Yet nevertheless, for all this large spreading of the Gospel, there was no destruction of the Roman Kingdom. In those times, the Romans continued their Power and Tyranny, though the Gospel of Christ was Preached everywhere. But when the stone shall become a Mountain, and fill the whole Earth; before this can be done, the Stone must strike the Image upon the Feet and Toes thereof. The Tyranny of the Roman Kingdom must be broken by the Power of the Gospel, before the Kingdom of Christ can be set up in the Throne. Now, if we apply these things to the times, we shall find that the Church was in perpetual conflict with the Empire of the Romans for 300 year [...] together, in all the times of the Ten first Persecutions. Now it is said of the Primitive Mareyrs, That they overcame him; to wit, The Persecuting Empire, [Page] by the Blood of the Lamb, and by the Word of their Testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death, Rev. 12. 11. By the scope of the place it is clear, That the Lord Christ by his Power, and his Martyrs by their Sufferings, both together, did break the Tyranny of that Persecuting Empire. It is said of them, That they overcame him, to wit, the Dragon with Seven Heads and Ten Horns. The Saints by their Sufferings did overcome him; and so the Gospel was set up as the regent Law. The Woman brought forth a Man-Child that should Rule all Nations with a Rod of Iron. This is meant of the Reign of Christ upon the Earth; and there were some beginnings thereof in the times of Constantine the Great, as appears by the scope of the text, vers. 9, 10, 11.

Now, whereas it came to pass afterwards, That the Christian Empire was broken to pieces by the coming down of the barbarous Nations out of the North, and Ten Kings rose out of the Ruines of the Empire aforesaid; Then also, according to the Prophecies, a New Persecuting Empire was Erected, to try the Faith and Patience of the Saints. This in the whole Prophecie is called, The Antichristian Empire, or, The Roman Kingdom in the last Edition thereof. Now, this Kingdom also shall be broken in pieces by the Preaching of the eternal Gospel; the Nations shall be undeceived, and the Gospel shall be set up as the regent Law, as it began to be set up in the times of Constantine the Great, but was hi [...]dered afterward. But now it shall be far otherwise: The Kingdom of Christ shall be so set up, after the breaking in pieces of the Toes and Feet of the Image, after the wearing out of the Antichristian Tyranny, that he shall Reign 1000 years. From all that hath been said, it is clear, That we must look after the Monarchical beginning of the Kingdom of Christ according to the Prophecies. Of this we shall have some occasion to speak more largely afterward.

Now let us consider what is Alledged by Polanus.

Polanus.

[Page]

The Scope of Daniel, is, To speak of those great Empires only that should stand up one after another till Christ, in those Territories where the Babylonian began. Now the Roman had nothing that the Babylonian had, but only Syria and Egypt: He had nothing that the Persian had, more than the Babylonian, but Asia the Less. Therefore the Roman is not to be accounted one of the Four Empires.

Answer.

It is true that the Roman went no further Eastward than the River Euphrates, neither did he possess many of those Eastern Countries which were formerly under the Babylonian and Persian Monarchies. But what of all this? It is enough for our purpose, That he possessed all those Countries on this side Euphrates, which were the Continent of the Church. In the Churches Continent the Roman was the Successor of the Babylonian, Persian, and Graecian Empires. For look what Monarchy the Babylonian began over the People of the Jews, the same was continued by the Romans, when their time came to have the Monarchy over the Church. If this be a truth, we may quickly Answer the Objection of Dr Willet, which is much to the same effect. These are his words: This Vision of an humane Image, signified one united Body, consisting of divers Kingdoms, one succeeding another, as the parts of the Body do joyn one to another, the Beginning and Head of which was Babylon. And then he addeth, The Roman Monarchy being distant at least 1200 miles, could not make one united Body with it. Therefore that Monarchy cannot here fitly be understood. By the same Reason he might Argue, The Graecian Kingdom being distant many miles from the Babylonian and Persian, therefore it cannot be compacted into the same Image of Persecuting Empires. But this is not the Point which we are on. For we are not to measure the Monarchies by the Longitude, Latitude, and Distance of place▪ but by the same Succession of Monarchical Dominion over the Churches Territories▪ [Page] In this sense, the Roman may be placed in the same Image of Monarchical Empires, as long as he did continue the same Sovereignty over the Church which the Babylonian began. And therefore when the Scriptures do call the City of Rome by the Name of Babylon, it is a very proper Expression; for she did continue the same Tyranny over the Saints which the Babylonians began. And it is clear also, That the same Empire did Devolve and Descend upon the Romans in the Fourth Alteration and Change of State. But let us proceed.

Polanus.

At the Coming of Christ, the Kingdom represented by the Feet and Toes, was ruined; but so was not the Kingdom of the Romans, which was not compleat till the time of Trajan. Therefore the Roman is not the Fourth Kingdom.

Answer.

I have already touched this Point in my Answer to Piscator; but because I see many Excellent Expositors build upon this Principle, That the Kingdom of Christ Beginneth at the Dissolution of all Four Metal-Kingdoms, and that this Dissolution was at his Incarnation: Because they build strongly upon this, we will bestow the more pains to enquire into the matter. To the clearing of this, let us look to that which the text naturally affordeth, and then let us make Application. From the Second Chapter of Daniel, we gather these Four Observations.

First, Concerning the time of the Beginning of the Kingdom of Christ, it must be in the latter times. For though it is only said, That in the dayes of these Kingdoms (speaking indefinitely) shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom, that never shall be destroyed: yet in the scope of the Vision, it is implyed to be in the times of the last Metal-Kingdom. For, according to the Order of the Vision, Nebuchadnezzar first saw the Head of Gold, then the Breast of Silver, the Belly and Thighs of Brass, the Legs of Iron, the Feet and Toes, part of Iron, and part of Clay. And then after some consideration, [Page] he saw a Stone cut out of the Mountain, that smote the Image upon his Feet. Therefore the Beginnings of the Kingdom of Christ were in the latter times, when the Image was in its last and lowest Region. At leastwise, the eminent operation of Christ's Kingdom was upon the Feet and Toes of the Image.

Secondly, We are to observe, That the Kingdom of Christ was small in the beginning: it was a little Stone cut out of the Mountain: For look what difference there is betwixt a little Stone and a great Mountain; so the same difference is betwixt the Kingdom of Christ when it began, and that Kingdom when it self became a Mountain and filled the Earth. Calvin upon the place speaketh very well: Propheta admonet exordia Regni Christi fore contempta. The Prophet doth well admonish us, the beginnings of the Kingdom of Christ to be weak and contemptible.

Thirdly, We are to Note also, That the progress of this Kingdom was from small beginnings: First, it was a Stone cut out of the Mountain, and then by degrees in time (though the space of time is not expressed in the text) it became a Mountain, and filled the Earth.

Fourthly, Concerning the means of the encrease, how it came to that plentitude, or fulness of Power. It smote upon the Feet and Toes of the Image, and so the Iron, the Clay, [...]he Brass, the Silver, the Gold, were broken all together, and the Stone became a Mountain and filled the Earth, vers. 34, 35.

These are the Four Observations drawn from the Second Chapter: Now let us apply our selves to Polanus, and other Interpreters of that way. And here we agree, That the Kingdom of Christ did in some sense begin at his Incarnation. And this is one chief Argument to prove the Roman to be the Fourth Kingdom; because the Lord Christ came in the Flesh, and his Gospel was Preached, and many Churches were gathered, when the Romans did bear rule. But our Question is, Whether did the Kingdom of Christ begin as the Fifth Monarchy, as a Mountain that did fill the Earth? In this sense he [Page] cannot be said to begin in that fulness and amplitude of power at the Incarnation. For, from the scope of the text it is plain, That the Kingdom of Christ was small in the beginning: Secondly, That it grew by degrees: Thirdly, That the means of the encrease was by wearing out the Fourth Kingdom. The Stone smote the Image upon the Feet and Toes, and so became a Mountain, and filled the Earth. If we apply this to the event, The Kingdom of Christ began when the Romans did bear rule. His Kingdom was small in the beginning; but by degrees, first by wearing out Rome Imperial, and after that, by wearing out Rome Papal, this Kingdom of Christ shall come to the fulness of all Monarchical power over the whole Earth.

Now on the contrary; Let us suppose, That the Seleucidae and the Lagidae joyntly, or the Seleucidae alone, do make the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. For so Iunius, Broughton, Piscator, Polanus, Hayne, Willet, and others, will have it. Upon their Grounds, I Demand, First, How did the Kingdom of Christ begin in the times of the Four Metal-Kingdoms, if the Seleucidae and the Lagidae do make the Fourth Metal-Kingdom? Secondly, Seeing the Kingdom of Christ did begin as a little Stone cut out of the Mountain, How do they prove that this Kingdom did come to that small beginning in the times of the Seleucidae and the Lagidae? Thirdly, Seeing the Kingdom of Christ did encrease by decrees in the duration of the Metal-Kingdoms, How did it encrease in the duration of the times of the Seleucidae and the Lagidae? Fourthly, Seeing the means of the encrease was by the wearing out of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, (the Stone smote the Image upon the Feet,) How did the Kingdom of Christ wear out the Dominions of the Seleucidae and Lagidae? Were they not totally destroyed some years before the Coming of Christ in the Flesh, by the means of the Romans?

All these things put together, do weaken that Principle of the Dissolution of all the Four Metal-Kingdoms at the Coming of Christ in the Flesh; and that the Kingdom of Christ did begin at the Incarnation, in the fulness of Monarchical [Page] Power. Now, because Mr Hayne In his Treatise concerning the Kingdom of Christ upon the Earth. hath laboured very much in this Point, we will take his Arguments into Consideration.

Mr Hayne.

When Herod, Pilate, and the Iewish Rulers rose up against Iesus Christ, God set him to be his King on Mount Sion, and gave him so Eminent a Kingdom, that to it all Kings, Iudges, and People must submit, or else be crushed with an Iron-Scepter. But Herod, Pilate, and the Rulers of the Iews, rose up against Iesus Christ 1500 years ago, and more. Therefore God set up Christ his Ki [...]g on Mount Sion, and gave him a Kingdom so Eminent 1500 years ago, and more.

Answer.

For the beginning of the Kingdom of Christ 1500 years ago, I yield that this is true according to the right meaning of the Scriptures. But the great Question is, Whether the Monarchical Kingdom of Christ, when the Saints of the most High shall become the Monarchical People, whether did that Kingdom begin 1500 years ago, yea or no? I do call that the Monarchical Kingdom of Christ (to speak cleerly in the Point) not when he hath a power in himself greater than any Earthly Dominion; not when by the merit of his death, and donation of his Father, he beginneth to have right to all Earthly Kingdoms, for this was given to him at his Ascension: But by the Monarchical Kingdom I understand, when the Lord Christ, after the several and respective times of the Tyrannical Kingdoms of this world, according to the free Dispensation of his Father, doth actually take into his Possession the Sovereignty over the Earth, and that his Gospel cometh to be the regent Law over the Nations. Now, this Monarchical Kingdom I deny that it began 1500 years ago. It is not fully begun as yet, though we have some beginnings thereof by the Preaching of the eternal Gospel by Luther and those that follow. The scope of the Spirit in the Revelation is to shew that this Kingdom must begin at the end of the [Page] Dominion of the Beast, or the Roman Kingdom of the latest Edition. But to come to particulars: It is mentioned, Rev. 19. vers. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. That when the Saints did sing their Halelujah at the Judgement upon the great Whore, then a voyce was heard, The Lord God Omnipotent Reigneth, vers. 6. Here I demand, Did not the Lord God Omnipotent Reign before? He did not Reign before, in the sense of that text▪ For the great Who [...]e had Ruled all the world, and had corrupted the Earth by her Fornications: all was under her Power, and she spilt the Blood of the Martyrs at her own pleasure. But at her destruction the Lord Christ did begin to Reign, and that was the time of the marriage of the Lamb, of the glory of the Gospel-Church, when the Lamb's Wife had made her self ready, vers. 7. So it is said, Rev. 11. 15. The Kingdoms of this world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall Reign for ever and ever. Here I demand, Were not the Kingdoms of this world the Kingdoms of Christ before the sound of the Seventh Trumpet, before the fall of the great City, before that time when the Kingdom of the Beast began to be destroyed? I Answer, They were his Kingdoms jure by Right, they were his by vertue of Purchase 1500 years ago, and more; but he entered not into the actual Possession till the destruction of the Tyrannical Kingdoms of this world. He received Institution▪ & jus ad rem, above 1500 years ago; but he had not In [...]uction & jus in re, till the destruction of the Beast's Kingdom. And therefore these words are specially and Emphatically added, [...], [...] Thou hast taken to thy self thy great Power, and hast Reigned. In which words the holy Spirit doth insinuate, That before the sound of the Seventh Trumpet, the Lord Christ by his own free and voluntary permission did suffer the Beast, and other Monarchical States to encroach upon him, and to detain his Power for 1260 years. At the end of this time he doth resume and take the Power to himself alone. This is the scope of the Prophecie. And for the Argument of Mr Hayne, That Christ was an established King upon Mount Sion, when Herod and [Page] Pontius Pilate conspired against him; I will further adde, That in those times when the Beast ruled over all, and when all worshipped his Image, and received his Mark, in those very times the Lamb stood upon Mount Sion, and with him 144000, having their Fathers Name written in their forehead, chap. 14. vers. 1. Now, I believe, none that understand the scope of the Prophecie will affirm, That Christ was stated in his Monarchical Kingdom in all the times of the Reign of Antichrist upon the Earth. To speak properly, These were rather the times of the Patience of the Saints, and of the Exinanition and concealment of the Glory of Christ's Kingdom. The Kings did agree to give their Power to the Beast, and must do so till the Word of God be fulfilled. When this is done, the Beast shall be destroyed, his Body shall be given to the burning Fire; and then the Lord Christ shall begin to Reign.

Mr Hayne.

It must be granted, That Christ's Kingdom when it was set up, was more powerful than Romes, which to this day never could (though assisted by the Gates of Hell) either by Might or Policy, prevail against Christ's Kingdom.

Answer.

It is true, That the Kingdom of Christ is in it self stronger than any Monarchical Kingdom whatsoever. But the great Question is, Whether it be his mind at all times to e [...]ert and put forth his Power? If this had been his mind, why did he not dash in pieces the Babylonian, the Persian, the Graecian, and the Roman Powers as soon as they had any Being? Why had they any liberty given▪them to Afflict the Saints? In these Variations and Changes of Empire, the Lord Christ would not put out his Power till the times of his Reign upon the Earth should begin. Again, We do not absolutely and simply affirm, That the Lord Christ did not exert and put out his Power in the times of the Metal-Kingdoms: For, he armed his Saints with Faith and Patience, and made them [Page] able to Suffer. But this we affirm, He did not put forth his Power to the destruction of these Kingdoms in their Tyranny and Rage against the Church. When the Babylonian stood in all greatness of Power, it could not overcome the Spirit of Christ in the Three Children. And when the Ten Horns did agree together to give their Power to the Beast, The Lamb did overcome them, for he is Lord of Lords, and King of Kings; and they that are with him, are called, and chosen, and faithful, chap. 17. vers. 14. It is manifest then, That the Lord Christ did put out his Power to hold up the Faith of the Saints, and to make them able to Suffer. But for the present he did not break those Tyrannical Empires in pieces, to make them submit to the Laws of the Gospel. He did not, nor will not exert and send forth that part of Power, till the time and season doth come when his Monarchical Kingdom shall begin. The Apostle saith, 1 Tim. cap. 6. vers. 15. In his times he will shew who is the [...], the only Potentate, the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords. He will set forth his Monarchical Sovereignty and Potency; but [...], in his own times, in that season which the Father hath appointed for his Sovereignty and Dominion. Now that time, according to the Scriptures, is at the end of the Metal-Kingdoms, and more particularly at the end of the Antichristian Kingdom. But let us proceed.

Mr Hayne.

Christ in S. Iohn's time was the Prince of the Kings of the Earth, Rev. 1. 5. Had all things given him by his Father, Luk. 10. 22. All Power in Heaven and Earth was given him before his Ascension, Matth. 28. 18. So that he was the Head of the Church his Body, and in Place far above all Principalitie, and Power, and Domination, and every Title and Name that is Named, not in this world only, but in the world to come, Eph. 1. 21, 22. Therefore at Christ's being here on Earth, or near unto that time, he had an absolute and boundless Sovereignty far above all Monarchs that here [...]ofore lived, or shall ever live hereafter.

Answer.

[Page]

To this matter I have spoken before, scil That the Kingdom given to the Son at his Ascension, was far greater than any Earthly Kingdoms whatsoever. But the Question here is, Whether did he enter into the Possession of that Kingdom, yea or no? There was a Power given to Christ at his Ascension, by vertue of which he was able to destroy the Beast, the false Prophet, the Dragon, Gog and Magog, Death and Hell, and all other Enemies: yet we see that he doth not, nor will not execute and put forth his Power in their destruction, till the time appointed of the Father, till the Saints have passed the time of their Patience and Sufferings under these Tyrants. But in this matter, let us Answer Mr Hayne with Mr Hayne. In the first Page of his Book he speaketh of the Eternity of Christ's Kingdom, and of its extent to the end of the world. And afterward in the second Page he speaketh as followeth: Of this Extent (saith he) is Christ's Kingdom: yet in regard that God hath so [...]etimes permitted Satan and wicked men in extraordnary manner to domineer, and to exercise their worldly and ungodly Power; and that at other times he hath made his own Sovereignty by remarkable Mercies and Iudgements to appear; God and Christ, upon this more glorious expression of their more Over-ruling Might, are then especially said to have a Kingdom and to Reign, Because in such times their Glory and Majesty doth more manifestly shew it self, Exod. 15. 18. 1 Sam. 12. 12. Obad. vers. 21. Rev. 12. 10. In like manner I may say, Though at the Ascension of Christ there was given to him a Kingdom, far greater than all the Kingdoms of the world; yet in regard that it hath pleased God the Father, for many Ages together, to permit Rome Imperial, and afterwards Rome Papal, in an extraordinary manner to exercise their worldly Power: And seeing also it is his pleasure, after some Ages, to make his Sovereignty known, in the destruction of the Tyranny of these States, and in setting up the Gospel as the regent Law; in this respect the Reign of Christ may be said to begin at the Dissolution of the Fourth Kingdom, in the last and Antichristian State thereof. [Page] But a little further to open the meaning of the Scriptures. When Michael and his Angels, i. e. Christ and his Primitive Martyrs, had conquered the Dragon, presently and immediately upon the Conquest this Acclamation was heard: I heard a loud voice saying in Heaven, Now is come Salvation, and Strength, and the Kingdom of our God, and the Power of his Christ: for the Accuser of our Brethren is cast down, Rev. 12. 10. Here I demand, what is meant by [...], by that Kingdom of God, and Power of Christ? You are to Note, That the scope of the place is concerning the Fight between the Lord Christ and his Primitive Martyrs on the one side, and the Powers of the Persecuting Empire of the Romans on the otherside. After a long and terrible Fight, the Dragon was overcome by the Faith and Patience of the Martyrs, by the Prayer of Faith grounded upon the Promise of God. And in the times of Constantine the Great, when the Christian Faith (as the best Expositors will have it) became Religio Imperii, the Religion of the Empire; then at that time the Kingdom of God, and the Power of his Christ was revealed to the world. The Deliverance and Salvation of the Church from under the Ten first Persecutions was much desired before, but it was not effected till the dayes of Constantine the Great. To his times then that notable expression, (the Kingdom of our God, and the Power of his Christ is come) is more immediately [...]o be applyed. By that which the Church hath had Experience of already, we may learn what is the meaning of the Spirit, when he speaketh of her Deliverance from under Antichristian sufferings, and of the future Reign of Christ upon the Earth for 1000 years. And though there was some beginning of his Monarchical Reign in the dayes of Constantine, yet that was but radiatura vel specimen Regni Christi, a glympse, or a hand [...]el as it were of the Kingdom of Christ, and of the future liberty of the Church that shall be. For that glory was Eclipsed, and the Church fell under Persecution in all Antichristian times. When those times shall be fulfilled, the Kingdoms of this world shall become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ. And so they shall continue and remain for many years, [Page] when Jews and Gentiles, both together, shall make a glorious Church under Christ their Head and King, in the latter dayes. After the destruction of the Fourth Beast, it is expresly said, The Dominion under the whole Heaven shall be given to the Saints of the most High; and that this Dominion is to continue for ever, Dan. 7. 27. Now then, If the Monarchical Kingdom of Christ did begin at the Incarnation, and so forward to continue for ever, what shall we make of the Reign of Antichrist for so many Ages together? Christ hath Reigned but a little, if we look to an exteriour Reign.

Mr Hayne.

The Reign of Antichrist, and of other Tyrants, is no impeachment to Christ's absolute Sovereignty. The wickedness of Sons, taketh not away the Fatherhood and Authority of Parents; Nor a Debauched Servant's ill carriage, argue his exemption from the Master he is subject to. David was, and continued a King, though Ishbosheth, and Saul's House, though Absolon his own Son, though Sheba a Benjamite, and many of Israel rose up against him, and submitted not to his Scepter.

Answer.

We agree, That the Tyrannical States, and by Name the [...]ntichristian, cannot be such impeachments to Christ's Kingdom, so as absolutely and finally to obstruct it in every part and point of Power. We yield also, That the Right belongeth to Christ, to be Universal Head of the Church, though Antichrist hath Usurped his Right for many Ages together. And further, Though his Jurisdiction hath been detained by others a long time, yet he hath Power enough in himself to recover it again, when the time appointed for the Dominion of the Tyrannical States is once fulfilled. But to say for the present, That the Antichristian State is no impeachment to the Kingdom of Christ, this is a marvelous thing. When a Usurpet is in the place of Government, is this no impeachment to the lawful power? All the world did agree together to worship the Beast, and to receive his Mark; and was this [Page] no impeachment to the Kingdom of Christ? The great Whore corrupted the Earth with her Fornications, and the Kings of the Earth agreed together to give their Power to the Beast: and was this no impeachment to the Kingdom of Christ? Though David was anointed King over Israel, and though by vertue of his Unction he had true Title to the Kingdom; yet so long as Saul and Ishbosheth did bear Rule, the Kingdom was not his. In like manner, Though the Lord Christ by suffering Death, and by his Unction, had Title to all the Kingdoms of the Earth; yet as long as the Tyrannical States of this world, and particularly the Antichristian Kingdom do continue, the Kingdoms of this world (in that form and manner as they shall be) are not his. And therefore at the Fall of the Great City, this expression is used, The Kingdoms of this world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ. Here is a tacite implication, That they were none of his Kingdoms before, in that sense which the text intendeth.

Mr Hayne.

You much debase and vilifie Christ and his Kingdom, in comparing it, and counting it Inferiour to Earthly Monarchies and Kingdoms.

Answer.

For the Kingdom of Christ, I acknowledge that it is far above Earthly Monarchies in largeness of Dominion, in greatness of Power, in time of continuance: Yet we do not vilifie and debase it, by compa [...]ing it with the Kingdoms of this world. We see both in Daniel and in the Revelation, That the Kingdom of Christ, and the Monarchies, are all Numbered together, and are set one in Opposition against the other; the Kingdom of Christ against the Governments of this world.

Further, We have good Reason to Affirm, That this Kingdom is not begun in that fulness and amplitude of Power as it shall have; because the Lord Christ hath not yet Ruled [Page] Universally over the known parts of the Earth, as Earthly Monarchs have done.

Mr Hayne.

That Christ hath not so Ruled, the Reason is easily given. Soloman, who excelled in Abundance of all outward and royal Accoutrements, found all to be vanity of vanities, and vexation of Spirit.

Answer.

That Christ hath not so Ruled, is because the time of such a manner of Ruling is not yet come to that fulness of Perfection as it shall have. The Scriptures do everywhere speak of his Kingdom over Jews and Gentiles in the latter dayes: and shall any imagine that there shall be no such Kingdom? And though that of Solomon be rightly applied to the Kingdoms of this world, that they be all vanity of vanities; yet we must take heed that the same things be not spoken of the Kingdom of Christ. For the Nature of this Kingdom, we desire that we may not be mistaken. We do not plead for a Personal Note. Reign, nor a literal Resurrection of the Martyrs, nor a confluence of all Sensual Delights, as many have done. That which we principally stand for, is, The Universal Subjection of the Nations to the Laws of the Gospel, and the rest of the Church from such Persecutions as have been in all Antichristian times, when the Governments of this world have been engaged to Afflict the Church. For as formerly, The Kings of the Earth being deceived, did yield a Universal subjection to the Bishop of Rome, and to the Laws made by his Authority: So the times shall be, when the spiritual Excellencies of the Gospel shall be discovered to the world; then the Dominations, Dignities, States, and Governments of the Earth, shall willingly submit to the Laws of Christ: Whole Nations shall come in, in the time of the Gospel. They that willNote. call such a Kingdom vanity of vanities, must needs call many Promises of the Scriptures, Vanity of Vanities. For many Promises are concerning the bringing in of the [Page] fulness of the Gentiles, when that Nation of the Jews shall be called.

Secondly, The Hall [...]lujah that was sung to the Lord Christ at the burning of the Great Whore, was in reference to this, The Lord God Omnipotent Reigneth, chap. 19. vers. 6. For, as the Great Whore somtimes Reigned over the Nations, when their Laws, Statutes, Customs, Priviledges, and all other things were made subject to the Authority of that Church: So the Lord Christ shall Reign, when the Nations shall willingly yield themselves up to be governed by his Scepter, and shall live in subordination to the Laws of the Gospel. Be it far therefore from any to think, That the Hallelujah was sung to Christ in reference to his Monarchical Reign, and such a Reign, when all comes to all, be but vanity of vanities. But leaving this Point, let us come to that which is more pertinent to our purpose; to the Discourse concerning the Four Metal-Kingdoms, and to the Parallel between the Ten-Horned Beast in Dan. 7, and the Ten-Horned Beast in the Book of the Revelation.

Mr Hayne.

The Beast, Rev. 13. expresseth not the very same, but a like Kingdom to the Fourth Kingdom, Dan. 7. Therefore it is not one and the same Roman Kingdom. That the Beast, Rev. 1 [...]. expresseth not the very same, but a like Kingdom, I thus prove: The Chief Mystical and Figurative terms in the Revelation, having reference to some thing in the Old Testament, express some New matter like the Old, yet not the same with the Old. But the Beast in the Revelation hath in the Figurative and Mystical terms thereof reference to the Old Testament; namely, to the Fourth Beast in the Prophe [...]ie of Daniel. Therefore the Beast in the Revelation expresseth not the same, but a like Kingdom to that in Daniel's Prophecie. What I Affirm of the chief Mystical and Figurative terms in the Revelation, is evident. For Egypt, Babylon, the New Ierusalem the Wilderness, Paradise, Manna, express new terms like [...] same.

Answer.

[Page]

I can see no Reason but the Fourth Beast with Ten [...] in the Prophecie of Daniel, is one and the same in substance with the Ten-Horned Beast in the Revelation. They are [...]et out by one and the same Character, with the same circumstances, and both Prophecies do pitch upon one and the same Roman Kingdom. And what Mr Hayne doth Alledge to [...] contrary, in my Apprehension is not of such great moment. For, what if it happeneth many times, That the [...] mystical terms in the Revelation, having reference to [...] in the Old Testament, express some New matter [...] the Old, yet not the same with the Old? What if this be true in many particulars, as in those aforenamed? yet it d [...]th not follow, That it is true in every particular. We can shew many Instances to the contrary, That the same truth is literally and historically mentioned in both Prophecies. First, The Kingdom of Christ is described to be an everlasting Kingdom that shall not pass away, Dan. 2. And is not this one and the same Numerical Kingdom with that which is mentioned in the Book of the Revelation, concerning the Dominion of Christ, that he is Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Lord Almighty? Secondly, Mu [...]h is spoken i [...] the Old Prophets concerning the future Glory of the Church of the Jews, that shall be at the Call of that Nation; and are not the same things Numerically and in terms repeated by Paul in Romans 11, and by Iohn in the Revelation?

But now let us come more particularly to enquire concerning the Ten-Horned Beast, whether he be one and the same in both Prophecies: for if Mr Hayne, or other Interpreters of his way, can make it appear, That this Beast is the Seleucian Kingdom, and the Ten Horns are the Ten Kings in a lineal Succession, we will willingly yield the truth of that which he Affirms. But on the contrary, if we can make it appear, and that by true Demonstration, That the Roman is the Fourth Kingdom; then we may conclude, That one Kingdom is [Page] Identically, Literally, and Historically spoken of in both prophecies▪ and that Iohn doth but more fully declare those things which were more fully decyphered in the prophecie of Daniel. This is that which we shoot at, to make it appear that both Daniel and Iohn do describe one and the same time of the Roman Kingdom, under the Type of a Beast with Ten Horns. This being once explained, the Doctrine of the Number 666, and other Apocalyptical Mysteries, will begin to be made clear. But seeing that Dr Willet in his Commentary upon Daniel, and in his Appendix against Grasserus, is somthing more copious in this matter, we will therefore more diligently enquire, Whether the Fourth Beast in Daniel be the Seleucian or the Roman Kingdom? The Queries are of Three sorts: The First, From the Nature of the Fourth Beast; The Second, From the Ten Horns; The Third, From the description of the little Horn.

The Queries, from the Nature of the Fourth Beast, are these:

Querie 1. How can the Seleucidae be the Fourth Kingdom upon the Earth under the Type of the Fourth Beast, seeing they are one of the Four Heads of the Third Beast going before? chap. 7. vers. 6. chap. 8. vers. 8, 22. If they make one of the Four Heads with the rest of the Successors of Alexander, they cannot be the Fourth Kingdom. The Fourth Beast must necessarily be the Roman, seeing the Third with Four Heads is the Graecian going before. But Dr Willet thus replieth:

Alexander's Four Captains were at the first Regents under him, and his Successor Aridaeus; but they became the Fourth Beast, when they erected the Kingdom to themselves.

If we put Alexander and his Successors together, we can give a cleer Reason why the Third Beast may be said to have Four Heads, because in the times of the Monarchy of the People of Greece, that Nation became divided into Four Kingdoms; as appeareth Dan. 8. 8, 22. But if we take Alexander and his Successor Aridaeus asunder from the Four Successors, I cannot see possibly how the Kingdom of Alexander [Page] in that abstract consideration may be said to have Four Heads, or that it may be decyphered properly by such a character. The Four Heads do signifie the Four Divisions of the Greek Monarchy; and can this be a Character of Alexander's Kingdom, which in it self considered had no Heads, Parts, or Divisions at all? The Scriptures speak plainly, That the Graecian was one intire Kingdom in him; and after his eradication, the Dominion began to be divided into Four parts. Therefore his Successors, quatenus Heads, had no being at all in all the times of his Dominion: Much less could they be the Characters of his Kingdom, at whose only extirpation they were to begin as Heads of the Graecian State. Besides, it would be a great work, to prove out of the Stories, That the Kingdom of Alexander was Governed by Four principal Regents in his time. And further, If it could be made appear, still this would be a great Question, Whether in the Description of the Monarchies, the Scripture would look to such inferiour Administrations? Darius the King set over the Mede-Persian Kingdom 120 Princes, Dan. 6. 1, 2, 3. and yet we do not reade that this Number of Regents is set forth as the special Character of that Monarchy. We have a clear Reason in the Scriptures wherefore the Graecian State is figured by the Type of Four Heads, scil. in relation to the quadri-partite Division of Alexander's Kingdom [...] after his death. Therefore the Notion of the Four Regents of Alexander, during his life time, I take rather to be an evasion, than a just Truth grounded upon the Prophecie, or the civil Stories.

Querie 2. How can the Kingdom of the Seleucidae be the Fourth Kingdom upon the Earth, that shall be different from the former, and shall devour the whole Earth, and tread it down, and break it in pieces? chap. 7. vers. 23. How can this be applied to them? The Seleucidae were far inferiour to the Kingdom of Alexander. Four Kings or Kingdoms did arise out of him, but not [...]—in his Strength, chap. 8. vers. 22. Further, The Seleucians were far inferiour to the former Monarchies of Babel and Persia, in greatness of Power, and largeness of Dominion. On the contrary, If we apply the Fourth [Page] Beast to the Roman, all the properties of that Beast will be verified i [...] him. First, The admirable condition of the Fourth Beast above the former. Secondly, His multi-form, and various shape. Thirdly, The greatness of terrour. Fourthly, The highest degree of strength. Fifthly, His Iron-Teeth and Brazen-Nayles. Sixthly, His Actions to devour, and to break in pieces. Seventhly, The object of his Victory, to subdue the whole Earth. Eighthly, The time of the continuance. And so the Earth hath longer continued under the Dominion of the Romans, than under any, nay, under a [...]l the Metal-Kingdoms. All these properties agree to the Roman; and I cannot possibly see how they may be applicable to the Seleucian Kingdom.

But Dr Willet replieth, That the Kingdom of the Seleucidae make the Fourth Beast, not so much in respect of greater strength, as in respect of greater cruelty and hardness of disposition against the People of God, the Iews. And therefore when it is said of this Kingdom, That it did devour the whole Earth; this is not simply the whole Earth, but the whole Earth about the Confines of the Iewish Church.

If we should grant this Principle of cruel Disposition against the People of the Jews, this would strongly prove the Roman to be the Fourth Kingdom. For the Jews suffered much from the Babylonians, much from the Persians, more from the Graecians, yet most of all from the Romans: They were under the Roman Tyranny for the space of 130 years together; and then last of all, the Nation and Church was destroyed by their means. The Sufferings of the Jews under Antiochus were great, but they were not to be compared with the last and fatal destruction of Ierusalem. Our Saviour himself doth testifie as much, when he speaketh concerning the great calamity that should come by the Romans, Luk. 21. vers. 20, 21, 22, 23. And this also is well observed by a certain nameless Writer, in a Tract concerning Antichrist and the Four Monarchies. For, (saith he) Quamvis Antiochus graviter afflixit Iu [...]aeos, tamen ea afflictio ad tempus tantum duravit, & cum illa [...] quae a Romanis facta est nequaquam conferenda. [Page] Therefore, if the greatest degree of Cruelty against the People of the Jews doth give denomination to the Fourth Beast, the greatest Sufferings of the Jews have been under the Romans.

Secondly, In the case of the Monarchies, in the Chaldee Visions I see no reason why the Jews should be called, The only People of God. In Dan. 2. there is mention made of the beginning of the Kingdom of Christ, and how that Kingdom should break the Metal-Kingdoms. Now is this verified in the Nation of the Jews? Do they only make the Kingdom of Christ? Or have they been only used as Instruments to the Dissolution of the Fourth Kingdom? Again, It is mentioned, That the little Horn did wear out the Saints of the most High, till the Saints took the Kingdom: Now, what warrant is there to take them only for the Saints of the Jewish Church? True indeed, in the Hebrew Visions there is some mention made of the People of God: but then commonly you shall see some circumstances in the text, to decypher the People of the Jews only. As for ensample: You shall read somthing spoken of the Tsebi, or the pleasant Land; of the daily Sacrifice; of the Sanctuary; of Daniel's People, and the like: But in the Chaldee Visions there is no such thing mentioned; which maketh me to think, That the Saints there mentioned, are of a more general Nature, and concern the People of God both Jews and Gentiles. Indeed it is often spoken concerning the Saints of the most High, That the little Horn did wear them out and consume them; and that at the time appointed they shall take the Kingdom. But yet it is not specified in Daniel, what these Saints are, Whether they be the Saints of the Jews, or the Gentiles, or both. Dr Willet seemeth to me to give a good Reason why they should be called, The Saints of the most High, scil. in reference to their most High Prince, the Lord Christ. The words of the text are fair for this Interpretation: And the Kingdom and Dominion under the whole Heaven, shall be given to the People of the Saints. And then in the words immediately following, His Kingdom [...] is an everlasting Kingdom, and all Dominions [Page] shall obey him, vers. 27. The Kingdom is given to the Son of man, as to the Head; and by him it is communicated to his People and Subjects after their Sufferings. By all that hath been spoken, we may conclude, That the Subjects of the Kingdom of Christ, the Members of his Mystical Body, are the Objects of the Tyranny of the Fourth Beast.

Thirdly, The great Power and Cruelty of this Beast is not only against the Saints, but against all the former Metal-Kingdoms; for, as Iron it shall break them all in pieces, vers. 40. Therefore this Kingdom is said to be more Mighty than any going before, in respect of the exercise and imployment of strength upon the former Kingdoms, and not only in respect of the particular exercise of cruelty against the People of the Jews. If this be so, we cannot say, That the Seleucian was such: but to the Roman all things agree.

Fourthly, I do yield also, that this Expression is used specially for that part of the earth about the Confines of the Church of the Jews; yet it is not the whole meaning of the text. When the Lord gave Nebuchadnezzar (the Head of the Image) a Kingdom, Power, Strength, and Glory; And wheresoever the Children of men dwelt, he gave them all into his hands; we cannot say, That he made him Ruler over all in Iudea only, but he made him Ruler over all the Eastern Countries, far and near, round about the Confines of that Church and Nation. In like manner, when the Fourth Kingdom arose and brought the Earth into a more absolute subjection, we must not only confine this to the Countries of Iudea, but we must also expound the whole Earth by some Analogie to the former Metal-Kingdoms. According to this sense, when the Fourth Kingdom cometh to the times of its Monarchical Dominion, it will be the most potent Kingdom that ever was about the Confines of the Church, and it will bring the former Kingdoms into the greatest subjection. If you apply this to the Kingdom of the Seleucidae, there will be no correspondence at all; but to the Roman all things do agree. For that Kingdom was absolutely the most mighty, and the most powerful that ever was about the Church of the [Page] Jews. And, as the People of Rome had Iudea under their Obedience; so they had the greatest Empire about Iudea, from East to West, that ever was.

All these Reasons laid together, shew plainly, That the Fourth Beast is the Roman Kingdom; and so consequently the Ten-Horned Beast in Daniel and the Revelation is all one. It is not only one and the same in Analogie and similitude of Expression, but it is Literally and Historically one and the same. The Roman Kingdom is described in both Prophecies by the same Emblems and similitudes.

And thus much concerning the Queries of the Fourth Beast in the more general Nature thereof. We will now descend more particularly to the Ten Horns. And here we will shew that they cannot be the Ten Kings lineally succeeding in the Seleucian race; but they are so many inferiour Realms of the Roman Empire.

Querie 1. If the Ten Horns be Ten Seleucian Kings, there will be Eleven Horns in all: and how can Ten Horns be the Character of the Beast? If in the whole succession the Number of Kings be Eleven in all, the Beast is more properly called, Unde [...]em Cornupeta, the Beast with Eleven Horns. The words are plain: The ten Horns are ten Kings that shall arise, and another shall arise up after them, that shall be diverse from the first, vers. 24. Therefore if in the whole succession there be Eleven Kings; first Ten, and then another that came up after them; why is the Beast set forth by the special Character of Ten Horns? The little Horn must needs be the more cruel, and more eminent, according to the text: And yet by this rule, that which is more principal, shall be excluded from the denomination. But Doctor Willet hath this evasion; to wit, That the little Horn did not come up after the ten, but it came up as the last of them. And so Piscator rendreth the words: Et Cornua decem ex illo Regno, nempe decem Reges exsurgent, & postremus resurget post illos, & is diversus erit à prioribus. And in his Scholia upon the 8 verse, he thus speaketh: Vox Chaldaica [...]—quae versu sexto & septimo significat alium, hic valet ultimum seu postremum. Nam Antiochus Epiphanes, qui [Page] per Cornu illud figurabatur, fuit ultimus inter decem illos Reges qui hîc per decem Cornua figurantur. But let it be supposed that the Chaldee word may indefinitely be taken, yet it is to our purpose to consider what the scope of the text will admit. In the former verses, when the description of the Babylonian-Lyon was ended, it is there mentioned, I beheld [...]—another Beast like a Bear, not a latter Beast that came up out of the Sea. For the scope of the Spirit is to shew the rising of Four several Monarchies, each one diverse from other. So in the present case, after the description of the Ten Horns, the little Horn is said to be another that came up after them, to shew the notable diversity between it and the Horns that came up before. And so this is the meaning of the text, That another Horn, much differing from the former Ten in Nature and Condition, came up after them in order of time. Secondly, Suppose we should let this Translation pass, Postremum exsurget post illa, a latter shall arise after them: Here I ask, What, and who are they after whom the little Horn shall arise? Are they not the Ten Kings, signified by the Ten Horns? and is not then the litle Horn the Eleventh in the same succession? Mr Mede in his Apost. pag. 74. thinketh that the words do best run in this sense, Out of this Kingdom ten Kings shall arise, and another shall arise [...] behind them, as the 70 translate [...]. This plainly sheweth the rising of Ten Horns, and the little Horn rose behind them in the order of time. Thirdly, Let us go to the scope of the words going before; For Daniel would know the truth of the Fourth Beast, and of the Ten Horns, and of the little Horn that came up after them: And the Angel's Answer is sutable to the Question: The ten Horns are ten Kings that shall arise, and another shall arise up after them, and shall be diverse from the first, vers. 24. Now is not here a plain Antithesis, or Opposition betwixt the Ten Horns and the little Horn that came up after? Upon these grounds we may conclude, That there are Eleven Horns mentioned in the text. Now if these be Eleven Kings lineally succeeding, why is the Beast called and set forth by the Character of Ten Horns? Why is the [Page] most Tyrannical Prince left out of the Number? But on the contrary, If you take the Fourth Beast for the Roman Kingdom, and the Ten Horns for the Ten Kings that shall arise in a famous change of State, all things will agree: For though the little Horn be more Tyrannical than any of the Ten, yet it is not of that Edition of Horns from whence the Beast fetcheth his proper denomination. In the Goat of Graeciae, chap. 8. there are Six Horns in all. First, Alexander, the great Horn: Secondly, His Successors, Four notable Horns: And then Thirdly, Out of one of them Antiochus Epiphanes, a little Horn. Yet we do not say, That Six Horns, but Four Heads and Four Horns are the proper Characters of the Graecian Kingdom. For in a famous mutation of State, that Monarchy became Divided into Four Realms. So likewise, though the little Horn, scil. the Papacie, was more terrible than any of the Ten going before; yet the Ten Horns give the denomination to the Beast, because the Roman in a famous alteration of Government was par [...]ed into Ten inferiour Dominions. There is a delineation of the Roman by the same Character, in the Book of the Revelation, chap. 17. vers. 12. Now whereas Dr Willet maketh the Question, How ten Kings may arise out of one Kingdom at one time? I Answer, As well as Four Kings or Realms may arise out of one Graecian Kingdom at one time. The Four Horns are Four Kings or Kingdoms which shall stand up [...] out of that Nation, chap. 8. vers. 22. So the Ten Horns are Ten Kings that shall arise [...]—ex Regno, out of that Fourth or Roman Kingdom, chap. 7. vers. 24.

Querie 2. If the Ten Horns be Ten Kings in a lineal succession, and the little Horn is one in the same row or order, why doth the Spirit put such a difference between the one and the other? According to the text, there is a great distance between them: they were of a former Edition, this of a latter: They came up together, and were of the same kind; this after some pause or interval of time came up after them, was diverse from them, before whom Three of the former were plucked up by the roots. If you apply this to the row [Page] of Seleucian Kings, I cannot see how this can be true, either in the general, or in the particular accommodation. In the general it is not true; for the Seleucian Kings Reigning one after another, make but one Dynastie. For though some of the Kings were more mighty than others, and some more cruel against the Saints of the Jewish Church; yet all make but one succession of Kings in the same Kingdom. Now, if you look to the text, there is mention made of a double change or form of State: the first is when the Ten Kings arose; the second, when the little Horn arose up after them, which was diverse from them, and subdued three of the former Kings, and so became Great. The scope of this Scripture is concerning the Division of the Fourth Kingdom into Ten Regencies or Divisions at one time: and after some space of time, it sheweth how the little Horn arose and subdued three of the former Realms. We cannot see how this can be spoken so properly of Kings Reigning one after another in the same Policie or Government. Neither is it true in the particular Accommodation: for they that will have Antiochus Epiphanes to be the little Horn, they have not yet cleared the Point, First, How Antiochus Epiphanes was the tenth Seleucian King: Secondly, How he was more Potent than his Father Antiochus Magnus, or Seleuc [...] Nicanor: Thirdly, How he did pluck up three of the former Seleucian Kings by the roots: Fourthly, How he did wear out the Saints of the most High, till the Saints did take the Kingdom which should be for ever and ever. Fifthly, How he did continue his Dominion and Persecution so long till the Beast was destroyed, and his Body given to the burning fire. All these Particulars have not yet▪ been cleared in Antiochus Epiphanes. Somthing hath been spoken in the Commentaries, which I take rather to be Evasions, than just Answers. On the contrary, if you take the Roman for the Fourth Kingdom, all things will agree. For in a famous Revolution of Empire, that Monarchy became divided into ten inferiour Realms, as it is set forth by the rising of the Ten▪ Horned Beast our of the Sea, Rev. 13. 1. After this, another rose out of the Earth. This in Daniel is called [Page] the little Horn, which is the Emblem and Type of the Papal Government. Now to this last Edition of Roman State, all the aforementioned particulars do agree. First, it is evident, That this was more dreadful than any of the Horns going before. Secondly, That it did eradicate some of the former, to have elbow-room in Italy. Thirdly, That it did wear out the Saints a time, and times, and half a time. Fourthly, That the wearing out of the Saints was till the Body of the Beast was cast into the burning fire, and the Saints of the most High did begin to Reign with Christ, chap. 19. vers. 20. and chap. 20. vers. 4.

Querie 3. If the Ten Horns be Ten Kings, and the little Horn the last King, why is it said, I considered the Horns, and behold there came up amongst them another little Horn? vers. 8. If these be so many Kings in a lineal succession, how could the little Horn that came last of all, be said to come up, [...]—inter ea, among them, to have Being and Existence with them? We do willingly yield, That Antiochus Epiphanes was one of the Seleucian Kings, and reigned in the same row with Antiochus Magnus, and Antiochus Theos. Yet we cannot say that he came to reign with them; for when he began, they had no Being at all. This is true in all successions; when he that cometh after beginneth to Reign, then they that go before cease to be. But it is otherwise spoken of the little Horn, he came up among them, to wit, among the Ten Horns; he broke three of them in pieces; and for the residue, they had their Existence and Being together at one and the same time. You will say, That this is but a similitude, and similitudes are not to be pressed in every particular. I Answer, That Types and Similitudes used by the Holy Ghost, ought to be pressed so far as he intendeth. If therefore by ten Horns he did intend a lineal succession of Kings, why did he not keep the same method which he used to do in the description of such Successions? In the former verses he speaketh of the rising of Four Beasts out of the Sea; the first like a Lyon, the second like a Bear, the third like a Leopard, the fourth was diverse from the former. All these are said to come up [Page] out of the Sea one after another: by which it is clear, That there are so many successions of Monarchy. But when he cometh to describe the Ten Horns, there is nothing to prove such a subalternation, or succession of one Horn after another, but rather the contrary. The Ten Horns are Ten Kings that shall arise, and after them a little Horn shall arise; and so all shall exist together: But when the Babylonian-Lyon rose up out of the Sea, and after that the Persian-Bear, and Graecian-Pard; it is no where said, That these Beasts did arise up inter se invicem, and that they had an existence at one and the same time. For, this were to confound that order, succession, and subalternation of the Four Monarchies, which the holy Spirit intendeth.

But Dr Willet doth make this Reply: The Beast in the Revelation is called a Beast with seven Heads, which signifie so many forms of Government in a lineal Succession. So the Beast may be called a Beast with ten Horns, to wit, so many Kings succeeding one another.

Answer. If he could shew as good Reason wherefore the ten Horns are ten Kings in a lineal succession, as the seven Heads of the Beast are so many successive forms of Roman Government, we would yield up the Cause. For it is expresly said, There are Seven Kings, five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come, chap. 17. vers. 10. Now there is not the least iota, word, or apex in Dan. 7. to prove such a succession, but rather the contrary. To me therefore it is very strange, That the holy Spirit should depart from his usual method in Typical and Periodical Prophecies; that he should speak of ten Kings lineally succeeding, and yet leave no Character or Mark in the text to know the succession. I may say, It is not ordinary with him so to do. Now, take the ten Horns for the ten Kings of the Roman Empire, it is clear, That these had Existence with the Papacie, or little Horn. The Angel thus speaketh concerning the ten Horns, These have no Kingdom as yet, but receive a Kingdom one hour with the Beast, vers. 12. Both Scriptures plainly shew, That the ten Kings are of one and the same time, though in order of succession the little Horn came up after the ten.

[Page] Querie 4. If the ten Horns be ten Kings, and the little Horn be the tenth, why is it said, That only three of the former were plucked up by the roots? This implyeth, That there was no eradication of the residue of Horns, but they had some being with the little Horn. You will say, That only three were plucked up by the roots, because the little Horn did actually subdue and humble three, as the word [...] doth signifie. Well, be it so, still the Question is, which three of the former ten were they that the little Horn did eradicate? Dr Willet, and other Interpreters of his way, take it for a granted truth, That he did pluck up Three Kings that Reigned immediately before. But now do they prove this from the text? The words are without any restriction or limitation, He shall subdue three Kings, vers. 24. Before whom three of the first Horns were plucked up by the roots, ver. 8. Therefore to my understanding, when the Scripture saith, That the little Horn came up among the Ten, and did subdue Three only, this is to me an Argument, That the residue of Horns were not brought in subjection, but had an existence as Kings in the times of the little Horn. Secondly, It is said of the little Horn, that he shall be diverse from the first, and shall subdue three Kings. If you take the Three Kings for Three lineally Reigning, how could the taking away of such a Number of Kings make the little Horn more powerful than the former? In the corrupted State of the Ten Tribes, we read somtimes, That he that came after did take away the life of the Prince that went before; yet this was never judged as a cause of greater power and strength to come to the Kingdom by such Usurpation, 2 King. 9. 3. Hos. 1. 4. On the contrary, If you take the Ten Horns for Ten States or Realms into which the Fourth Monarchy became divided, here will be a clear Reason why the little Horn became unlike to any of the former, because he brought Three Kingdoms under his Dominion. We read that Alexander's Dominion was plucked up by the roots; and this was the cause of the greatness of the King of the South, and the King of the North, Dan. 11. 4, 5, 6. So in the present case, the eradication of Three States or [Page] Dynasties before the little Horn, is the cause of the greatness of his Dominion. Thirdly, Let us come to particulars: what Three Kings were they whom Antiochus did subdue? They say, Ptolomaeus Philopater the King of Egypt, Seleucus the Brother of Antiochus, and Demetrius. But it is mentioned D [...]n. 11. 21. that he shall come peaceably into the Province. Now what peaceable coming is this, when he shall begin with the extirpation of Three Kings? Again, how can Ptolomaeus Philopater be one of the Ten Kings of the Seleucian line? No Historian did ever reckon Ptolomaeus Philopater among the Seleucians. And for his over-running of Syria, this doth no more make him one of that Succession, than Tamerlains over-running the Turkish Empire doth make him one of the Ottoman line. Now on the contrary, let us take the little Horn in that sense as the text naturally requireth, all these difficulties will be avoided. The Beast with Ten Horns is the Roman, as divided into Ten lesser Kingdoms. The little Horn is the Papacie. Now to give elbow-room to this in Italy, Three of the Ten Kings, lately raised out of the Ruines of the Empire, were all plucked up by the roots. By the conquering of which Three, and by the voluntary resignation of the rest, the little Horn became more stout than his fellows, being made greater than they in a triple proportion.

Object. But you will say, Which are the three Kingdoms that the little Horn did subdue? and how do you prove the truth of this out of the Stories?

Sol. The First is, The Kingdom of the Goths in Italy. For the Bishops of Rome were under the Dominion of these Kings, they were sent as their Ambassadors, and lived under the fear of continual Persecution; and there was nothing in the Old Empire to keep back the Papal power in the growth and the increase thereof, but there was the same impediment from these Gothish Kings. Now it is clear in the Stories, That this Government was wholly extinguished by the valiant Narses, in the time of the Emperor Iustinian. And for the means to procure it, we may easily believe, That the Bishop of Rome had some hand in the extirpation of these Kings, that he might be freed from fear.

[Page]Secondly, After the Ruine of the Gothish Kings, the Exarchs of Ravenna had some Dominion in Italy. Now when the Controversie grew hot, between the Bishops of Rome and the Emperors of Constantinople, about the matter of Images (as Mornay well obser [...]eth in his History of the Papacie, Progress. 27.) the Popes then called in the Lombards against the Exarchs, to the ruine of both Estates. And for the Dukedom of Rome (for so we must now call it) the People of that City upon the Difference concerning Images in Churches, being engaged with the Popes in Rebellion, wholly shook off the yoke of the Emperor, and took an Oath to be subject to the Pope in all Points. And here (saith Baronius, An. 726) was an end of those Dukes and Governors which the Emperors were wont to send to Command in Rome, and the Places adjoyning. Sigonius also speaketh much to the same purpose, That the Dukedom of Rome was translated from the Graecians to the Pope of Rome, by reason of their wicked Heresie and Impiety. But that which he calls Heresie, is no other but Iconomachia, or a standing against Image-worship.

Thirdly, The Kingdom of the Lombards growing very Mi [...]hty, by the Conquests over the Exarchs; these also the Bishop of Rome did subdue, humble, and eradicate by a Forreign power: For, he brought in the French into Italy, which did willingly hearken to the Motion. By these several passages it is clear, That the Papacy did destroy Three new-Erected States; by means whereof, the Temporal Dominion of that Church in Italy was much established. And so, according to the Story, it is made clear, That the little Horn did humble and subdue Three of the former Horns, and did pluck them up by the roots.

Querie 5. If the Ten Horns signifie Ten Kings in a lineal Succession, Why is it that in Daniel and the Revelation, the Beasts, their Heads, and Horns, usually signifie Realms and Dominions, and not Persons individually Reigning? The Mede-Persian Monarchy is Typed by a Ram, and the two Horns are not two particular Kings, but the two Kingdoms of Media and Persia, Dan. 8. vers. 24. So the Goat is the [Page] Graecian Monarchy, and the Four Horns are Four Kingdoms that shall arise out of that Nation, vers. 22. Also, the Ten Horns of the Beast in the Revelation do not signifie Ten particular Kings, but so many Realms and Dominions of the Roman Kingdom. Further, The Beast which came out of the Earth with Two Horns, Rev. 13. 11, signifieth the Papacie; and the Two Horns his bi-partite Jurisdiction; to wit, His Spiritual and his Temporal Dominion. There is good Reason to be rendred for this, because Persons do change, Governments do abide. And it is the manner of the Spirit, when he doth describe the Tyrannical Kingdoms of this world by Beasts, to decypher them by that which is Permanent and Characteristical, and not by that which is fluent and changable at every turn. To me therefore this is a good Reason (considering the Analogie of both Prophecies) that the Fourth Beast should be set forth by the Character of Ten Horns, and that these Horns should signifie so many Realms and Dominions of the Fourth Kingdom.

Object. But it will be objected, in the description of the Graecian State under the similitude of an He-goat, That Alexander is the Great Horn that came up, and Antiochus Epiphanes is the little Horn. Therefore the Beasts and their Horns in Daniel and the Revelation, do not alwayes signifie Tyrannical Empires, Dynasties, and Governments; but somtimes denote particular Persons that Reign.

Sol. One Exception must not prejudice a general Rule. He that can, let him give another Example. Our Position is built upon the general use of both Prophecies. But Dr Willet, and the Interpreter [...] of that way, do build only upon one particular Instance, exempt from the ordinary Method. Secondly, We grant, That in the description of the He-goat, the first Horn is Alexander the Great, and the little Horn is Antiochus Epiphanes; yet in the Case we speak, neither of these are any way to be ranked in the Number of Horns, that do Characteristically and specifically distinguish the Graecian from the other Three Monarchies. It is expresly said, That a Third Beast c [...]me out of the Earth with Four Heads. Now these are not [Page] such a Number of particular Kings, but they are so many Realms, States, and Dominions that shall stand up [...]ut of that Nation, as we have above proved, and are the special Notes of that Kingdom. If therefore the Ten Horns be the Characters and Badges of the Fourth Beast, they are so many Realms, Divisions, and Regencies of the Fourth Empire. The course of the Spirit, is to set forth different Empires under different Types, and to distinguish Kings or Kingdoms of one and the same time, from those that come after one another in a lineal Descent. Now they that hold the Ten Horns to be so many Kings in the Seleucian line, what Letter or Syllable is in the text to prove such a succession?

Querie 6. Sixthly, If the Ten Horns of the Fourth Beast be Ten Kings succeeding one another, rather than one and the same Empire divided into Ten inferiour Realms; why should the holy Spirit in the Iron-Metal, chap. 2. speak so much of the Division of this Kingdom, That in the Feet and Toes of the Image it should be divided into a plurality of States, that these should mingle themselves with the seed of men, to preserve an Union? All this sheweth, That the Fourth Kingdom toward the latter times should be divided into many lesser Dominions. And if we may interpret one Scripture by another, both speaking of one and the same matter, the particular Number of Realms is represented by the Ten Horns. Now, they that will have Ten Horns to be Ten Kings lineally Reigning, cannot infer from hence any Division of the Fourth Kingdom; nor consequently the need of any mixture of State. Kings Successively Reigning, need no mingling one with another to preserve the Union of a Kingdom. On the contrary, if we take the Ten Horns for Ten Kings or Kingdoms at one and the same time, there is nothing more ordinary than to establish Leagues and Confederacies betwixt Kingdoms and States that are contemporary each with other. For that which they Alledge concerning the Division betwixt the Seleucidae and the Lagidae, we have spoken thereof already, and therefore we will not repeate the same things again.

[Page]Let us now in the last place come to those Queries concerning the Collation of the little Horn mentioned Dan. 7. and that little Horn spoken of chap. 8. For they that differ from us, stand much upon this, That Antiochus Epiphanes is signified in both Scriptures under the same Emblem.

Here we agree with them in Two Points: First, That the Prophecie of Daniel doth repeat one and the same thing, for the better understanding of the Visions. But then there must be some good evidence from the text, to prove the things repeated to be the same, though the Expression is divers. Now what good proof is there to make it appear that the little Horn, chap. 7. and that little Horn, chap. 8. are one and the same? Secondly, We agree, That Antiochus Epiphanes, the Graecian Antichrist, doth resemble the Roman Antichrist in many things; and that the one is the express Image and Type of the other. In these particulars then they do agree, and are parallel.

Antiochus, the little Horn, Dan. 8. | The Papacie, the little Horn, Dan. 7.
1. Out of the Graecian Kingdom there came forth a little Horn, vers. 9. | 1. After the Ten Kings a little Horn did arise out of the Fourth Kingdom, vers. 8.
2. He did destroy the Mighty, & the Holy People, vers. 24. | 2. He shall wear out the Saints of the Most High, vers. 21, 23.
3. He shall magnifie himself in his heart against the God of gods, vers. 25. | 3. He shall speak great things against the Most High, vers. 25.
4. By him the daily Sacrifice shall be taken away, vers. 11. | 4. He shall think to change Times and Laws, and they shall be given into his hand, vers. 25.

In these several Particulars it is manifest, That the little Horn mentioned chap. 7. and chap. 8. do both agree. But yet whosoever he is that diligently considers the Scriptures, he shall finde them to differ in the most remarkable circumstances.

[Page]First, They differ in the State or Government where they arose; the little Horn, chap. 8. rose out of one of the Four Divisions of the Graecian State; but the little Horn, chap. 7. arose out of the Kingdom Typed by the Fourth Beast, which all our Arguments asorementioned, prove to be the Roman Kingdom.

Secondly, They differ in the preparation and moulding of the State before the rising of either of them. For the little Horn, chap. 8. arose out of one of the Four Divisions of the Greek Empire: But the little Horn, chap. 7. arose after the Division of the Roman Empire into Ten inferiour Realms.

Thirdly, They differ in their Actions. For the little Horn, chap. 8. is only said to rise out of one of the Four Kingdoms of the Graecian Empire; but the little Horn, chap. 7. is said to arise after the Ten Kingdoms of the Roman Empire: And that he did pluck up Three of the former Kingdoms by the roots. This is cleer from the scope of the text.

Fourthly, They differ in the object of their Tyranny. For though the little Horn, chap. 8. is said to destroy the Holy People, vers. 24. yet the whole scope of the text sheweth that only the People of the Jews are here intended. Now for the little Horn, chap. 7. he is said to wear out the Saints of the Most High, but there is no circumstance in the text to prove that these are the People of the Jews. There is not one word of taking away the daily Sacrifice, or of the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation, or of Daniel's People, or the pleasant Land, or any such passages which the Prophet useth when he speaketh of the Jews. All that can be said, is this, That he shall change Laws and times: But from hence we cannot infer, That these must be the Laws and Times of the Jewish Church. For the Apostle, when he speaketh of the Great Antichrist, doth use such an expression, He shall sit in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God, 2 Thess. 2. And yet he doth not mean the literal Temple in Ierusalem.

Fifthly, They differ in the time of the Continuance of [Page] their Tyranny. The little Horn, chap. 8. shall prevail, and the Sanctuary shall be troden down unto Evenings, Mornings 2300, vers. 14. Now for the little Horn, chap. 7. he shall wear out the Saints a time, and times, and half a time, till the Saints themselves take the Kingdom. How this time, and times, and half a time, should be all one with the 2300 Evenings, Mornings, I cannot discern. If you apply this to the Roman Antichrist, a time, and times, and half a time, is the full sum of the Antichristian Tyranny, Rev. 12. 14.

Sixthly, They differ in the Event. For after the 2300 Evenings Mornings, the Temple was cleansed, vers. 14. and after that the little Horn had finished his times, he was broken without hand, vers. 25. All these things were truly fulfilled in Antiochus Epiphanes. But if you apply the little Horn, chap. 7. to Antiochus, there can be no right accommodation. First, That little Horn did wear out the Saints till the Son of Man came in the clouds of Heaven: but so did not Antiochus Epiphanes. Secondly, The little Horn did wear out the Saints a time, and times, and half a time, till the Dominion under the whole Heaven was given to the Saints: but so did not Antiochus Epiphanes. Thirdly, The little Horn shall continue till the time of the Destruction of the Fourth Beast. But the Kingdom of the Seleucians ended not at Antiochus; many of that line succeeded afterwards in the Kingdom. And there was a good space of time from the death of Antiochus to the destruction of the Seleucian State by Pompey the Great. But Dr Willet replieth, Though the Kingdom was not utterly ruined, yet the Glory of it was much abated at Antiochus his death. By the like Reason I might argue, That there was an end of the Babylonian Kingdom at the death of Nebuchadnezzar, because the Glory of that Kingdom did afterwards abate in Evilmerodach. I might argue also, That the Graecian Kingdom ended in Alexander, because the Kings that arose after him did not arise in his strength. Others there are that do Alledge the words of the Eleventh Verse: I beheld then, because of the voyce of the great words which the little Horn spake. I beheld even till the Beast was slain, and his Body given to the [Page] burning fire. From hence they gather, That the little Horn was first broken off; and when the Beast was Hornless and harmless, then he was destroyed. Such a sense may be admitted. For we read in the Scripture, That the Davidical Kingdom should be destroyed for the sins of Manasseth King of Iudah, 2 King. 23. 26. yet the destruction was many years after his death. Though such a sense may be admitted, yet it will not stand in the present case; for in this Chapter the little Horn is said to continue till the destruction of the Fourth Kingdom. It is said in express terms in the 26 Verse, That the Iudgement shall sit, and they shall take away his Dominion, to consume and to destroy it to the time of the end. Here I demand, Whose Dominion is it that they shall take away? Is it the Dominion of the Fourth Beast, Hornless and harmless? No: This is immediately spoken of the little Horn that should wear out the Saints of the most High, and should change Laws and Times, a time, and times, and half a time. Touching this little Horn it's said, That the Judgement shall sit, and they shall take away [...] his Kingdom. They shall bereave him of his Dominion. Therefore it is clear, That the times of the little Horn shall continue to the end of the Beast's Kingdom, and to the beginning of the Kingdom of the Saints. And yet further, Daniel did desire to know the truth of the Fourth Beast, and of the Ten Horns, & of the little Horn that came up after them. I beheld, (saith he) and the same Horn made War with the Saints, and prevailed against them, until the ancient of dayes came; and judgement was given to the Saints of the most High, & the time came that the Saints possessed the Kingdom, vers. 22. From these words also it is manifest, That the times of the little Horn do extend to the beginning of the Kingdom of the Saints. Now how this should be verified in Antiochus Epiphanes, it is not as yet made so clear to me. But if you apply this to the Papacy, all things will agree: for it is manifest, That the Two-Horned Beast in the Revelation must wear out the Saints a time, and times, and half a time, Rev. 12. 14. Rev. 11. 7, 8, 9. Now when this time is once fulfilled, the Beast and the false Prophet shall both of them be cast into the Lake of fire; and [Page] the Reign of Christ and of his Saints shall begin upon the Earth, Rev. 19. 20. Rev. 20. 1, 2, 3, 4.

But by the way, because some stand for a Personal Reign of Christ at the end of the Fourth Kingdom, because then theNote. Son of Man is said to come in the clouds of Heaven; I Answer, That they have no Reason to take that strictly, which we can prove from the Harmony of Scripture, ought to be construed with some kind of Latitude. These things are shewed to Daniel (who saw afar off) as joyned together; and yet in experience they do not meet in the same juncture of time. As for example, A man that traveleth in Wales, or some such-like hilly Country, while he is yet at a long distance, he may see the tops of two great Mountains as though they were near together: yet when he cometh to look upon them with a more distinct view, the one may be ten or twelve Miles beyond the other in the distance of place. It is well known also, That when the Apostles made mention of the coming of Antichrist, they also spake of the end of the world, 2 Thess. 2. What then? shall we argue, as many do, That the Discovery of Antichrist will not be till the end of the world? This cannot be. We that live in these times, may see more clearly, That Antichrist hath been revealed many hundred years ago; and the end of the world is not yet come. If therefore a Reason be demanded, why these two, The Revelation of Antichrist, and the End of the World, are coupled together; we may say, That the Apostles, who saw afar off, spake of these things, because they should happen in the last times; though in the particularity of time the one might be before the other. In like manner, the Prophet Daniel, who lived very remote from the Dissolution of the Fourth Kingdom, from the glorious Kingdom of the Saints, and from the coming of the Son of Man in the clouds of Heaven; to him all these things in the general, and in the lump may be represented together, when in a more distinct and particular consideration, the one may be before the other. The consuming of the Kingdom of Antichrist with the word of his mouth, and the establishment of the Kingdom of the Saints, may be before the [Page] Personal appearing of the Son of Man in the Clouds of Heaven.

But now it is not to our present purpose to meddle with this Difficulty. That which we have to say, is only concerning the Fourth Beast, That either he must signifie the Seleucian or the Roman Kingdom. But, we have proved by many Arguments, against Dr Willet, and others, That the Seleucian cannot here be meant. Therefore we may safely conclude, That the Fourth Beast with Ten Horns, is the proper EmblemeNote. and Type of the Roman Kingdom. From whence also we gather, That Daniel in his Prophecie, and Iohn in the Revelation (so far as this Point is concerned) do speak of one and the same matter. And by the Interpretation of the one, we may finde out the sense of the other Prophecie. There is no Principle that can be more useful and demonstrative than this, To discover the Truth by the Harmony of the Prophecies.

Now, let us go to the beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, and so let us see how there is a Chain of 666 years from that beginning, to the Universal Headship of the Beast, This shall be the Subject of the Chapter following.

CHAP. VI. That the Beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, is not from the time of Julius, or Augustus Caesar, or from any other vulgar Beginning; but precisely from that instant, when the Church of God came under the Dominion of the Romans, 60 years before the Birth of the Lord, and 666 before the going forth of the Decree, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all the Churches.

[Page]

THere are in this Proposition Two Parts that need special Confirmation: First, That the Roman did begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Church came under the Dominion of that People. Secondly, That from this beginning there is the space of 666 years, to the Universal Headship.

For the Beginning of the Dominion of the Romans, according to different Relations, men may differently state the Epocha thereof. But laying aside all other considerations, we are to note in what sense Daniel doth begin it as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. And here I stand upon it, That we are principally to look to the state of the Church; How the Church, and the Continent adjoyning, came under the Dominion of that People.

For the clearing of this, we will also demonstrate two things: First, That the Beginning of this Fourth Monarchy is to be stated according to Church-relations. Secondly, We will shew, out of the Stories, in whose times, and by whose means, the Church came first under the Dominion of that People.

Now, That the Roman doth begin, as the Fourth of Daniel's Kingdoms, when the Church came under the Obedience of that People, may be proved by these Arguments.

ARGUMENT I.

[Page]

Where the former Three Kingdoms in Daniel's Image did begin, by the same Analogie we are to proceed in stating the Beginning of the Fourth Kingdom.

But the former Three Kingdoms in Daniel's Image, did begin, each of them in their several times, when the Church and the Confines adjoyning came under their Dominion:

Therefore, the Roman, as the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel's Image, began when the Church and the Confines about the Church came under the Obedience of that People.

The Major is clear: For none will Deny but that the Roman doth hold Analogie with the three former Empires in their beginning. And for the Minor, we prove it by Induction of Singulars. As for Ensample.

Example 1. First, In the Babylonian Kingdom (the first of Daniel's Four) there were many Potent Kings that did Reign in that Succession, before the times of Nebuchadnezzar; for he began to Reign in the 144 year of the Aera of Nabonazzar. Now the several Names of the Kings, the times of their Reign, and the order of their Succession, are all set down in the famous Canon of Ptolomy, as we shall shew afterwards. But not to go far for an Example; There is mention made of one Merodach-Baladan, (in the Canon aforesaid, called by the Name of [...]) that he sent Ambassadors to Hezekiah King of Iudah, 2 King. 20. 12. There was then a Succession of Babylonian Kings before Nebuchadnezzar. You will say, Why is he then called, the Head of Gold, as much in sense as the first Babylonian King? I Answer: Though he was not simply the first Babylonian King, (others Reigning before him) yet he was the first Prince of the Babylonians that brought the Jewish Church, and the Confines about that Church, within the Babylonian Empire.

Example 2. Secondly, That Kingdom of the Medes and Persians, whereof Darius and Cyrus were the Founders; if we go strictly to work, the Foundation of these was laid before. For it is manifestly plain by the testimony of the Greek Historians, and by the Chronographical Tables now in the [Page] hands of all men, That there was a Potent Race of the Kings of Media, down from Arbaces the Mede. Yet for all this, Darius and Cyrus are the true Founders of the Mede-Persian Kingdom, because they first brought the Jewish Church under the power of the Medes and Persians. And that which is very remarkable to our present purpose, though it be a thing famously known among Historians, That Cyrus began to Reign in the 55 Olympiad; though he subdued many Nations, & Propagated the Persian Empire very far: yet the Scripture taketh no notice of that beginning, but then only when the Church came within the limits of the Persian Dominion. And therefore it is well Observed by Piscator, in his Scholia upon Ezra, chap. 1. vers. 2. That the Edict came forth in the first of Cyrus King of Persia. This (saith he) is the first year of his Reign in Babylon.

Example 3. The Third Kingdom in Daniel's Image, is that of the Graecians, of which Alexander became the Head at the overthrow of Darius. The rough Goat is said to be the Monarchy of the Graecians; and the Great Horn, to wit, Alexander, is expresly called the first King, Dan. 8. 21. Now, How can he be said to be the first King of the Graecians, seeing there were many Mighty Kings before him, in, and over that Nation? To let pass all the other States of Greece, in Macedonia it self, Philip, the Father of Alexander, was a Potent Prince. But the Answer is, as before, He was the first Monarchical King that subdued the Territories of the Church. There was never any Graecian Prince that extended the Sovereign Rule of that People so far Eastward, to the Confines of the Church, as he. And therefore he is expresly called, [...] the first King of the Graecians.

From all the forementioned particulars, it is clear, That the former Three Kingdoms in Daniel's Image began, each of them in their several times, when the Church came under their respective Dominions. And so the Assumption is proved. If then we proceed in the same Analogie, we must necessarily say, That the Roman began as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Jewish Church, and the Continent adjoyning, [Page] came first under the Sovereign Lordship and Command of the People of Rome.

But yet for further confirmation of this truth, we will produce some new Arguments, to prove, That the Metal-Kingdoms are Numbred in relation to the Church.

First, The Revelation of these Metal-Kingdoms was specially for the Saints and People of God. For though one end was, to Discover to Nebuchadnezzar what Successions of Tyranny there should be after him; yet this was principally for the Churches sake, and the Churches use. And therefore it is mentioned, This Secret is not revealed unto me for any wisdom that I have above all living, but for their sakes that shall make known the Interpretation to the King, vers. 30. Therefore in the delineation of these Tyrannical Empires, the Lord doth specially intend to Reveal to the Church those Changes and Vicissitudes of times that she should meet withal. In Relation to her then, There is primarily a Discovery of these things.

Secondly, These Metal-Kingdoms are also Discovered, to shew in what Region, or Part of Time, the Kingdom of Christ should begin. All the Scriptures in the Old Testament, point mainly to Christ; some, point to his Parentage; others, to the place of his Birth; others, to the Tribe that he should come of: So this in special, pointeth to that period of time when his Kingdom should begin. These are the words of the text: In the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed. From whence it is manifest, That the Monarchies are reckoned according to the alterations which shall be in and about the Borders of the Jewish Church. For, Where should Christ be Born, but in Iudea? And hereupon he is called, The King of the Jews.

Thirdly, If we go to that Expression so often mentioned, Dan. 11. where the Seleucian is called, The King of the North; and the Dominion of the Lagidae, The King of the South: Here we must necessarily Affirm, That these Empires are said to be North and South in some special relation. And [Page] the Reason is clear, Because Iudea did lie in the middest betwixt them, as a Lamb betwixt Two Wolves; having the Seleucidae on the North, and the Lagidae on the South. Now, that the People of the Jews are herein principally respected, the words of the Angel are clear: I am come to make Thee Understand what shall befal Thy People in the latter dayes, Dan. 10. 14.

From all which we gather, That the Monarchies are specially Numbred according to Church-relations. And therefore the Roman began as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Church came first under the Obedience of that People. Let us now proceed to the Second Argument.

ARGUMENT II.

Where the Graecian Kingdom, Typed by the Brass-Metal, and the Third Beast, made an end; there did the Roman, typed by the Iron-Metal, and the Fourth Beast, begin.

But at the overthrow of the Seleucian Kingdom in Asia, and at the Conquest of Judea, the Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal, and the Third Beast, did make an end:

Therefore, at the Overthrow of the Seleucian Kingdom, and at the Conquest of Judea, the Roman, typed by the Iron-Metal, and the Fourth Beast, began.

The Major is evident; it being a ruled case in the Body of the Metal-Kingdoms, That where the former ceaseth, the latter doth begin. All the Question is concerning the Assumption, Whether the Graecian ended as the Third Metal-Kingdom at the destruction of the Seleucian? Here I finde that Interpreters are greatly divided. They agree in it, That the Graecian is the Third Kingdom; but they are divided about the particular time when that Empire ended. For, all the Successors of Alexander came not under the power of the Romans at one and the same time. His Successors in Greece ended, when Macedonia was made a Roman Province by Aemilius the Consul, 166 years before the Birth of our Lord. His Successors the Seleucidae in Syria and Iudea, ended, when all that tract of [Page] Land was brought under the power of the Romans by the means of Pompey the Great; & this was done about 60 years before the Birth of our Lord. His Successors, the Lagidae in Egypt, were made a Roman Province by Augustus Caesar; & this was done 28 years before the Birth of the Lord. So then it is plain, That all Alexander's Successors fell into the hands of the Romans; yet all fell not under the Roman Obedience at one time. The great Question is, Where we shall set the Ending of the Graecian Kingdom, as typed by the Third Beast, and the Brass-Metal? And this, I say, must needs be at the overthrow of the Seleucian, 60 years before the Birth of the Lord.

First, In the Original distribution of Alexander's Kingdom, Iudea is pleaded to belong to the Seleucian, Polyb. lib. 5. And therefore the Seleucian is that Successor to whom the Title of the Monarchy doth principally appertain. I do not Deny but the Lagidae somtimes made their Incursions into Iudea, as may be seen, Dan. 11. But in the Original Constitution of the Kingdom, Iudea was allotted to the Seleucian. And that which may strengthen our Argument, if you reade Iosephus, the Book of the Macchabees, and such-like Stories, you shall find, That the Sufferings of the People of the Jews have been wholly in a manner from those Successors of Alexander, that were of the Seleucian line. And this to me is a great Reason, wherefore the Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal, is rather to end at the destruction of the Seleucian Kingdom.

Secondly, At the Overthrow of the Successors of Alexander at several times, the Fall of the Seleucian was only at that time, when Iudea, Ierusalem, and all that Continent of Land fell under the Power of the Romans. Mr Mede, and some Historians, do look principally when Greece, the Head-Province, was brought into subjection to the Romans by Aemilius the Consul: they look here more specially to the ending of the Greek, and beginning of the Roman Empire. But at this very time, Iudea was under the Tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes; and the true Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal, [Page] and the Third Beast, in great vigor and sulness of strength. For, though in those times Greece, their Native Country, was taken away from the Graecians; yet nevertheless, that People had still the sovereign Dominion in and about the Borders of the Church. And this continued for the space of 106 years, till the time of Pompey the Great; then the Selcucian Kingdom, and together with it, all the Lands of the Jewish Church, fell under the Dominion of the State of Rome.

And, that which may adde to the force of this Reason, let us Consider, First, The limits of the Land of Promise. Secondly, The Governments that there should be erected. For the limits of the Land of Promise, (the Seat of the Church for 2000 years) these are the words of the Charter to Abraham: Unto thy Seed have I given this Land, from the River of Egypt to the great River Euphrates, Gen. 15. 18, 19, 20. This was performed in the dayes of Ioshua, who brought Israel into the Possession thereof. Secondly, For the Governments here erected; The Scriptures do take notice that these Countries were under the Government of the Judges; and then after that, under the Kings of the Line of David, to the times of the Captivity. And then it was revealed to Nibuchadn [...]zzar, in the Image of Persecuting Empires, what Succession of Tyrannies should be in and over those Countries. For as somtimes the Kings of the Line of David did bear Rule in the Land of Promise: so they continued the Government till the People of Babel got the Dominion. So the People of Babel carried on the times of the Golden-Metal, till the People of Media and Persia did take the Kingdom. And after that, the People of Media and Persia did continue the times of the Silver-Metal, till they were subdued by the People of Greece, under the Conduct of Alexander the Great. And after the Victories of Alexander, the People of Greece went on with the sovereign Dominion over all the Territories of the Church, from the River of Egypt, to the great River Euphrates, till the destruction of the Seleucian Kingdom by Pompey the Great. And then all that tract of Land came under the [Page] Dominion of the People of Rome. So then, we may conclude, As the Seleucian is the immediate Successor of Alexander in and over the Continent of the Church: So where he ended, as the Third Metal-Kingdom over the Church, there the Roman did begin as the Fourth.

Object. But some, perhaps, may Reason, That the Lagidae, the Successors of Alexander in Egypt, were not made Subject to the Romans, till the times of Augustus.

Sol. Grant this to be true, That Augustus did extinguish the last Successor; yet the Monarchy was taken from the People of Greece before, when the Romans came into Asia, and brought all those Eastern Countries about Iudea within the compass of their great Empire. It is one thing for the People of Greece to have a Fragment of the Kingdom of Alexander remaining; and another thing for that People to have the sovereign Dominion over the Continent of the Land of Promise. And this they had, till the Overthrow of the Seleucian Kingdom by the Roman State.

But Helvicus, in a little Treatise intituled, Chronologia Universalis, doth stiffly argue the Point, That the Graecian Kingdom did not end as long as the Lagidae, one of the Successors of Alexander, did remain. These are his words: Quatuor Reg [...]aunam Monarchiam constituunt, non per se separat [...]m considerata, sed conjunctim hoc axioma mereri, haud secus ac de mortuo Principe omnes Praefecti Conjunctim repraesentant Principem: Adeo si pars Ditionis ab extero quodam avellatur, illa non Praefecto sed toto Principatui decedat. Ita Romani, ereptâ Asiâ, Occupatá Macedoniâ, diminuêre quidem Monarchiam, extinxisse vero & ad se transtulisse dici non potuerant antequam ultimam partem, Aegyptum subegerunt, pag. 50. From which words of his it is clear, That the Graecian Empire was diminished only at the Overthrow of the Seleucian Kingdom; and it was extinguished at that time only when the Lagidae were brought under the Power of the Romans. But herein he is greatly deceived: for if we must Affirm, That each Metal-Kingdom doth continue as long as any Fragment thereof doth remain, what shall we say by the meaning of this Scripture, [Page] As for the rest of the Beasts, their Dominion was taken away; but their Lives were prolonged for a time? Dan. 11. 12. This plainly sheweth, That after the Imperial Dominion was taken away, there might be some prolongation of life; some inferiour Dominion, as long as any Relique remaineth. This is true in some sense after the death of Alexander the Great: when his Kingdom was divided among his Successors, there was some diminution of the Monarchy, because these Successors did not stand up in his strength; And yet for all this, the Empire of that Nation did still abide. And further, when Aemilius the Consul subdued Perseus, there was a greater defalcation; yet nevertheless, The Graecian Monarchy continued the most prevailing about the Borders of the Church. But afterwards in the times of Pompey, when those Eastern Countries were brought under the People of Rome, then there was not only a diminishing, but a plain abrogation of the Empire of the Graecians. For then the Graecian did not only lose the Imperiality, in a more general sense, but the Imperiality (here principally intended) about the Borders of the Church. And therefore, where the Seleucian made an end, there the Roman began.

Thirdly, The Seleucian, of the Four Successors of Alexander, was the most prevailing, and the most eminent Pri [...]ce: Therefore, at the Ruine of the Seleucian, we do rather place the end of the Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal, and the Third Beast.

That the Sele [...]cian was the most notable of all Alexander's Successors, we prove,

First, From the Testimony of the Scriptures. For it is expresly said, That a Mighty King (scil. Alexander the Great) shall stand up; but when he shall stand up, his Kingdom shall be broken, Dan. 11. 3, 4, 5. Now, this came to pass after his death; his Kingdom was divided to Four Successors, the Kings of Syria, Egypt, Asia, Greece. For the Kingdom of Asia, that [...]oon vanished: and the Kingdom of Greece, or Macedonia, was very remote from the Confines of the Church. All the description is limited to the Two Successors, [Page] Syria, and Egypt; and of these Two, that of Syria was the more Potent. The King of the South (meaning Egypt, shall be strong, and another of his Princes shall be stronger than he, vers. 5. that is, The Seleucian Prince in Syria, called the King of the North, shall be stronger than the other Succes [...]or. And further, Concerning the Seleucian, it is added, His Dominion shall be a great Dominion. This plainly sheweth, That the Seleucian is the most eminent, and the most notable of all the Successors, according to the Testimony of Scripture. Secondly, This is clear by the Testimony of Historians. For the Stories of the times plainly shew, That the Seleucidae did possess Syria, Babylon, and part of Asia; and, as some will have it, they possessed all from Phrygia, to the River of Indus. Thirdly, It may be confirmed by Reason: for the Antigonidae in Asia, that were one of the Four Successors, were subdued by the Seleucian: and therefore by the Addition of this, the Seleucian must needs be the greater Dominion. Fourthly, Here is the Consent of Modern Expositors; for Iunius, Broughton, Rolloc, Piscator, W [...]llet, and other Interpreters of this way, do pitch upon the Seleucian as the principal Successor. I do not say, That their Position, in the particular Application, is true: but that which I stand upon, is, The ground of their Reasoning in a more general sense. For if they Affirm the Seleucian to be the fourth Kingdom, in their judgement there must be somthing more eminent and remarkable in that Potentate, above all the rest of the Successors. Wherefore else should they appropriate the Fourth Metal-Kingdom to him only? Lastly, We are to have special regard unto this, rather than to any of the other Successors; because whatsoever is spoken in the Prophecie of Daniel concerning the Graecian or the Third Metal-Kingdom, is specially meant of the Seleucian Kings. As for Ensample: A great part of the description, chap. 8. and chap. 11. is concerning Antiochus Epiphanes his rising, greatness, cruelty against the Saints, and his polluting the Sanctuary. Now, out of which of the Four Successors did he spring? Was not his Original out of the Seleucian stock? And did he not Reign as a Seleucian King? For the Angel speaking [Page] of the Fall of Alexander, and the Rising of the Four Successors, proceedeth in these words: [...] and out of one of them came forth another little Horn. Now, if you enquire, which Successor was that One from whom Antiochus Epiphanes did spring; Did he not arise out of the Seleucian Family?

By all that hath been said, it is clear, by the Testimony of Scriptures, by the authority of Historians, by the weight of Reason, by the consent of Interpreters, and by the sufferings of the Church, That the Seleucian is the most eminent and notable Successor of Alexander. Therefore we do conclude, That we have more special Reason to end the Third Metal-Kingdom at the destruction of the Seleucian, rather than at the destruction of any other successor. If we must end at the the destruction of the Seleucian; where he endeth, the Roman must begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

ARGUMENT III.

When all things needful to the being of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, began first to be applicable to the Roman State, at that instant of time did the Roman begin as the Fourth Kingdom.

But at the time of Pompey's Victory over the Seleucian, and his reducing of the Territories of the Church, all things needful to the being of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, began to be applicable to the Roman State:

Therefore, at the time of Pompey's Victory over the Seleucian, and his Reducing the Territories of the Church, the Roman did begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

For the Major, none will Deny, That the Roman did then begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when it did receive all things necessary to the being of that Kingdom. Things do then begin, when they receive all things necessary to their being. All the Controversie is about the Minor, to wit, That the Roman had all things necessary to the being of the Fourth Kingdom and the destruction of the Seleucian. This is proved in these Particulars.

Particular 1. When the Fourth Kingdom beginneth, it must exercise sovereign Dominion over many inferiour Kingdoms. [Page] And so far Melancthon's definition of a Monarchy doth hold true, though Bodin doth much deride it in hi Method of History, chap. 7. So saith Melancthon: Monarchia est summa unius Reipublica potentia, quae aliarum opes & cop as super are possit. A Monarchy is the supreme Power of one Common-wealth, which can easily excel the Riches and Plenty of all other Common-wealths whatsoever. And so could the Roman State, in those times, go beyond all the Kingdoms of the Earth, when the [...]ewish Church came under the Obedience of that Nation or People.

Particular 2. When the Fourth Kingdom beginneth, it must not only exercise sovereign Dominion over many inferiour States, but also sovereign Dominion over many inferiour States in and about the Borders of the Church. Now, the Roman did first begin to do this, at the destruction of the Seleucian Kingdom, and at the reducing of Iudea to the Obedience of the People of Rome.

Particular 3. The Fourth Kingdom did then begin, when all the Three former Metal-Kingdoms had fulfilled their several and respective times. But the People of Babel, of Persia, and Greece, had then only compleated the times of their Monarchical Rule in and about the Territories of the Jewish Church, at the Overthrow of the Seleucian Kingdom: Ergo, &c.

If we put all these Particulars into one sum, The Fourth of Daniel's Kingdoms may be thus described, To be the Fourth tyrannical State, which in its times, at the end of the Three former, is to bear Rule over all the Earth; but more specially in and over the Churches Continent. This is the true definition of the Fourth Kingdom, so far as such a matter may be defined. For, First, The thing Defined, and the Definition, are Convertible. Secondly, The most Essential Attributes of the Fourth Kingdom are mentioned. Thirdly, They are all mentioned, therefore this is a true Definition. Now, all these things, necessary to the being of the Fourth Kingdom▪ began to be applicable to the Roman State at the Overthrow of the Seleucian, and the Reducing of Iudea by Pompey the Great.

[Page]

Object. But here perhaps some will Reply, Julius Caesar was the First Roman Monarch: Therefore the Roman, quatenus the Fourth Monarchy, did begin at the time of Julius Caesar, and no [...] at the time of their Free-State.

Sol. If you take a Monarchy for a Form of Government in and by One only, I acknowledge Iulius Caesar to be the Foundet of that Monarchy: For, he was the first Prince that changed the Free State into the Government by O [...]e. But I justly question, whether this be Daniel's meaning, That everywhere, and in every point of time, these Dominions must necessarily be under one Head. To say the truth, This is but a Tradition borrowed from the custom of Speech. They take it for a granted truth, That these Kingdoms must be so Constituted; but this doth not alwayes necessarily hold. The Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal, was under one Head in Alexander the Great. But after that, it came to be under Four Heads, in the times of his successors. Nay, in the inter-Regnum, in the vacancie, it was scarcely under any Head at all. The Roman Kingdom was under one Head in the time of the Caesars. After that, it came divided into Ten inferiour Realms. Nay, there was a time when there was an intercision of Roman Majesty; the Beast was wounded in one of his Heads. And last of all, when the Fourth Kingdom was destroyed, the Dominion, and the greatness of the Dominion under the whole Heaven, was given to the Saints of the most High, Dan. 7. 27. This is expresly said to be given to the People of the Saints, in opposition to Four kinds of People that had the Dominion in the times of the Four Monarchies going before. All these Particulars shew, That it is not alwayes necessary to the Being of Daniel's Four Kingdoms, That the particular Form of Administration should be under one Head. It is a good and a material Observation of Helvicus, in the aforementioned Treatise, pag. 3. Quamobrem (saith he) nihil movemur Aetymologiae Graecâ ex [...] & [...] quam Bodinus ostendit in Methodo Histor. cap. 7. Cum per Monarchiam nihil aliud intelligan us quam imperium in mundo summum, à Daniele praesiguratum, quod Deus potentiâ prae [Page] caeteris instruit, ut caetera illud respiciant. And in very deed, if we narrowly look to the words of the text, though these Kingdoms are familiarly called the Four Monarchies, this is meant chiefly of their Latitude and sovereignty of Dominion, as they are so many summa Imperia. But it is not necessary that these Dominions should be alwayes under one Head: and therefore, whereas it is said, That God gave to Nebuchadnezzar a great Kingdom, and a second arose up after him, and a Third that should bear rule over all the Earth; and lastly, a Fourth Kingdom, as strong as Iron, which shall bring all into subjection: From all this we may collect, That these several Kingdoms must have supreme Dominion over inferiour Realms; but it is not necessary to supreme Dominion, That one man alwayes must bear Rule. And therefore look what sovereign Dominion Nebuchadnezzar began over the Church, the same did descend in as large a way, and in as ample a manner upon the Romans, in the times of their Free-state, when the Church came within the precincts of their Dominion. There is nothing then doth exclude, but that the Roman might begin as the Fourth Empire in the time of their Freesta [...]e: For then they became supreme Commanders about the Borders of the Church.

Object. 2. But if you Alledge, That this is the way to confound the Free-state and the Monarchy of One together, which ought not to be done;

Answ. It is the plot of the Spirit not to look upon the several Forms of Roman Dominion, but upon the Roman as opposed to one Graecian, one Persian, one Babylonian Dominion going before. The scope of the Prophecie is to shew, That the Earth, especially the parts of the Earth about the Territories of the Church, should fall under the sovereign Command of Four sorts of People. And further, It is the scope of the Spirit to shew, while these several Dominions are in their flux and succession, Christ shall be born, and his Kingdom shall be set up. If this be so, we need not fear the confounding together of Two several kinds of Government into One. It is enough for our purpose, that the Roman was Imperium [Page] in mundo summum, the prevailing Dominion over the Earth at that time when the Church of the Jews came under their sovereign Lordship and Power.

But yet further, They that stand for such a Beginning of the Roman Empire at Iulius Caesar, I desire they would Answer this Question. In the Tables of the Consuls it is manifest, That there is the space of 17 years from the Conquest of Iudea to the Empire of Iulius Caesar. Now concerning this Number of years, it must be either reckoned as a Chasme in the Prophetical Chronologie; or else it must be applied to some one of the Four Metal-Kingdoms. But it cannot be reckoned as a Chasme in the Prophetical Chronologie. For it is clear from the Scriptures, That these Four Monarchical States must continue one after another in a lineal succession; and when their times are in flux and succession, then the Kingdom of Christ shall begin. Therefore this portion of time from the Conquest of Iudea to the Monarchy of Caesar, must necessarily be reckoned as appertaining to one of the Four Kingdoms. If so, it must either appertain to the Graecian Kingdom typed by the Brass-Metal, or to the Roman typed by the Iron-Metal. For none will be so absurd as to apply it either to Babel or Persia, which were destroyed long before. Now, they that apply this term of time to the Graecian Kingdom, how can they make their Position good, seeing that People were brought under the Power of the Romans? But if you apply this to the time of the Roman typed by the Iron-Metal, you give up the Cause, to wit, That the Roman began as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom in the time of their [...]ree-state.

Object. [...] [...] will Reply, The Four Pers [...]uting States of the world are compacted together into one Image; but the Romans in the time of their Free-State did not Persecute the Church: Ergo.

Sol. By the like Reason you may argue, That Cyrus did not begin the Persian Kingdom, nor Alexander the Graecian, because neither of these Monarchs did actually afflict the Church. But if you shall say, Though they raised no actual Persecution [Page] in their own persons, yet they did first bring the Church within the verge of that Dominion, which in its times did notably afflict her; I may say the same of the Romans. For if it may be supposed, That they did not afflict the Church in the times of their Free-state, yet then she came first within the verge of that Dominion, where were the [...]orest Persecutions that ever were. In the Book of the Revelation, there is again and again mention made of the Sufferings of the Church under Roman Tyranny; And when she was to bring forth her Man-Child that should Rule all Nations with a Rod of Iron, when she cried in pains to be Delivered, a great red Dragon with seven Heads and ten Horns did lie in wait to Devour her Child, chap. 12. All do agree, That this noteth the Sufferings of the Church under Roman Tyranny. There must then be some particular instant of time when the Church first came under that Tyranny, and there we must set the date of the Tribulation.

Secondly, Whereas it is Affirmed, That the Romans did not Afflict the Church in the times of their Free-state; this I do plainly Deny. For let us hear what is spoken by Iosephus: for he, I presume, in this matter, is able to give us the best information. Thus saith he: Hircanus and Aristobulus, through their Dissentions and civil Broyles, were the cause of that Servitude that fell upon the Iews. For, we have lost our Liberty, and have been subdued by the Romans, Antiq. lib. 14. ch. 8. And further he addeth; That which is to be lamented, the Romans in a little time have drawn from us more than 10000 talents: and the Royalty, which before was an Honour reserved to the High Priests, hath been bestowed upon men of obscurity, Antiq. l. 14. c. 8. But if we go to Particulars, it is a thing famously known to* And besides the Testimonies of Josephus, Dio the Historian [...]. [...] [...] [...] Iews [...] Tax [...]d by Gabinius, [...]. 3 [...]. all Posterit [...], how Crassus did rob the Temple at Ierusalem.

And when all this is done, shall we say, That the Jews suffered nothing from the Romans during the times of their Free-state? If we look to the times of Nehemiah, we may well conceive that these were some of the best times of the Jewish Church: Yet mark what is expressed in the Confession of the Levi [...]es: Behold, we are Servants this day: and for the Land [Page] that thou gavest unto our Fathers to eate the Fruit thereof, and the good thereof; behold, we are Servants in it, and it yieldeth much encrease unto the Kings whom thou hast set over us because of our sins. Also, they have Dominion over our Bodies, and over our Cattel at their pleasure, and we are in great distress, chap. 9. vers. 36, 37. Here was then no publick Persecution for Religion, only their Vassalage under the Persian Kings is here noted. And may not all things be rightly applied to the Romans when they came to have supreme Dominion in the Land of Promise? Were not the Bodies, Lives, Goods, Cattel, of the Jews, and all that they had, at the Roman devotion? Nay further, if we will compare the times that went before, with those that come after, we shall find, before the Romans came into Iudea, that the Jews had indifferently well asserted their Liberty against the Tyranny of the Seleucian Kings; as may appear in the Stories of the Macchabees, that rose up for the defence of their Country. But from that time as the Roman Legions entred Ierusalem, and a Conquest was made over the Churches Continent, the Jews did totally and finally lose that Liberty, to the destruction of their City and Temple. And that which is to be noted, The Christian Church also hath been under Roman Tyranny, more or less, to this very day; as may appear by the Book of the Revelation, and the Stories of the Church.

Now then, if we put all together, we may conclude, That all things neeful to the beginning of the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel's Image, began to be applicable to the Roman State at the destruction of the Seleucian Kingdom, and at the subduing the Territories of the Church. And therefore we do here fix the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

ARGUMENT IV.

Where the Story of the Gospel doth insinuate the beginning of the Roman to be, that is the true beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

But the Story of the Gospel doth insinuate the beginning of the Roman to be in the time of their Free-state, when [Page] the Churches Continent came first within the Verge of their Dominion:

Therefore, within the time of their Free-state, when the Churches Continent came under the Verge of that Dominion, is the true beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

The Major is plain: for we cannot but think that the Story of the Gospel doth rightly expound the true beginning of the Fourth Kingdom. And for the Minor, That the Story of the Gospel doth insinuate the beginning of the Roman to be in the time of their Free-state, we have these Instances that follow.

The Evangelist being to write the Story of the Gospel, and particularly the entrance of Christ into his Ministery, he hath these words: In the fifteenth year of the Reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Iudea, and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, and his Brother Philip Tetrarch of Iturea and of the Region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the Tetrarch of Abilene; the Word of the Lord came to Iohn, the Son of Zacharias, in the Wilderness, Luk. 3. 1, 2, 3. Here I demand, What hath the Evangelist to do with the times of the Romans, being a Government so alien to the affairs of the Church? I Answer: There be Two Reasons wherefore he Numbreth the times according to the Roman accompt.

The First is, To shew the Truth of Daniel's Prophecie in the Image of Persecuting States. For there it is expresly said, That in the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, Dan. 2. 44. Now the Evangelist expoundeth this to be the Kingdom of Christ, and that the Roman in particular is the Metal-Kingdom, in whose times the Kingdom of Christ did begin. And he doth leave it upon Record, That the Lord Christ had a solemn Inauguration into his Office in that part of time when Tiberius was Emperor, in the fifteenth year of his Reign, when Pontius Pilate was Governor of Iudea, &c. Now, if it be the scope of the Evangelist to shew, That the Lord did begin his Office in Preaching the Gospel when the Romans did bea [...] [Page] Rule, there must be a particular instant of time also, when all in Iudea fell under the Dominion of that People; and that in the sense of the Gospel must be the Epocha, or term of the Roman Kingdom.

Secondly, The Evangelist doth so punctually Number the times according to the Roman Government, because then Iudea (where the Gospel began to be Preached) was under the Command of the People of Rome. And the Evangelist doth no more in the times of the New Testament, than what the Prophets and ancient Writers had done in the times of the Old. As for Ensample: Those Prophets that lived in the times of the Kings of Iudah and Israel, as Isaiah, Ieremy, Hosea, dated their Prophecies from the Reign of those Kings. And from that time that the Kings of the Line of David were taken away, it was the use to reckon by the times of the Four Monarchical States. So Daniel and Hez [...]kiel, who lived in the times of the Babylonian Empire, do reckon their Visions by the times of the Babylonian Kings: And after them, Ezrah, Nehemiah, Haggie, and Zachary, who lived in the times of the Persian Monarchy, dated their times by the Reigns of the Kings of Persia. And as for those Ecclesiastical Writers that lived in the times of the Graecian Kingdom (as the Author of the Book of the Macchabees) they accounted by the years of the Kingdom of the Greeks. In like manner, the Evangelists, living in the times of the Romans, date the Story of the Gospel by the Roman account. In all which they do secretly imply, That the Roman is the Fourth Metal-Kingdom; and it began so to be, when the Church of the Jews became subject to the People of Rome. So long the Stories of the Church were Numerable by the Roman account.

But let us adde another Testimony out of the same Evangelist, where he telleth us, chap. 2. vers. 2. A Decree went forth from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed: [...] this taxing was first made when Cyreneus was Governor of Syria. Now whereas he saith, That all the world should be taxed; this is meant only of the world under the Roman obedience. And here we Affirm, When Iudea and the Countries near [Page] Bordering, became Members of this [...] or Roman world; then did the Roman begin as the Fourth of Daniel's Kingdoms. The Evangelist being to speak of the Birth of the Kin [...] of the Jews, his special purpose is to shew how that particular Continent was under the sovereign Power of Augustus Caesar at that time▪

Object. 1. But here it may be Objected, How could Augustus tax Iudea, when it was under the Power of Herod the King?

Sol. This matter is solidly Disputed by the learned Spanhemius, in his Dubia Evangelica, part. 2. dub. 2. pa. 157. The sum of that which he doth deliver, cometh to this issue: Though Herod was King, he had not jus summum, the supreme Dominion; he had only jus subalternum, a Right and a Power meerly by the courtesie of Augustus. And therefore he citeth a passage out of Appianus, That as Darius was the King of Pontus, and Polemon of Cilicia; so Herod was King of the Jews; that is, meerly by favour and courtesie. Secondly, He sheweth, That there were often Appeals from Herod to the Romans: and therefore he was compelled to plēad for himself before Antonius at Laodicea; and before Augustus, after the Battel of Actium at Rhodes. Many more Arguments he brought, to prove that his Government was meerly Precatious, and at the will of the Romans. Now for that particular time when the Romans began to have the sovereignty over the People of the Jews, this was at the times of Pompey the Great. These are the Authors own words, pag. 160: At a sane erat conditio populi Iudaici tempore Macchabaeorum qu indo à Iudâ Macchabaeo foedus primò cum Romanis initum ubi Iudae [...] vocantur [...] populi Romani rescripto Sena▪ us ad De [...]ctrium à quo premebantur, 1 Mac. 8. Sed quam [...]rimum à Pompeio Magno subacti fuere, societatis nomen in servitutem ab [...]r, & illi aequè ac aliae gentes d [...]victae Romanis vectigales facti eorum imperio accessêre. Ab e [...] tempore Iudaeorum gens in Clientelâ Romanorum fuit, à qu [...]bus Reges pro arbitrio instituebantur vel destituebantur & tales quidem, quibus precarium & limitatum erat imperium, à nutu eorum suspensum qui Romae rerum pot [...]ebantur. [Page] In these words of his, he doth plainly distinguish what the People of the Jews were before the Conquest of Judea by Pompey, and what they were after. Before the Conquest, they were Friends, Allies, and Auxiliaries; and after that, their society was turned into servitude; and as other Conquered Nations, so the Jews were made Tributaries to the Empire. From that time, the Nation of the Jews was alwayes under the Dominion of the Romans, by whom their Kings were either set up, or plucked down at pleasure. And for the manner of their Rule, it was meerly limited, hanging upon the good will of them that had the supreme Command at Rome. Now if this be so, I leave it to any man to judge when the Roman did begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. According to these Principles, he must needs begin at the times of Pompey, when the Church was brought under the Power of the Romans.

Object. 2. Why is it said, That the taxing was when Cyreneus was Governor of Syria, and not rather when Herod was King of the Iews?

Sol. The Answer is clear; That though Herod was King of the Jews, yet Cyreneus was the principal Agent of the Romans in the Tax; and Iudea was but a Member annexed to the Province of Syria. Maldonate upon the place (to my apprehension) speaketh satisfactorily: For, saith he, Cyreneus was not the Governor of Judea, but of Syria: but because Judea did then belong to the Province of Syria (as all Authors do deliver) it was his Office to tax not only Syria, but Judea also. And in very deed, much is spoken in the Roman Story, That Iudea was a Member annexed; and Ios [...]phus calleth it [...], the Apendix, or the Additament of Syria. If we go to the Original, we shall find in the Stories. That when the Seleucian Kingdom was destroyed, Syria and Iudea, both together came under the Power of the Romans, by the means of Pompe [...] the Great. And here we set the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

But because Spanhemius doth seem to go another way, and doth stand upon it, That Iudea was not a Member annexed to [Page] Syria, till the time of Archelaus, when Iudea was made a Province. Let him now give his Answer, Why the Birth of Christ is recorded by the Evangelist to be in the times of the Oecumenical Tax of the Roman World? His Answer is this: Ut non tantum res tam illustris Charactere temporis illustri consignaretur, sed & tali qui responderet vaticiniis Propheticis: not only that so famous a matter should be decyphered by so famous a Character of time, but by such a famous Character of time, which should Answer the Predictions of the Prophets. And then in particular, he citeth those words of the Prophecie of Daniel, In the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, chap. 2. vers. 44. And then he concludeth upon the Premises, in these words: Descriptio enim Iudaeorum sub Augusto erat publica servitutis professio, & tessera Obsequii quod debebatur Principi Extero, adeóque [...] advenisse [...] illud [...] quo Messias nasci debuit, & lapis sine manibus è monte excindi. The Tax of the Iews under Augustus, was a publick profession of their Servitude, and a Badge of that Homage which was due to a Forreign Prince; and therefore a clear Demon [...]ation that that fulness of time was come, in which the Messiah should be born, and in which the Stone should be cut out of the Mountain without hands. From these words of his, we do conclude, That in the sense of the Evangelists, the Roman is the Fourth and last Metal-Kingdom. For when the Lord Christ was born, the Jews did yield their Homage and Obedience to the Romans, as to those that were set over them. But if we do enquire after the time when they came to be Homagers, it was at the time of Pompey the Great. Therefore in the sense of the Evangelists, we must there set the beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

ARGUMENT V.

That which doth necessarily spring from the [...]r Principles who do most authentically expound the Monarchies, that is the true beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

But the beginning of the Roman, at the time of their Free-state, when the Church came first within the Verge of their Dominion, is such: Ergo.

[Page]The Major is plain: For we cannot reject that beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom which doth necessarily spring from the Principles of the most Authentick Expositors. We do in substance take that for truth which is implyed, as that which is plainly expressed. But for the Minor, That the beginning of the Roman Monarchy was at the time of their Free-stare; and that this doth spring from the Principles of the most Authentick Expositors: This is proved by the enumeration of Singulars.

First, The most approved Interpreters do hold, That all the Four Tyrannical Empires are compacted into one Image; and though they differ in some particulars, yet they all agree in the greatness of Dominion. In this sense nothing doth exclude the Roman from being one of the Four.

Secondly, They agree, That all these Tyrannical Empires, compacted into one Image, continue a succession of that Lordship which the first (scil. the Babylonian) did take from the People of the Jews. If this be so, the Roman must begin as the Fourth of Daniel's Kingdoms at that time only when the Church of the Jews came under their Dominion. For though the Romans were a mighty State, and had gained to themselves a great Power in the West; yet they were not the sucsessors of Nebuchadnezzar in that Monarchy which he had begun, till they had taken in the Eastern Countries, and brought the Jewish Church within the Power of their Kingdom. But when this matter was once effected, then did the Roman begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. And this doth necessarily arise from the Principles and Foundations of such as have best Expounded the Metal-Kingdoms.

Object. But some perhaps may alledge, You have formerly taught, That the Metal-Kingdoms do not only respect the People of the Iews, but the People of the Gentiles also, when the Gentiles come to be the Church of Christ.

Sol. This I confess to be a Truth: Yet withal, in the right stating of the beginning of the Four Kingdoms, we must have only respect to the Nation of the Jews. For when all these Kingdoms began, and in particular the Fourth and the last, [Page] there was no other Church in all the world, but that of the Jews only. Afterwards, by the Preaching of the Apostles, the Church did greatly encrease; and the whole Empire, in its just Latitude, from East to West, from North to South, was the Seat, and the Place of the Church. And hence it is, That the Spirit in the Revelation doth discover her State according to the changes of time in the Empire of the Romans. But yet however, The Doctrine of the forementioned Interpreters will strongly inforce the beginning of the Roman, when Iudea came under the Power of that People, seeing there was no Church in all the world but that of the Jews only.

Object. But if it be further Alledged, Why do you call this a Principle of the most Approved Interpreters; seeing you your self do not Allow their Exposition in some Particulars?

Sol. So far forth as the Exposition is Approved, I do build upon it; and it doth strongly inforce the Conclusion. And for the kinds of Interpreters, I will shew who are the most Approved, and why they are so called. After such times as it pleased the Lord to Reveal to Daniel the Four Ages of the Church, under the Type and Similitude of Four Metals in the Image; this Discovery hath been variously received. Some only having a glaring light of the Truth, have turned it into Fables; and it is very probable, That Ovid in his Metamorphosis received some hints of the Four Metals of Daniel's Image, when he spake of the Golden Age under Saturn, and of the Silver Age under Iupiter, &c. We must not think whatsoever is spoken by this Poet, to be altogether a Fable: That which he saith concerning Deucalion's Flood, in many particulars it was a Fable of his own making; yet in the general ground we all know that it is a Scripture-Truth, that there was a Deluge to drown the world. So he speaketh of the Gyants, and of their heaping of Pelion upon Ossa; we may conceive that in this he had some respect to the Gyants before the Flood, and to the building of the Tower of Babel. So in the present case, when he spoke of the Four Ages of the [Page] world, of the Golden, the Silver, the Brass, and the Iron-Ages; though in this matter (to use the Apostles Expression) he turned the Truth of God into a Lye, yet in the ground it is true, That the times of the Church are divided into Four Ages; and these Ages are figured by so many Metals of the Image. In after times, they that lived in the Church, and had the right Experience of things, did expound the Babylonian to be the Head of Gold, the Mede-Persian to be the Silver, the Graecian to be the Brass, and the Roman to be the Iron. This is a true Exposition in the main; but in some particulars they have gone too much after Ovid in his Metamorphosis. It is true, that the Babylonian Monarchy is represented by the Golden-Metal: but it is a common Error in the Ancients, and now generally among the Historians, Chronologers, and Writers, to begin the Babylonian Monarchy at Ninus. Upon the front of many Chronological Tables you shall find, That Ninus is Pictured as the Founder of the Babylonian, Cyrus of the Persian, Alexander of the Graecian, Iulius Caesar of the Roman Monarchy. This distribution, though it may take in a greater compass of time, yet it doth not agree with the sense of the Holy Ghost in some chief Circumstances. For the beginning of the Babylonian at Ninus, Historians have taken this out of th [...]ir own Heads, and not out of the Word of God. And from hence Bodin, in his Method of History, ch. p. 7. hath taken occasion to Dispute against the Scriptures, and to strike out the Truth, because some have mingled their own Inventions with the Word of God. He hath taken this Advantage upon the private Errors of some, who have stood for the Truth in the main. But the latter Expositors do decline this Error of Ninus, and do pitch upon this, That Nebuchadnezzar is the Head of Gold, and that the Babylonian Kingdom doth begin from his Monarchy. They find by Experience, That the Scriptures do chiefly point to those several Empires that were to stand in fulness of Power one after another in those Countries where somtimes the Kings of the Lineage of David did bear Rule. These are the most approved Interpreters; which I so call, because they go [Page] according to the minde of the Scriptures. Now, according to their grounds, it followeth by necessary consequence, That the Roman must begin as the Fourth Kingdom, in the time of their Free-state, when the Church, and all the Countries adjoyning, came under the Lordship and Dominion of the People of Rome. And whereas in the Chronographical Tables Iulius Caesar is set forth as the Founder of the Roman Empire; this is as false an imagination as that of Ninus. First, It is clear, That every Metal-Kingdom did rise and encrease by the destruction of the Empire that went before. Now, what part or parcel of the Graecian Empire did Iulius Caesar bring under the Power of the Romans? Secondly, What part or parcel of the Nations about the Borders of the Church, did he bring under the Roman Obedience? If we speak in a Latitude, Caesar did change the Free-state into the Government by One; yet to speak accurately, The Roman did not begin then as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, but in the times of Pompey, when the Jewish Church came under the Obedience of that Nation. And so our Argument is Founded upon the Principles of the best Expositors, for the true beginning of the Roman Kingdom.

Now then, to gather all into one sum, we may conclude the Roman to begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Church came under the Dominion of that People. This is demonstrated, First, By the Analogie of the Three former Metal-Kingdoms, which did begin each one as the Church came under their Dominion. Secondly, By the end of the Graecian Kingdom, typed by the Brass-Metal. Where the Graecian endeth, there the Roman beginneth. Thirdly, By that which is necessary to the Being of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, which began to be applicable to the Roman in the time aforementioned. Fourthly, By the Testimony of the Evangelist S. Luke, which doth insinuate such a Beginning. Fifthly, By the Principles of the latter and most Approved Interpreters, which being rightly laid, do necessarily prove such a Beginning also.

Having thus laid the Foundation, I should now proceed [Page] to the Building. But there are some few Objections that yet remain to be Answered.

Object. 1. Mr Mede standeth upon it, That the Roman came up by the same degrees as the Graecian went down: Therefore there can be no determinate and set time of the Beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom.

Sol. What he speaketh in his Apostacy of the latter-times concerning the gradual encrease of the greatness of the Romans, we do yield to be a truth in the main: But we here speak of the beginning of the Roman in a more strict sense, in that acception as it is in the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. And here, as there was a determinate time of the beginning of the Babylonian, Persian, and Graecian Empires: So there must be a determinate beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. Secondly, Daniel saw in the Vision the Four Beasts come up out of the Sea one after another, and the Fourth Beast last of all: There must then be some determinate time of the beginning of the Fourth Empire. Thirdly, It is the plot of the Spirit, by the Four Empires, to decypher so many periods of time. According to this Rule, If there be no certain beginning of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, there will be a Chasme; There will be some part of time, which will be long to no Metal of the Image. For, as Mr Mede himself doth allow, The Image doth comprehend Four great Revolutions of time, to begin one after another in an orderly succession. These are his own words: Apost. pag. 69. For the true account of the times in Scripture, we must have recourse to that Secret Kalendar and Great Almanack of Prophecie, The Four Kingdoms of Daniel, which are a Prophetical Chronologie of times, measured by the Succession of Four Principal Kingdoms, from the beginning of the Captivity of Israel, until the Mysterie of God should be finished. A course of time, during which the Church and the Nation of the Iews, together with those whom, by occasion of their unbelief in Christ, God should surrogate in their rooms, were to remain under the Bondage of the Gentiles, and Oppression of Gentilism. But these times, once fulfilled, all the Kingdoms of the World should become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ. So far Mr Mede. [Page] In whose words I Note these Three Points. First, That the Four Metal-Kingdoms in Daniel's Image, are a Prophetical Chronologie of the times. Secondly, That this Prophetical Chronologie beginneth at the Captivity of Babylon. Thirdly, That it endeth at the glorious Kingdom of the Saints. And for the Four Kingdoms, he Numbreth them in this manner, First, The Babylonian; Secondly, The Mede-Persian; Thirdly, The Graecian; Fourthly, The Roman. And for the beginning of the Roman, (the Point that we now are upon) he hath this Observation: In which quaternary of Kingdoms, as the Roman, being the last of the Four, is the last Kingdom: So are the times thereof the last times we seek for. During which times, saith Daniel, the God of Heaven shall raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, &c. In these words also we do agree with the forenamed Author in Two Points. First, In the Number of the Four Kingdoms. Secondly, In the date of the last times from the beginning of the Fourth Kingdom. And this is that which we endeavor to prove, That assoon as the Church came under the Dominion of the Romans, that People became the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. And here also we do set the beginning of those [...], or latter times so much spoken of. If therefore we set our selves in this beginning, where, in Mr Mede's own Opinion, the latter times do commence: If we Number 666 years, we shall come to that particular time, when the Name, or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome began to be set up. And so every man may easily observe, That we go in the true Scripture-way of account. But of this afterward. Now let us go on, and consider wherein we do differ from Mr Mede about the true beginning of the Roman Kingdom. For either (saith he) we must set the beginning thereof when all Greece came under the Roman Obedience, after the Conquest of Perseus; or else the Roman Kingdom must begin by degrees. In which Opinion of his there are Two Errors: For that of the beginning at Perseus, we have spoken already: And for the Roman Encroachment by degrees, let it be what it will be, there must be a certain determinate time where the Roman doth begin as the Fourth [Page] Metal-Kingdom; unless we will admit of a Chasme, or a vacuum, in the Prophetical Chronologie. And yet further, Upon Mr Mede's own grounds, we do desire to press this Argument: If the Babylonian did begin as the first Metal-Kingdom, when the People of Israel came under the Dominion of Babel; then the Roman will begin as the Fourth Metal Kingdom, when the same People of Israel [...] under the [...] of Rome. But the former is true: Ergo, the latter. The Consequence is clear, from Analogie; for the Roman doth but continue that Dominion which the Babylonian began. And for the Minor, our Author saith, That the Four Metal-Kingdoms did begin from the Captivity of Israel, when that People fell under the power of the Babylonians. I say also, When the same People of Israel came under the power of the Romans, there is the true determinate beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. And this is proved by such Principles as Mr Mede himself will allow.

Object. 2. Others do plead, That the Roman did begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when it began to be the prevailing Dominion upon the Earth. But they were so some years before the Iewish Church came under their Obedience.

Sol. It is true, That all the Monarchical Kingdoms were prevailing, when those times came that were appointed of God that they should prevail. For Nebuchadnezzar, the Scriptures speak very much how he carried all before him. And for Cyrus, the Founder of the Persian Kingdom, Thus saith the Lord to Cyrus his anointed, whose right hand I have holden. The right hand is the instrument of Action; and Conquerors prevail by the Lord's holding up their right hand. I will loose the loyns of Kings. When the loyns of Kings are loosed, wherein their strength lieth, he must needs prevail against them. To open Before him the two-leaved Gates. It was the Power of God that did go before him, and that was the Petard to burst open the Gates of his Enemies, Isa. 45. v. 1, 2, 3, 4. And for Alexander the Great, the Scripture saith, Behold, an He-goat came from the West, on the face of the whole Earth, and touched not the Ground, Dan. 8. 5. Livy is of [Page] Opinion, That if Alexander had turned his Arms against the Western people, as he did against the Eastern, he would have failed of his Conquests. And Caesar objected to Pompey, That the Wars waged against the People of Asia, in respect of others, were rather against Women, than Men. But these are only Observations of States-men and Souldiers, that look upon second Causes. The Scripture yieldeth us the true reason wherefore Alexander prevailed against the Asiaticks, & carried his victories so far eastward: I saw an He-goat come from the West to the East, and touched not the ground. This is the true cause of the greatness and celerity of the Conquest of Alexander; He came upon the face of the whole Earth, and touched not the ground. It is not the situation of the People in the Western Hemisphere, that maketh them prevail over the Eastern; but they only shall prevail whom God will set up. We may see on the contrary, That great Conquerors have come from East to West, as well as they have passed from West to East. This may be seen in the Victories of Cyrus, Belisarius, the Saracens, and now last of all, the Turks, which have come from the East too too far (but only that God would have it so) into the Roman Territories. Now, if you would know the true Reason of the prevailing of the latter, their Commission lieth in these words: Loose the Four Angels that are bound in the Great River Euphrates: and the Four Angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men, Rev. 9. 14, 15. For the Four Angels, the course of the Prophecie, and the best Expositors, do plainly shew, That this is meant of the Turkish Nation, which Originally were divided into Four Families, and had power to come over the River Euphrates, into the Territories of the Western World. And for that famous Instance of Xerxes, That a few Graecians in the West, did defeat multitudes of People that came out of the East; the reason lieth not in the situation of either People, in respect of the Hemisphere, but in the hand of the Lord, that fought against the Persian Empire. For from that time that the building of the Temple was hindred by the Persians, and Daniel mourned [Page] for it full three weeks together; the Angel to comfort him, telleth him plainly, Dan. 10. 20. I will return to fight with the Prince of Persia, and then the King of Graecia shall come in. The meaning of which words is this, That the power of the Empire of the Persians should be overthrown by the Graecians: and then he cometh to particulars, to speak of the expedition of Xerxes into Greece, how that the Fourth King of the Persians should raise up great multitudes of People against the Graecians. These are the words of the text: for speaking of Darius the Mede, he saith, In the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to strengthen him, chap. 11. vers. 1. And then he addeth: I will shew thee the truth; behold, there shall stand up three Kings in Persia, to wit, Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius: And the Fourth (meaning Xerxes) shall be richer than they all; and by his strength, through his riches, he shall stir up all against the Realm of Graecia, vers. 2, 3. If we will go to the true Reason wherefore the Graecians were so couragious at the Straits of Thermopylae, and wherefore they did prevail against the Persians; the true cause doth lie in these words: I will fight against the Prince of Persia, and then the Kingdom of Graecia shall come Note. in. It was the secret and invisible hand of the Lord, that was the cause of the declining of the Power of the Persians in the East, and the rising of the Graecian in the West. It is true, That the He-goat passed from West to East, upon the face of the whole Earth: and yet it is as true, That the Ram of Persia did push to the three several Coasts, Westward, Northward, and Southward, chap. 8. vers. 4. By these words it is plain, If the Victories of the Graecians did pass from West to East, then è converso, it is as true, That the Victories of the Persians did pass from East to West. Let us hear the words of the Prophet Isaiah, to put all out of question; for speaking of Cyrus, thus he saith: I have called a ravenous Bird out of the East, the man of my Counsel from a far Country, chap. 46. 11. From hence it is plain, When God will, Conquerors shall come out of the East. And in Allusion to this Story, those Kings that shall deliver the Mystical Israel out of the Captivity of Western Babylon, are called the Kings of the East in a Figure, Rev. 16. 12. It is [Page] not in the Climate, in the Hemisphere, in the temper of the Heavens, in the better exercise of Military Discipline, in the experience of old Souldiers, in the success of fortunate Generals, or any other inferiour cause; but in the immediate Dispensation of God. Therefore, to adde the words of the Psalmist, as an Epiphonema, Lift not up your Horn on high, speak not with a stiff neck: for promotion cometh not from the East, not from the West; but God is judge; he putteth down one, and setteth up another, Psal. 75. 5, 6, 7.

I have staid the longer upon this digression, because I set that States-men, Souldiers, and others of deepest wisdom, look to these subtilties. Hereupon they trust in an Arm of Flesh, oppose the Gospel, perfecute the Saints, bear themselves more high over those that are made subject to them; Make no Conscience of Honesty, Truth, or Religion, when they have the Law in their own hands. They should as well look to the invisible and spiritual causes of the Changes of Empire, to the Providence of God, to the Revelations in the Word, to the Angels fighting against the Kingdoms of this world, to the power of the Saints Prayers that are offered upon the golden Altar. There is nothing more divine, nothing more spiritual, and nothing more apt to carry up the Soul into an high contemplation of the manifold wisdom, power, truth, and Fidelity of God, then to behold, in the Prophecie of Daniel, and in the Book of the Revelation, as in a Map, the several Empires of the world where the Church should be seated; their times, their changes, and their causes of the change; and this many hundred years before these Empires come to be set up.

They that read the VVord, together with the Stories of the times, may see the Fidelity of God, and may by this come to know him by the Name Iehovah. But so much by the way, touching the sudden growth of the Graecian Empire from VVest to East. Now we come to the Romans; and in the times of their Dominion they must also have the strength of Iron, to subdue the whole Earth and break it in pieces. And though great Nations and mighty Princes should rise against [Page] him, as Pyrrhus, Hannibal, Perseus, Iugurtha, Sertorius, Methridates, Tigranes, &c. yet in their times the Romans must be too hard for them all, and break them all in pieces. And therefore when Dionysius Halicarnassaeus, Cicero, and others, boast of the Roman Greatness, it may be said to them, as somtimes it was to Cyrus, I have girded thee with strength, though thou knowest not me, Isa. 45. 1, 2. This was the true, though the invisible cause, why the Romans grew so Great, and their Dominion reached to the ends of the Earth.

But now it is high time to return, (from whence we have made a digression) to shew when the Roman began as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. Some think it was when that Nation was the most prevailing Nation upon the Earth: But this cannot be. For in the times of Antiochus the Great, but more specially in the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, they were the more prevailing People: yet they did not begin in those times as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom in Daniel's Image.

You will say then, VVhere shall we set the beginning of the Fourth Kingdom? I Answer; In this case we must distinguish between the Latitude of the Roman Dominion more absolutely considered, and the Latitude of the Dominion in and about the Borders of the Church. If you speak of the Latitude of Dominion in a more absolute consideration, then the Roman began as the more prevailing Dominion, when it became more mighty than any other Empire of the world. But if you speak in a more strict sense, it began then to be the Fourth Metal-Kingdom in Daniel's Image, when it did begin to take in the greatest Amplitude and largeness of Rule in and about the Confines of the Church. And this is to our purpose.

Object. 3. Others perhaps may Alledge, That we cannot begin the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Iewish Church came under the Dominion of that People. For (say they) it is foretoll in the Prophecie of Jacob; The Scepter shall not depart from Iudah, nor a Law-giver from between his feet until Shiloh come, Gen. 49. 10.

[Page] Sol. I Answer: We must so expound the meaning of one, that it may not dash against the main sense of another Scripture Now it is the manifest scope of other Scriptures to shew, That the Four Monarchies must come to bear Rule over those Countries where the Kings of the Line of David had the power before. And therefore it is mentioned, That a Rod shall come out of the stock of Iesse, and a Branch shall come out of his Roots, Isa. 11. 1, 2. A Lapide upon the place speaketh very well: Christo enim nascente regia Davidis familia ad pauperes redacta. When Christ was born, the Kingly Family of David was brought very low. To this accordeth the Prophet Daniel: In the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that shall never be destroyed, chap. 2. vers. 44. In these words he doth insinuate, That when the Kingdom of Christ beginneth, it shall be as it were a new-erected Kingdom, raised up out of the rubbish. To me therefore Baronius in his Apparatus, seemeth to deliver a strange Exposition of this Prophecie. For he speaketh to this effect, That the Kingdom was specially foretold to the Tribe of Iudah above any other. To which when that tribe had once attained in David, by a long race of Kings, it held out to the Captivity of Babylon. And after the Captivity of Babylon (where there was some intermission for a time) the Empire recovered again in Zorobabel: And then, from him being derived, it held in his Posterity, without any absolute interruption, to the second year of the 184 Olympiad, when Calvin and Pollio were Consuls. Then Herod an Idumaean, a Gentile at the first, and after that a Proselyte, by the courtesie of the Romans, took the Kingdom in Iudea; and so the Government was translated from the Natives to a Forreigner. This is the sum of that which is more largely delivered. Where Three Errors are to be noted.

First, That he maketh the Davidical-Kingdom to last to the times of Herod. Which cannot be. For the Kingdom was taken from the Kings of the Line of David by the Babylonians. And by them it was transmitted to the Persians and Graecians. And so last of all, it came to the Romans, in whose time Christ was Born. Neither did Herod, a Forreigner, Reign any more [Page] by the courtesie and favour of the Romans, than did Hyrcanus, his immediate Predecessor.

A Second is this, That he maketh the Scepter to continue in the time of Zorobabel: which is not so. For they that plead for an inferiour way of Rule in the High Priests, the men of the Great Sanhedr [...]m do not affirm, That all these came of Zorobabel, no nor of David neither.

Thirdly, He erreth in this, That he maketh the Scepter to depart from Iudah in the times of Herod; for the Jews had some form of Government, some Laws of their own, which did continue to the destruction of Ierusalem. When the Lord Christ had provided him a People amongst the Gentiles, then Ierusalem was destroyed, and the Jews were cast away according to the Prophecies.

Object. You will say then, What is the true meaning of Jacob's Prophecie?

Sol. This is the meaning thereof, That there should be a Succession of Kings in the Line of David, till the Captivity of Babylon. And though the other Ten Tribes should be cast away; yet that Tribe should remain. And after the Captivity, though the supreme Power should be taken away from them, yet still among that People there should be a continuation of some Laws and forms of Government under the Persians, Graecians, and Romans, till the coming of the Messiah. When the Messiah shall be born, he shall raise up the Tabernacle of David which hath fallen down; he shall set up that Kingdom that never shall be destroyed. And at the end he shall destroy all the Metal-Kingdoms, and fill the Earth. And so by consequence the Kingdom of David shall continue for ever. This is the full sense and the meaning of Iacob's Prophecie.

Piscator, in his Scholia upon this text, doth confirm what we speak: Gubernatio plena cujus princeps pars est potestas judiciorum capitalium, adempta fuit Posteris Iudae per Pompeium, qui Iudaeam in formam Provinciae redegit, imperio (que) Romanorum subjecit. Post quam gubernationis ademptionem paulò post natus est Christus sub Augusto. Quod autem potestas illa Iudaeis per [Page] Romanos fuerit adempta fatentur ipsi, Joh. 18. 31. Gubernatio vero imminuta (ademptâ scilicet potestate Iudiciorum capitalium relictâ Potestate Iudiciorum civilium & Religionis) duravit usque ad tempus illud quo natus est Christus, immo etiam quo patefactus est in orbo terrarum per praedicationem Apostolorum. Quippe Iudaeos adhuc tempore passionis Christi habuisse potestatem aliquam judiciorum patet ex verbis Pilati ad illos. In which words of his, there is a plain distinction betwixt the Sovereign and Supreme Power, and that which is subordinate. For the Sovereign and Supreme power in Capital Crimes, he faith this was taken away from the Jews by the means of Pompey the Great, who first brought that Nation in subjection, and made it Tributary to the Romans. And so that speech of the Jews is to be expounded: It is not in our power to put any man to death, Joh. 18. 31. For the subordinate Power, which he calls gubernationem imminutam, a regulated, or limited power in Civil Causes and in matters of Religion, this (saith he) did continue to the destruction of Ierusalem. And so those words are to be expounded: Ye have a Law, and judge ye him according to your Law, Joh. 18. 31. By this then we may understand how Iudea may be made subject to the Romans before the coming of Christ, and yet some form of Policy might continue among that People, to make good the Prophecie of Iacob.

But if we must needs stand upon the words, That the Scepter was taken away by the means of Pompey the Great, this hath excellent ground in the Stories; and it doth make exceedingly for our purpose. For the ground in the Stories, we shall finde, That the Jews that were in Bondage, first, to the Babylonians; secondly, to the Persians; thirdly, to the Graecians; that after the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, they did assert their Liberty against the Graecians of the Seleucian Line. And some Kings did Reign in Iudea of the stock of the Macchabees. But after such time as Pompey the Great brought Iudea under the power of the Romans, they never recovered their Liberty again. Now then, I leave it to any to judge, Whether here is not the beginning of the Fourth Metal-Kingdom [Page] in Daniel's Image? This we have confirmed by Reasons, and have Answered such Objections as might be alledged to the contrary.

Now let us go to the second Point, to shew the Order of the times, that there is the space of 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, to the setting up of the Name, or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, under the Emperor Phocas.

And for the time, we cannot easily be deceived, because the words of Iosephus are so plain, That this came to pass in that year when Cicero and Antonius were Consuls at Rome, in the 179 Olympiad, in the third Month, on a Fasting-day: he saith, That Pompey entred Ierusalem with the Roman Legions, Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 8. And for their subjection to the Romans, he addeth, That Syria and Iudea, and all places from the Borders of Egypt to Euphrates, were committed to the tuition of Scaurus, Antiq. lib. 14. cap. 8. & de Bell. Iud. lib. 1. cap. 5. And here I finde, That all Historians and Chronologers do agree in the aforementioned year.

Now for the Number of time, That there are 666 years from this beginning to the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome under the Emperor Phocas; this is clear also in all our ordinary Books of Chronology. Dr Willet, who doth differ from our Judgement about the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, he in his Synops. Papism. Quaest. de Antichr. part. 2. saith, That the Scepter was taken from Iudah at that year when Cicero was Consul at Rome, which he affirmeth to be 60 years before the Birth of the Lord, and 666 before the setting up of the Headship of the Bishop of Rome. And in general, he doth approve the truth of our Interpretation, as Bale the Historian did before him. And whereas it may be Alledged, That Calvisius, the most accurate Chronologer, doth Number somthing more than 60 years to the Birth of the Lord: To solve this Difficulty, let us say as he doth, That Cicero and Antonius did enter their Office about the 20 of October, when all was full of troubles at Rome: And in the fourth of Iuly following, which was the 17 day of the Month [Page] Tamuz, the Romans entered Ierusalem, and Pompey went into the Temple. To this if we adde those Acts of his, of breaking down the Wall of Ierusalem, of making Iudea Tributary to the Romans, and delivering all into the Power of Scaurus the Questor till further Order should be taken by the Senate; These things must necessarily be done in the latter end of the year, when C [...]cero and Antonius were Consuls; or rather▪ in the beginning of the next year, which, according to Calvisius his account, is the year of the world 3889. To which, if you adde 666 years, the Number of the Name of the Universal Headship of the Beast, this will make the year of the world 4554. And this will bring us to that fatal year of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome under the Emperor Phocas. And so this present year will be,

From The Creation of the World the 4555 Year.

From The Birth of the Lord the 606 Year.

From The Beginning of the Roman, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, the 666 Year.

For the Number of years, there is yet one main Objection. Some will have the periods of time in Daniel's Image to be a meer Scholastical speculation.

Sol. We will go to the Scriptures, and to the Stories of the Church, to decide the Question.

For the Scriptures, Let us first consider the words of Daniel's Thanksgiving, upon the Revelation of the Mystery of the Four Metal-Kingdoms: Blessed be the Name of God for ever; for Wisdom and Might are his: he changeth the times, and seasons: he removeth Kings, and setteth up Kings, Dan. 2. 20, 21. The scope of the Vision is concerning the Four Metal-Kingdoms, and so many changes of time answerable to those Four Mutations of Empire. But if we look more narrowly to the text, the words in the Chaldee [...]—are times, and revolutions of time. For the word [...] signifieth as much as tempus statutum & determinatum, an appointed and determinate time. For the Lord having shewed Nebuchadnezzar's Dream to Daniel, and the substance of the Dream, [Page] That it concerned a Fourfold change of Empire, and a Fourfold change of time upon the Earth; Upon this Reason, the Prophet breaketh forth into the praise of the Wisdom and the Power of God, in a sutable manner to the present occasion. And in very deed, if we look upon the translation of the Empire from the Babylonians to the Persians, from the Persians to the Graecians, from the Graecians to the Romans; Here is a notable Example of the Wisdom and the Power of God. And that which is more considerable, The Lord speaketh of the times of the sovereign Dominion of these People, many years before they come to have the Dominion upon the Earth. For this cause the Prophet breaketh forth into the praises of the wisdom of God in his disposing the changes of times, and the changes of Empire; and for the communication of this deep secret to him and the other three Children; and by their means, to the information of the Church. And when all this is done, shall we say, That the Four changes of time, in the Image of the Metal-Kingdoms, are but a curious speculation? Further, it is added, vers. 44. In the dayes of these Kingdoms shall the God of Heaven raise up a Kingdom that shall never be destroyed. This is spoken of the rising of the Kingdom of Christ in the time of one of the Four Metal-Kingdoms. The Four periods of time then are not a bare Speculation, but a plain Scripture-truth. For it is the plot of the Spirit to shew, That down from Nebuchadnezzar there should be Four Changes of Empire, and Four notable Revolutions of time; and when these Changes should be in their course and succession, then the Kingdom of Christ shall begin.

Now whereas Bodin, in his Method of History, chap. 7. taketh a great deal of pains in the Confutation of this; Let us Consider what he Alledgeth.

First, There be many things he confuteth, which we do not allow. For, as we have formerly said, The Babylonian Empire did not begin at Ninus, but at Nebuchadnezzar.

Secondly, He taketh it as Granted, That only the Amplitude of Dominion, maketh a Monarchical Kingdom: And [Page] hereupon, Reasons, Why should not the Kingdoms of the Parthians, Saracens, Turks, Tartars, go under the account of Monarchical Kingdoms? Here he is to consider, That not only the greatness of Dominion, but the greatness of Dominion over the Churches Continent, is necessary to the Being of Daniel's Metal-Kingdoms. And therefore, look what Kingdom Nebuchadnezzar did begin, it did orderly descend to the Persians, Graecians, and Romans; and not to the Parthians, as experience sheweth. Therefore, a Beast in Daniel or the Revelation doth not signifie a State or Government in the General Notion; but a State or Government that is Idolatrous, and doth persecute the Church. Neither doth it signifie an Idolatrous Government in the Latitude; but such an Idolatrous Government in and about the Borders of the Church. If this distinction were well observed, They that are Enemies to Magistracie, would not have such harbour in the Revelation, as they think they have.

Thirdly, He disputeth against those who stand for a German-Roman Empire. And with him we do agree, That this is but a Fable. For the Empire, of the last Edition, is the whole Body of the Kings that make one Catholick Communion under the Pope their Head, Rev. 13. and chap. 17. In these Particulars, he doth not touch us in his Disputation; but them only who do maintain the Truth with some mixtures of their own.

Secondly, For the Points wherein we differ: He standeth hard upon this, That the Roman cannot be called the Iron-Metal, seeing in these latter Ages, Learning, Civility, Religion, Discoveries by Navigation, have been raised to a higher perfection: and therefore the Roman cannot be set forth by a more worthless Metal than the other Kingdoms.

Sol. But in this matter he doth not Dispute so much against us, as against the Scripture it self, and the scope of the Spirit. For is it not the scope of the Spirit, to compare the Fourth Kingdom to Iron, because of the strength, cruelty, and power to break all things in pieces in and about the Borders of the Church? What good will Learning, Civility, Navigation, [Page] and other such things do, when the Church of God is under Persecution?

But yet further, to Convince the Consciences of men, That the Four Metal-Kingdoms in Daniel's Image, are no nice speculation; I would willingly put it to men to Resolve me this Question: The Faithful that lived in the Iewish Church some years before the coming of Christ, whether was it not their practise, and some way their duty, to search after the time of his coming? These are the words of Peter: Of which Salvation the Prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who Prophesied of the Grace that should come unto you; searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signifie, when it testified before-hand the Sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow, 1 Pet. 1. 10, 11. Out of these words Three Points no necessarily issue. First, The coming of Christ, his Sufferings, and the glory that followed; this was revealed to the Church of the Jews. Secondly, It was revealed to them, in what period of time Christ should come. Thirdly, They did diligently search the several periods and changes of time, to come to that particular season when the Son of Man should come in the flesh. The words in the Original are very Emphatical, [...]. Piscator hath it, Scrutantes inquem & cujusmodi temporis articulum. Beza, In quem aut qualem temporis articulum. But I think the words are more naturally rendered: Scrutantes ad quam aut qualem temporis periodum: Searching to which, or to what kind of period of time the Spirit should point, as with a finger, when he spake of the coming of Christ in the flesh. But let the Translation be what it will be, all is to this sense, That the Believers of the Antient Church did diligently search the periods of time to the coming of Christ in the flesh. And our Saviour doth blame the Jews for it, That they could discern the face of the skie, and yet could not understand the signs of the times: that is, The signs of the times of his coming in the flesh, Matt. 16. 1, 2, 3. Now for the periods of time to the coming of the Son of Man in the flesh, there are none more clear & demonstrative in the [Page] whole Old Testament, than those two in the Prophecie of Daniel. The first is that of the Four Metal-Kingdoms, chap. 2. and the Second is that of the 70 weeks, chap. 9. By these Two, the Saints and Prophets in the Old Testament might periodically come to the times of the Messiah, and so might discover his coming in the flesh à priori. Our Saviour therefore doth blame them, that by the changes of State in Iudea, First, From the Babylonians to the Persians; Secondly, From the Persians to the Graecians; Thirdly, From the Graecians to the Romans; that by these several Alterations of time they did not discern the signs of his coming, nor the beginning of his Kingdom, which should be set up when the Image should come to the last and lowest Region, to the Fourth and the last Metal-Kingdom. In the times of this Kingdom, the God of Heaven shall set up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, Dan. 2. 44. Therefore when the times of the Romans were come, (the Fourth and the last Monarchical People) the Jews, by the course of Daniel's periods, might easily understand that they were not far from the times of the Messiah. And to put all out of doubt, if they had Numbred 490 years, or 70 weeks of years, from the building of the City and Temple in the dayes of Ezra and Nehemiah, by this period also they might have come to the time of the cutting off of the Messiah, and to the preaching of the Gospel among all Nations. By the Collation and Parallel of these two periods, the Saints in the Jewish Church might have found out in what Article or what period of time the Son of man should come in the flesh. And shall we then say, That the Four periods of time in Daniel's Image, is a Scholastical and nice speculation?

Thus I have largely insisted upon the Point; where Two things are made good: First, That the Roman doth begin as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, when the Church and the Continent of the Church, came under the Dominion of that People. Secondly, That the Number of years are 666 to the setting up of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome under the Emperor Phocas, if the account be made from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. [Page] I have proved also, That this Method of Account is no nice speculation, but a true Scripture-way to calculate and Number the Prophetical times.

Let us now proceed to the next Chapter, to shew the issue of the Discourse.

CHAP. VII. The whole Process of the Discourse is repeated: That there are 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, to the setting up of the Name, or Vniversal Headship of the Bishop of Rome; And that this is the meaning of the Spirit in the Revelation, when he speaketh of the Name of the Beast, and of the Number of the Name.

FOR the cleerer Demonstration of the Truth, it is necessary that I should Repeat the sum of that which I have formerly delivered, that we may see the whole Process of the Disputation. First, I have shewed, That the Name of the Beast is not the word Lateinos, nor any other Grammatical Name whatsoever; but in the Apocalyptical stile, it noteth his Universal Headship or Power, standing in immediate Opposition to the Name or Headship of the Lamb. Secondly, For the time of the beginning of this Universal Headship, I have shewed, That it had not only a determinate beginning, but it began after the Fall of the Empire: and not only so, but it began after the Fall of the Empire, in such a time when the Universal Headship was ascribed to the Bishop of Rome. Now this I have proved, out of the Stories, to begin under the Emperor Phocas, when the Decree went forth, That the Bishop of Rome should be Head over all Churches. For the Calculation of the times, I have shewed, That there is a Chain [Page] of 666 years, from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship aforesaid. To the clearer probation of which, I have largely insisted upon two Points. First, That the Roman is the Fourth Metal-Kingdom; against Iunius and his followers. Secondly, That the Roman doth begin, as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, not from Iulius or Augustus Caesar, but from that time when the Church came under the Dominion of that People. Now from this beginning, I do positively Affirm, That there is a Chain of 666 years to the beginning of the Papacie, set forth by the Type or Emblem of the little Horn, Dan. 7. And this is the true Accommodation and Application of Daniel's Visions to the Stories of the Church.

And whereas Iohn in the Revelation speaketh of the rising of the Two-Horned Beast out of the Earth, that the Number of the Name, or Universal Headship, of this Beast is 666; His meaning is, That there are 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast. He doth more fully repeat that which was more briefly delivered before. And in these Calculations, he doth but refer us to Daniel's Chronologie in the Image of persecuting States. This is the whole process of the Discourse.

But before I come to the Point, I will remove a mistake in some of our latter Commentaries, which will have Mahomet, or the Turk, to be the little Horn. This is the Opinion of Grasserus, and Mr Brightman.

I have been held with some kind of admiration, to see two such worthy Expositors to leave the Common and plain way, and to embrace a private Fancy of their own, so contrary to the scope of the Scriptures, and to the ordinary Reason of men.

But let us come to Argument.

First, The little Horn and the Ten Horns in the text, are set forth as the parts that do integrate and make up the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. But so do neither [Page] Mahomet, nor the Turk, as it is plain by experience. For who can say, That the Turk or Mahomet, are any integral parts of the Roman Kingdom, being every way so contrary and opposite, having no union or conjunction at all?

Object. 1. But it may be Replied, The ten Kings that arose out of the Ruines of the old Empire, are reckoned as Branches and Parts of the Roman Kingdom; and yet they were the Princes by whom the Empire was destroyed.

Sol. To this I Reply; The forenamed Interpreters may easily give an Answer to this Doubt, out of the Revelation. Though the Ten Kings did arise out of the Ruines of the Empire, yet all of them afterward were united in one Roman Body of the last Edition; but neither Mahomet nor the Turk ever came within this union or combination.

Object. 2. But it may be further Alledged, That the little Horn did subdue three of the former Horns; and this rather agreeth to Mahomet and the Turk, than to the Papacie, whose part it is to preserve them.

Sol. Among the many Notes of the little Horn, it is possible some few may be applicable to Mahomet and to the Turk: but we should also consider the multitude and Evidence of those others that do utterly reject such an Application. Now there are many Notes that cannot possibly agree with Mahomet or the Turk, if we should come to singulars. And for the eradication of Three Horns, we have largely proved how the Papacie did humble Three Dominions, to have elbow-room in Italy. He did cast down some of the former; and it is as true, That he did preserve the union of the Residue, to make a Roman Catholick Empire. Secondly, For the Blasphemies of the little Horn, The Beast was destroyed, and his Body given to the burning fire. Now, what Congruity or colour of Reason is there, That the Roman Kingdom should be destroyed for the Blasphemies of Mahomet? If you apply this to the Papacy, this is fully verified in that which is spoken, The Beast was taken, and with him the false Prophet, and they both were cast into the Lake of fire. Thirdly, In all the times of the Roman Kingdom, from the beginning to the end, there was the greatest [Page] cruelty exercised against the Saints in the times of the little Horn. Now, if you apply this to Mahomet and the Turk, though they have made great waste in the Christian world, yet the War hath not been formerly against the Saints as such; neither hath their cruelty been the greatest that ever hath been. But if we apply this to the Papacy, here hath been a War against the Saints, as Saints; and here hath been the greatest Persecutions that ever were, as appeareth by the whole Book of the Revelation. Fourthly, The little Horn is said to continue a time, times, and the dividing of time. This will not agree to the duration of Mahomet; for, what place of Scripture doth once mention such a thing? But it is plainly applied to the Papacy, Rev. 12. 6. Rev. 13. 5.

These, and many more Reasons, may be produced to prove, That Mahomet cannot be resembled by the little Horn: and the Reasons for the Affirmative are very weak and feeble. On the contrary, if you take the whole Body of the Chapter, and the whole Bundle of Notes, they will be wholly applied to the Bishop of Rome; and strongly prove, That the Papacy is the little Horn.

Now I will try the truth of one Principle, on which the forenamed Authors do build, when they take Mahomet to be the little Horn.

The chief Ground they build upon, is this, Because the Turk doth hold all those Countries in Asia, which were formerly the Continent of the Iewish Church.

To this I have said before, That so long as the Jews were the only People of God, the delineation of the Four Metal-Kingdoms was in special reference to that Church. But they being cast off, the Metal-Kingdoms, so much of them as doth remain, doth more immediately concern the Churches of the Gentiles. If Mahomet be the little Horn, who were the Saints of the most High whom he did wear cut? Will any man say That they were only the Saints of the Jewish Church? Alas! the Jews were a People cast away some hundreds of years before the Name of Mahomet was heard in the world: and they do remain till this day a People not called again.

[Page]It may be more truly affirmed, That the Metal-Kingdoms in Daniel's Image, do not concern the Jews only, nor the Gentiles only; but both Jews and Gentiles in their several times. For proof of this, we will lay down some special Observations.

First, In the Image of persecuting States, it is not the purpose of God only to shew Four Revolutions of Empire, but his more special intent is to shew the beginning of the Kingdom of his Son. Secondly, It is his purpose not to reveal this only to the Jews, but to the People of the Gentiles also. This latter may be proved from the person of Nebuchadnezzar, to whom this secret was revealed. For if it had only concerned the National Church of the Jews, That the God of Heaven will raise up a Kingdom that never shall be destroyed, Why was this delivered to Nebuchadnezzar, an Heathen Man, and an Enemy of the Church? When the Lord did reveal to Pharoah the Dream of the seven fat Kine; and after, the Dream of seven lean Kine, this was not only discovered for the good of the Church, but for the preservation of mankind. So the Succession of the Four great Empires, and the beginning of the Kingdom of Christ in the times of the last Empire, these things were not revealed only to Nebuchadnezzar, that the Jews might understand the truth, but that the whole habitable world under Nebuchadnezzar's Dominion, might take notice of that which God did intend to do.

Secondly, This appeareth by the manner of the Revelation to Nebuchadnezzar, which was to this end, That the whole world might observe it, First, If you consider the Person, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed a Dream. Secondly, The way of God's dealing with him; he forgat the Dream, and therefore a great trouble fell upon his Spirit. Thirdly, His calling for the wise-men of Babylon, which City in these times was the Eye of the world, and the seat of the Empire. Now, it is not to be imagined, but all that lived within the Verge of so large a Dominion would be apt to hearken after such a thing: Specially, when they should hear of the trouble of the King, and of the Edict to kill all the wise-men of Babylon. [Page] Here was a matter set out, in the view of all Asia as it were, to prove Three Particulars. First, That the God of Israel was the true God. Secondly, That he would set up Four great Changes of Empire in the world. Thirdly, That in the last Succession of Empire he would set up a Kingdom that never should be destroyed. These things were propounded not only for the Church, but for the Observation of the whole habitable Earth under the Babylonian Empire that then was, and for the Ages following.

Thirdly, If we look to the Story of the Evangelists, we do read that the Evangelist S. Matthew doth tell us, That when the Lord Christ was Born in Bethleem, in the dayes of Herod the King, wise-men came to Ierusalem, Matth. 2. 1, 2, 3, 4. Here Interpreters upon the place do raise many Questions. First, Who these wise-men were? Secondly, Why was it Revealed to them by a Star? Thirdly, Why did the Star guide them to Ierusalem, and then vanish out of [...] These Questions are propounded by Interpreters; and they do give very learned and solid Answers to them. Only there is a Question to which I do not yet finde a satisfactory Answer; and that is this: Why was this matter Revealed to wise-men in the East, rather than to any other Nation, Profession, or Sect among the Gentiles? Spanhemius doth handle this Point in his Dubia Evangelica, part. 2. dub. 31. pag. 326. and he doth come to this issue in the close: Concludimus itaque causum vocationis Magorum nequaquam in illis suisse, sed in solâ Dei vocantis bonitate, & illos ex merâ ejus gratiâ vocatos, sive absolutè eorum vocatio consideretur, sive comparatè: Quod enim & vocati, & vocati prae aliis Dei miserentis fuit illorum potius quam aliorum. Et haec causa causarum est, & summa ratio, pag. 329. Here I do agree, That the Call of the wise-men doth chiefly depend upon the Grace and Mercy of God. This is the Cause of causes, and the chiefest Reason why they were called, and why they were called before any other. But yet, with submission to a better judgement, I think there lies a plain reason in the Scriptures, why the Birth of the King of the Jews, was revealed to the wise-men of the East, [Page] rather than to any other Gentiles. For when the Lord had a purpose to Reveal Four great Changes of time to the world, and particularly the time of the setting up of the Kingdom of his Son, he had appointed in his Providence that the wisemen of Babylon, whose Profession it was to understand the changes of time, that they should come to take notice of these things; but more specially of the time when the Kingdom of Christ should be set up. But because they could not know this by their own strength, the Lord did Reveal it to them by the Ministery of Daniel, That he would set up Four Kingdoms over the Earth, whereof the Babylonian in Being was the first; and then in the latter end he would set up a Kingdom that never should be destroyed. In a word, This is the Cause wherefore these changes of times were revealed to the wise-men of the East, because it did suit with their Profession to take notice of such things. And the Lord having once revealed in particular the time of the setting up of the Kingdom of his Son to the wise-men of the East, when the Lord Christ was born at Bethleem in Iudea, in the days of Herod the King; he did Call that sort of men in special, to take notice of that which was foretold. Because these things were revealed to them, they were called in a special manner to take notice of the Birth of the Messiah, and of the beginning of his Kingdom.

From all that hath been said, we may conclude, That the Vision of the Metal-Kingdoms doth concern both Jews and Gentiles: Therefore there is no necessity that Brightman, Grasserus, and other learned men, should take the little Horn for Mahomet, because the Country of Iudea is now under the Turks. Many other Arguments might, be brought to prove, That neither Mahomet nor the Turk can possibly be resembled by the Type of the little Horn. The scope of the text, and the whole collection of Circumstances, do altogether pitch upon the Papacy, which arose after the division of the Roman Empire into ten inferiour Kingdoms in the time of the Emperor Phocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom. This is the true Application of [Page] the times to the Stories of the Church; and this is the natural sense of Iohn in the Book of the Revelation, That the Number of the Name of the Beast is 666.

Now for the truth of this Interpretation, we will prove it, First, From the whole scope of the text, Rev. 13. Secondly, From the drift of the Spirit, Rev. 17. Thirdly, From the whole Harmony of the Prophecie in the chief and remarkable Circumstances. Lastly, From the scope of the Apostle, 2 Thess. 2. And of these in their Order.

CHAP. VIII. The Truth of the Interpretation is proved, from the remarkable Circumstances of the Text it self, Revel. 13. 16, 17, 18.

THere be many excellent and precious Truths in the general, which we cannot alwayes avouch, That the Spirit doth intend them in such or such a particular Scripture. Now that this may appear to be a right Interpretation, we will compare it with every Circumstance in the Text. These are the words that follow: And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to Receive a Mark in their right hand, and in their forehead; and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the Mark, or the Name of the Beast, or the Number of the Name. Here is Wisdom; Let him that hath Understanding [...]ount the Number of the Beast, for it is the Number of a Man, and his Number is six hundred threescore and six. In these words we are to Note Four Particulars. 1. The matter of the Law which the Beast doth impose; he causeth all men to receive a Mark in their right Hand, and in their Forehead; and that they have the Name of the Beast, and the Number of it. [Page] 2. The maker of the Law: soil. The Beast with Two Horns. He causeth men to receive the Mark by his coercive power. 3. The Persons on whom he doth impose the Law. He causeth all both small and great, bond and free, rich and poor, to receive a Mark. For though there is great difference in civil Relations between poor-men and rich, bondmen and free; yet in this matter none are exempted. All must receive the Mark, one as well as the other: there is no difference of Condition. 4. The Penalty inflicted on him that will not submit to the Law; He must have no civil Commerce with men; he must not buy nor sell, that hath not these Three Things: First, The Mark; Secondly, The Name; Thirdly, The Number of the Name.

Now, that men might rightly conceive what is meant by these things, the same Spirit doth exhort them to Calculate the Number, the Point that we are now upon.

For the Calculation of the Number, these Four Particulars also ought to be Observed: First, The Person exhorted, who it is that must make the Discovery. And this is every such one as hath a mind given him of God more accurately to search into the meaning of the Prophecies. The matter is not easio to be understood at the first sight; there must be some Wisdom used to the Discovery thereof. Secondly, The manner: It must be by the way of Reckoning, or Numbering. Let him that hath Wisdom reckon the Number of the Beast. Thirdly, The Rule and Method of Account. There is some way of Reckoning, called, The Number of a Man; by and through which, the Calculation is to be made. Fourthly, The particular Number it self: and in this Method or way of Account, it is 666.

These are the Natural distributions of the words of the text. Now according to this Pattern or Platform, let us proceed to shew the truth of our Interpretation, and what apt coherence it hath with the Circumstances, and with the Natural scope of the text.

To begin therefore with the matter of the Law: It is expresly said, That the Beast did cause all to receive a Mark, to have the Name, and the Number of the Name. For the [Page] Mark, we are not to take it for a material Character, but it is the publick Profession of the Faith of a Roman Catholick, by and through which he doth publickly acknowledg his subjection and Allegeance to the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. For, as in the words immediately following, when Iohn saw the Lamb stand upon Mount Sion, and with him 144000, having their Father's Name written in their Forehead, We do not take the Name of the Father written in the Forehead for a literal Character, but for the visibility of their Profession that yield subjection to the Commands of God the Father as their Sovereign Lord: So on the other side, The followers of the Beast, the Mark in their Forehead, and in their right hand, is not a visible brand or print-mark consisting of Letters and syllables; but it sheweth the visibility of their Profession that do own the Bishop of Rome's Universal Headship over all Churches, and that they are in Conscience bound to be subject to his Laws, as to another Christ. Paraeus upon the place speaketh to the same effect: Unde secundò liquet, cum Bestia Antichristiana sit Papa Romanus, exuviis Romani Imperii & tunicâ Christi indutus, Characterem Bestiae esse Professionem Papistici cultus, sicut supra Character Christi non fuit nota materialis, sed professio Christiani cultus.

But that in this matter we may not altogether depend upon Authority, we will prove by many Arguments that the publick Profession of the Catholicism or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome is the Mark in the Forehead and in the right Hand. First, This agreeth omni, to every Subject in the Beast's Kingdom. He causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a Mark. And such a Mark is the Profession of the Faith of a Roman Catholick. And though all are not Cardinals, all are not Archbishops, all are not Bishops; yet all are Roman Catholicks: all agree in this, To profess the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. This is Nota maximè communis. Secondly, The Mark agreeth Soli, only to such a one as is a Subject of the Beast's Kingdom. For as Princes have Marks and Cognizances to distinguish [Page] their Servants and Subjects: So the Beast hath a peculiar Character, to discern between those that are his, and those that are none of his. Now, if you apply this to the Profession of a Roman Catholick, all that whole Society and Body of men, as they are one among themselves in their publick Profession: So in this they are distinguished from all other kinds of men in the whole world. Here is nota maximè propria. Thirdly, The Mark agreeth to the Subjects of the Beast's Kingdom at all times. For not only at the first beginning of the spiritual Monarchy, he caused every man to receive a Mark, but in all the times of his Kingdom he did impose this Law upon his Subjects. And therefore we reade in the latter end of his Dominion, That the first Vial was poured out upon them that had the Mark of the Beast, and worshipped his Image, chap. 16. vers. 2. And those Souls that lived again to Reign with Christ 1000 years, were such as were beheaded in all the times of the Beast's Kingdom, because they had not worshipped the Image, nor received the Mark. The receiving of the Mark in the Forehead it must be semper, in all the times of the Beast's Kingdom. Now, such a Mark is the Profession of a Roman Catholick. This hath been received in all times. There are some things received by that Society of men, which are not much more ancient than the Council of Trent, which were not established de fide, till that time. And though in the dayes of Queen Mary, the Critical Question was, What say you to the Sacrament of the Altar? Yet it is well known, That Transubstantiation hath been introduced in the latter times. But now it is not so with the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome: this hath been in hatching in all Ages almost down from the times of the Apostles, till in the 666th year from the beginning of the Roman as the Fourth Metal-Kingdom, it began publickly to be established under the Emperor Phocas. And here was the true beginning of the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast, and of the Mark of the Name. Fourthly, The Mark in the Forehead and in the right Hand, is a convertible and reciprocal Note, to distinguish the Subjects of the Beast's Kingdom from other men; and [Page] such a convertible Note is the publick Profession of a Roman Catholick. And therefore many of their chief Writers do lay down Three Notes to prove a true Church by: Verae fidei Professione; by the Profession of the true Faith: Sacramentorum Communione; by participating of the Sacraments: Pontifici Romano tanquam legitimo Pastori subjectione; by subjection to the Bishop of Rome as to their lawful Pastor. Fifthly, The Mark in the Forehead and the right Hand, must be such a thing as is in open view, and in common use: for so do these figurative Expressions import. It is not said, That he causeth all to receive a Mark in their Arm, or Breast, or Foot, or Leg, or any other Member of the Body: but in the Forehead, which is in open view; and in the right Hand, as being that part of the Body which is of most common use. Now, what is there among that Society of men, which is of more common use and publick view, than the Profession of a Roman Catholick? Experience doth plainly shew, That none can buy, nor sell, nor hold Land and Possessions, but such a one as doth acknowledge this Universal Headship. Sixthly, The Mark in the Forehead and in the right Hand is in express and significant terms called [...], the Mark of his Name. They have no rest day nor night that worship the Beast, and his Image, and receive the Mark of his Name, chap. 14. vers. 11. Now, if you apply this to the Profession of a Roman Catholick, all things will agree. For, what is a Roman Catholick, but such a one as doth make it the chief and main Article of his Faith, to acknowledge the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, and to subject his Conscience to the Laws made by that Authority? And this we have already proved, in the Third Chapter of this Treatise, to be no other but the Name of the Beast. For if there were no such thing as the Universal Headship, Sovereign Power, and Supreme Dominion of the Bishop of Rome, what would become of the Faith and Profession of a Roman Catholick? The Name or Universal Headship is that which giveth foundation to the Mark or Profession à priori: and the Mark or Profession is that which declareth the Name or Universal Headship à posteriori. [Page] And therefore in significant terms it is called the Mark of the Name. Seventhly, The Mark in the Forehead and in the right Hand is that which the Subjects of the Beast's Kingdom do assume to themselves as a matter of the greatest Honour and Dignity. It is not a brand or nick-Name put upon them by their Enemies, but that which themselves do voluntarily profess, as may be seen in the whole Book of the Revelation. Now such a Name is the Profession of a Roman Catholick. The Roman Church comprehendeth all those Nations, Languages, and People, that agree in the same Unity of the Faith under the Pope the Head. And every Member of this Church, of what sort soever, maketh this as the principal Badge of his Profession, to adhere to the Bishop of Rome, as to the visible Head of the Church. Eighthly, The Mark in the right Hand and in the Forehead must be so expounded, That in receiving of this, men must be guilty of great sin against Christ, and so consequently lyable to most grievous Judgements, except they repent. And therefore it is expressed, That such shall be tormented day and night that worship the Beast, and receive his Mark. Surely then that act of receiving the Mark of the Beast must needs be a grievous sin, because the Lord Christ doth threaten it with so heavie a Judgement. Now if you take the Profession of the Faith of a Roman Catholick as he professeth his subjection to the Bishop of Rome, this is the greatest derogation that can be to Christ, to supplant him in his Universal Headship. For it is his peculiar and incommunicable Priviledge, to be the only Head of the Church, his Mystical Body. Therefore, whosoever he is that doth ascribe this to himself, or to any other, doth sin against the Kingly. Office of Christ, and doth what in him lies, to dethrone, and put Christ from his sovereign Dignity. A Wife may be guilty of many Offences against her Husband; but that is one of the most capital, when she doth take another in his room: for that is, in a sense, To break the bond, and to cast him off from being her Husband, when she doth give her self to another man. A Roman Catholick then when he doth profess his Allegiance to the Bishop of Rome, as to [Page] the visible Head of the Church, this publick Profession of his is Rebellion, and high Treason against the Lord Christ, the true Head of the Church; this doth supplant him of his Kingly Power and Dignity: and therefore he doth threaten this sin with such grievous Judgements. Those words therefore that are added as an Epiphonema in the end of the Revelation, Whosoever shall adde to the words of this Book, God will adde to him the Plagues that are written in this Book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the Book of this Prophecie, God will take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the Holy City, and from the things which are written in this Book, chap. 22. vers. 18. 19. Interpreters do usually apply this place to those that bring in Traditions; but I think that here is a more special sense intended, sutable to the nature of the Book: for the principal scope of the Book of the Revelation, is to speak of the Kingly Office of Christ; and therefore they that set up another Head of the Church, they do adde to the words of the Prophecie of this Book, and God will adde to them the Plagues that are written in the Book. So they that take away from the Kingly Office of Christ, they do in a more special sense take away from the words of the Prophecie of this Book. And therefore God will take away their part out of the New Ierusalem, and from the things that are contained in the Book. If these things are so, I cannot but admire at Hugo Grotius, a man of great Learning in these last times, who in his Tract de Antichristo, doth speak very favourably of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. But, saving the great worth and Learning of such an Author, here is the very formality of Antichristianism, for which which men shall be liable to very great Judgements, unless they do repent. And though they do distinguish betwixt Two kinds of Heads; that Head which is Supreme, and that which is Ministerial: it is too too well known, if we go to Practice, That the Bishop of Rome hath not assumed a Ministerial Headship to himself: nay, indeed and in truth, he hath made the Headship of Christ nothing at all. Ninthly, The Mark in the Forehead and in the right Hand, ought to be so expounded, that therein [Page] must appear the principal Cause of the sufferings of the Martyrs. For after that the Beast was destroyed, Iohn saw in the Vision the Souls of them that were beheaded for the Word God, and for the Testimony of Jesus, that had not worshipped the Beast, nor received his Mark, Chap. 20. 3, 4. The special Cause of the sufferings of the Martyrs, must be for the refusal of these things. If we transfer this to Experience, we shall find, That great Multitudes of Men and Women have been put to death in all the times of the Beast's Kingdom, because they would not yield Obedience to the Laws, Ceremonies, Traditions, and Superstitious Observations, imposed upon them by the Authority of the Bishop of Rome, as Universal Head of the Church. They were slain, because they held the Word of God, and the Testimony of Jesus Christ; because they took the Lord Christ alone for the true Head of the Church, and would live only in subjection to his Laws.

Now then, to gather up all the aforementioned particulars into one sum; it is clear, That the Profession of a Roman Catholick, in the visibility thereof, is the Mark of the Beast in the Forehead, and in the right Hand; and all Circumstances do wonderfully agree.

But let us now come to give some special instance for this out of the Old Testament. And here, if we go to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, we shall finde a cleer instance of the Character or Mark of the Beast in the times of the Graecian Antichrist. For there is mention made of one Iason, when he had bought the High Priesthood for Money, and did assign 150 Talents more, if he might have license to set up a place for Exercise, and for the training up of Youth in the Fashions of the Heathen; and to write them of Hierusalem, by the Name of Antiochians. Which, when the King had granted, and he had gotten the Rule into his hand, it is expressly said of this Iason, [...]. Our English hath it, He forthwith brought his own Nation to the Greekish Fashion. Iunius, and Montanus, and the Lexicographer Scapula, have it, Ad Graecum Ritum. But I think the words may better be translated, He carried over his own Country-men to the [Page] Greek Character, 2 Macc. 4. 9, 10.

For the more close and perfect Application of this Truth, we will note these four Particulars: 1. What is the Hellenick or Graecian Character. 2. Who are the Persons that do receive it. 3. The Time when. 4. The Power and Authority which did compel them to receive it.

For the first, A Character is nothing else but a Note of Distinction, by and through which one sort of People are distinguished from another: as the Ephraimites were distinguished from the Gileadites, by the Word Shiboleth; so one Nation is distinguished from another by their Language, Attire, and other Customes. But in this case we have not to do with the Marks of civil distinction; and therefore when it is said, That Iason carried over his own Country-men to the Hellenick Character, this is meant of such a way of worship, as was the publick Profession among the profane Graecians in matters of Religion. In respect whereof, that publick Profession was, determinatus modus vivendi, (as the School-men speak) containing that manner and way of living according to the Law of the Antiochians. The like may be said, That the Mark of the Beast in the Revelation is that whereby they of the Romish Religion are distinguished from others: for they have a peculiar manner of living according to the Laws of that Church under the Pope the Head. There is then an exact Agreement betwixt the Hellenick and the Romish Character; and in both Nations Men are distinguished by this, as by the Badge of their Profession.

Secondly, For the Persons; who were they that Iason carried over to receive the Mark of the Beast in the Graecian Tyranny? It is plainly said, That he carried over [...] his own Country-men, of the Stock and Lineage of Abraham. And these things were foretold by Daniel the Prophet many yeers before, That in the dayes of Antiochus Epiphanes, many of his own Country-men should forsake the Holy Covenant, Dan. 11. 31, 32. and as he foretold, it came to pass indeed, as appeareth in the Book of the Macchabees, and in the Stories of Iosephus and others. Now if we apyly this to the Beast in the Revelation, [Page] there is a more general Defection and Apostacie of the whole Christian world: He causeth all to receive a Mark in their forehead, and in their right hand.

Thirdly, For the time; When was it that Iason carryed over his own Country-men to the Hellenick Character, to the publike Profession of Religion used by the Grecians in the Sele [...] cian State? It was in the times of Antiochus the Grecian Antichrist. If therefore we read in the Book of the Revelation, That the Beast did cause all to receive a Mark in their forehead and in their right hand; this was no other but that which was done before, in the times of Antiochus the Grecian Antichrist; who is set forth as a Type and a Figure of that great Antichrist who should come in the last times.

Fourthly, For the power by and through which Iason should carry over his own Country-men to the Hellenick Character, or to that way of Profession: It was then, when he had gotten the Rule into his hands. Some sins do increase by Propagation, as Original sin; some, by Ensample, as many evil Customs amongst us: But here is mention made of the increase and prevailing of a sin by Imperial Edict, by the Countenance, Power and Authority of them that have the Soveraignty in their hands. The like may be said of the Beast in the Revelation; all did receive the Mark in their forehead and in their right hand: and if you look to the reason, it was a sin of Monarchy or Imperial power. The Beast, as a Potentate, did cause all to receive a Mark in their forehead and in their right hand.

By the Hellenick Character used in the times of the Grecian Tyranny, we may know what is the Mark of the Beast so often mentioned in the Revelation; and by the one, we may finde out the meaning of the other.

I have stay'd the longer on this Point, because it is the principal matter in the Text; and the right discovery of this, will guide us in the clearing of other things. For if we do rightly conceive what is meant by the Mark of the Name, we may come to demonstrate the Name it self what it is. And when the Name it self is truly and Apocalyptically defined, we may [Page] be the better prepared for the discovery of the Number. All these do mutually depend each upon other. And therefore for the subject-matter of the Law of the Beast, in the several branches thereof, we do thus determine, in these three Particulars. First, The Mark that he causeth all to receive in their forehead and in their right hand, is nothing else but the visibility of their Profession, that do acknowledge him as Head of the Church: And this he compelleth men of all sorts to submit and to yeeld obedience unto. Secondly, For the Name of the Beast, which is also a part of that Law which he did impose upon his Subjects, That none might buy nor sell, but they that have the Name of the Beast. This Name, I have formerly proved, in the third Chapter of this Treatise, That it is not the word Lateinos, nor any other Grammatical Name; but the Name is the Universal Headship it self. The matter cometh to this Issue, That none must buy nor sell, nor have civil commerce within the Dominions of the Beast, but those onely who will acknowledge his Name or Headship. Thirdly, For the Number of the Name, the third part or branch of the Law imposed upon the Subjects of that Kingdom, that none must buy nor sell but they that had the Number of the Name; I have shewed in part, and I shall more fully declare afterward, That the Number is not made out of the Numeral letters of the name Lateinos, or out of any other Grammatical Name whatsoever: but it is the Number of time when that Name or Headship had its first visible and remarkable Institution: and therefore it is called, The Number of the Name. The matter then must come to this Issue, That none must buy nor sell, but he that doth own the Universal Headship as it was established and set up in the first Foundation and Institution of that spiritual Monarchy.

Object. You perhaps will alleadge, That the words are plain, That none must buy nor sell, but he that hath the Number of the Name: Therefore if the Number of the Name be the Number of time when this Name or Universal Headship began, according to this Exposition, he must not buy nor sell, who hath not the Number of time when this Universal Headship began.

[Page] Sol. We must not take the words further then they naturally intend: And therefore this is the meaning of the Text, That he must not buy nor sell, who doth not receive the Catholicism, or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, as it was Enacted in the first Institution of that Spiritual Monarchy. And if we look attentively to the words, we shall finde, that there is some difference to be made betwixt the Mark of the Name, and the Number. For when the Spirit speaketh of the Mark in the forehead and in the right hand, and of the Name in relation to the Mark, he speaketh of such a thing as is apparent to the sight of every man. The Beast's Subjects, in their usual buying and selling, may discern who have the Mark in the forehead, and who have not. But now for the Number of the Name, and for the Name in reference to the Number, it is nowhere said, that this is in the forehead or in the right hand: for it is of a more secret and occult nature. Let him that hath wisdom count the Number of the Beast. This sheweth plainly, that the Number is to be found out by some subtilty of observation; and, it is not to be discerned in the ordinary use of buying and selling.

Object. You will say, Why are all these joyned together, that none must buy nor sell, but he that hath the Mark of the Beast, the Name, and the Number of the N [...]me?

Sol. They are all joyned together, by reason of their affinity or relation that the one hath to the other: and therefore a man cannot well take upon him the Profession of a Romane Catholick, which is the Mark of the Name; but he must also profess the Name or Soveraign power it self: And he cannot profess the Name or Universal Headship, but he must relate also to the first Foundation and Institution thereof, in the time when it first began visibly to appear. And therefore when the Romane Catholicks do at this day own the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, they do not mean it onely personally of the Pope now living, but of the Succession that hath continued many hundred years. There must then be some particular instant of time, where this Institution did begin. In many great Kingdoms at this day, it is not safe for a [Page] man to live among them, unless he will acknowledge the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. Now I say then, there must be some particular term and instant of time, where this Universal Headship had its first institution, where we must set the date thereof. And here I say, it must be in the time of the Emperor Phocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman, as the fourth Metal-Kingdom. Thus I have distinctly shewed the matter of the Law which the Beast imposeth upon his Subjects, in the three branches thereof: And though I have departed in some particulars from the ordinary stream of Interpreters, yet I do agree with many Protestant Writers in the main sense and substance of the Interpretation. Since the preaching of Luther, Bullinger was one of the first that did historically and with Principles expound the Book of Revelation: And so Paraeus speaking of Expositors of the last times, hath these words, ‘Quibus omnibus meo judicio facem praetulit Henricus Bullingerus, quam ferè secuti sunt alii.’ Prooe [...]. in Apocal. Cap. 4. Now this Interpreter doth pitch upon the same sense as we do, as it is manifest in his Commentary upon the Revelation. And so do some other Interpreters, as Danaeus de Antichristo, &c.

If therefore a Reason be demanded, Why the latter Interpreters have not gone on in this ancient and true way of Exposition: There are two Reasons, which are usually given, as we may see in the Commentary of Paraeus upon the Revelation, and of Downham in his Tract de Antichristo, and of Dr. Mayer in his Expositions upon the Revelation.

First, they alledge, That the Number of the Beast is numerus nominis, the Number of his Name, and not the Number of the time of his rising.

Sol. If these Interpreters will consider the truth of that which we have largely disputed; to wit, that the Name of the Beast is no other but his Universal Headship and Power; by the discovery of this, they will finde that there is no difference between the Number of the Name, and the Number of the time of the rising of the Beast, when that Name or Universal Headship began. We reade when our Saviour [Page] was born at Bethleem, that certain wise-men came from the East to Ierusalem, saying, Where is born the King of the Iews? [...], for we have seen his Star in the East, Matth. 2. 1, 2, 3. Here I demand, Why is this Star called [...], his Star? The reason is plain, Because it did denote and set forth the time of his birth. So in the like case, the Number of the Beast may be called [...], the Number of his Name, because it doth characterize, decypher and set forth the time when that Name or Universal Headship began.

Secondly, whereas they alledge, That there are onely 606 years to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, under the Emperor Phocas: I confess this is true, if we make our account by the years of our Lord. But what warrant have we to proceed in this method? For though the Christians do generally use this way of computation, yet the general use hath not been so to reckon: For as Martinius an acu [...]e Grammarian, speaketh of the reading of the Hebrew, so we also may say the same concerning the computation of the times in the Book of the Revelation; We are not in this to follow the modern, but the ancient use. These are his words: ‘We ought not to think the custome of our age to be the rule and direction of speaking Hebrew, but so far onely as it doth agree with the custome of the ancient people. ’ Further he addeth, ‘In every Nation there are skilful and learned men in that language, yet they do not all reade after the same manner▪ The Germans pronounce their words one way, the French another, the Spaniards and Italians another; and each of them say they have their proper and peculiar custome. But such a custome is not to be accounted a lawful argument. Let us hold this therefore for a sound foundation, both in reading, writing and [...]ronouncing Hebrew, Veterem Haebraeorum usum sequendum esse, The ancient use of the Hebrews is to be followed.’ Technol. p. 45. So I may say in the present case, They that take the Name of the Beast for the Universal Headship, & they that stand upon the beginning of the Universal Headship (for so Paraeus, Downham, and our best Interpreters do) at the Emperor Phocas, they must not count the Number of time by the year of [Page] the Lord, or by any such like modern style; but they must have recourse ad veterem Prophetarum & Apostolorum usum, to the ancient use of the Prophets and the Apostles in the days of Iohn. And here they may finde, that the Name of the Beast, which is onely 606 in the years of the Lord, will be 666 in Daniels Chronologie. And that which may be for a confirmation of this truth, let us but remember what hath been formerly proved, to wit, that Iohn in the Revolation doth largely repeat shat which hath been more briefly mentioned by Daniel concerning the Roman or the fourth Metal-Kingdom. Further, we reade, That when the seventh Angel began to sound, it is expresly said, That time shall be no more, but the mystery of God shall be finished, as he hath spoke to his servants the Prophots, Rev. 10. 6, 7. Here two questions are to be demanded, First, what did he mean when he saith, That time shall be no more? Secondly, To what Prophets doth he refer us, when he saith, As he hath spoken to his servants the Prophets? By Time, we are to take it onely, with a restriction, for the time of the sufferings of the Church, under the Tyrannical Governments of this world, as it is set forth in the type of the four Metal-Kingdoms: But more specially, in the last and Antichristian state of the fourth Kingdom. Secondly, for the servants the Prophets, Mr. Mede, Grasserus, and others, do understand this of the times in the Prophecy of Daniel, which do reach to the dissolution and destruction of the Antichristian Kingdom. If we put all this together, we shall finde, that the times of the Beasts Kingdom ought not to be computed by the years of the Lord, but by the ancient and Prophetical Chronologie in the Visions of Daniel. These two Arguments being answered, Paraeus, Downham, and other Protestant Writers are wholly ours: For they altogether in a manner in their Treatises and Commentaries do teach, that the formality of Antichristianism doth lye in the Universal Headship; and that a thing is Antichristian, so far as it doth contribute to the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, to put him in the place of Christ, who is the onely, undoubted, unquestionable Head of the Church, and there is none besides. And so much concerning [Page] the matter of the Law, that the Beast causeth these three things to be received, The Mark, the Name, and the Number of the Name.

Onely here is one hard question to be dissolved, in which I finde, that Interpreters are greatly divided, and that is this; Whether the Mark, Name and Number are so many expressions of one and the same matter, or whether are they three distinct several matters? Some are of opinion, as Alcasar, that all these three ought to be coupled together exegeticè, by way of explanation: Seeing that which in this and the former verse is absolutely called the Mark, is afterward expresly called the Mark of the Beast, Chap. 15. ver. 2. and the Mark of the Name of the Beast, Chap. 14. ver. 11. Others are of a different judgement, as Ribera; for they hold, that these things ought to be distinguished: for they that stand on the glassie Sea, are said in express terms to overcome the Beast, his Image, Mark, Name, and the Number of his Name, Chap. 15. ver. 1, 2. Now our answer to this question is this: First, we say, That the Mark, Name, and the Number of the Name, cannot be affirmed to signifie one and the same thing, seeing they are in many places of the Prophecy delivered with distinction; and the reason of the distinction is laid down in sundry Texts. To the second also we answer, That these are not three several matters, as Ribera, Paraeus, Abbot, and others will have it; as though some of the Beasts Subjects should have the Mark, others the Name, and a third sort the Number of the Name. There is no reason that we should put those things asunder, which in the Prophecy are always joyned together.

Therefore to determine the question, we will take a middle way between these two extremes: We affirm then, That in the general these three do agree in one matter for the substance, though it be distinguished by three Apocalyptical considerations. Let us come to that particular place where Iohn saw the Number of them that stood upon the glassie Sea mingled with fire, who had overcome the Beast, his Image, Mark, Name, and the Number of his Name, Chap. 15. ver. 2. All [Page] these several expressions set forth one sort of men, that had persevered and held out for Christ against the Power and Headship of Antichrist in all the time of that Tribulation. And yet as this matter is one, it is branched into several Considerations.

First, If you speak of the Papacy as a State or Government afflicting the Saints, so it is called a Beast, like to one of the Beasts in Daniel. Secondly, If you speak of the Universal Headship, wherein the form and essence of the Kingdom doth consist, this is the Name of the Beast. Thirdly, If you speak of that Universal Headship, as a Representative of that Soveraign Majesty that was formerly lost in Rome Imperial, and now repaired in Rome Papal, this is the Image of the Beast. Fourthly, If you speak of the publick profession of this Universal Headship in the society of men, this is the Mark of the Beast. Fifthly, If you speak of the time when this Universal Headship began visibly and remarkably to appear, this is the Number of the Beast, and more specially of his Name and Headship. All these are so many distinct Apocalyptical Considerations, which agree in one main Truth in the general. And thus having spoken of the Law of the Beast, in the three branches thereof, we will now come to speak more briefly of the other particulars, because they are more easie to be understood.

Secondly, For the Law-maker, the Power by and through which he caused all to receive the Mark; this is a Spiritual Christ-like efficacy prevailing in the Consciences of men, to make them subject to his Laws. It is said of the Monarchy of Nebuchadnezzar, that the most High God did give to him a Kingdome; And for the Majesty that he gave him, all People, Nations and Languages trembled, and feared before him: whom he would, he slew; and whom he would, he kept alive, Chap. 5. ver. 18, 19. So the Beast in the Revelation hath the same transcendent power; he causeth all to receive a Mark, whether rich or poor, bond or free, male or female; he compelleth all to yield obedience, as they sometimes did, that were under the power of Nebuchadnezzar. But here is the difference: [Page] The power of Nebuchadnezzar was more external, over the bodies of men; this is more internal, over their Mindes and Consciences, and by consequence over their bodies also. Secondly, They tha [...] were under the Jurisdiction of Nebuchadnezzar, had they been left to their free choyce, they would have been glad to have enjoyed their liberty: but now for those that lived in subjection to the See of Rome, for the most part, the matter was far otherwise with them▪ they would not be free if they might. The Kings of the Earth divided in Interests, and in many Civil respects, all of them could agree in this one thing, To give their Power to the Beast, Rev. Ch. 17. They thought they could not be saved, unless in all Realms there was a Universal subjection to this Headship, given by Christ himself, as they thought, to Peter and his Successors. And for the time of the publick Institution of this Universal Headship, there were some preparations and previous workings towards the setting up of this Power; but there was no publick Establishment thereof, till the time of the Emperor Phocas. Let us hear what Mr. Fox in his Acts and Monuments speaketh concerning this matter, Pag. 108. Col. 2. But Rome (saith he) would not so soon lose the Supremacy once given, as the giver lost his life: For ever since from that day, she hath holden, defended and maintained the same still, and yet doth to this present day, by all force and policy possible. And thus much concerning Boniface, whom by the words of Gregory we may call the Fore-runner of Antichrist. For as Gregory brought in the style Servus Servorum: So this Boniface brought into their heads first, Volumus & Mandamus, Statuimus & Praecipimus; that is, We Will and Command, We Injoyn and Charge you. The same is mentioned by Paraens, in his Commentary upon the Revelation, Chap. 6. ver. 12. From whence I gather, As the Bishops of Rome have had a Mandatory Power in and over the Church; so this first began in the time of the Emperor Phocas, in the Decree of the Universal Headship.

Thirdly, Let us consider the persons, who they are that are subject to his Power. He commandeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, to receive a Mark. The greatness of rich [Page] men cannot procure a toleration; neither can the meanness of poor men exempt them by their poverty. Bullinger upon the place speaketh very pithily: We see (saith he) that Emperors, Kings, Dukes, Marquesses, Earls, Barons, Realms, Countreys, Cities, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, Prelates, Doctors, Clerks and Lay men, obey him. And also men of the greatest Power, Riches, Wisdome, together with the poor people. There is no such Kingdome, and so diversly compact, in the whole world, no not among the Mahometans: And all these are willingly subject to the Seat; yea, they have perswaded themselves, that they cannot well live, and that they cannot be saved, unless they be subject to the See of Rome. So far Bullinger. From hence we gather, that the event doth fully answer the Prophecy; for we see by experience, how all the world hath worshipped the Beast, and received his Mark. And whereas some, to illude this truth, have pleaded, that the Popish Churches in France do not own the Pope for Head of the Church: We will easily grant, that they may not be so strictly obliged to the Popes Chair in some temporal respects; yet it is too plain, that his Authority is set up in their Consciences, and that they are subject to his Laws.

Fourthly, Let us consider the punishment to be inflicted upon those that have not the Mark in the Forehead, and in the right-hand; they are forbidden to buy or sell. Mr. Mede doth take this for Excommunication, or casting out of Church-fellowship. But rather the words signifie, a cutting off from all civil commerce among men. Yea, if we compare the Scriptures, we shall finde that it was present death for any man to refuse to have the Mark in the forehead, and in the right-hand. Therefore when Iohn saw the Souls of those that were beheaded for the Word of God, and the testimony of Iesus, that had not worshipped the Image, nor received the Mark, Chap. 20. ver. 4. he doth plainly shew, that the beheading was for the Non-worship of the Beast, and for the not receiving of the Mark. We may conclude then, when men are exempted from bu [...]ing and selling, this is a Synecdoche: By this one, all other kindes of punishment whatsoever are understood. And thus [Page] we have seen the matter of the Law, the Law-maker, the persons subject to the Law, and the penalty upon all such as shall refuse subjection. Let us now come to the several particulars which concern the right calculation of the Number.

First, For the Person, who it is that must make the discovery: It is such a one as hath wisdome, [...] &c. Here is wisdome, let him that hath understanding count the Number of the Beast, &c. The discovery then must be by understanding. But here we are not to conceive such a kinde of wisdome as lyeth meerly in Mathematical subtilties: For how can it be imagined, that the holy Spirit (and that under the highest penalties) should give such serious warning to the Church, to beware of receiving the Mark of the Beast, the Name, and the Number of the Name, and these things be onely discoverable to them that have skill in the Mathematicks? You will say, What wisdome is here intended? I answer, such a skill and dexterity onely, by which men are able to render the mystical and figurative expressions of the Prophecy in their true natural sense and construction. The like expression is used, Rev. 17. 9. Here is the minde that hath wisdome: the seven Heads are seven Mountains where the woman sitteth. By wisedome, he doth here mean a sagacity and skill to expound the Parables, and mystical expressions of the Prophecy in their bare sense and signification. And so in the present case, when he speaketh of the Name and Universal Headship of the Beast, and the Number of the Name, it is not to be doubted, but that he pointeth to some method of Account famously known in the days of Iohn. And whereas he doth not openly and plainly, but under dark terms, express the matter, to wit, that it is the Number of a Man, and the Number 666: By this he doth imply, that some kinde of wisdome is to be used in the true calculation and discovery of the Number.

You will say, If there be 666 years to the setting up of the Name, or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, why is not this expressed in plain and significant terms?

By the like manner of reasoning, you may argue, Why doth the Spirit, through the whole body of the Prophecy, [Page] carry on the description of the state of the Church in a figurative, mystical, and typical way of expression? He might (if he had so pleased) have said in so many syllables, that the seven Heads of the Beast, are so many Mountains of the City of Rome, and so many Heads of Roman Government: But he doth rather use a dark circumlocution, of a woman sitting upon a Beast with seven Heads. He doth use such an hidden way of expressing these things in Emblems and Figures, that pious men might bestow the more diligence in searching the Stories of the Church. Paraeus in his Commentary upon the R [...]velatun, Chap. 17. v. 7. speaketh to the same purpose: Piis vero interpretatione aenigmatic à aurem ve [...]icare voluit spiritus, ut subinde in suorum temporum eventus atque Historias invigilar [...]nt. And if we come to example, we shall finde, That the [...]even Trumpets are delivered in a very dark and mystical manner: For after that the Angel had offered much incense, with the Prayers of all Saints, upon the Golden Altar before the Throne, then the seven Angels began to sound. When the first Angel sounded, there followed Hail, and Fire mingled with Blood, Chap. 8. ver. 7. When the second Angel sounded, a Mountain burning with fire was cast into the Sea, ver. 8. And when the third Angel sounded, a great Star fell from Heaven into the Rivers, and Fountains; and the Name of the Star is Wormwood, ver. 10, 11. Here it is plain, That by these Emblems and Figures, so many Judgements of God, in a succession, are said to fall upon the world, for their persecuting of the Saints. For after the Prayers of all Saints were offered up on the Golden Altar upon the Throne, then the seventh Angel began to sound. As in the like case, when Eliah fled to Horeb, he made intercession against Israel, saying, I have been very jealous for the Lord God of Hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy Covenant, thrown down thine Altars, and killed thy Prophets; and I am left alone, and they seek my life, to take it away. In answer to this Prayer, the Lord bade him go out, and stand upon the Mount, 1 Kings 19. 11, 12, 13. And as he stood, first the Lord passed by, and a great and a strong Wind rent the Mountaine; and after the Wind, there was an Earthquake▪ [Page] and after the Earthquake, a Fire. Here if we would inquire after the signification of these three Emblems (for we cannot otherwise think, but that something is specially intended in Visions of this nature) the Lords own interpretation will shew the meaning of this, in the words that follow: He that escapeth the sword of Hazael, shall Ie [...]u s [...]ay; and he that escapeth the sword of Ie [...]u, shall El [...]shah s [...]ay. Here then are three Judgements in a succession, the Wind, the Earthquake, and the Fire. And for the still small voice that is expressed in these words, I have reserved to my self seven thousand men that have not bowed the knee to Baal, ver. 18. Now if you go to the seven Trumpets, it is clear, That they are so many Judgements of God, that come one after another upon the world, for their Idolatry, and for their killing of the Saints. But who shall assure us, what is certainly meant by each Trumpet? What is meant by the Hail mingled with fire; by the Mountain burning with fire? Who shall assure us, what is meant by these Types, seeing the Spirit doth not set down his meaning, as he doth in the Vision represented to Elias? We should in this case have recourse to the Body of the Stories of the Church: For I am perswaded, That the Lord doth on set purpose deliver these things more Aenigmatically and Figuratively, that we should attentively consider the way of his dealing, in judging the World, and in delivering his Church. O how far then do they go out of the true way, who are Enemies against all secular Learning, in the profitable and sober use thereof! God doth of set purpose carry on the whole Prophecy so darkly, because we should turn every way for the discovery of the truth. And this is the reason, wherefore he doth speak so mystically concerning the Name of the Beast, the Number of a Man, and the Number 666. Further also, we are to consider, That seeing the Kingdom of the Beast was to be set up by deceiving of the Nations, it was not needful to speak every Circumstance plainly, to the understanding of men. How should the Beast have deceived the world, if his deceits and pious frauds, if the time of his Kingdome, and every particular should have been fully discovered? There is [Page] then a peculiar sort of people, to whom the Lord hath given a special desire to look into the things contained in this Book of the Revelation; and they have in some measure an ability (though others are dark) to understand the meaning of the Spirit in his deep and mystical expressions. In the several Epistles to the seven Churches in Asia, this is added in the close of all, He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches. There are many excellent things that he speaketh to the Churches, in the way of Reproof, in the way of Advice, and in the way of Comfort; yet onely he that hath an ear to hear, will understand the meaning of his words. And so in the present case, when it is said, Here is wisdome: let him that hath understanding count the Number of the Beast. This implieth, That this matter must be found out by some subtilty of observation. The person that doth inquire, must be such a one as hath wisdome.

Secondly, For the manner of discovery, it must be by calculation of the Number; and therefore it is said, [...], Let him count the Number of the Beast. The word [...], signifieth such a kinde of Numbring as is by Counters or Stones, of [...], Lapillus, Calculus. But in the ordinary and common use, it doth promiscuously note any kinde of reckoning. And therefore it is said concerning the man that went about to build a Tower, [...], he counteth or reckoneth the cost, Luke 14. 28. And so in the present case, there is a computation or way of account to finde out the mystery of the Number: But here is the difference betwixt Interpreters; some go to the extraction of the root, some to the numeral Letters of the name Lateinos: But of these we have spoken in part already, and we shall further shew the vanity of this way in the process of the Discourse. We will therefore come positively and plainly to set down the meaning of the Spirit: And we shall finde, That there is nothing more familiar in the Predictions of Prophetical Scriptures, then for the Spirit to foretel remarkable occurrences, by a definite number of years to every such occurrence. Of many Examples that may be given, take these few. When the [Page] Lord would give Noah warning concerning the Flood, he told him, That such a Number of years should fulfil their course, and then the Flood should come: My Spirit shall not alway str [...]ve with man; yet his dayes shall be an hundred and twenty years, Gen. 6. 3. So when he made a Promise to Abraham, that he would give to his Posterity the Land of Canaan for an Inheritance, he told him, That 400 years should run compleat, to the performance of the Promise: Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs; and shall serve them, and they shall afflict them four hundred years, and afterwards they shall come out with great substance, Gen. 15. 13, 14 15. Further, when the people of the Jews were carried captive into Babylon, in the times of Ie [...]kims Captivity; to these the Prophet Ieremy did send a Consolatory Letter, in which he did declare two things of eminent note; Their remarkable deliverance, and the overthrow of the Babylonian Empire: Yet withall [...]e did declare, That seventy years must first be fulfilled and accomplished at Babylon, before their deliverance wi [...] come: And these Nations shall serve the King of Babylon seventy years; and when seventy years are accomplished, then will I visit the King of Babylon, Jer. 25. ver. 11, 12. And again, Thus saith the Lord, After seventy years be accomplished at Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word towards you, in causing you to return unto this place, Jer. 29. 10, 11. Last of all, when Daniel himself was m [...]sing on the truth of the Promise of God, and gave himself to understand the Times, and to pray in faith for the accomplishment of the Promises, he had a further discovery of the seventy weeks, that should lead him to the times of the Messiah, to his Passion, to the Preaching of the Gospel among all Nations, and to the destruction of Ierusalem. Now to the performance of these things, it was shewed to him, That there must be seventy Sevens, or seventy weeks of years, or 490 years in all, to begin and commence from the building of the second Temple: which line of years if he followed, it would bring him to that time when all these things should be fulfilled. By these Examples it is manifest, That it is a frequent thing in Prophetical Scriptures, to foretell [Page] future occurrences, and to shew the Number of years that shall pass before the event. If this be so, we have a rational ground to build upon, when we make 666 the Number of years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome.

But for the further clearing of the truth, That the study and the calculation of the Prophetical years is said to be wisdome, we can make this appear by some special Examples out of Scripture.

We reade in the the Prophecy of Daniel, In the first year of Darius the son of Ahashuerosh, of the seed of the Medes, which was made King over the Realm of the Caldeans, in the first year of his reign, I Daniel understood by books, the Number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Ieremiah the Prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Ierusalem, Dan. 9. 1, 2, 3. Concerning Darius the Mede, there is a great Controversie among Chronologers, whether he came to the Kingdome of the Caldeans by Conquest, or by free Election. But let that point be what it will be, all do agree in it, That Darius the Mede raigned immediately before Cyrus the Persian. And it is as clear also by the stories of the times, That the first year of Darius the Mede, was upon the very dawning of the Churches deliverance. In this year then Daniel gave himself to study by books, the Number of years that the Lord would accomplish in the Churches desolations. In him then, by the way, let us note, That they who have the greatest fulness of Spirit, are chiefly imployed in the meditation of the Scriptures: And they who are conversant in the Prophetical Scriptures, are many times helped out in the knowledge of these things, by the Sacred and the Civil Stories. But now let us take notice of the process and order of his meditations. First, he did lay it as a general ground, That seventy years must be expired, before deliverance will come: But now, saith he, the seventy years of the desolations of Ierusalem begin almost to be fulfilled; Therefore in these times we are almost come to the promised deliverance. And thereupon he did pray with great faith in the Promises of God, as [Page] appeareth by the scope of the Chapter. Here now in this Syllogism Daniel did [...], by two known Numbers he did finde out a third unknown: His major Proposition was the Prophecy of Ieremy; his Assumption was his own experience, and the Chaldee Registers of the Time: and his Conclusion was the approach of the delivery of the Church: And the whole operation in computing the times was by wisdome. For these are the words of the Text, I Daniel [...] understood by books. Piscator hath it, Consideravi in libris: Iunius, Fui considerans ex libris. All cometh to one sense, That whether he did consider these times in books, or by books, or out of books, he laid the times together, to wit, the times in the Prophecy of Ieremy, and the times that had past in the Churches experience, and accordingly did argue the approach of the deliverance that should come. This act of his was by wisdome or understanding, for so the word doth signifie; the inward contriving or plotting of any thing in the minde, as Artificers do cast the frame of a building: Thus Kirkerus doth render the meaning of the word in his Concordance. Iunius upon the place doth very significantly express the meaning of the word, Fuit intelligens ex libris Prophetiarum Hieromiae quibus annorum numerus fuit praefinitus, tum Historiis temporum quae à deportationis initio effluxerant. In Daniel [...]hen we have an example of computing the times, and of his wisedome in numbring the seventy years of Ieremy before the event. And this Daniel did do, not by extraordinary revelation, but as an ordinary believer might do by search.

Let us now go to another Instance. When the Disciples came privately to our Saviour upon Mount Olivet, they asked him concerning the time of the destruction of Ierusalem: and in order to their question, he made them this answer, When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation stand in the holy place: let him that readeth, understand, Mat. 24. 15. Here I demand, What is meant by him that readeth? Secondly, what is meant by the book that he must reade? By him that readeth, is meant, any one to whom God hath given a minde to search and to look into the meaning of the Scripture: And for the [Page] Book, that must needs be the Prophecy of Daniel, concerning the seventy weeks, Dan. 9. And whereas it is said, Let him that readeth, understand; the words must go in this tenor, Let him that readeth, know and understand how many years the 70 weeks of Daniel must contain, and where they must begin: And from the knowledge of these two, if he reckon well, he shall come to that time where they shall make an end, and that will be the time of the destruction of Ierusalem. And so we have an answer to the Disciples question. But yet further, concerning the time when the period of the seventy weeks are to be studied, and that is, when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. In that particular instant it is said, Then let him that readeth, understand. As for the standing of the abomination of desolation in the most holy place, our Saviour doth expound his meaning more plainly in another Evangelist: When ye shall see Ierusalem compassed about with Armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh, Luke 21. 20. Here some man may object, It is not always a necessary truth, that when a City is compassed with Armies, therefore it shall be taken; and when it is taken, it is not infallible that it shall be brought to utter desolation: What doth our Saviour then mean by this speech? His meaning is not, that from such weak principles men should draw a Conclusion of that weight; but this is the drift of his speech, When ye shall see Ierusalem compassed about with Armies, then let him that readeth, fall upon the calculation of the times in the Prophecy of Daniel: Let him consider where they begin, how long they shall continue, and where they make an end: and then by the joynt consideration of all these together, they shall finde they be not far from the destruction of Ierusalem, and that the years of the patience of God are run out. And yet further, our Saviour would not have men calculate the times to satisfie their curiosity, but meerly for use and practise, and better information. He saith, Let him that readeth, understand. But to what end? These words are immediately added, ver. 16. Then let them which are in Iudea, flee to the Mountains, &c. Now the understanding of the Prophetical times is no common [Page] matter, but there must be much study and meditation used, to finde out the meaning of the Spirit. The words of the Text are most emphatical, [...], Let him that readeth, ponder and consider the times, by some subtilty of observation.

Now then to apply all this to the present Text, and so we have many examples out of Scripture, to warrant us. That the Number 666 may be such a Number of years to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. And for the computation of these years before the event, this in the Scripture-language is called by the name of Wisedome. Having then such a multitude of Examples out of the Old Testament, where pious men have calculated the Prophetical years before the accomplishment; why by the like reason may we not conceive, That Iohn spake to the people in his own times, to the ages immediately following, but most specially to those who should live upon the borders of Antichrists rising, that they should calculate 666 years to the beginning of his Kingdom? The coming of Christ in the flesh, and the glory that should follow, was revealed to the ancient Prophets, though under dark and figurative expressions. Now mark what the Apostle S. Peter speaketh of the practise of those wonderful men: Of which salvation the Prophets have inquired, and searched diligently; searching into what manner of time the Spirit did point to, when he spake of the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow, 1 Pet. 1. 10, 11, 12. The times of the ancient Church were divided into many periods. Now it was shewed them (though darkly) in what period of time Christ should come: And accordingly they who had his Spirit in them, made no spare to search when that time should be. In like manner, the times of the New Testament are divided into many regions or parts; and it was revealed to the Apostles in mystical terms, how Antichrist should come, in what particular period of time he should come, and what should be the signs of his coming. Now seeing these things are revealed in the Prophecies of the New Testament (as I think none can well deny) was it not the duty of men immediately [Page] after the Apostles time, and so downward, to calculate the Times. And for the actual rising of the Kingdom of Anti-Christ, there is no one place doth speak more of his pedigree and genealogie, then the Text we now are upon. If this be so, it will quickly appear, of what nature the Number 666 is, seeing it is put in the close of the Chapter. There is then the greatest probability as can be supposed, that this must be the Number of years to the first Institution and Foundation of that Spiritual Monarchy, and the person who hath wisedome is to make up the account. Further, if we take 666 for the Number of time, and particularly for the Number of years, this will agree with the word [...] ▪ for in the known and most familiar use, that art which teacheth us to number Periods, Cycles, and greater Revolutions of years, is called [...], the art of Computation. But if all this will not give satisfaction, if any shall still say, That this may be the sense, yet it doth not prove that it must be so. For the further clearing of the matter, we will go to the third Circumstance, to the Method or the Rule which we must number by. And here we shall finde, That we have not onely typical proof, but true Apocalyptical and demonstrative grounds to build upon, if we compare the words of Scripture with our own experience.

Thirdly, the method by which we are to account, is, by the Numbers of the four Metal-Kingdoms in Daniels Image. So then, if we account from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdom, there will be an exact line of 666 years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome under the Emperor Phocas. And here the best Expositors do set the rising of the two-horned Beast out of the earth. And this is the reason that 666 is called the Number of the Name of the Beast: and experience also sheweth, That the account is to be made by the periods of time in Daniels Image. And so we have not onely probabili [...]y, but also apodeictical proof for the Exposition of the Number. But now to come to clear the point, we will shew the Reasons why the account by Daniels method is called [Page] [...], the Number of a Man, and that this is the meaning of the Spirit.

First, it may fitly be called a Number, because (as Mr. Mede rightly saith) It is the Sacred Kalendar, or Prophetical Chronologie, appointed by God himself to measure the times. We may therefore fitly call it a Number, or (as they speak in the Schools) numerus numerans, because it comprehendeth the four Periods of time appointed by God himself, to number the special occurrences of the Church.

Secondly, in a more special sense it is called the Number of a Man, because it pleaseth the Holy Ghost by the four Regions, Parts and Divisions of the Body of Man, to number the four great Empires of the world, and the four notable and remarkable Revolutions of Time. The Image in the parts and in the divisions of it, doth not (as Interpreters well observe) naturally signifie these things, but meerly by positive and divine Institution. It pleaseth the Lord by the four parts of the Humane Image, to decypher so many periods of time. And this is the true reason, wherefore the Spirit in the figure calls this form, method, and way of account, [...], the Number of a Man, because it is the Number of the Humane Image.

Thirdly, this way of expression doth agree with the manner of the Spirit in other places: As for example; Thou art this Head of Gold; that is, Thou art signified by this Head of Gold. The seven kine are seven years; that is, the seven kine do represent seven years. And, The seven Heads are seven Mountains; that is, the seven Heads do type and set forth seven Mountains. And so in the present case, The Number of the Beast is the Number of a Man, and that Number is 666. The plain meaning whereof is this, That 666 signifieth so many years specified and declared in the accounts of Daniels Image, called, The Number of a Man. It is so styled, because the Number is such in that Calculation; and it is so to be made out in that method and way of account.

Fourthly, this method of account will agree with the word [...]. Here will be an excellent subject for a man that [Page] hath dexterity in the Calculations of the Times, to imploy the art and skill of a good Accomptant. For to what end did the Lord reveal this Prophetical Chronologie, under the figure and similitude of the four Regions and Parts of the Body of Man, but that it might be a certain and a standing rule to all Posterities, to number those times and changes of times, that should befall in and about the affairs of the Church?

Fifthly, the Number of time by the account of Daniels Image, is the most fit to decypher the rising of a Tyrannical State, such as the Kingdome of the Beast is, whereof we speak. Now what is the Image of Daniel? It is no other but a Systeme or body of the four great persecuting Empires, which should rise up one after another in the same succession, notably to afflict the Church of God. Now fith the Beast with two Horns in the Revelation, is such a Dominion or State that shall notably afflict the Saints in the latter days; where can it be more properly or fitly placed, then in the Image of Tyrannical Empires? All these are of the same lineage and kindred. And therefore seeing it is the plot of the Spirit to delineate these four Successions by so many Parts of the Body of Man, we may well conclude, That this way of Computation is the Number of a Man meant in the Text, seeing it doth so notably agree with the event.

Sixthly, the Number of Time by the account of Daniels Image, in the days of Iohn, and in the times immediately following, was most apt to finde out the events that should befal the Church. For this is to be observed, That though the Beast, his Name, Mark, and Image were not extant in the times of Iohn, yet the number by and through which these were to be computed, must then be not onely extant, but it must be also of remarkable use. As for example: The Anti-Christian Church had no beeing in the days of Iohn, nor in the ages immediately following; yet nevertheless the Spirit in the Revelation doth decypher the place of this Church by such a Character, as was famously known in the days of Iohn. The seven Heads are seven Mountains, where the woman sitteth. Now this did more properly appertain to those first times in [Page] which S. Iohn lived, That Rome was seated upon seven Mountains: For the people then living, though they should never see the Antichristian times, yet Iohn did foreshew the place where that Church should have her beeing in the time appointed and limited by the Lord. In like manner, though the Name, Image, and Mark of the Name, had none of them existence in the days of Iohn; yet the Number by which all these must be accounted, must needs then be in some tolerable use. For how shall a man that hath wisdome, by the Number finde out the Name, if the Number were no way discoverable in those times? Mr. Brightman upon the place, doth fully agree with us: His words are these: Though the Mark and the Name were not extant, the Beast being not as yet; Nevertheless, the Number of the Name might be manifest to that age wherein John lived; and not onely to himself by Revelation, but to some others also by search. For how could it be possible, that a Government to come might be discoverable by a Number, and that Number not extant? How great a torment would it be for a man to assay to do that thing that were altogether impossible? From which words of his, I do conclude, That the Number which must discover the Name of the Beast, must be some way extant in the days of Iohn. If this be so, what Number was then more familiarly known, then the Number by the four divisions and parts of the Body of Man, by and through which Daniel doth number the four persecuting Empires of the world? Therefore we may well conclude, That this Prophetical Chronologie was the [...], the Number of a Man meant in the Text.

Object. You will say, That the four great Empires in Daniels Image, were all destroyed before the coming of Christ in the flesh, and therefore no way sutable or apt to number the times of the new Prophecy.

Sol. By the same reason you may say, That five forms of Government were fallen in the City of Rome; Kings, Consuls, Dictators, Decemvirs, Tribunes: Therefore these several forms of account are not fit to decypher the Beast in the last and Antichristian edition of Roman Government. And this [Page] were plainly to [...] against the scope of the Text, Rev. 17. But in the present case we answer, It is true, that the Babylonian, the Mede-Persian, and the Graecian Empires were fully destroyed before the coming of Christ; but this is not true of the Roman, for that stood in fulness of power, when Iohn wrote the Revelation. If therefore the people living in his times, had made their account from the beginning of the Roman (as the onely remaining Empire of the four) by a line of 666 years, they would have come to that particular instant where the Name and Universal Headship of the Beast should begin. And so by the Number of a Man, by that Prophetical Chronologie they might have discovered the times of the rising of the second Beast a priori. Now whereas many learned men in these times are of opinion, That all the old Prophets do end at Christ, and that none of their Predictions are repeated in the new Prophecy: I yield, that this is true in part, but it is not universally true; for there are some things declared in the old Prophets, which are more distinctly and fully set down in the Revelation. Beza in his Preface speaketh to excellent purpose: Spiritum Sanctum in hunc pretiosum librum congerere volu [...]sse quae ex superiorum Prophetarum praedictionibus implenda supererant, & nonnulla addidisse quae nos interesse cognovit. And this is true in the four Metal-Kingdoms in Daniels Image. For what is more briefly and more darkly delivered in that Prophecy, concerning the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdom, is more fully and clearly revealed by the Spirit in the Revelation. And therefore had the people that lived in the days of Iohn, computed the times from the beginning of the Roman Kingdom (for this was the onely surviving and remaining Kingdom of the four) by a line of 666 years, they had been carried upon the year of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, upon that time when the Name, and the Mark of the Name of the Beast did begin.

Lastly, the Number of a Man, in the Text, must be so expounded, that it may also be the Number of the Beast: for though ordinarily a Man hath nothing to do with a Beast, there being so great a difference in their kindes; yet the words [Page] of the Text are plain, Let him that hath wisdome, count [...], the Number of the Beast, [...], [...]r it is the Number of a Man. In this sense of the Text th [...]n, the Number of the Beast and the Number of a Man be all one, and here is no [...], though it may [...] [...] to be. For a [...] Daniel describeth the four great Em [...]es by so many parts of the Body of Man, Chap. 2. So he [...]escribeth the same Empires under the type and similitude of [...]our Beasts, Chap. 7. In the present case then, the Number of the Beast and the Number of a Man are all one. And that which may make for the more abundant confirmation of the truth, all Interpreters (some few excepted) do agree, That the Little Horn in the 7 of Daniel, is the Emblem and Type of the Papacy, and that it is all one with the two-horned Beast mentioned in the Revelation. And therefore when the Spirit saith, Let him that hath wisdome, count the Number of the Beast, for it is [...], the Number of a Man; he doth but refer us to that ancient Prophetical way of account, by the members and parts of the Body of a Man in Daniels Image. Therefore seeing all Circumstances do agree, and we finde it true in the event, we may conclude, that the calculation by the times of Daniels Image, is the [...], the Number of a Man meant in the Text.

But that this may better take with the Reader, we will make a brief Narrative in what order, and by what degrees we came to be of this judgement. It may be when he shall finde the process of this discovery to be upon probative grounds, this will give him the fuller and the surer satisfaction.

The first thing I builded upon, was, The subject of the Number. For I found by the whole scope of the Prophecy, (as I have formerly proved) that the name of the beast is no other, but his Universal Headship and Power. And therefore for the discovery of the Number, the true work was to finde out the Number of the Universal Headship: and here was the first degree of discovery. Therefore they who have spent their time about the word Lateinos, and the numeral Letters [Page] of that or such like Grammatical names, have but wasted their time, and have erred in the very beginning of the work. Therefore I did conclude, That the Name was the Universal Headship, and that the [...]umber was the Number of the Unini [...]ersal Headship, and no other. And this was the first step.

Secondly, for the discovery of the Number, I did observe, That in every Mathematica Proposition that is dubious, three things are specially observable: First, the [...], where both the subject and the predicate are propounded; and so here the datum or the subject, is the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast: The quaesitum, or the praed [...]cate, is 666. The second is [...], the Exposition of the Antecedent that is given, or of the subject of the Demonstration: and so, as I have formerly spoken, the Name of the B [...]ast I found to be no other, then his Universal Power and Headship.

The third is, [...], the definition and explanation of the Predicate or of the Consequent. And so the great question was to me, how the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast should be 666?

Here I mused, and often pondered in my minde what is the manner and use of the Spirit in the Scriptures, when he speaketh of the ri [...]ng of Governments, and their Calculations by Number, to discover their beginning. And here I found (as I believe every man shall do the like, who will give himself to observation) that the Prophetical Scriptures do very often reckon Governments, either by the Number of years to the time of their rising, or by the Number of years how long they shall continue. Now I was sure, that 666 could not be the time of the continuance of the Antichristian Kingdom, seeing in the whole body of the Prophecy, it is largely shewed, That the Kingdom of the Beast must continue 1260 Prophetical days, or years; and that this time must commence from the rising of the ten-horned Beast out of the Sea, or the ten Kings out of the ruines of the Empire. Therefore Mr. Archer in his book of the Personal Reign, is a very fabulous Writer in this, as in many other particulars, when he will [Page] needs have 666 to be the time of the continuance of the Beasts Kingdome. All the circumstances of the Text plainly laid together, do decypher this Kingdome à priori; and therefore the Number must refer to the time of the beginning, or the standing up of the Name or Headship.

But then the great [...] was, [...] what time I should [...] to Number? In this ca [...]e I was helped by the practise of Chronologers. For the [...], when they have a Prophetical Number, and do not know [...]rom what beginning to compute i [...], a [...]k how long it continueth, and where it maketh an eno? And if they be certain of these two, they will finde out the third▪ where it ought to begin. It is a sure rule in this, as in other kindes of learning, By two known things, you may come to discover a third unknown. And sometimes it so cometh to pass, that some diligence must be used, before we can come to the knowledge of the two, by and through which we may prove the third. As for example, We reade, That the Prophet Ezekiel was to lye upon his left side 390 days, which signifie so many years of the patience of God in bearing the iniquity of the house of Israel. Again, he was to turn, and to lye upon his right side 40 days; which signifie so many years, of the patience of God in bearing the iniquity of the house of Iudah, Ezek. 4. 4, 5. Now for the application of the times, the great Que [...]ion is, Where the 390 years begin, and where they make an end, and how long they do continue. For the continuation, there is no doubt to be made; and for the time of the ending, this must be at the destruction of Ierusalem by the Chaldaeans: For the time of the end, though it is not set down in express terms, yet it may be collected from the whole scope of the Text. For five years before the destruction of Ierusalem, Ezekiel was to take a Tile, and pourtray upon it the city Ierusalem, and la [...] s [...]ge against it, & build a fort against it. So then, the scope of the whole Vision is to shew, That after the 390 years of the patience of God are run out, the time should come, that the Chaldaeans should destroy both City and Temple. In this Ezekiel was a sign to the home of Israel, to foretel the destruction of the City and [Page] Temple, five years before it came to pass, Ezek. 1. 2. Upon these grounds Chronologers do reason in this manner: If the 390 years do end at the destruction of Ierusalem by the Chaldaeans, they must necessarily begin at the Apostacy of Ieroboam. For, if you take the right vein of Chronologie in the Book of the Kings, and number the times interchangably, as each King of Iudah, and each King of Israel began to reign, and to carry on the whole series and order of years, you shall find by induction of singulars, That there will be an exact line of 390 years from the defection of Ieroboam, to the destruction of Ierusalem aforesaid. He that desires the particular account of the years, and how it is exactly computed, let him go to the Isagoge of Calvisius. And of the certainty of the account, the Chronologer thus speaketh, Hunc igitur numerum annorum 390 ex annotatione Historiarum hujus temporis ab initio Ieroboami usque ad excidium Hierosolymae nos colligemus. It a quidem, ne conjecturas nos Lectori ob [...]rudamus, neque etiam sacrae Scripturae vim faciamus. Isag. Cap. 40. And in very deed, his performance is answerable to the Promise: for he doth exactly prove by induction of singulars, and that from the words of Scripture, That there are 390 years from the Apostacy of Ieroboam to the destruction of Ierusalem.

But now for the 40 years of the iniquity of the house of Iudah, this matter is somewhat more dark: But yet nevertheless Chronologers do reason in this wise: If 40 years be the time of the patience of God in bearing the iniquities of the house of Iudah, and those years must run compleat at the destruction of Ierusalem by the Chaldees; then it will follow, according to the Scripture-Chronologie, and the series of the times, that they must necessarily commence from the 13 year of Iosiah. Now if a question be made, Why these years should begin from the 13 of Iosiah, who was a reformer of the Church? Though he was, these times are to begin there, because the Lord did then begin to strive with that people, to bring them to Repentance by the Ministery of Ieremy. These are the words of the Text: From the thirteenth year of Iosiah the son of Ammon King of Iudah, even unto this day (that is, [Page] the three and twentieth year) the word of the Lord hath come unto me, and I have spoken unto you, rising early and speaking, but ye have not hearkned. And the Lord hath sent unto you all his servants the Prophets, rising early and sending them, but ye have not hearkened, nor inclined your ear to hear, Jer. 25. 3, 4. From these words it is plain, That the 40 years patience of God in bearing the iniquitie of the house of Iudah, did begin from the Ministery of Ieremy: and when these should run compleat, then the Prophet [...]zekiel doth signifie, That there shall be the destruction of Ierusalem. From this, and from some such like passages, I was moved to take the like course. I argued in this manner: If 666 be such a Number of years, and if this period of time also must end at the setting up of the Universal Headship under the Emperor Phocas, by necessary consequence I did conclude, That this time must begin 60 years before the birth of the Lord. Consulting with Chronologers, I found, that this was much about that time when Cicero and Antonius were Consuls at Rome. But here to me was the great difficulty, Why I should begin the times from the Consulships aforesaid, there being neither ground in History nor Chronologie for such a way of account. And further, to increase the difficulty, in my first thoughts of the matter, I was perswaded that [...], was no other but a Number commonly and frequently used amongst men. Besides the judgement of Interpreters, I did ground much upon that Scripture where the Angel measured the wall of the New Ierusalem 144 Cubits, [...], according to the measure of a man, Chap. 21. v. 17. Here I thought that [...] the Number of a Man, in discrete quantity, was the same with [...] in quantity continued. Now it is clear, that [...], the measure of a Man, is no other but that by and through which men do familiarly Number Furlongs withall. I could not say this touching the Consulship of Cicero and Antonius. The usual Computation of the times in that age, was from the building of the City of Rome, from the beginning of Iulius Caesar, from the Spanish Aera, from the Battel of Actium; and not from the time of the two Consuls aforesaid, [Page] With these difficulties I was intangled, in my first thoughts upon this argument. But there was one thing that chiefly kept me on in this way of account: I found in our Modern Chronologers, that the year in which Cicero and Antonius were Consuls, the Jewish Church came first under the Dominion of the State of Rome. For if you look before this time, you shall finde, That the same people of the Jews that were formerly under the Dominion of the people of Babel, Persia and Greece, in this year they came first of all under the Dominion of the people of Rome. Further, if you look to the times following, you shall finde everywhere, that the Church was under the Tyranny of the Romans. The whole order of the Book of the Revelation, is concerning the times of the Roman Tyranny, and of the susterings of the Church under that people. Now if you ask, at what instant of time the Church came under the Roman obedience, it was in that year when Antonius and Cicero were Consuls, or much thereabouts. Which way soever therefore ye go, the forementioned year must be famous for the accounts of the Church. Here also upon further search I found, that the Roman did begin as the fourth Metal-Kingdom, as I have formerly proved. So far I proceeded in the discovery: Onely I could not solve the Point, how this could be [...], the Number that men did familiarly count withall. When I proceeded this way, I found, that one thing would not hang with another: Therefore being cast upon a more deep consideration of the matter, I did finally pitch upon this sense. The account of the times in Daniels Image, is called [...], the Number of a Man; not because men do familiarly use this way of Calculation, but because it pleased the Lord to Number the times of the Church by so many Regions and Parts of the Body of Man in the Humane Image. And thus, Reader, thou hast a true Narrative by what degrees I came to rest in this Interpretation: And truly, when we look to the whole Coherence of the Text, the very words will excellently agree with such a sense. For, when one that hath wisdome, is exhorted to calculate the Number of the Beast, may be not [Page] be apt to say, What Rule must I observe in the Calculation? Or who shall assure me, whether 666 be the Number of Time, the Number of Place, the Number of Degrees, the Number of Longitude, or the Number of Latitude, or what is it the Number of? But if you will say to him, [...], it is the Number of Time in Daniels Humane Image, then you do [...]ive him a certain, [...], and determinate Rule to Number by: You shew him where he must begin, and where he must end; and how all being laid together, will discover the Name or the Universal Headship of the Beast. On the contrary, they who take [...], for such a number as is ordinarily and [...] used amongst men, the words may seem to run fair in this sense, and to go smoothly with the Context. But yet nevertheless, they who are of this judgement, I do desire to propound these things to their deliberate consideration. First, seeing the methods of Numbring used amongst men, are infinite and uncertain; let them positively and determinately shew, what that Number is, by and through which they will count the Name of the Beast. The familiar ways of numbring among men, whether you respect the Number of Time, the Number of Place, or the Number of Persons, is infinite almost. The Number of Time familiarly used, is very various; if you look either to the ancient or the latter Ages of the Church, to the Civil or Ecclesiastical, to the Astronomical or the Vulgar [...]. If the Number of a Man, be a Number familiarly used amongst men, who shall assign, limit or specifie the particular way, amongst so many several kindes? Secondly, now can it be imagined, that the holy Spirit should deliver to the Church a Number, which is the Characteristical Note of the Name or Soveraignty of the Beast, and never circumscribe or define what that Number is, but leave the matter at randome? I cannot finde that he doth so in any [...] of the Old or New Testament. When he speaketh of the Beast with seven Heads and ten Horns, how doth he particularize and individuate the matter? The seven Heads are seven Mountains, where the woman sitteth; The ten Horns are ten Kings that shall [Page] arise at the fall of the Empire of the Romans; and many such like instances may be found. Thirdly, they who expound the Number of a Man, for a Number frequently used amongst men, do not practise according to this Rule. For let them shew how it is the familiar use of men to decypher the rising of States and Governments, by the Anagram and Numeral Letters of a Grammatical Name. I think scarcely an instance can be given for this, in any solid and serious learning; to which I think the holy Spirit would rather refer us, then to the dotages and trifles of the Cabalists. All these Reasons laid together, do plainly teach, that [...] is not to be construed for a Number familiarly used amongst men: but the circumstances of the Text, and the event of things, do fully pitch upon the Number of time in Daniels Image. And so there is an excellent coherence of one thing with another, the Visions and the Stories do fully agree. Fourthly, concerning the Number it self, it is expresly said to be 666. The Spanish Bibles have it in words at leng [...]h, and not in figures: For so the Text [...]. But the other Greek Copies onely in figures: Though some Interpreters, as Irenaeus, Paraeus, Dr. Mayer, do put some distinction between this way of writing, to the understanding, both ways do come but to one sense, if you go to the sum of the matter. For if you would speak of a thing to be done in one of the years of the Lord, as in thi [...] present year for instance: Is not 1654 in figures, all one with One thousand, [...] hundred, fifty and four, in letters written at length? Do not we decypher the years of the Lord in our common way of writing by figures in brief, as well as by words in their full delinearion? If none can deny this, we may conceive the like of the meaning of the Spirit, when he saith, that the Number of the [...] [...] that is as much as to say, the 666th year is the Number of time when this Government shall begin to be [...] up. But [...]eeing there have been in former Ages, and now there are that are do [...]ing ripe upon the Numeral Letters; I do here seriously put it to them, to [...] me their opinion concerning the two Letters of the Greek Alphabet, α and ω. The question is [Page] proper to the purpose in hand: for they may well observe, as the Lamb standeth in direct opposition to the Beast, the Name and Soveraignty of the Lamb, to the Soveraignty of the Beast; so the Number of the Name, or Dominion of the Lamb (if oppositio be in eodem) must necessarily be opposed to the Number of the Name, or Dominion of the Beast. But for the Letters [...] and [...], there is none that ever went about to find out the Anagram of the Name of the Lamb in the Elements of the Greek Alphabet. These Characters do not set forth any literal Name, nor the Numeral Letters of any Grammatical word▪ but they do denote and set forth the infinity and eternity of his Kingdom. For when he is called [...] and [...], this is all one with that expression, [...], The first and the last, which is, which was, and which is to come, the Almighty, Chap. 1. v. 8, 11. So in immediate opposition to those Characters of the Kingdom of the Lamb, the Number of the Name or Headship of the Beast, is [...] 666, according to the Calculation of the times in Daniels Image. For as the Characters [...] and [...], if we take them severally in themselves, they may be ascribed to any kinde of Infinity in the Lambs Kingdom; he may be said to be [...] and [...], in reference to Place, Power, and time: But in the Book of the Revelation, it is necessary that these Characters should be restrained onely to the Number of time. So in the like case, the Number [...] may many ways be applied to the Beasts Kingdom; but in the natural and genuine sense of the Prophecy, this doth onely denote such a Number of time to the setting up of his Kingdom. Now for the further confirmation of this truth, let us call to minde what is written in the Prophecy of Daniel, concerning the Ancient of Days: I beheld till the Thrones were cast down; or more properly, I beheld till the Thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment is as white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wooll, Ch. 7. v. 5. In these words, why is God the Father called, The Ancient of days? why is the hair of his head compared to the pure wooll? This doth note the eternity of his Kingdom, in immediate opposition to the four great Periods of time, set forth by the Tyranny of the four great Empires [Page] of the World. So the same is [...]aid concerning the Dominion of the Son of Man, that his Dominion is an everlasting Dominion, that shall not pass away, and his Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, ver. 14▪ Here then if we demand, Why the Kingdom of the Son of Man is called An everlasting Kingdome? This is in immediate opposition to the several and respective times of the four Beasts: their Kingdoms had an end, and they were destroyed; but the Kingdom of the Son of Man is an everlasting Kingdome, that never shall be destroyed. According to this Analogie do we conform the Exposition of the Number [...] and [...], the Number of the Kingdome of the Lamb: we do oppose it to [...], the Number of the Name of the Beast. And so Iohn in the Revelation, and Daniel in his Prophecy, do agree in the Numbers, and in the same method and way of account. For when the Son is said to be [...] and [...], the First and the Last, in the order of time; is not this all one with that passage in Daniel, His Dominion is an everlasting Dominion?

But because many stand upon the Letters, we will cite the famous Canon of Ptolomy, where the Kings of Babylon, of Persia, of Greece, and Rome, are set forth by the Characters of the Greek Alphabet. It is useful to illustrate many passages in this Book, and therefore it followeth as hereunder written.

De Epochâ Nabonassareâ.

[Page]

Ex Manuscripto libro Graeco Claudii Ptolomaei continente Hypothes [...]s [...].

[...].

[...].

[...]. | [...]
[...] | [...] | [...] | 14
[...] | [...] | [...] | 16
[...] | [...] | [...] | 21
[...] | [...] | [...] | 26
[...] | [...] | [...] | 38
[...] | [...] | [...] | 43
[...] | [...] | [...] | 45
[...] | [...] | [...] | 48
[...] | [...] | [...] | 54
[...] | [...] | [...] | 55
[...] | [...] | [...] | 59
[...] | [...] | [...] | 67
[...] | [...] | [...] | 80
[...] | [...] | [...] | 100
[...] | [...] | [...] | 122
[...] | [...] | [...] | 143
[...] | [...] | [...] | 186
[...] | [...] | [...] | 188
[...] | [...] | [...] | 192
[...] | [...] | [...] | 109

[...].

[...] | [...] | [...] | 218
[...] | [...] | [...] | 226
[...] | [...] | [...] | 262
[...] | [...] | [...] | 283
[...] | [...] | [...] | 324
[...] | [...] | [...] | 343
[...] | [...] | [...] | 389
[...] | [...] | [...] | 410
[...] | [...] | [...] | 412
[...] | [...] | [...] | 416

[...].

[...] | [...].
|  | Anni Phil. & Al [...]x. | Nabonass.
[...]. | [...] |  | 424
[...] | [...] | 7 | 431
[...] | [...] | 19 | 443

[...].

[...] | [...] | [...] | 39 | 463
[...] | [...] | [...] | 77 | 501
[...] | [...] | [...] | 102 | 526
[...] | [...] | [...] | 119 | 543
[...] | [...] | [...] | 143 | 567
[...] | [...] | [...] | 178 | 602
[...] | [...] | [...] | 207 | 631
[...] | [...] | [...] | 243 | 667
[...] | [...] | [...] | 272 | 696
[...] | [...] | [...] | 294 | 718

[...].

[...] | [...] | [...] | 337 | 761
[...] | [...] |  | 359 | 783
[...] | [...] | [...] | 363 | 789
[...] | [...] | [...] | 377 | 801
[...] | [...] | [...] | 391 | 815
[...] | [...] | [...] | 401 | 825
[...] | [...] | [...] | 404 | 828
[...] | [...] | [...] | 419 | 843
[...] | [...] | [...] | 420 | 844
[...] | [...] | [...] | 439 | 863
[...] | [...] | [...] | 460 | 864
[...] | [...] | [...] | 483 | 907

[Page]Here it is clear, That Ptolomy doth set down particularly how long each King did Reign in the four great Empires; and he doth also Collect the whole Number of yeares, the [...], from the beginning of Nabonassar. Some Ecclesiastical Writers, as Panadorus and others, do frequently mention this Canon, with whom Ioseph Scaliger did finde it, but very corrupt; who also did insert it in the third Book of his Isagogicall Canons. But Calvisius doth represent it more pure and uncorrupt, out of the Greek Manuscript. And for the testimony which he doth give, he doth not shun to call it more precious then any Gold; and that had it been sooner published, the matters of Chronologie would have been in a far better condition, Calv. Isag. pag. 102. And for my part, if I might cast in my Mi [...]e, I may say also, That I have been greatly delighted with this excellent Monument of Antiquity; but for this reason more especially: From the Creation of the world, to the times of the Persian Monarchy, we have a plain Scripture-Chronologie: but from the times of the Persians, to the coming of Christ, for the space of 500 years, or thereabouts, for this whole interval of time (set the Prophecy of Daniel aside) we have no continued History in the Canonical Scriptures. Many things have been foretold by Isaiah, [...]eremiah, and other Prophets; and we finde also all along in the Stories of the Scripture, how the Prophecies have been fulfilled. Now it is not so with those things that are foretold in the Prophecy of Daniel: there is no Story in the Old Testament that doth shew the truth of his Predictions. Now I say, What must be done in this case? It is the minde of God that we should go to the Civil Stories, to Herodotus, Xenophon, Diodorus Siculus, Appianus, Iosephus, and others: For these have left upon record, the truth of that which Daniel long before did foretel, concerning the Persian and the Graecian Empires. And for his Prophetical Chronologie of the 70 weeks, this Number of time may fitly be expounded by the [...], or the Collection of years in the Canon aforementioned. And for the certainty of the Computation, we may believe, That Ptolomy, so exact an Artist, could not easily be mistaken▪ [Page] seeing he lived near the times of the Apostles, at Alexandria in Egypt, the chiefest School of Learning in all the East. The like may be said of the whole Book of the Revelation: for though many things are recorded in the Evangelists, and the Acts of the Apostles, concerning the fulfilling of the old Prophecies; yet the Predictions in the Book of the Revelation, which contain many an hundred years from the first to the second coming of Christ, are declared in no Story of the New or Old Testament. What must then be done in such a case as this? It is the minde of God, that we should reade the Stories of the Church, and so accordingly by the order of the Story, expound the Prophecy. These things I thought good to note, for their sakes who are the Enemies of Huma [...]e Learning in these times. Now let us return again to that Point, from which we have made so necessary a Digression. I say then, if we peruse the aforementioned Canon, we may see how Governments, and the Changes of Government, may be numbred by the Characters of the Greek Alphabet. Let us take Nebuchadnezzar for instance, the Root of the Babylonian Monarchy; he is called in the Canon by the Name of [...]; and the Number of his Government from the beginning of Nabonassar, is [...] 144, for in that year of Nabonassar he began to Reign. So Darius the Mede, who is called in the Canon by the Title of [...], the Number of his Government is [...] 193; for in that year he did begin to Reign, from the beginning of Nabonassar: And so of the rest. The like may be said in the present case of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, that from the beginning of the Roman, as the fourth Metal Kingdom, the Number of his Name or Government is [...] 666: Onely the difference is in the manner of the Computation. For when we account the times of Darius, Nebuchadnezzar, and others, [...], it is the Number of Nabonassar: But when we account the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, and the beginning thereof, [...], it is the Number in Daniels Image, in the way of the Prophetical Chronologie, figuratively called the Number of a Man.

[Page]Let us carry the matter to Antiochus Epiphanes, the Graecian Antichrist. Of the beginning of his Reign and Government it is said, [...], he reigned in the 137 year of the Kingdome of the Greeks, 1 Mac 1. 11. If we will draw this matter into figures, the Number of his Name or Government is [...] 137. And for the way and method of account, [...], it is the Number of the Kingdome of the Greeks; for in such a year of their Kingdome he began to Reign. If we apply this to the Roman Antichrist, to the beginning of the Universal Headship under the Emperor Phocas, we may say that he began that Dominion in the year [...] 666, [...]. For from that time, as the Church of God came under the Dominion of the Romans, there is such an exact Number of years. Many more instances might be brought out of Antiquity, to shew how it hath been the manner of the Ancients to reckon the Times and the Changes of Government, by the Characters of the Greek Alphabet. But these shall suffice.

Now to gather all into one sum, I have compared the Interpretation with all the particulars of the Text. I have shewed, what is meant by the Law, what by the Beast that made the Law, what by the Persons that did receive the Mark in their Forehead, and in their Right-hand. I have largely discoursed also concerning the Calculation of the Number; who the Person is that is to make the discovery; what the Calculation is; what is meant by the Number of a Man; and what by 666 years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Hea [...]ship of the Bishop of Rome. And seeing I finde all things to agree, therefore I conclude, That this is a true Interpretation. For the confirmation of this, let us go to the next Chapter.

CHAP. IX. The Truth of the Interpretation is further confirmed, from the scope of the Seventeenth Chapter of the Revelation.

[Page]

HEre all solid Expositors do agree, That the same matter is handled again, which was formerly discoursed of in the 13th Chapter. The thing is not aliud & aliud, another and another; though it be delivered aliter & aliter, in another and another manner. That which is there spoken concerning the Beast, as a King or Potentate, is here applied to an Idolatrous or Whorish Church. But let us hear the words of the Text: So he carried me away in the Spirit into the Wilderness, and I saw a woman sit upon a Scarlet-coloured Beast, full of the Names of Blasphemy, having seven Heads, and ten Horns, v. 3. This Woman is an Idolatrous Church; and, if we look to the whole scope of the description, she can be no other, but the Roman Idolatrous Church. That this is meant of the City of Rome, is clear, from the 9th Vers. The seven Heads are seven Mountains, where the Woman sitteth. Now all Stories do agree, That Rome was seated upon seven Hills, and was famous through all the world by the title of Septi-collis, or The Seven-hilled City. And to put all out of question, the Angel saith, The Woman which thou sawest, is the great City that reigneth over the Kings of the Earth, ver. 18. Now what was the Great City, which in the days of Iohn reigned over all earthly Kings, but the City of Rome? There are such clear Characters in the Text, that the Ancients who lived before the fall of the Empire, did all agree in it, That Rome was the City Babylon. And the Jesuits in these days, who of all men living are the most active to hide the meaning of this Scripture, do yield that Rome is here intended: But how? Not Rome Christian, but Rome Pagan. To this we reply, Though the Apostle doth [Page] make mention of Rome Pagan; yet he doth primarily intend Rome Christian, or rather Rome Antichristian. Let it be considered what Title is given to her; and so, not onely in this Chapter, but in other places, she is called The Whore of Babylon. In Scripture-language, this Name is onely given to Idolatrous Churches. We never, or at least seldome, reade in the Writings of the Prophets, of the Whore of Egypt, of the Whore of Edom, of the Whore of Tyrus, or of the Whore of Damascus: this Title is usually given to Samaria and Ierusalem, to the Churches of Israel and Iudah, as they did fall away from the Worship of the true God, to serve other gods. And therefore Hosea in the Vision was to take a wife of fornications, because the land had committed great whoredome, in departing from the Lord, Hos. 1. 2. So the Prophet Ezekiel being to speak of the spiritual fornications of Samaria and Ierusalem, calleth the one Aholah, and the other Aholibamah, Ezek. 23. 4. From these and many other Scriptures, it is evident, That the Title is usually given to Idolatrous Churches, which have departed away from Christ their lawful Husband. So then, if the Whore of Babylon doth signifie Rome; this must needs be applied to Rome Christian, as she did break her Marriage-Covenant with Christ, and yield her self up to another Husband. For Rome Pagan was never married to Christ; and therefore though she might be called Babylon in the figure, yet she is not the Whore of Babylon.

Secondly, she is described in the Text, having a Golden Cup in her hand: By which amorous po [...]ion, she did entice the Kings of the Earth to commit fornication with her. Now this doth not appertain to Rome Pagan, but to the Romish Church, which hath greatly deceived the Kings of the Earth by her Idolatries and Superditions.

Thirdly, it is clear from the scope of the Text, That the Woman doth ride the Beast in its last and renewed State, in the times of the ten Kings; for these shall carry the Whore, and shall be wholly at her devotion, till the words of God be fulfilled; and after that, they shall hate her as much, and burn her flesh with fire. If we apply this to Rome Pagan, there is nothing [Page] will agree: for she had no beeing in the times of the Ten Kings. But all things may be fitly applied to Rome Antichristian, which is truly and properly called the Whore of Babylon in the figure.

But now a little to draw nearer to the Point: When was it that the Whore did begin to ride the Beast, and where shall we set the date of her Dominion? For so the Angel doth expound the words; The Waters where the Whore sitteth, are Kindreds, and People, and Multitudes, and Nations, and Languages, ver. 17. Her sitting upon the Beast, and upon many Waters, doth not onely imply an ordinary sitting, but a sitting in the way of Lordship, Dominion, and Supreme Command. Such a kinde of sitting we must look after, if we will truly know the time when the Whore began to ride the Beast. And here, I say, at that time when the Bishop of Rome did begin to be the second Beast, or Universal Head under the Emperor Phocas; then at the same time did the Roman Church begin to be the Mother of all Churches; or rather, the Great Whore that rideth the Beast; the Mother of all the Fornications, and the Idolatries of the Earth.

Let us therefore more distinctly consider the times, as the Angel doth give the true delineation of them: And therefore speaking of the Ten Kings that should carry the Whore, that should be wholly at her devotion, he doth expresly speak of them, They have no Kingdome as yet, but receive a Kingdome as Kings, one hour with the Beast, ver. 12. Therefore the fall of the Empire, and the rising of the Kings, must needs anticipate or go before the Jurisdiction and Dominion of the Great Whore. And lest there should be any mistake in the time, the Angel doth plainly shew, That there must be eight Revolutions of State in the City of Rome; and that seven of them must fall, before the time cometh that the Whore shall ride the Beast. These are his words: There are seven Kings; five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space: And the Beast that was, and is not, he is the eighth, and is of the seventh, and goeth into Perdition, ver. 10, 11. From whence it is manifest, That the [Page] Ten Kings must arise, and seven Forms of Government must fall in the City of Rome, before the times of the Great Whore can begin. But here is a hard question to be decided by the way: How can the Beast be said to be the eighth King, and yet one of the seven Heads? I will the more willingly take it into Consideration, because I have been heretofore much puzled with the question. And I finde also, that the very best and most approved Interpreters do not give a certain sound. To let pass how far Brightman and Paraeus have gone aside in the matter; Mr. Forbes makes the Kings, and Heads of the Beast, to be co incident terms: but in this he is greatly mistaken. For the Beast, in the order of Kings, is expresl [...] said to be the eighth King; and in the order of Heads, he is onely one of the seventh. Therefore we may certainly conclude, That these are not equivalent terms, but that necessarily some distinction must be made betwixt the Heads and the Kings. Mr. Mede therefore keeps himself in doubtful terms: for speaking of the seventh Change of State; to wit, The Christian Caesars; he saith, That this Potentate, because he should be of short continuance, shall seem to be Dynastes alius, another Ruler; sed revera non alius, in deed and in truth not another. So likewise concerning the Beast, in which State he should carry the Whore, This Beast (saith he) in respect of the Change of the Caesars, seemeth to be the eighth; but revera non nisi septimus, in deed and in truth no other but the seventh. In which words of his, so far as I apprehend, there are two passages which seem to me to differ from the scope of the Text: For when he speaketh of the Change of the Caesareate, from the Pagan to the Christian Caesars, how can he call that of the Christian Caesars, Dynasten quasi alium, revera tamen non alium? The words of the Text are plain, Five are fallen; one is, to wit, that of the Pagan Caesars, when Iohn wrote the Revelation; and the other, [...], that of the Christian Caesars is not yet come. It is clear then, that the Governments of the City of Rome are eight in all, and not eight in appearance onely; and the Dynasty of the Christian Caesars is [...], another in reality and truth, and not another in shew onely, as Mr. Mede will [Page] have it. So likewise for the Beast, it is strange, that he should affirm him to be quasi octavum Dynasten, as it were the eighth Potentate, sed revera non nisi septimum, but in deed and in truth no other but the seventh. The words of the Text are express: The Beast that was, and is not, he is octavus, the eighth in reality and in truth, and not the eighth in appearance only. Therefore the Exposition of Mr. Mede doth contradict the words of the Text, and the knot remains. Upon much debate, I finde, that we must go another way to work; and here we must distinguish the Roman Governments, as they are simply so called, from the Roman Governments, as they are Heads of the Beast. If you look upon the Roman Governments, as so many Policies and Forms of Dominion, then it is clear, That there are eight Forms of Regency; to wit, The Kings, the Consuls, the Decemvirs, the Dictators, the Tribunes, the Pagan Caesars, the Christian Caesars; and after all these seven, cometh the Beast, as octavus Dynastes, the eighth Potentate. Now on the other side, if you reckon the Heads of the Beast, there can be but seven Heads; and therefore the Beast must needs be the particular seventh, seeing the Christian Caesars, from Constantine to Augustus, cannot be called an Head of the Beast at all, unless we will go against the scope of Scripture: For it is not the manner of the Scripture, to call Christian Governments by the Title of a Beast, or the Head of a Beast: This Character doth properly appertain to the Kingdomes and States of this World, that persecute the Church, and are contrary to the Laws of the Kingdom of Christ. Upon this account the Christian Caesars do indeed make a distinct Dynasty or Policy, and yet are no part or Head of the Beast. The words of the Text are clear: for when the Spirit speaketh of the other that should come, to wit, the Dynasty of the Christian Caesars, he doth not say, [...], another Head; but [...], another King: which sheweth plainly, That the Christian Casars are a distinct Form of Government, but no Head of the Beast. So likewise the Beast of the last edition is not termed [...], the eighth Head; but he is simply called [...], the eighth King. Touching the Kings, it is [Page] spoken of them, Five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come: and the Beast that cometh out of the Bottomless Pit, he is the eighth. To satisfie the doubt, we do pitch upon this sense, that the Beast is both the eighth Dynasty, and the seventh Head. For if you reckon by the order of Kings, (the Dynasty of the Christian Caesars being included) he must needs be the eighth. But if you reckon by the Heads of the Beast, which are Pagan and Idolatrous Forms of Government; then that of the Christian Caesars must be Status ex [...]resimus, or exemptilis, a State exempted and put out of the Kalendar. From whence it comes to pass, That the Beast, if you reckon him among the Kings, his place is to be the eighth; but yet among the Heads, he is but the seventh. And so these words, The Beast that was, and is not, he is the eighth, and is one of the seventh, are plain (as I take it) and the knot is untied. But leaving this scruple, I finde, That all solid Interpreters do agree in the general sense of the Text; to wit, That the Antichristian times begin at the fall of the Empire, and the rising of the Ten Kings. The words of the Angel are so clear; for speaking of the Roman Dominion, and the Ten Horns of that Beast, he expresly saith, These have no Kingdome as yet, but shall receive a Kingdome one hour with the Beast: which plainly sheweth, That their times shall be, when the Roman Dominion shall come to the last and Antichristian edition of State. The fall of the old Empire, and the rising of the Ten Kings, is an infallible Character of the beginning of the Antichristian times. And this no man can rationally deny, that doth look upon the true scope of the Angels Interpretation.

But our question is, concerning the times of the Great Whore; when was it that she did begin to ride the Beast? We cannot say, That it was at that time when the Kings did rise out of the ruines of the Empire: For then the Kings of the Earth did not dogmatically and conscientiously acknowledge the Church of Rome the Mother of all Churches. To the resolution of the case, we will consider what Expositors do say to this purpose. For in the 17th Chapter, though there is mention made of the Beast with Ten Horns; yet there is [Page] not the least word of the two-horned Beast. Now the reason ordinarily given, is very solid, and it doth agree with the scope of the Scripture: For it is plain, That the description under the resemblance of a Beast with two Horns, Chap. 13. is again repeated under the similitude and type of a Great Whore, Chap. 17. Both Scriptures speak of one and the same matter in substance, though in a different manner: And if need should require, we have many Arguments to prove the Parallel.

Now then, in the present case, seeing Iohn speaks of the City of Rome, that in his days was the great City that ruled over the Kings of the Earth, it is to our purpose to inquire, when the Church came within the verge of the Dominion o [...] that great City. And here I say, if we calculate the times aright, and reckon 666 years, from that time when that great City came to have Dominion over the Church, we shall precisely come to that point and instant of time, when the Church of Rome was made the Catholick and the General Mother of all other Churches. The Church first came under the Dominion of the City of Rome: and then 666 years after, [...]hat Church her self was declared Universal Mother of all Churches. And here then our Interpretation is one and the same in substance, in both Scriptures. And whereas the Woman hath this Inscription on her Forehead, Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots, and the Abominations of the Earth: The Name then on the Forehead of the Woman, is not a Grammatical word, consisting of Letters and Syllables; but it signifieth her Universal Maternity or Motherhood, when she began to be declared Universal Mother over all other Churches. Now if you apply this to the times, it came to pass in the 666th year from that time, when the Church, and the Territories of the Church, came under the obedience of the City of Rome. And this is the Number of her Maternity or general Motherhood, or of the Name written in the Forehead of the Woman. If we apply this to the twohorned Beast in the 13 Chapter, his Name is no other, but his Paternity or Universal Headship; and the Number of his [Page] Name is no other, but the Number of his Universal Headship, from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome. And so the sense of one Chapter is clear, by the scope and drift of the other. But we go on.

CHAP. X. A List of Fifteen Principles drawn from the main sense of the Prophecy, concerning the Beast, his Name, Mark, and Number; by the Position of which, the present Interpretation is established. Also, the several Expositions of Mr. Potter and other Writers, are brought to Tryall.

FOr the more full proof of the Point, we must take the same method to prove the truth of our Interpretation, as Divines do when they would prove the Pope to be Anti-Christ. They do infallibly determine him to be so, because all the Properties of the Beast, do punctually pitch upon that Seat or Succession: So in the present case, we may say, That 666 is such a Number of years, to the setting up of the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast. And this we take to be an infallible and undoubted Truth, because all the Principles of the Prophecy do pitch, and mainly centre upon such an Interpretation. We can prove the truth thereof, by the accumulation of Notes. W [...] may further take in the words of the Jesuite Suarez; for he himself well obserueth, That it is not sufficient to decypher Antichrist by one, two, or three Notes, but by the Concurrence of all the Properties that do appertain to him: So I may say, for a tight Exposition of the Name of the Beast, and the Number thereof, we must not rest in a few Circumstances, for so many have been brought for the name Lateinos. And M. P [...]tters Interpretation also seemeth to be very [Page] fair. But this is that which I mainly stand upon, That their several Interpretations will not agree with many Principles. The same course then that we take to prove the Truth, shall be to disprove their Error. But now to the Principles in order.

Princ. 1. The Name of the Beast, his Mark and Number, do all agree to the Papall Tyranny, by a special application. This is proved from the whole scope of the Text. For the Beast is a Tyrannical Empire or Government; and not onely so, but also a Roman Tyrannical Empire, in the last edition thereof: Therefore these Characters are specially applicable to that Government, and to the Hierarchy thereof, and not to any other. They erre therefore, that seek after the Number in the Name of any one particular man, as Bellarmine doth in the Names of some Protestant Divines. Whereas, to speak properly, the Name of the Beast is the Name of a Tyrannical State or Government. Secondly, they also do depart far from the Truth, that will have the word [...] to be the Name of the Beast. And though indeed the Name doth make 666, according to the Numeral Letters in the Greek Alphabet; this cannot be the sense: For though the Turks make a Tyrannical Empire, and have greatly afflicted the Church; yet the scop [...] of the Spirit is here mainly to speak of a Roman Tyrannical State in the last edition; and this is clear from the scope of the whole Prophecy.

Princ. 2. The Name of the Beast, his Mark, Image, and the Number of his Name, ought so to be expounded, that all these may have mutual relation each to other. This is proved from the Text, Chap. 13. ver. 15, 16, 17, 18. Chap. 14. ver. 9, 10, 11. For there the persons who did worship the Image of the Beast, are also said to receive his Mark in their Forehead, and in their Right-hand. Now how is it possible that they could receive the Mark, but they must also receive the Name, sith it is called The Mark of the Name? And how can they receive the Name, but they must receive the Number, seeing it is styled, The Number of the Name? All these are Homogeneal, and have near relation each to other. And therefore when [Page] Iohn did behold that company that stood upon the glassie Sea mingled with fire, and did sing the triumphal Song in honor to the Lamb; they are said to overcome the Beast, his Image, Mark, and the Number of his Name. Therefore all these have a neer affinity and correspondence each with other. From whence we may convince those Interpreters of error, who do distinguish the Subjects of the Beast into divers kindes; into those that worship the Image, into others that receive the Mark, into a third sort that have the Number of the Name: Whereas, according to the Text, the same persons that worship the Image, receive the Mark and the Number thereof. Secondly, those Expositors are too blame, which do not ground their Demonstration upon these things, but do immediately proceed to calculate the Number. Mr. Potter in his Treatise, endeavoreth to finde out the Number in six things in the Hierarchy of the Church of Rome, as they stand opposite to six things in the New Ierusalem. But in my apprehension, he doth not lay a right foundation: for the Number which he is to calculate, is the Number of the Name of the Beast; and the Number is answerable to the Mark. Therefore the proper work which he hath to do, is, to handle these matters, and not six things in the Hierarchy of the Church of Rome, immediately opposed to six things in the description of the New Ierusalem.

Princ. 3. The Name of the Beast, his Mark and Number, must necessarily begin at the first Visible Constitution of his Dominion; and continue in all times, to the end thereof. For the first Visible Constitution, we reade, That as soon as the second Beast came up out of the Earth, he made an Image to the Beast, and caused all to worship the Image, and to receive a Mark in their Forehead, Chap. 13. ver. 14, 15, 16, 17. Now this was not done onely at the time of the beginning, but in all the times of that Kingdome, from the beginning to the end. For, the Vials were poured out upon them that worshipped the Beast, and received the Mark, Chap. 16. ver. 2. And at the ending of the Beasts Kingdome, when the eternal Gospel is preached to every Kindred, Tongue and Nation; then are the threatnings [Page] denounced against all those that worship the Beast, and receive the Mark, Chap. 14. ver. 9, 10, 11. From whence we gather, That the Name, Mark and Image, must be in all the times of the Kingdome of the Beast. According to this Rule, how can Iunius apply the Number of the Beast to the Canon-Law? How can he make it appear, that this Law hath been in force all the times of that Kingdome? Mr. Potter also, when he doth apply this Number to the Cardinals, Gates, and other circumstances in the City of Rome; how can he prove, that these have been in all the times of that Kingdom? He doth mainly stand upon it, That the Cardinals are the very Essence of the Papacy, so nearly united to the Pope, that they make one Body, containing and representing all Ecelesiastical Iurisdiction. Well, be it so; but how proveth he this Colledge to have been in all the times of the Beasts Kingdome? I do willingly yield to that solid determination of his: I conceive (saith he) the second Beast, mentioned Rev. 13. ver. 11. to be that unlawful Ecclesiastical Power, which these latter times have setled upon the Pope. And I believe, that he is the Great Anti-Christ, not as Bishop, or Archbishop, or Patriarch; but as he pretends himself Pope, and Vicar of Christ; having such a transcendent Ecclesiastical Power, as is incommunicable to any other upon Earth, pag. 55. This Testimony I take to be a plain Scripturetruth; and for my part, I do believe, Though the Mystery of Iniquity was long in working, the Bishop of Rome did not begin to be the solemn Antichrist, and the two-horned Beast did not rise up out of the earth, till the times of the Universal Headship. In this I do fully agree with the Author aforenamed: But yet, with submission to a better judgement, I cannot understand how the Colledge of Cardinals, or the other five particular Circumstances, applied to the Hierarchy of Rome, how these began at the time of the declaration of the Universal Headship; or how they have continued in all the times of the Beasts Kingdome, from the beginning to the end thereof. Now it is apparently evident, That the Name and the Mark have been applicable to the Kingdome of the Beast in all the times thereof.

[Page]Princ. 4. In submitting to, in worshipping the Image, and in receiving the Mark, the Name, and the Number of the Name, hath been the great sin of the world in departing from Christ. This may be proved from the whole scope of the Prophecy: the great deceiving of the Nations in all Antichristian times, hath been in the matter of the worship of the Image, and receiving the Mark, Chap. 20. ver. 1, 2, 3. Chap. 13. ver. 15, 16, 17, 18. From whence I further argue, That the Number 25 cannot be proved to be the Number of the Name of the Beast; neither hath the Apostacy of the world consisted in the frequent and superstitious use of this Number. For how doth a State sin, when they use such a particular Number as this? The Philistims were a people given to superstitious observations; yet I cannot see how they did sin in the observation of the Number 5, when they did send five Golden Emerods, and five Golden Mice, 1 Sam. 6. 4. The Number 5, is the Number of so many parts of their Jurisdiction; and thereupon they observed this Number in their Trespass-offering: But we cannot say, that it was their sin to do it. Neither can I see (if there should be the like National cause) that it is simply a sin in any State, to be frequent in the use of the Number 25. For in it self, what good or what evil is in that Number? You will then say, What is meant by the Name, and the Number thereof? I answer, Take the Number 666 severally by it self, it is nothing; but if you take it joyntly, as the Character of the Name, and the Mark of the Name, we may say, That in these things hath consisted the grand Apostacy of the latter Times. And for Mr. Potters Interpretation, I cannot be satisfied in it, for these three Reasons: First, he undertaketh to expound the Number, and to apply it to so many Cardinals, so many Churches, so many Altars, &c. Whereas the Number is not the Number of these, but it is [...], the Number of the Name of the Beast. Secondly, he undertaketh to shew, how the Beast is frequent in the use of such a particular Number: whereas the Number is rather the specifi [...]al Note and Character of the Kingdome it self, Thirdly, he sheweth how the Beast is frequent in the [Page] use of the Number 25, the square-root of 666. But what sin is there in the frequent use of such a Number? To speak properly, in these things there is neither good nor evil. These are some of the Reasons, that move me to depart from the Interpretation of the forementioned Author; whom I do otherwise acknowledge to be a man of solid and excellent Learning, and much to be approved for his industry and diligence, which he hath bestowed toward the discovery of these Mysteries.

Princ. 5. For the Mark of the Beast, and for the worship of the Image, and for such-like things, the world is made liable to the most grievous Iudgements of God. This I have largely proved from Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. Now if you apply this to singulars, How can men rationally be tormented day and night? How can the smoke of their burning ascend for ever and ever, for the superstitious use of the Number 25, the square-root of 666? Surely, all these things ought so to be stated, that the Justice of God may be cleared in the execution of Judgement. I cannot then think, that so grievous a Judgement is denounced against the superstitious use of the Number 25; but rather (as I have largely proved) for the yielding subjection to the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, as it began publickly to be established in the 666th year from the beginning of the Roman, as the fourth Metal-Kingdome.

Princ. 6. In over coming the Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name, standeth the special object of the Martyrs Victory. This I have largely proved, from Chap. 15. ver. 2. The persons that stood on the glassie Sea, that overcame the Beast, were the company and society of Martyrs, which suffered for Christ in all Antichristian times; and their Victory is no other but a Victory of Martyrdome. Now if you apply this to the ordinary Interpretation: If the Name of the Beast be no other but the word Lateinos, and the Number no other but the Numeral Letters of that Name; what a kinde of Victory shall the Martyrs obtain over Words, and Syllables, and Numeral Letters? We may be well assured, That there [Page] is another kinde of meaning in these words; that is, the Martyrs did overcome that Power, Authority, and Universal Headship it self, which began solemnly and publickly to be established in the 666th year, from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome.

Princ. 7. The glorious Resurrection of the Martyrs to reign with Christ 1000 years, is grounded in special upon this Reason, Because they did refuse to worship the Image, and to receive the Mark. And therefore Iohn in the Vision saith, I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the Word of God, and the Testimony of Iesus, that these lived (to wit, out of their Antichristian death) and reigned with Christ 1000 years, Chap. 20. v. 3. It is evident from hence then, That the Name Lateinos, or any such-like Grammatical word, cannot be the Name of the Beast: For the Martyrs were never put to death, neither shall they ever have their glorious Resurrection, for Names consisting of Letters and Syllables. The slaughter hath been mainly for the refusal of the Authority, and the Laws made by the Authority or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. Therefore their glorious Resurrection to reign with Christ, shall be for their suffering in the behalfe of Christ.

Princ. 8. The Image of the Beast ought so to be expounded, that it may express to the life the repair of Roman Majesty, after the deadly wound. This is proved from the scope of the Text. When the second Beast came out of the earth, he did cure the deadly wound that the first Beast had in one of his Heads. He had power also to give life to the Image of the Beast, that the Image should both speak and live, Chap. 13. ver. 14, 15. Now for the curing of the wound of the first Beast, and the giving life to the Image of the Beast; these typical expressions do denote the onely repair of Roman Majesty, after the fall of the old Empire. This is clear from the scope of the Scripture, and it is abundantly shewed in many Commentaries. The Angel also in Rev. 17. hath this expression, The Beast thou sawest, that was, is not, and yet is. Here he speaketh of the marvelous recovery of the Roman Majesty, after a former [Page] loss and destruction: which is nothing else in sense and substance, but the making of an Image to the Beast that was wounded in one of his Heads, and the causing of the Image both to speak and live. For in a sense it is true, that there was a total eradication of the Roman Soveraignty for a while; and when it was set up in the Popes, there was a kinde of reviving, and a rising of that Soveraignty from the dead. The laying down of this one Position, did drive me from an Interpretation, which seemed to be very plausible in my first meditations upon this Argument. Now that particular Interpretation did concern the times of Victor his Excommunicating the Churches of Asia, not long after the writing of the Revelation. Now because the Roman Jurisdiction over all Churches, did begin to make its first visible appearance in these times; I did therefore apply the Number of the Beast to the forementioned Excommunication. And for the particular time, Calvisius the Chronologer saith, That those Churches were Excommunicated in the year of the World 4145, and in the year of the Lord 196. Now if you subduct 666 years out of 4145, there will remain the 3479th year of the World, which was the first year of the Twentieth Jubilee, according to the Authority of the Chronologer aforementioned. Being furnished with these Principles, as also being firmly perswaded by other Reasons, That the Beast was the Bishop of Rome, and that the Number did signifie the first visible declaration of the Authority of that See: Finding also the account by Jubilees to be [...] ▪ a Number frequently used amongst men in those ancient times: Upon these Considerations, I was at length induced (probably at least) to take this as the meaning of the Text: As who would say in plainer terms, Let him that hath wisdome, count by the Jubilees, a Number frequently used amongst men, and he shall finde, that this Beast shall begin to erect and put forth his Power in the 666th year, from the beginning of the Twentieth Jubilee; and so he shall come to the particular year when Victor Excommunicated the Churches of Asia. This Interpretation, though it seemed very specious and plausible at the first; yet [Page] afterward, when I came to dive into the Prophecy, and to compare the Commentaries, and to look into the natural sense of the Visions; I did finde from the collation of all, that there must be first a death, and a wound of the Roman Majestie in the Caesars, before it could be revived in the Popes; the Caesareate must fall, before the Papacy could begin. This I gathered from the whole scope of the Apocalyptical learning: And I do admire, how any can begin the 42 Moneths from Constantine the Great, or from Iulian the Apostata, or from any other time before the fall of the old Empire. They who do this, to my understanding, go against the scope and drift of this kinde of learning. Another Interpretation I had, which I did favour in the beginning; and that is the Interpretation of Moulin, in his Treatise concerning the Complement of Prophecies: He in that Treatise doth set the beginning of the Beasts Kingdome, at the fall of the Exarchs of Ravenna; and so concludeth, That where the Empire made an end, there the Papacy was to begin: But the Empire ended at the Exarchate; Ergo. In this Exposition of his, he doth well to set the beginning of Rome Papal, after the destruction of Rome Imperial; for this is but the sense of the Prophecy. But yet withal this must be remembred, that we must not set the beginning of the Beasts Kingdom where we will, & how we will our selves; but we must set it there where it ought to be set. Now for the place where it ought to be set, it must be at the beginning of the Universal Headship of the Beast, which is the Name of the Beast, when he did make an Image to the Beast that had a wound in one of his Heads. If these things be applied to the times, they do not agree to the ruine of the Exarchate, but to the setting up of the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, under the Emperor Phocas. Then there was an Image made to the Beast; then the Name or Universal Headship began; then the Roman Potency did revive in the Popes, which was formerly lost in the Caesars; then the second Beast caused the Image both to speak and live.

Princ. 9. The Name of the Beast ought so in special to be exp [...]unded, that it may be the subject-matter of the Mark. This [Page] is proved from Chap. 14. ver. 11. where the Mark is expresly called, [...], The Mark of his Name. Now it would not be so called, if there were not something in the Name, that giveth beeing to the Mark. And therefore when Mr. Potter endevoreth to shew, That 25 is the Number of the Beast; and that the Government may be known by the frequent use of the Number 25, the square-root of 666: In my apprehension, he should not have imployed himself in the variety of those things in the Beasts Kingdome, to which this Number might be applied: His prime work had been, first to have found out the Name of the Beast; and then he should have proceeded to the Mark, and the Number of the Name. For there is no other Mark, but that which relateth to the Name; and there is no other Number, but that which is the Number of the Name. I cannot conceive any other: but his mistake is in the subjectâ materiâ, in the subject matter of the Number. He that erreth in the beginning, must needs go far out of the way.

Princ. 10. The Name of the Beast ought so in special to be expounded, that it may appear to be the matter about which the Number is conversant. This is proved from Ch. 13 v. 17. There it is expresly called [...] The Name then only must be the immediate Object of the Number, or the thing Numbred: Why is it else called, The Number of the Name? By this Reason then, I cannot see how Mr. Potter can apply the Number indefinitely to all such kinde of things as are essential and constituent in the Kingdome of the Beast, seeing the Number is onely restrained to the Name, and is the Number of the Name or Universal Headship. But let us look to the grounds of the Interpretation laid down by that learned man. He supposeth this Number 666 to be an Image or typical Representation of the whole Body of Antichrist; that is, of the whole Body of his Kingdome, State, or Hierarchy. And thus much, saith he, is acknowledged by many Writers, but especially by Cotterius. Further, he addeth, If this Number be an Image or a Type of the whole Body of Antichrist; then no man ought to imagine, that the whole Image of Antichrist is like to one prrticular [Page] Member, or part of the Body of Antichrist. For as the whole Image of Caesar is not like unto the Hand of Caesar, or▪ the Head of Caesar: so neither is the Number considered wholly applicable to any particular Times, Names, Persons, Places, or other Individuall things, or Circumstances belonging unto Antichrist, as divers Interpreters have laboured to apply it. But (saith he) if any man desire to know Caesar by his Image, he must compare Head to Head, Face to Face, Eye to Eye, Foot to Foot; and so conclude a likeness in general, from an induction of particulars. In like manner, he that desires to know Antichrist by his Number, he must first finde in this Number, such things as are essential and remarkable to that Government. So far Mr. Potter. In which words of his, though I do acknowledge there is greater solidity, then I have ordinarily met withall in Interpretations of this kinde; yet under favour, I conceive when all is done, the Number must be the Number of the Name, or Universal Headship, and that by right ought to be the thing Numbred. And whereas he saith, That the Number is not applicable to any particular Times, Persons, Places, or other petty Circumstances of the Kingdome of Antichrist; I do acknowledge, That there hath been vanity more then too much among Interpreters, about the explication of these things. And whereas the Author aforenam [...]d, following Cotterius and other learned men, doth tell us, That the Number must be applied to that which is essential in the Kingdome of the Beast: In this we do fully agree with him; and therefore we have stated the Name, Mark, and Image of the Beast, and have so explained these things, that they do contain the very essence, form and beeing of that Kingdome. For what is the Name, but the Power and Universal Headship? And what is the Mark of the Name, but the profession of Subjection to that Power or Headship? Thus we come to the sense of Cotterius and others in the main. Now whereas Mr. Potter doth stand upon 25 Cardinals, 25 Churches, 25 Articles, in the compilation of Pius Quartus; How doth he make all these the Name of the Beast? In all true Mathematical Demonstration, we should begin with expositio Dati, the Exposition of the Subject [Page] or Antecedent. If therefore the Name of the Beast be Datum, or the subject of the Demonstration; this must be first expounded, before the Number can be rightly applied, seeing it is called the Number of the Name. Secondly, if 25 be the Characteristical Number of the State or Hierarchy of the Beast; why doth not the Holy Spirit, in so large a description of that Kingdome, once make mention of the Number 25? Shall we imagine, that he will not once mention that which is individually necessary, but altogether stand upon remoter points? Thirdly, if the Number 25 is to be applied to the Hierarchy of the Beast, as the Number 12 is to the New Ierusalem; why is not the like reason given for the one as for the other? The Number 12 is therefore so frequently used in sacred Numbers, in reference to the first Original of the Church, and to the division into Twelve Tribes. And therefore we reade of Twelve Cakes of Shewbread, Exod. 24. 5; of Twelve Pillars of Moses his Altar, Exod. 24. 4; of Twelve Stones in the Breast-plate of Aaron, Exod. 28. 21; of Twelve Oxen brought to the Dedication of the Tabernacle, Numb. 7. 23; of Twelve Rods laid up before the Ark of the Testimony, Numb. 17. 1; of Twelve Spies sent to search the Land of Canaan, Numb. 13. 1; of Twelve Stones in Iordan, Iosh. 4. 9; of the Garment of Ieroboam rent into Twelve pieces, 1 Kings 11. 30; of Twelve Stones on which the Altar of Eliah was built: and many such-like instances. Now it is apparent in these Scriptures, That the Spirit standeth upon the exact Number 12: and all this in reference to that ancient distribution of the Church into 12 Tribes. Therefore in imitation of the Jewish Church, the Holy Spirit in the new Prophecy, is very frequent in the use of the same Number, when he setteth forth the state of the Gospel-Church in these latter days. But can there be the like Reason given, why the Antichristian Church is so frequent in the Number 25? Fourthly, if it can be proved in some places, that 12 is the square-root of 144; and that the Spirit doth stand upon this way of Calculation: yet I am sure he doth not universally do this in the description of the New [Page] Ierusalem: For there is a remarkable passage, touching the measures of that City, in these words: And the City lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the Breadth; and he measured the City with a reed 12000 furlongs; the length, breadth and height of it are all equal, Rev. 21. 16. If there be any one Text that do [...]h shew a Characteristical Number to decypher the Holy City, this is that Scripture. Now if it be the manner of the Spirit, in all Apocalyptical Computations, to count the square-root of any figurate Number; why doth he not use that method here? In this particular Number then, 109 is the square-root; and if you will multiply it into it self, it will make 11881, and the remainder will be 119. Therefore in the Dimensions of the Holy City, the Spirit doth not perpetually look to the Number 12, as to the square-root of those Holy Numbers. Fifthly, if it could be proved, That 12 is the Root of all the Numbers in the New Ierusalem; yet it cannot be made manifest, That 25 is the square-root of 666, in so special a manner at least. For all the Numbers from 625 to 676, have 25 for their square-root: and therefore all the Numbers aforementioned, may be the Number of the Name, as well as the Number 666. According to this ground, what certainty of Interpretation is here to be had? More properly then, if 25 were the square-root, 625 would rather be the Number of the Name of the Beast. For if you Multiply 25 into it self, it will make exactly 625, and no fractions remaining: Whereas 666 (as skilful Artists do use to speak) is numerus surdus, a deaf Number; it hath 25 for the square-root, and 41 fractions remaining. All these Reasons put together, do plainly shew, That 25 is not the onely Characteristical Number; and if it could be proved to be so, yet is not [...], The Number of the Name of the Beast.

Princ. 11. The Mark of the Beast ought so in special to be expounded, that it may agree to all those, and onely to those that are the Beasts Subjects, and that it may be the Badge and Livery of their Profession. This is proved from Chap. 13. ver. 16, 17. He causeth all, both small and great, to receive a Mark in their [Page] Forehead, and in their Right-hand. The Mark then agreeth to all the Subjects of the Beasts Kingdome, and to those onely that are his: And this also is the badge of the distinction, in the matter of buying and selling. If this be so, how doth Mr. Potter give a true Exposition of the Number? For admit the Number 25 be rightly applied to the Cardinals, Gates, Churches, and other remarkable Circumstances of the City of Rome; yet how doth he distinguish the Beasts Subjects in the matter of buying and selling? The Text saith plainly, That none might buy nor sell, but he that had the Mark, the Name, and the Number of the Name. The right understanding of these things, lieth nor in the subtilties of Arithmetick, nor in the extraction of the square-root of any figurate Number, or in any occu't Circumstance of the Kingdome of the Beast: for these things are discernible unto all, and are obvious in the matter of buying and selling. Secondly, how do they also rightly expound the Number, who apply these things to more then the Subjects of the Beasts Kingdome; seeing these are the peculiar Characters of them onely, who are of his flock? Therefore they who will have Lateinos to be the Name of the Beast, how do they make this the individuall Character of the Beasts Subjects? Our Saviour himself, his Apostles, and many holy Martyrs for sundry ages, have been under the Dominion of the Latines or Romans: Therefore we cannot be of so flinty a Philosophy, to believe, That all sinned who lived under the Roman Obedience; or that all had the Mark of the Beast, who were Subjects under that Jurisdiction. To speak properly, they sin onely against the Kingly Power of Christ, and his Regal Office as Mediator, that submit to the Roman, or rather to the Antichristian Dominion in these last times.

Princ. 12. The Mark of the Beast ought so in special to be expounded, that the whole Company which c [...]rrieth the Mark, may be set in direct opposition to the 144000, who had their Fathers Name written in their Forehead. This is clearly proved, from the collation of two Scriptures, Chap. 13. ver. 16, 17, 18. with Chap. 14. ver. 2, 3, 4, 5. In the former Scripture, we have a [Page] description of those that worshipped the Image, and received the Mark: and immediaiely after them, there is the description of those that were with the Lamb upon Mount Sion, and had their Fathers Name written in their Forehead. It is plain then, That there is an immediate Antithesis or Contraposition betwixt the Lamb and the Beast; the Name of the Lamb, and the Name of the Beast; the Followers of the Lamb, and the Followers of the Beast. There is then a perfect contrariety betwixt these two, as may be seen in the whole Body of the Prophecy. They therefore who will rightly expound the Book of the Revelation, must diligently observe the Contraposition; and by the one, expound the meaning of the other contrary. But withall, this Rule ought to be remembred, That oppositio, must be in eodem, & circa idem; the opposition must be in the same, and about the same matter. And therefore, to apply the matter to particulars, I cannot see how Mr. Potter doth proceed by this Rule, in that Contraposition of his, between the Number of the Beast, and the Numbers of the New Ierusalem. First, whereas he opposeth the Number 144, to the Number 666, he should have proceeded in eodem, and made the opposition in the same matter. If therefore 144000 be the Characteristical Number of the Subjects of the Lambs Kingdome; then 666000 should be the Number of the Subjects of the Beast: and so Subject will be opposed to Subject, and Number to Number. Secondly, Mr. Potter opposeth the Number of the Beast, to the Numbers of the New Ierusalem; which cannot properly be said to be oppositio in eodem, an opposition in and about the same matter. For in the true Apocalyptical method, the Beast is not so much opposed to the New Ierusalem, as to the Lamb, his Ri [...]al in Kingly Power. If we will speak plainly, the New Ierusalem is opposed to the Whore of Babylon; the Gospel-Church, to the Roman Idolatrous Church. For after that the Saints had sung their Halelujahs at the destruction of the Great Whore, these words are immediately added: Let us be glad and rejoyce, for the Marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made her self ready, Chap. 19. ver. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. Therefore the contrariety [Page] standeth more immediately betwixt the Lamb and the Beast; the New Ierusalem, and the Whore of Babylon. Therefore the Number of the Beast, is not so immediately opposed to the Dimensions of the New Ierusalem. And yet further, in the opposition between the Lamb and the Beast; between the Whore of Babylon, and the New Ierusalem, we must go so far onely, as may be well warranted by Scripture, or by necessary deduction from Scripture. And therefore whereas Mr. Potter layeth down this Maxime, The description of the New Jerusalem, is not for this reason onely set down in Scripture, that by it the knowledge of the true Church of Christ might be described; but that the false Church of Antichrist, by way of Antithesis, might by the same description (mutatis mutandis) be also manifestly revealed, pag. 122. This Position of that learned Author, I do in part receive; but yet I do not think, that we are to extend it to every particular, without any restriction. We reade in the description of the New Ierusalem, of 12 Gates, 12 Apostles, 12 Angels, 12 Foundations; and yet I do not think, that we have warrant to look after such a set Number of Gates, of Angels, of Apostles, of Foundations, in the City of Rome. And yet further, if we could finde such certain Numbers in the City aforesaid, it were not to the purpose in hand: For in the true sense of the Prophecy, not Rome within such Walls or Gates, but the Romish Church in such a largeness and compass of Territories, is immediately opposed to the New Ierusalem, or the Gospel-Church that shall be in the latter times, at the end and destruction of the Beasts Kingdome. We reade in the slaughter of the Witnesses, that they did lie slain in the streets of the great City, spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, and where our Lord was Crucified, Chap. 11. ver. 8. Now there is none that will say, that they did lie slain in the streets of Rome, literally so called, but within the verge and precincts of the Romish Church. This properly is the Great City, that is opposed to the New Ierusalem, to the Holy City, to the Lambs Wife that comes from God out of Heaven.

Princ. 13. The Number ought so in special to be expounded, [Page] that it may appear to be 666, in that method and way of account, which is called the Number of a Man. For so it is expresly said, Let him that hath wisdome, count the Number of the Beast; for it is [...], the Number of a Man. They therefore who will have Lateinos, or some such Grammatical word, to be the Number of the Name; how do they make it appear, That this is the Number of a Man, or that it is the manner of men to calculate States and Governments by Anagams or Numeral Letters of any Grammatical Name whatsoever?

Princ. 14. The Number ought so in special to be counted, not according to the subtilties of humane invention, but according to the nature of the subject matter, and the manner of the Holy Spirit in such-like descriptions. For the nature of the subject matter, the great sin of the world, is, in receiving the Name, and the Mark of the Name. And shall we think, when the Lord Christ speaketh to his Churches concerning these things, that only they who have skill in the subtilties and mysteries of Art, shall have ability to understand his meaning? Surely, though the Number it self may be more mysterious, yet the Matter Numbred must be in more open view. Secondly, for the manner and use of the Spirit in such-like descriptions, his use is to speak Parabolically and Typically; and yet we finde no one instance of the discovery of a Government, by the extraction of the square-root. Very often we finde, when he speaketh of the rising of a Government, or the destruction of a State, he doth usually Number such a Chain or Line of years to each such remarkable occurrence; and he doth refer us either to the Chronologie of the Bible, or to the Stories of the Church. These things are most necessary, for the Calculation of the Times, and for the Exposition of the Prophecies. But whereas Mr. Potter doth wholly build upon the extraction of the square-root in a figurate Number, I cannot see how this doth agree with the practise of the Spirit in other Scriptures. I must needs confess, that he speaketh very rationally in these words, as they follow: I have (saith he) but beaten & made plain the same path which Mr. Forbes, and other Commentators have trodden out before. But I am now come to the place, where they either stood still, or [Page] turned out of the way. They say, that the Number 12 is the square root of 144: why then do they not proceed in the same Method, to finde out the root of the Number of the Beast, seeing they say it is opposed to the Number 144? These learned men cannot be supposed to be guilty of so much nescience, as to be ignorant of the square-root of a Number. Rather, they thought it unbeseeming the Wisdome of God, and the Majesty of the Scripture, to wrap up such Divine Mysteries in Humane Inventions. But be it what it will be, it is the foundation of Geometry and Arithmetick; it is that also, in and through which many famous inventions have been brought to light: And the words themselves also do insinuate, that the discovery is to be made by wisdome. So far Mr. Potter, pag. 47. In this I do agree with him, That it is the foundation of Geometry and Arithmetick in some good measure, to extract the square-root of any figurate Number: yet for all that, I cannot see when the Spirit, either in Daniel or in the Revelation, doth speak of Tyrannical States or Empires, under divers Emblems and Figures, that we should discover and finde out these Governments, by calculating the square-root of any Number; but rather, we should go to the Chronologie of the Times, and the Stories of the Church. And in this sense we hold, That Humane Learning is exceeding necessary. And for the invention of the square-root, it is very necessary in its kinde.

Princ. 15. The Number ought so in special to be expounded, that it may be in some sort discoverable to the people that lived in the days of John, and in the ages immediately following, though they lived before the beginning of the Beasts Kingdome. Therefore when it is said, Let him that hath wisdome, count the Number of the Beast; S. Iohn in these words speaketh to the people that lived in his days, and in the ages immediately following, that by this they should understand the signs of the coming of the Man of Sin. And he doth yet further shew, in what Revolution of Time he shall appear: There are seven Kings; five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come: and the Beast that comes out of the Bottomless Pit, he is the eighth. In which words of his, he doth plainly shew, That when seven Forms [Page] of Government are fallen in the City of Rome, then the Beast shall begin as the eighth Potentate. At the same time also he saith, That the Roman Empire shall be divided into ten inferiour Kingdomes; that these have no beeing as yet, but receive a Kingdome one hour with the Beast. By the collation of both these Scriptures, it is clear, That the Number was discoverable in the times of Iohn; and not onely to Iohn by Revelation, but to others also, that would imploy themselves by search. From hence then we may clearly discern, That they are in an error, who would have the Number 666, to be the Number of the time of the rising of the Beast, and yet make their account by the years of the Lord. So Danaeus in his Treatise de Antichristo: The Spirit of God in that place (saith he) medleth not with Arithmetical signification of Letters, but with the Time and Number of years, wherein those things shall be accomplished that are there spoken of: and for the particular time, he referreth us to the year 666, pag. 13, 14. Alstedius saith, Denotatur tempus quo Antichristus inchoaturus regnum suum, scil. anno 666, quo tempore coepit Papa maxime dominari, Theol. Polem. Part. 4. Controv. 5. pag. 388. The like is said By Eckard the Lutheran, and others. Though in this matter we do agree with the forenamed Expositors, That about the 666th year from the birth of the Lord, the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome was set up; though this be true in some latitude of speech, yet it cannot be the meaning of the Text. For what knowledge had the people that lived in the days of Iohn, and in the ages immediately following, of the account by the year of the Lord? Why should not the Christians that lived in Spain, finde out the Number by the Spanish Aera? The Christians in Aegy [...]t and Africa, by the Aera of Dioclesian? And the Christians under the Emperors of Constantinople, by the Indictions? These, and many other ways of account, were anciently used. Dyonisius the Less, about the year 532, did begin to compute by the years of the Lord; and that way of Computation came not into vulgar use many years after. It is therefore very strange, That men should Number the times of the beginning of the Beasts Kingdome, after the account [Page] by the years of the Lord, and yet certain hundred years after, the Church should be wholly ignorant of that way of Computation.

And thus laying all things together, we have proved by the concatenation and connexion of all particulars, That ours is the true Interpretation; because it doth agree with all the Body of the Circumstances fore-alledged. And for other Expositions, we have shewed the Reason why we cannot rest in them, because in severall Principles, more or less, they do cross the meaning of the Spirit. Now it remaineth, that we compare the substance of our Interpretation, with the scope of the Apostle S. Paul, 2 Thess. 2.

CHAP. XI. A brief Description of the Doctrine of S. Paul, 2 Thess. 2. And how he doth fully agree with the present Interpretation.

ALl Interpreters and Writers, in a manner, do agree in this, That the Beast, his Name, and Image, spoken of Rev. 13. are all one and the same in substance with the description of the Great Antichrist in the Thessalonians. Let us come to the words of the Text.

Vers. 1. & 2. Now we beseech you, Brethren, by the coming of our Lord Iesus Christ, and by our gathering together to him, that ye be not soon shaken in minde, nor be troubled, neither by Spirit▪ nor by word, nor by letter, as from us, as though the day of Christ were at hand. In these words, there is some darkness in our English Translation: for whereas the Translation hath it, We beseech you, Brethren, by the coming of the Lord; the word in the Original is, [...], for the cause of the coming of the Lord. The Apostle in the former Epistle, having spoken [Page] of the coming of Christ to Judgement; of the Resurrection from the Dead; and the taking up of those that should remain, to meet the Lord in the air: Hereupon, certain among the Thessalonians mistaking the meaning of the Apostle, did conclude, That the Day of Judgement, and the general Assembly of the Saints, was then at hand. Now to diminish this opinion, the Apostle doth exhort them in these words, I beseech you, Brethren, [...], for the cause of the coming of Christ to Iudgement, [...], for the matter or cause of our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in minde, nor be troubled, either by Spirit, by word, or by letter, as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. This sheweth plainly, That they did mistake the Apostle in his former Epistle, and did understand his words, as though Christ should come presently to Judgement. Now for their better information, he proceedeth.

Vers. 3. Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and the Man of Sin be revealed, the Son of Perdition. He plainly sheweth, what things should precede the coming of Christ; to wit, A general defection from the Faith, and the revelation of the Man of Sin. And this, I take it, doth fully open the meaning of our Saviours words in the Gospel, concerning the woful state of the Church in the latter times. He speaketh plainly, that many false Christs shall arise, and shall deceive, if it were possible, the very Elect, Matth. 24. 5, 23, 24. Now to what times can we better refer this, then to the times of Antichrist, to the times of the Apostacy, in which men shall depart from the Faith, and shall give heed to the Doctrine of Devils? 1 Tim. 4. 1.

Now whereas the Apostle saith, That there shall come a falling away first: Some of the Ancients, as Hierom, did understand this, of the defection from the Roman Empire. Though this be a truth, yet it is not the meaning of the Text: For, the falling away here meant, is, [...], a falling away from the true Faith, or from the pure Worship of God. So the word is used commonly in the New Testament: [Page] and the sense of the Text doth plainly shew, That God gave men up to delusions, to believe lies, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. The words then do not intend a Civil, but a Spiritual apostacy or falling away. Further, whereas it is said, And the Man of Sin shall be revealed, the Son of Perdition: Here is a great question, Whether the times of the Apostacy, and the Revelation of the Man of Sin, do begin all at one instant? Some will have this to be a Figure, which the Rhetoricians call Hendyadys: But they are deceived; for the words are plain, that a falling away from the Faith, should be by degrees: and when this Apostacy should come to some ripeness and maturity, then the Man of Sin should be revealed. For how is it possible, that the Christian Church should degenerate so far from Christ, to take Antichrist for her Head; but she must be moulded, prepared and wrought by degrees for such a rebellion? And for that expression, The Man of Sin; whereas the Romish Interpreters, and Hugo Grotius in his Tract de Antichristo, do take this for one individual Man, herein they are monstrous absurd. For if he be one Man, as they suppose, then the Apostle tells us, That he was secretly conceived in those first times, the Mystery of Iniquity did then begin to work. And he further addeth, that he shall continue till the last times, whom the Lord shall consume with the word of his mouth, and shall abolish with the brightness of his coming. Upon these grounds, if the Man of Sin be one individual Man, he must needs be very longlived, he must live in a manner from the first to the second coming of Christ. But leaving them to make good their own conceits, to speak positively, The Man of Sin meant in the Text, is, A State, or a Succession of Men in a State or Government: for Iohn in the Revlation doth call this Tyrannical Empire, by the Title of a Beast; which all do know, in the sense of the Prophets, doth intend an Idolatrous or a persecuting Empire. He is called, The Man of Sin, by a singular Emphasis, as being exceeding sinful, and the cause of sin to others: for so it is said in the Scriptures, Ieroboam the son of Nebat, that made Israel to sin. And if he be the Man of Sin, [Page] it is no hard matter to render a reason why he should be called, The childe of Perdition. This Title was sometimes given to Iudas: While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy Name; those that thou gavest me, have I kept, and none of them is lost, save the Son of Perdition, Joh. 17. 12. In the next words, the Apostle doth describe him according to his nature.

Ver. 4. Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or is worshipped: So that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. For his opposing himself, this is spoken in relation to Christ, as he is King, Priest and Prophet. So the Beast in the Revelat. is set in immediate opposition against the Lamb, as if he were another Christ, the Rival of his Kingly Power and Dignity. And whereas he doth exalt himself above all that is called God; Interpreters do ordinarily take this for Magistrates, whether Inferior or Superior; above all which, Antichrist must advance himself. The expression above all that is called God, is a style too diminuent to express the true God by: There be ma [...]y that be called Gods; yet to us there is but one God, 1 Cor. 8. 5. This is spoken of Magistrates, that they are called Gods; and above all these, Antichrist, as he doth pretend himself Universal Head of the Church, shall exalt himself. Further, whereas it is said, that he sits in the Temple of God; this is meant of the Church of God, where God is worshipped in the time of the New Testament, as he was in the Temple of Ierusalem of old. Now that the Church is called, The Temple of God, is clear from that of the Apostle, Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God? and, The Temple of God is holy, which ye are, 1 Cor. 3. 16. The result of the whole speech, is this, That Antichrist shall sit in the Universal Church, as in his Episcopal See: for so the word in the Original doth signifie, Cathedraticâ potestate praesidere. By these words it is plain, That the formality of Antichristianism, lies in the Universal Headship. For when the Apostle doth describe the Great Antichrist by his nature, he saith, That he sitteth in the Church of God, as the supreme Lord and Ruler. Therefore if that be true which I have so largely dispured in the Body of the [Page] Treatise, That the Name of the Beast is no other, but his Universal Power and Headship over the Church of God; then I will leave any man to consider, Whether one and the same thing is not here spoken by S. Paul, in the Epistle to the Thessalonians: He as God, sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. And hath not the Bishop of Rome for 1000 years, put himself in the place of Christ, as the Head and Law-giver to the Church of Christ? But the Apostle goes on.

Vers. 5. Remember you [...]ot when I was with you, I told you these things? We reade in Acts 20. when the [...] sent to Ephesus, he called for the E [...]ders of the Church; he told them, that grievous Wolves should come, and that they should not spare the stock. The same things in effect he spake among the Thessalonians, when he did foreshew the decay of the Christian faith, and the revelation of the Man of Sin. Now for the time of his coming, and the knowledge they had o [...] that time, he hath these words.

Vers. 6. And now ye know what with hol [...]eth, [...] he may be revealed in his time. [...]y the [...] the thing that doth withhold, all Interpreters, for the most part, [...] understand the Great Empire of the Romans. For as long as the M [...]jesty of that Empire did stand, it would keep [...] the dominion of Antichrist, who should ari [...]e. What knowledge the [...] Thessalonians had of this, is doubtful: yet there i [...] nothing more [...]ure, then that the Ancient Writers, [...] as lived before the fall of the Empire, did believe, That when this [...] [...] come, then the Man of Sin should be revealed▪ Among many others, when Hierom heard of the taking of Rome by the R [...]me, he did make application of this Scripture, that then the Man of Sin was at the doors. Now whereas some Interpreters think, that we cannot shew any precise time of the coming of Antichrist, they divide themselves into sundry opinions: And therefore some speak of his Conception, some of his Birth, some of his higher advancement into the Throne, and some of the full Perfection of his Power. Others there are, that take all these together, and tell us, That he was conceived in [Page] the Primitive Times, born about the times of Constantane, set up in the Throne under the Emperor Phocas, and raised to the high pitch, when he did assume the Power of both Swords. But all these are but conceits of mens own Commenting. For the time of the revelation of the Man of Sin, must not be as every one will feign it at his own pleasure, but as it is positively and plainly set down in the Word of Truth. Now if we go to the scope of the Context, the Great Empire of the Roman, the impediment that hindred must be taken away, and then after that, the Man of Sin must be revealed, [...], in his definite and determinate time. There is then a precise. definite, and determinate time, for the revelation of the Man of Sin; and this must be after the fall of the old Empire. N [...]w according to these grounds, there can be no other time intended, but when he was installed Oecumenical Bishop under the Emperor Phocas. It is clear by the Stories of the Church, That the Empire fell, and the Kings arose in the fifth Century. And after that, in the year 606 from the birth of the Lord, and in the year 666 from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome, the Bishop of Rome was declared Universal Head over all Churches in the times of the Emperor Phocas. In this year he was revealed, and declared to the world, in such a manner, as the Apostle doth describe him: for in this year he did begin to sit in the Church, or in the Temple of God, as in Cathedrá, as Oecumenical and Universal Bishop and Head of the Church. And so we have the particular time when Antichrist was revealed, [...], in his definite time. This we take to be the natural sense of the Text: for if these two things be supposed, First, that the beeing of the Man of Sin lies essentially in his Headship over the Church and Temple of God. Secondly, that he did appear in his proper time, after the fall of the old Empire: What other thing can here be signified or decyphered, but that which we speak of, to wit, that the Number 666 in the Revelation, doth point out the time of the rising of this Spiritual Monarchy? For as we have formerly shewed, the year 606, according to the calculation of the [Page] times in Daniel, is the Number 666, the Number of the Name or Universal Headship of the Beast. And thus we see how the scope of the Apostle in this Scripture, doth fully answer our Interpretation, concerning the Name of the Beast, and the Number of the Name. Now let us go to the words of the Apostle, as they follow.

Vers. 7, 8. For the Mystery of Iniquity doth already work: onely he who now letteth, will let, till he be taken out of the way; and then shall that wicked one be revealed. Here Interpreters do inquire, what is meant by the Mystery of Iniquity. Some do think, that the Apostle doth refer to those Heresies in the first times, that were previous to the bringing in of the Man of Sin. But how could those gross Heresies be so called? The Mystery of Iniquity did incroach upon the Church, and upon godly men, under the appearance of the greatest holiness. Secondly, suppose that in those first times there were some beginnings of Free-will, Justification by the Merit of Man; yet these things are not to our purpose: for we are here specially to look after such a working of the Mystery of Iniquity, as makes way for the Papacy, or the Papal Government, or the Universal Headship of Antichrist, that he shall sit as Lord, or chief Ruler in and over the Church and Temple of God. The question is, What previous workings were there in the Apostles days, and so downwards, towards the setting up of the Universal Headship. For this is to the scope of the Text, and this doth answer the matter in hand. Let us therefore consult with other Scriptures. S. Iohn saith, Ye have heard that Antichrist shall come: even so the spirit of Antichrist is already in the world, 1 Joh. 4. 3. What doth he mean by this, that the spirit of Antichrist was already in the world? He doth explain himself in his third Epistle, and the 9th verse, I would have wrote unto the Church, but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence, suffereth us not. It appears from hence then, that in those first times men did affect that [...], that Primacy or Headship in and over the Church of God. Here then the Mystery of Iniquity did begin to work in those first times. But lest any man might alledge, that these incroachments [Page] were too gross; and that the Mystery of Iniquity must be carried on with greater shews of holiness, that very godly men themselves might be deceived by it: For the clearing of this, let us consider, That the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, is built upon the Primacy of Peter over the rest of the Apostles: and for the Primacy of Peter, there were some beginnings thereof in the very Apostles days. His Authority was so great, that it seemed to be a Law. Paul chargeth him, that he did compel the Gentiles to be circumcised, Gal. 2. 13, 14. I demand then, How did he compel them? Not by Precept or Command; not by any coercive Power, but by his Example. His Authority was so great in the Consciences of the People of those times, that is seemed to be a Law: And Barnabas himself also was drawn away with their dissimulation. S. Paul also, an eminent Apostle, seemed to be nothing in comparison of Peter: for so he expresseth himself; Iames, and Iohn, and Cephus, which seemed to be Pillars, Gal. 2. 9. Such credit had Peter with the Faithful in those first times. And truly, after his death it was not diminished: for the ancient Fathers of the Church, conceiving him to be Bishop of Rome, did ascribe more then too much to his Successors, and to that Succession for his sake: At least, the Bishops of Rome themselves did take too much upon them, under that consideration. And this did go on, and increase so by degrees, that it did never leave, till it came at that pitch at last, that the Bishop of Rome was declared Universal Head of the Church. And this Universal Headship, we call the Name of the Beast; and the time of the Institution, and remarkable appearance thereof, the Number of the Name. And look as the ancient Church, having a Promise of the coming of Christ, were held in expectation about the time of his coming: So the Christian Church, being forewarned of the coming of Antichrist, were also bu [...]ied about the times of his coming. Now for the means to understand the time when it should be: First, they were to look to the Revolution of Empires: Secondly, to the Number of years, to the setting up of that State or Government. For the Revolution of Empires, the Apostle saith, He [Page] that letteth, will let, till he be taken out of the way. All the Ancients did understand this of the fall of the Empire; and when the Empire should be removed, then they did believe that the Man of Sin should be revealed in his time. Again, we have further proved, That the time of his coming is not onely discoverable by the Changes and Revolutions of Empire, but by the Number of years. For if you reckon 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome, you will come punctually, prec [...]ely, and determinately, to the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, under the Emperor Phocas. And this is that which the Apostle d [...] mainly treat of in this Chapter, That when A [...] [...], [...]e shall sit as God in the Temple of God; that is, he [...] sit in the Church, as in his Ep [...]opal [...]ee. From the [...]ope of the whole, it is clear, That the formality of [...], d [...]h lie in the Universal Headship. And for the time of the revelation thereof, the Apostle saith, It must be after the removal of the old Empire, and then the Man of Sin shall be revealed in his time. Now this time can be no other, but in the decree of the Universal Headship, under the Emperor P [...]ocas, 666 years from the beginning of the Roman as the fourth Metal-Kingdome. And so Iohn in the Revelation, and Paul in the Thessalonians, do agree in one and the same sense; and both Scriptures do facere paria.

Now then, to gather up all into one sum. Seeing the truth of our Interpretation is verified in all the particulars of the Text, Rev. 13. Seeing also it is confirmed by the whole sense of the Chapter, Rev. 17. Seeing also it agreeth with all the Principles and Grounds throughout the whole Prophecy. And last of all, seeing it doth fully con [...]ent with the scope of the Apostle in the Epistle to the Th [...]ssalonians: We may safely conclude, That we have given a right Exposition of the meaning of the Spirit; and have truly shewed, what is meant by the Beast, his Name, Image, Mark, and the Number of his Name. Now we will come to the practical part, to the use of the Point.

CHAP. XII. The Application of the whole: [...] [...] is made first, of those things t [...]at are [...] [...].

[Page]

HEre if we apply our selves to the Times, we shall finde, That the term [...]ntichristian, is used by sundry sorts of men, for sundry kindes of Intere [...]. [...]ome do use it aright, and others do dangerousl [...] and schismatically traduce, by the misapplication thereof. For, seeing the great sin of the world hath consisted in this, In subjecting themselves to an Anti-Christian Authority, and to the Laws ma [...]e by that Power; And seeing i [...] is the duty of all true Christians, to separate and depart from such an Authority, as being so diametrally contrar [...] to the Crown and Dignity of Christ their Soveraign Lord: In this point, it is not to be doubted, but the Protestant Churches have rightly rejected the Beast, his Name, Mark, Image, and the Number of his Name, as they have cast away the Authority of the Bishop of Rome, and the Laws, as they stand by that Power and Headship. In all the passages of the [...]atise af [...]regoing, we have largely proved, That the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, is the Name direct [...] opposed to the Name, P [...]wer and Headship of the Lam [...] ▪ And therefore the Protestant Churches, as formerly, so now, [...]ave just Reason to depart from the Church of Rome, as she ha [...]h departed from Christ.

Now the Friends and the Followers of the Separation, do endeavor in these times, to go in t [...]e same method; for by this they think to free themselves from Schism. When they are put upon it to give a Reason, Why they depart from the Ministery, from the Ordinances, and the Publick Worship; they tell us, The Ministery is Antichristian; they have not renounced their Calling by the Bishops. In a word, they call all that Antichristian, which hath been used in Antichristian [Page] times, and hath a conveyance and transmission down to us, by the means of Antichristian men. Which Position of theirs, as it is most erroneous and false; so it doth draw many dangerous consequences along with it. Therefore to prevent such cunning Tricks of Legerdemain, we will lay down the truth distinctly. First, we will shew the things that are directly Antichristian. Secondly the things that are Anti-Christian by Analogie and Reduction. Thirdly, the things that are Antichristian by the Position of some Circumstances, as they are truly Christian by the Position of others. Fourthly, the things that are Antichristian falsly so called. For that which is [...]ruly Antichristian, all such are said to have the Mark of the Beast in their Forehead, and Right-hand. For the Mark, in the Greek it is said, He caused all to give them a Mark; as if the intent of the Beast were by this, that they should give testimony that they are his. They are also said to receive a Mark, Chap. 14. To have the Mark, Chap. 16. Now then we are sure, that to give, receive, or have the Mark of the Beast, is no other, but that Act by which the Consciences of men are obliged to the Authority of the Pope and his Church; When also they do prosess, That by their Swords, Wits, Goods, Lives, and by all that they have, they will maintain the Decrees and Laws made by that Authority. The Mark in the Forehead, is the publick Profession of the Universal Headship in the view of men: and the Mark in the Right-hand, is the solemn Resolution and Obligation to defend and maintain the Authority of the Beast, against all that do oppose it. And truly, the event of things doth notably answer the prediction. For we see by plain experience, That the Papists (such is their zeal to the Catholick Cause) do out-strip us by many degrees. The Jesui [...]es are never idle, they compass Sea and Land, they [...]urn themselves into all forms, and are still animating of Princes and People against the Protestant Cause: Yea, they have so wrought, that almost no man among them seemeth to spare either Labour, Wealth, Counsel, or Life it self, to uphold the Name and Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. God grant, that one day they do not rise up in Judgment against us, [Page] for we do not come near them in the least degree, in promoting the Kingdom of Christ, or in setting up the Gospel as the Regent-Law among the Nations.

But the Papists will not hear that they are enemies, or that they go against the Lord and his Word: They hold, That the Bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ; and that he hath all his Authority by delegation from him. These are specious shews; But in deed and in truth, they are real enemies against Christ: For, the Scriptures and the words of the Gospel, they can do nothing, but meerly as the Pope and the Church of Rome do give life, vigour and authority to them, and as they do interpret them, which always they do to their own advantage. There is no truth more clearly delivered in Scripture, then the Doctrine of Justification by Faith in Christ; and yet the Pope saith on the contrary, That there is a Purgatory after this life; and that the souls there detained, are freed by Masses, Indulgences, Pardons, and such like means. God and his Word say, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serve. The Pope on the contrary saith, Thou shalt worship Saints, Images, Crosses, Reliques, and the like. God and Christ have commanded all men, to search the Scriptures, and to try the Spirits, of what nature they be: Now the Pope on the contrary commandeth, that men should forbear the doing of this, and that they should depend upon him alone. God and Christ say, Marriage is honourable amongst all men, and the bed undefiled: The Pope on the contrary, forbiddeth Marriage to the Ministry. By these, and sundry suchlike instances, it is apparent, That the Name and Soveraignty of the Beast, is every way contrary to the Name and Soveraignty of the Lamb. For what the Lamb doth command, the Beast doth countermand for the most part. From hence it is clear then (say the Papists what they will) when they leave Christ, to follow the Laws of the Pope, in sense and substance they make him their Christ, their Spiritual King, Head and Governour, and so in effect are no true Christians. Now on the contrary, seeing the Lord Christ is given as a Leader and Commander to his people, they who refuse the Laws of the Pope▪ [Page] to yield subjection to Christ, in the times of the greatest persecution, are every where mentioned in the Revelation, to have the Name of the Father written in their Forehead, Chap. 14. ver. 15. To be the remnant of the seed of the woman, that keep the Commandments of God, and have the Testimony of Iesus Christ, Chap. 12. ver. 17. The Papists then in receiving the Doctrines and Decrees of the Bishop of Rome, under that formality as they do believe him Universal Head of the Church, are positively, directly and immediately Antichristian.

This Truth being laid down, a stream of excellent Uses do naturally flow from it.

First, We may here contemplate and behold the truth and infinite Wisdome of God, speaking in the Scriptures. It is now above 1500 years since, that Iohn wrote the Revelation, in which he spake of the Beast, his Name, Mark, Image, and the Number of his Name. Now if we go to experience, What have all ages for this thousand years last past, but verified and fulfilled the truth of that which he spake of long before? He that shall diligently reade the present Treatise, will finde it to be true as we have said.

Secondly, here is matter for our prayers and tears, yea for our bowels to yern over those great Countries, Kingdomes and Commonweals, which do as yet own the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome. They do continue in a great sin against the Kingly Office of Christ; their profession is no other, but Apostacy from the true Head of the Church; and unless they repent, they will one day feel the great Plagues contained in the words of the Prophecy.

Thirdly, here is cause for the Protestant Churches to be thankful to the Lord: For did they rightly understand it, he hath delivered them from a bondage and slavery, which far surpasseth the bondage of Egypt or Babylon. For in the present case, if men under this Government refuse to Worship the Beast, and to receive his Mark; the penalty is, that they shall have no liberty to buy nor sell; they shall be killed with the Sword; they shall have their blood spilt; they shall be subjected to sundry kindes of death: On the contrary, if [Page] they do worship the Beast, and receive his Mark, the Lord Christ doth threaten on the other side, that they shall be tormented day and night, and the smoke of their burning shall ascend for ever and ever, Rev. Chap. 14. ver. 7, 8, 9, 10. The day of the deliverance of the Churches from Romish Tyranny, was a day of deliverance from a Tyranny over their Souls, over their Consciences, over their Bodies, over their Estates. But all Treatises are full of Uses of this kinde. We will proceed [...]o that which is Antichristian by Analogie and Reduction; for this is more immediate to our purpose.

CHAP. XIII. Concerning that which is Antichristian by Analogie and [...].

IN the progress of the Discourse, we have shewed, That the formality of Antichristianism, is in the Headship of the Beast. By this Standard of the Market, we may prove all other things that do more remotely symbolize and agree with the Great Anti-Christ.

First, the power of the Magistrate, when it hath no bounds or limits, but he doth all by his Will and Prerogative in the Church of God, doth come too near to the formality of Anti-Christianism. Antiochus Epiphanes, in the Prophecy of Daniel, is described as a mighty King or Potentate in the Seleucian Line; but when he was not contented with his Power, which was great enough, but would exalt himself against the Prince of the Host, and tread down the Sanctuary, and do all things after his own will; in this he was a figure of the Antichrist to come, Dan. 8. 12. But that we may speak more distinctly in a matter of so great moment, we do desire to lay down this necessary caution in the beginning. Let us then distinguish [Page] betwixt the Essence, and the Exercise of the power. For the Essence, we do willingly acknowledg, that the Lord hath ordained Magistrates to be over the people, for his own glory, and the publick good; and that Magistracy is the Ordinance of God, Rom. 13. v. 1, 2, 3. And though he hath not tied any Nation or People, so strictly and precisely, to this or that particular Form of Government; yet his pleasure is, That the People should obey the Government that is set over them. In this case, If they resist the Power, they resist the Ordinance of God, and draw great guilt upon their Souls for their resisting. If we look to the Nation and People of the Jews, they did meet with the greatest Changes and Alterations of State; yet in each Alteration the will of the Lord was, that they should obey the Civil Authority, set over them, for the preservation of the Publick Peace. The hardest Change that they ever met withal, was the translation of their State from the house of David; yet they were to pray for the peace of the King of Babylon, & seek the good of the City, whither they were carried Captive. All this plainly sheweth, That Magistracy is the Ordinance of God; and the Lord would have his own Command to be observed by his People, though they did live under Heathen Kings. Secondly, we are to consider the Exercise of the Power. And here, First, is the lawful execution; and, Secondly, the exorbitancy and excess of the Power above Law. For the lawful use of the Power, we do willingly yield, That the Supreme Magistrate hath not onely Authority in the Common-wealth, but he hath also great Power, in and about the affairs of the Church. And this thing we have often incu [...] cated in the Body of the Treatise; to wit, That the Reign of Christ doth begin upon the Earth, when the Kingdoms, States and Governments of this World, become Nursing Fathers to the Church. And so we do affirm, That it doth appertain to the Higher Powers, to take order, that Unity and Peace be preserved in the Church; that the Truth be kept pure and intire; that horrid Blasphemies be supprest; that the Ordinances of God be duly setled; that the profane, the ignorant, and rude body of the People (who of themselves would [Page] never call upon the Name of the Lord) be brought by their Power and Authority to the publick places of Worship. For the better effecting of which, they have Power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide, That whatsoever is transacted in them, be according to the minde of God. In this sense we may not doubt to say, That the Chief Magistrate in every Common-wealth, is the Supreme Head in Causes Ecclesiastical; that is to say, The Supreme Head in Causes Ecclesiastical that do of right appertain to him, and do fall under his cognizance by the Law-Divine. In the forementioned cases, he is the Delegate and Vice-gerent of Christ upon the Earth. And this we take to be the lawful Exercise of the Power. Thirdly, there is the Hyperbole or Excess of the Power, when the Magistrate is not contented with his own limits or bounds, but shall further endeavor to carry all by Will and Prerogative in the Church of Christ. This is that which comes nearest to the formality of Antichristianism: for, Antichrist is said to sit in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. If therefore the Supreme Magistrate shall do the same in the Church of Christ; if he shall controll and do all things after his own Will in the house of Christ; this is to resemble the Great Antichrist, and to do the same in effect which he doth. But for this we have a clear example in Steven Gardiner Bishop of Winchester, who of all others is noted by Forraign Divines to cry up such an excessive Prerogative of the Kings of England in Causes Ecclesiastical. For he did not shun to maintain, That it was at the pleasure of the King to abrogate Statutes, and institute new Rites in the worship of God: yea, he further said, That it was lawful for the King to forbid the people the use of the Cup in the Lords Supper, and the use of Marriage to the Ministers. And the [...]round of all this was, Because the King was Supreme Head in Causes Ecclesiastical. Now in way of opposition to this, the Forraign Divines have risen with great indignation. These are the words of Dr. Rivet, in his Explication of the Decalogue, Edit. 2. pag. 203. Qui enim Papatus doctrinam adhuc fovebat, ut posteà apparuit, novum Papatum in personâ Regis erigebat. For he (meaning [Page] Steven Gardiner aforesaid) who did as yet nourish the Doctrine of the Papacy (as after it appeared) did erect a new Papacy in the Person of the King. And Calvin in his Commentary upon Amos, Chap. 7▪ ver. 13. speaking of them who did ascribe the Title of Supreme Head in Causes Ecclesiastical to Hen. 8. King of England, hath these words; Hoc me semper gravitèr vulneravit, quum vocarent ipsum summum Ecclesiae Caput sub Christo. This hath grievously wounded me always, when they called him the Supreme Head of the Church under Christ. He did take this for no other, then an incroachment upon the Prerogative of Christ. And he might well do so, if we look to the Interpretation of Steven Gardiner aforementioned, with whom he had to do. But the learned man doth proceed in these words: It is certain, if Kings do their duty, they are both Patrons of Religion, and Nursing Fathers of the Church, as Isaiah calls them, Chap. 49. ver. 23. This therefore is principally required of Kings, That they use the Sword wherewith they are furnished, for the maintaining of Gods Worship. But in the mean time, there are inconsiderate men, who make them too Spiritual; and this fault reigns up and down Germany, yea spreads too much in these Countries. And now we perceive what fruit springs from this root, viz. That Princes, and all that are in the place of Government, think themselves to be so Spiritual, that there is no other Ecclesiastical Government. And this Sacriledge creeps amongst us; because they cannot measure their Office with certain and lawful bounds, but are of opinion, they cannot reign, unless they abol [...]sh all the Authority of the Church, and become the Chief Iudges both in Doctrine, and in the whole Spiritual Government. Therefore there ought to be a temper kept: for this disease hath always reigned in Princes, to desire to bend Religion according to their own pleasure and lust, and for their own profits in the mean time. So far he. In which words, two Points are observable: First, the lawful exercise of the Power of the Supreme Magistrate, as it doth keep its due limits in Causes Ecclesiastical. Secondly, the redundancy and the excess of the Power, when it doth tread under foot the Laws of the Church. That which these learned men did speak concerning the Supremacy of the [Page] Kings of England in Causes Ecclesiastical, and the danger of the excess of the Civil Power, hath been too truly verified by some in our days; not onely to the total ruine of themselves, but also to the destruction of that Soveraignty it self, which they did so immeasurably exalt. And whereas Calvin in the place aforementioned hath these words; Et hodie quam multi sunt in Papatu, qui regibus accumulant quicquid possunt juris & potestatis. And at this day (saith he) how many are there in the Papacy, that heap upon Kings whatsoever Right or Power they can possible? So that there may not be any Dispute of Religion, but this Power shall be in one King, to Decree according to his own pleasure, whatsoever he list; and that should remain fixed without Controversie. So far he. But we for our parts may not onely say, Quam multi in Papatu? How many in the Papacy? but how many in the Profession of the Protestant Religion, have accumulated this great Power upon Princes, that they might do what they list in the Church of God, and in the determination of matters of Faith? In Daniel and the Revelation, these things are set down as the true causes of the destruction of Kingdomes. That is a most Divine expression of Daniel and the three Children, Chap. 2. ver. 20, 21. Wisdome and might are his, and he changeth the times and seasons; he removeth Kings, and setteth up Kings. And for the cause of these Changes, it is more particularly expressed Chap. 7. v. 11. I beheld then, because of the voice of the great words which the Horn spake; I beheld even till the Beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning fire. All solid Interpreters do understand some State or Government to be typed by the Little Horn. Now the destruction of such a State or Government, doth arise immediately from hence, because of great words which the Horn did speak against the most High. Therefore the exorbitancy of the Power against Religion, Christ, and his Saints, is oftentimes the cause of the eversion of States and Kingdomes. But that we may more fully understand how far the Power may go, and whither it must not go, let us consider the examples of the Kings of Iudah. And here it is clear, That Asa, Iehosaphat, Hezekiah, Iosiah, did great things [Page] about the affairs of the Church, and had a very large testimony for their zeal in the Worship of God: yet I am sure none can say that their Power was so transcendent, as to abrogate any thing that was appointed or immediately commanded by God in his Word. For when Uzziah the King would offer Incense, that appertained not to him, but to the Sons of Aaron, he was imitten with leprosie, and compelled to dwell alone, as one that should have no commerce nor society with men. So Belshazzar the King, when he made a Feast to a thousand of his Lords, we reade, That in the time of the Feast, the fingers of a mans hand did appear, and write upon the wall the destruction of the King and the Kingdome. And the cause of this Judgement is expounded by Daniel himself, in these words, Chap. 5. ver. 25. Thou hast lifted up thy self against the Lord of Heaven, and they have brought the vessels of his House before thee: and thou and thy Lords, thy Wives and thy Concubines, have drunk wine in them. Belshazzar and Nebuchadnezzar both, by strong convictions and demonstrations, were brought to understand, That the God of Israel was the onely true God, and that they had their Dominion from him. Now when they were not contented with this which the Lord had given them, but would insult over the Giver, and drink wine in the Bowls of the Temple, which they had taken with sacrilegious hands; this was the cause of the ruine of the King and Kingdome at last. There is a remarkable passage of Herodotus in his second Book, where he maketh mention of a Statue that was set up to Sennacherib in one of the Temples of Egypt, with this Inscription and Title upon it, [...], Whosoever looks upon me, let him learn to be pious. This Testimony, as it hath the greatest probability of truth; so doth it singularly well agree with the Story of the Scripture. We reade, that 185000 were slain in one night in the Camp of the Assyrians, by an Angel sent from Heaven; Sennacherib himself was killed by his own two sons; and that great Empire did decline and lose its vigour by degrees. Now if we look into the cause of all this, we shall finde, That the insolency of that King against God and his [Page] Church, was that which broke him all to pieces. This was done in the sight of all Asia, that the world might know that the insolency of the greatest Powers of the Earth against God, will prove the certain cause of their destruction. But we will conclude this matter with that Exhortation of the Psalmist, for so he speaketh to all Princes and Potentates who do intrench upon the Prerogative of Christ, Be wise now therefore, O ye Kings, and be instructed, ye Iudges of the Earth: serve the Lord with fear, and rejoyce with trembling: Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, Psa. 2. ver. 10, 11, 12. Now why doth he exhort the Kings and Judges of the Earth to be wise, rather then other men? They are Gods Vicegerents, and there is none greater in Power then they; and through the greatness of their place, none are more apt to bend Religion according to their own pleasures and lusts, then they are. Because this is more immediately against the Kingdome of Christ, and cometh nearest to Antichristian pride, the Psalmist doth advise them to take heed what they do, to serve the Lord with fear, and to rejoyce with trembling: If not, he tells them plainly, their insolency against Christ and his Church, will be a certain cause of their destruction. This is made manifest from the beginning of the Psalm: The Kings of the earth set themselves, and the Rulers take counsel together, against the L [...]rd, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast away their cords from us, ver. 2. Now he doth direct his speech to such as these, and tells them plainly, That the Lord Christ will break them with a Rod of Iron, and dash them in pieces like a Potters vessel. The scope of the Text, is chiefly concerning the exorbitancy and exaltation of Earthly Powers against Christ. And these, we say, do more nearly and immediately symbolize with the Great Antichrist.

Secondly, they come also in the nearest resemblance to Antichrist, and to that which is truly Antichristian, who forsake the Scriptures, to hang meerly upon Dreams and Revelations. For as the true Believers, who take Christ for the Head of the Church, have the Word of the Gospel applied [Page] to their hearts, and sealed to their Consciences by the inward working of the Spirit: So on the contrary, they who mis-believe, and take Antichrist for the Head of the Church, have his Superstitions, Laws, and Decrees, rooted and grounded in them, by Visions, Dreams, and Apocryphal Revelations. This is clear from the scope of the Scripture. And here is the es [...]igies and lively pourtraicture of Antichrists Kingdome. But before I come to the point, it is necessary that I should premise one Caution in the beginning. And here let it be noted, That I do not speak of Revelations absolutely and in their full extent, but of Revelations restrictively, and in a sense onely. If we take Revelations in the first sense, I do easily agree, That not onely in the first 2000 years from Adam to Abraham, but also in the last dispensation, since the coming of Christ, God hath wonderfully revealed himself to his People, as it is clear by the Scriptures, and by the Stories of the Church. And in my own experience I can avouch it to be true, as I have had occasion to converse in several places, so I have met with some good Christian [...], whom it hath pleased the Lord to bring home, by an admirable way of Conversion. And some select persons also I know, whom it hath pleased the Lord to chuse out for himself, to bear witness to his Truth, both in dark and troublesome times: I have found, that they have spoken great things, concerning the last troubles, and divers events thereof, which experience hath confirmed to be true. But concerning this kinde of people (that a distinction may be made between true and Apocryphal Revelations) I have ever noted three things in them. First, they have diligently waited upon the publick Ordinances of God, and have broke through all difficulties; through perswasions of Friends, through oppositions of Enemies, through threatnings of Tyrannical Courts, that they might enjoy the means of their Salvation. Secondly, I have observed, that they have always adhered to the written Word, and have spent very much time in the meditation of the Promises, Commands, and other Passages; desiring nothing more in all the world, then that they might know [Page] the minde of God, that they might save their own, & the Souls of other people. Thirdly, I have observed this in them, That though they have been under extraordinary teachings, yet they have had great darknesses, in which they have always begged of the Lord, that he would not leave them so, and that he would carry them on further. Now in praying, waiting, and using the means, they have first or last had assured help from the Lord, by the immediate supply of his Spirit. There is much spoken by the School-men, concerning the harmony betwixt the Grace of God and Endeavor of Man: Suarez hath his way, Alvarez bath his; Penottus seemeth to draw a threed betwixt both: and Cajetan saith, In hoc ego non possum quietare intellectum meum: In this I cannot satisfie my understanding. But for my part, I never found better grounds of resolution any-where, then from the experiences of some Christians, whom it hath pleased the Lord a long time to exercise in the Schoole of Temptation. As they have had sundry changes of trouble and fear; so they have had interchangable supply of Spirit, and of auxiliary Grace, to direct, help, and comfort them in all their fears. There hath been a sweet parallel betwixt Gods grace and their endeavor; as they did work under the grace, and by the help of grace, received. By their experiences, I do finde, That it is the manner of God in dealing with a Soul, to break it all to pieces, and then wholly to make it up, by the continual help of his Spirit. Now this doth not any way drown the endeavor of man, but doth onely put him upon the work of his Salvation with fear and trembling, and upon an humble dependance upon the Lord, for the supply of his grace. This I have found from the experiences of such as have lived by Faith in the Promises, and have prayed much by Faith in the Promises. With some of these the Lord hath dealt by peculiar Revelations. But these are particular priviledges, which he doth vouchsafe to certain persons extraordinarily, whom he doth set apart for special services, either to himself, or to his Church. I do acknowledge, That some Believers in this last dispensation, may be partakers of such extraordinary workings of [Page] the Spirit; therefore I will not absolutely and peremptorily conclude against all Dreams, Visions, and Revelations in these last Times. And I think it very expedient, that men should be moderate in their censure.

But yet for the ordinary course of Visions and Revelations, which men do make boast of in these days, it is very much to be suspected, that they do proceed from no good Spirit: Especially when they are carried so high, as to live above Ordinances, and to slight the Scriptures, which God hath appointed as the way and means to Salvation. Nay, when they shall go further, and maintain things apparently contrary to Scripture, and the analogie of Faith, and rest wholly upon the proof of extraordinary Revelation; there is great cause why we should have this way in deep suspition, that the power and working of Satan is here. And they who call every thing Antichristian in the Ministery, in the Ordinances, in the Worship, in the literal expressions of Scripture; if they would be pleased to examine themselves, and lay their hands upon their own hearts, they would finde, That by their slighting of the Scripture, & by their hanging upon extraordinary Revelations in matters contrary to Scripture, they themselves are the most Antichristian men, and do come in the nearest resemblance to the Great Antichrist, as he is described by the Apostle, in the Epistle to the Thessalonians, and by Iohn in the Book of the Revelation. But let us come to particulars; these are the words of the Apostle, Even him whose coming is after the working of Satan, with miracles, signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they did not receive the truth in the love of it, that they might be saved, Chap. 2. ver. 9, 10. In which words the Apostle doth plainly shew, and foretell, That not onely at the coming of Antichrist, but also in all the time of his Kingdome, the Devil shall have power given him to do great things; to deceive the world, that they may believe the lies of Antichrist. It is expresly said, That his coming is after the power of Satan: for as God did work by the Apostles, to bring men to Salvation; so shall the Devil put forth all his power in Antichrist, [Page] and his followers, to seduce the world to destruction. Oecumenius hath a very proper expression, [...], The Devil shall do all in the middest of him, or by him as the mean or instrument. The friends and followers of the Church of Rome do strongly plead the glory of Miracles, as a note of their Church: and so they do truly fulfil the Scripture; for it is expresly said, that the coming of Antichrist is with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and that he doth seduce the world with all deceivableness of unrighteousness. And we see by experience, where he hath wanted the Scripture, and the colour of Divine Revelation, there he hath usually confirmed his Doctrines by lying wonders; that is, by such wonders as the Lord doth permit him to work, to establish lies and errors in the Consciences of men. The Stories of the Church are full of examples of this kinde, and innumerable instances may be given. And although many of our Writers do take all those things in a manner for lies, which are written in the Legend; for it is the punishment of a liar, that he shall not be believed when he speaks true: yet for all this, I do incline to their opinion, who do distinguish the several pieces contained in that Rhapsodie. Some things there mentioned were meerly invented, and others there are which we may probably judge to be real operations of Satan to deceive the world. The words of the Scripture come to this Emphasis and height of expression; For this cause God shall give men strong delusions to believe lies: Therefore the Devil must have very great power in the times of Antichrist, to deceive the world, how else should the Scriptures be fulfilled? But passing by the multitude of examples that might be given, for their sakes who in these times do slight the Scriptures, and hang upon Revelations, we will come to a pregnant instance in the Tenth Century. This for the most part is called by Writers The dark age. Bellarmine and Baronius themselves do mourn over it, for the want of learning. But for my part, I do believe, it was not so much defective in these things, as it did abound in Revelations, Visions, Dreams, and such-like, by and through which Satan had a very great power in the [Page] Consciences of people. In that Century, in the times of the Saxon Monarchs, in the year 977, well near 700 years ago, there was (as Speed doth relate in his Chronicle) a very hot contention about the Marriage of Ministers. Dunstan and the Monks stood strongly on the one part, that Ministers should put away their wives; and the Ministers strongly pleaded on the other side, that Marriage was the Ordinance of God. Concerning this matter, a Councel was held at Winchester, where after long dispute, and much against the Monks, it was greatly suspected that side had gone down, had they not referred themselves to the Rood or Crucifix placed upon the w [...]ll of the Church, where the Councel sate. To this great Oracle S. Dunstan desired them devoutly to pray, and to give diligent ear for an answer: who in as great bounty, as they in devotion, gave them this advice: God forbid it should be so (said he) you judged well once, and to change that again, is not good. This, saith our Historian, was Authority sufficient to suppress the Priests, who now with their wives went down the wind. And indeed (saith he) to blame they were, to suspect this their Iudge, who never was heard to give wrong sentence before. Speed. Chron. pag. 355. Saving the great worth and learning of the Historian, I believe, That this was not the first false judgement given by this Judge; and I believe it will not be the last, as afterwards shall be declared. Spondanus in his Epitome of the Annals of Baronius, in the year 975, doth differ somewhat from this relation. These are his words: Quâ de re cum à Sancto Dunstano Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo Synodus Wintoniae congregata esset, deprecante ipso rege ac plerisque Episcopis, ut iidem Clerici restituerentur, mirandum illud contigit ut Imago Cruc [...]fixi in edito Ecclesiae affixa, audientibus cunctis dixerit, Non fiet, non fiet; judicastis bene mutaretis non bene. Quod omnes Clericos eorumque fautores confusos reddidit & lingues. It appeareth by this passage, That King Edward surnamed the Martyr, and many Bishops with him, did intercede very much, that the Ministers might have their wives restored unto them; and when all were in a suspence what answer should be made, this wonder happened, that the Crucifix determined the contrary: [Page] and so the Priests were confounded, and made speechless. After these things were done, the Ministers were not yet satisfied; therefore the matter was brought again to Councel, and a great Assembly congregated at Cleve in Wilishire, whither repaired the Prelates, and most of the Estates of the Land, besides Gentlemen, and of the Commons an innumerable sort. This Synod being set, and the Controversie propounded, a hot and a sharp Disputation insued, and was maintained for a while with many bitter invectives. But whether through the weakness of the foundation, or the overpress of weight, or both; the Joysts of the upper-Loft, wherein the Councel was held, suddenly brake, and down fell the floor, with all the people thereon; whereof many were hurt, and some slain out-right. Onely Archbishop Dunstan, then President and Mouth for the Monks, remained unhurt: For the Post whereon his Chair was set, stood (and not without miracle) wholly untouched. And hereupon the Historian concludeth in these words: Thus by this fall, fell the Cause of the Secular Priests, and the Peoples affections were drawn to the Monks: and the liberty of the Ministers to accompany their wives, was now taken away. Spondanus saith, that this Councel was held at Calne; but there is no great difference: Calne the Market-town, and Cleve a small Village are so near together. In that Councel, saith he, Mirandum illud accidit cunctis adversariis vel extinctis vel contritis, solus Dunstanus qui Synodo praesidebat illaesus evaserit: That is, All of the adverse party who were for the Marriage of Ministers, being either killed out-right, or sorely brused; onely Dunstan, the President of the Synod, remained without hurt.

This is a true relation of the fact, and most Historians do agree. Now let us come to inquire, by what power and by what efficacy these things were done. And for my part, I think it was very just with God, to forsake the Christian world, and to deliver them u [...]to strong delusions to believe lies, because they had forsaken his truth; and because the Ministers were so base, as to suffer their Cause to be tryed by the Rood or Crucifix, it was very just that they should further be [Page] deluded by the power of Satan. What shall we think of the Oracles among the Heathen; of the answer of the Gentile gods; of the power which the Devil hath in those Countries that lye wholly under gross Idolatries? There is no doubt to be made, but that Satan had great power to deceive the world by wonders. See August. in his Book Of the City of God, Lib. 10. Cap. 16. The Scripture also is very plain to the same purpose▪ If there arise among you a Prophet, or a Dreamer of Dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder; and the sign or the wonder cometh to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them: Thou shalt not hearken to the words of that Prophet, or Dreamer of Dreams; for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether you will love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, Deut. 13. ver. 1, 2, 3. In which words it is plain, That the Truth may be set up in the Church of God, according to the written Word; and yet for the tryal of the sincerity of men, God may suffer seducers to arise to do great things. We have a large experience of this in all the times of the Beasts Kingdome: For when our Saviour saith, There shall arise false Christs, and false Prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect, Mat. 24. 24. these things are specially spoken of the times of the Kingdome of Anti-Christ, when the Devil by the permission of God, had great power given to him to deceive the world by wonders and signs, and great variety of Revelations. From hence I am induced to believe, That the answer given by the Crucifix at Winchester was reall, and it was done by more then an ordinary power. Let us consider the meaning of that place in the Prophecy of Zachary: Ask ye of the Lord rain in the time of the latter rain; so the Lord shall make bright clouds, and give showers of rain, to every one grass in the field: For the Idols have spoken vanity, and the Diviners have seen a lie, and have told false dreams, Chap. 10. ver. 1, 2. Here I demand, How could the Idols speak vanity? The word in the Original is Teraphim, Idols made after the similitude of a Man. With [Page] these Idolaters did usually consult in matters of great difficulty: And Mr. Pemble upon the place, saith, It is very probable, th [...]t the Devil used the like feats to cozen the Iews, as he did to the Greeks and other simple Gentiles. And we may say the same touching the answer of the Rood: God in his just judgement might suffer apostatizing Christians to be deceived by the immediate delusions of Satan, because they did not receive the truth in the love of it, that they might be saved. But of all others, that place of the Apostle is most proper to the purpose, The Spirit speaketh expresly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of Devils, speaking lies in hypocrisie, having their Consciences seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving, 1 Tim. 4. 1, 2, 3. Seeing the Apostle doth here so plainly speak of the Apostacy of the latter times, and of the Prohibition of Marriage, Meats, and other lawful things; all do agree in it, That he pointeth to the times of Antichrists Kingdome. Onely the great Question lieth here, Why the Prohibition of Marriage is called [...], A Doctrine of Devils. Mr. Mede in his learned Treatise concerning the Apostacy of the later times, thinketh that this is Genitivus materiae, a Genitive case of the matter; because Daemons and the Souls departed, are so much worshipped in the Papal Kingdome. Though it is true in the general, That Daemon-worship (as he saith) is used in that Kingdome; yet it is not the meaning of this Text: For here is plainly Genitivus efficientis, a Genitive case of the efficient cause; for the Doctrine of the Prohibition of Marriage is, [...] A Doctrine of Devils, because it was brought into the Church by the suggestions of those impure Spirits, to cast miserable mortals upon all occasions of sin. If therefore we do determine the case, that the Devil in the Rood did utter this voice touching the Marriage of Ministers, God forbid it should be so; it doth singularly agree with the words of the Apostle, when he speaketh of the Prohibition of Marriage in Antichristian times, that it is [...] ▪ A Doctrine of Devils. [Page] For to say truly, The Prohibition of Marriage, as it did continue for many hundred years together, so it had its immediate original from the delusion of Satan. Now for the fall of the house at Cleve or Calne, we may probably believe▪ That God might suffer the Devil to do great wonders (for so Spondanus calls it, mirandum) to deceive the world: What else should be the meaning of that place, Rev. 20? He layed hold on the Dragon that old Serpent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the Bottomless Pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the Nations no more, ver. 2, 3. By this he doth tacitely imply, That the whole time of the Beasts Kingdome, was a time of the loosing of Satan, in which God was preased to give him leave to do great wonders to deceive the world; and therefore in the two last Verses of the former Chapter, these words are expressed: And the Beast was taken, and with him the false Prophet, that wrought Miracles before him, with which he deceived them who had received the Mark of the Beast, and them that worshipped his Image: These both were cast alive into a Lake of fire burning with brimstone, ver. 20. When this was done, an Angel came down from Heaven with a great Chain in his hand, and bound the Dragon, the old Serpent, that he should deceive the Nations no more. All this plainly declareth, That in Antichristian times, the Devil had freedome to do great wonders to deceive the Nations. If therefore at the fall of the house, they who stood against the Marriage of Ministers were marvellously delivered, and those that stood for it were slain out-right, or sorely bruised, we must not wonder at these things: The Devil can do great things to deceive them who forsake the Scriptures, and the known Will of God, to hang upon Visions, Dreams and Revelations. There was a time when the Devil could not touch a hair of Iobs head: Thou hast made an hedge about him, and his substance is increased in the Land: yet we see when God did give leave, the Devil could cause fire to come down from heaven to devour his sheep; he could blow down the house upon his Children by a violent wind; he could do any thing when he was let loose [Page] And so truly the times of Antichrist were the times of the loosing of Satan: God did permit him to do great things to deceive that kinde of people, who had forsaken the plain way to Salvation written in the Word, to look after dispensations of a higher light, by Visions, Dreams and Revelations.

Now then, to make Application of all these things to our times; my speech and exhortation is to them who amongst us have departed from Ordinances, and from Scriptures, and are now for extraordinary Revelations: my earnest desire is to them, That they would lay these things to heart. If they go on, if they build upon such uncertain grounds, let them seriously consider, whether they may not be deluded by the power of Satan; and whether God in his just Judgment may not deliver them over to believe lies. I will not make mention of that Sect which goeth under the Name of the Quakers; what they are, and who they are, God knows: I do desire to contain my self in such things as I have some experience of. There have been some friends of my familiarity heretofore, whom I did conceive to be people of good hope; these, as I have observed, have departed first from the Ministery, and then have come to slight the Written Word; and then last of all, to hang upon Revelations, and extraordinary Enthusiasms of the Spirit. I have seen a Book scattered abroad by these men, it beareth the Title of Gerard Winstanley his new Law of Righteousness. The argument of the Treatise, is, That the Propriety of Goods is the Curse laid upon the Creature; That all things should lie in common; and that the whole earth should be brought to a Publick Treasury. For probation of this, as he doth make some mention of the practise of the Apostles in the Primitive times, and that which shall be in the future glorious estate of the Church: so for the more special confirmation of this, he doth depend upon an extraordinary Revelation, as it is expressed, pag. 57. In the beginning of the Treatise, he doth distinguish three Ministrations; the Ministration of Moses, of Christ, and of the Spirit: And, saith he, as the worshippers in Moses Ministration envied [Page] those that worshipped the Son of Man: So those who now worship Christ at a distance in their several Congregations and Forms, and are most zealous, these are the bitterest enemies to the Ministration of Christ in the Spirit, pag. 14. But further, when he comes to expound himself concerning the Ministration of the Spirit, he slights all outward Forms, and doth look onely to inward Teachings. Now I will speak a word or two to the followers of this way: I will not say in positive terms, that they are led by the delusions of Satan; neither will I judge of their final estate; they stand or fall to their own Master: yet nevertheless, I may be so bold (seeing they have so often in their mouths the Whore of Babylon, and, Come out of Babylon my people; and that every thing is Antichristian, not onely in M [...]nistery, Magistracy, but also in the propriety of goods) to desire them to look home to their own hearts, whether they are not most Antichristian themselves, or whether that Spirit which did so strongly deceive the Antichristian world, doth not deceive them also, when they do believe and profess such things as are directly and diametrally contrary to Scripture. For these men, though I do desire to speak moderately of them; yet in some particulars they are delivered over to deep delusions, when they go so palpably against the written Word, and pretend extraordinary Revelation. It were good in this case, that they would judge themselves, that they do not prove in the event the greatest promoters of the Kingdome of the Beast. I am perswaded, that Gregory the Great was in the main a godly and zealous man; yet it appeareth by his Dialogues, that he did run into foul errors, into Idolatry, into wil-worship, and the like, when he left the Scriptures to follow Revelations. This is the only word which I do desire to speak to them.

Secondly, here is also a word of Admonition, for all those who endevour in these times to extinguish Book-learning. For though it is a most certain truth, and much to be lamented, that men have looked too much to Scholarship, and have made an Idol of it; for they have not regarded the inward teachings of the Spirit in the heart, nor the Spiritual understanding of the Mystery of Salvation, which are the principal [Page] qualifications to prepare and fit men for the Ministery. These things, I confess, have been too much slighted, and the slighting and neglect of them hath been a great cause of hurt to the Church of God, and damage to the Souls of men. This shall never be denied by me. For how may we probably conceive, that a Minister will come home with the Demonstration and Evidence of the Spirit (so powerfully at least) to the Conscience of the Hearer, when he himself is altogether a stranger to these inward workings? How can he so effectually bring home the lost Sons of men to Christ, when he himself never had a true feeling of his lost condition? They must needs then run into a great extream, who dote so much upon Secular Learning, and do neglect the chiefest thing. But yet on the other side, they go as far out of the way, who would have this kinde of learning to be extinguished in the Church of God. This I much fear may be one mean to throw the world back again upon Visions, Dreams, and Revelations, to set up the Kingdome of Antichrist once more. Now whereas it is alledged, That there were excellent Preachers in the Apostles times, when there were no Universities, nor was there any Humane Learning acquired by study. Though this should be granted, those extraordinary Revelations are now ceased. Therefore we must be contented, to go in the ordinary way, and not to look for those extraordinary distributions, which were in the first times. They who are for the dissolving of Universities, and for the total cashiering of Humane Learning, let them stay untill there be a renovation and a return of these extraordinary gifts unto the Churches. Some are of opinion, that such times shall come: if that be true, let them be patient till they do come. However, as the case doth stand for the present, I believe they who take away Humane Learning, do what in them lies to reduce the Antichristian times. All do agree, that in these times the Church was in an eclipse or great darkness. Now let us inquire after the time of the emersion, how the Church came out; and the time of the immersion, how she was brought into this darkness? For the time of the emersion, most do pitch upon it, that she [Page] waded out of obscurity at the time of Luther, when the eternal Gospel began to be preached to every Kindred, Tongue, and Nation. Yet if we seriously consider the times, we shall finde, That the light began to break out, and the day began to dawn, at the taking of Constantinople, in the year 1453. For the Greek Empire being destroyed, and that Eye of the Christian world being put out, it pleased the Lord by this means to cast many learned Grecians into this Western World. This gave occasion to the reviving of the Languages; and the reviving of the Languages brought in the study of the Scriptures, and other ancient Authors; and things began to be cast into another mould. By this means the more learned sort were brought off from the Doctrine of the School-men, and the more zealous ones from Visions, Dreams, and Revelations; and so the world was prepared to receive another kinde of light. Not to mention the troubles which Reuchlin, Pagnin, and Arias Montanus did meet withall, it is manifest by the Epistles of Erasmus, how much the Monks and Friars were inraged at him: He tells us how in England, France, Spain, Italy, and every-where in a manner, they did both publickly and privately inveigh against him. And it went for a received Maxime among many, That Erasmus did more hurt then Luther. How could that be? He revived the Tongues, he was an instrument to bring men to the study of the Scriptures, and ancient Authors: and by those amoeniores literae (which he so often speaks of) he did bring the world from Monkish darkness, and foolish Revelations. Campanella therefore calls the War betwixt the Protestants and the Papists, Grammaticale Bellum, a Grammarian War; because by the study of the Languages, by the Greek and the Hebrew Tongues, the Reformation of the Church was introduced. And it is the sentence of Melancthon, Non aliam ad veterem barbariem reducendam magis compendiariam esse viam, quam si studia linguarum interirent. There is no more compendious way to reduce the ancient barbarism, then if the studies of Languages should peresh, Orat. tom. 4. pag. 465. As light then as men make of Humane Learning in these times, it was one chief mean, under God, [Page] to bring the world out of Antichristian darkness. And it is the judgement of so id men, that if it should be totally abolished, it would occasion the return of that darkness once again.

Now let us come to consider the Stories and the time of the immersion, how the Church came first under this darkness. It is clear from the process of the aforementioned Discourse, that about the time of the Emperor Phocas, the Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome was publickly proclaimed, the Scriptures began to be slighted; and the Traditions of the Church immoderately extol'd. Now here is a great demand, How is it possible that the Church could apostatize and degenerate so far in one or two Centuries, seeing in the age of the Christian Caesars, when Chrysostome, Hierom, Augustine, and others lived, there was so much light? The answer is clear, The Goths, Hunnes and Vandals, and other barbarous Nations, came out of the North, overturned Churches, burned Libraries, overthrew Schools of Learning; and by this means the world was organized and fashioned to receive the Kingdome of Antichrist, and all that whole body of false Doctrine, that should be set up in the Consciences of ignorant people, by Visions, Dreams and Revelations. From all which I do conclude, If there should be a total abrogation of Book-learning, it would be a compendious way & means to bring the Church into its former darkness: For as experience sheweth, That the taking away of that Learning, was one chief me [...]n to introduce Antichristian darkness: So the restoring and renewing of it again, was one principal mean of the recovery of the former light.

Thirdly, they do symbolize and come in the nearest similitude to the true formality of Antichristianism, who do build their Corsciences upon men, and do make men the Lords of their Faith. In this sense we are to take the words of our Saviour, when he saith, Mat. 23. 9. Call no man your Father upon the earth; for one is your Father, which is in heaven: Neither be ye called Masters; for one is your Master, even Christ. Some are so void of understanding, as to take these words according [Page] to the letter; as though the practise of Christianity should extinguish civil relations and distinctions betwixt man and man. But these are idle conceits, we are to look to the scope of our Saviours meaning: The Jews in his time were divided into divers Factions, into the Sects of the Pharisees, Sadduces, Herodians, Gaulonites, and the like. Now it was the ambition of those times, for every man to have his Rabbi, and each Rabbi to have his Scholars depend upon him, as the Lord of their Faith. In this sense our Saviour speaks, that they should call no man Rabbi, Rabbi; and gives this reason, One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are Brethren. In these words he doth especially point at the formality of Antichristianism, that should be in the Popes Kingdome. For though there is much ado made betwixt the Criticks in the Greek, Hebrew, and Syriack Tongues, about the true Origination of the word Papa; yet I finde, That all do agree in the signification, that it is as much in sense as Spiritual Father. Now then, if we look to the practise of the Romish Church, we shall finde it apparent, That the Body of the People do depend upon their Teachers, as their Spiritual Fathers; and all the Spiritual Fathers of the lower degree, do depend upon the Bishop of Rome as the Father of all. And herein that Hierarchy doth directly oppose the true Church of Christ, as it is described, Eph. 4. ver. 4. 5, 6. There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as you are called into one hope of your calling: one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. The Apostle further speaketh, how the Mystery of Iniquity did begin to work in the Church of Corinth: Every one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of Apollo, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ: Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the Name of Paul? 1 Cor. 1. 12, 13. It appears by this, That the Unity of that Church was broken by many divisions; several Believers had their several Rabbies, on whom they did depend: and though Paul and Cephas would not take so much upon them, to be the Lords of peoples Faith, and the Heads of Parties; yet the false Apostles did wonderfully affect such a kinde of Title, and too many carnal Christians [Page] in those days were too forward to pin their Faith upon other mens sleeves, and to come in the nearest formasity to the Antichristian practise in these last times. The world is too apt to fall into Divisions, and to say, I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, and I am of Cephas. And in this, men must needs symbolize with them, who make the Bishop of Rome the Lord of their Faith, and do profess themselves to be Members of his Church. The building upon men then, is that which doth bring any people in the nearest resemblance to Antichristianisme; and the more they do this, the more or less are they Antichristian. And this I conceive to be one chief reason in Scripture, why the falls of the most eminent Saints are left upon record, Because others should not dote too much upon them. Moses did anger the Lord at the Waters of Meribah and Massah; he died before he entred into the Land of Canaan, and the Angel of the Lord did bury him in obscurity: No man knew of his Sepulchre, because the Children of Israel should not go a-whoring after it, Deut. 34. 6. And in the New Testament, among all the Apostles, the faults of none are left so upon publick record, as those of Peter: And what is the reason of all this? Doubtless the Lord did foresee, what Idolatry the Church of Rome would commit, in owning his Universal Headship over the Church, as that the Power of the Keyes was given into his hand alone. For these causes I believe the great falls of Peter are left upon record, that the Papists should not say, I am of Peter, I am of the Bishop of Rome the Head of the Church, by succession from Peter. Cyprian and some of the Churches of Africa, fell into another extreme: They thought, if a man had denied the truth in time of persecution, he should never be received into the Ministery again, but should stand in the Body of the People, as one of them onely. I cannot but in the general approve the strictness of the Discipline, especially against the faults and corruptions of Ministers, who should be Lights and Examples to others: But that they should be so strictly dealt with all, never to be received, no not upon terms of the greatest Repentance, Humiliation, and godly Sorrow; I may say in this [Page] case, That Cyprian, and the rest of the African Fathers, were too Canonical. And it was well for S. Peter, that he was no Minister in Africa, when he denied his Master in the High-Priests Hall: Surely, by the rigour of such Principles, they would never have received him into Office again. But the Lord Christ had a better end in the permission of his fall: Simon (saith he) Satan hath desired to winnow thee as wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith should not fail, Luke 22. 31. Here then the reason is clearly shewed, why Satan did prevail so against Peter, why he was upheld meerly by the Prayer of Christ; the reason is this, When thou art converted, strengthen thy Brethren God in great wisdome doth suffer the most eminent Ministers to fall greatly, to pluck down their pride, that they may be more humble, and that their bowels of affection and tenderness, may be greater towards the lost Sons of men; and that they should preach the Grace of God more tenderly and more feelingly, to the winning and saving of miserable Souls. These were the causes of the fall of Peter: and one special reason is also here to be remembred, God did permit him to fall so foully, to prevent that sin of Antichristianity (as I may so speak) which should be so general in the last times. Now the sin of Antichristianity, is to make men the Lords of our Faith, to build upon Peter, or the Pope, the pretended Successor of Peter, in matters of Faith and Salvation.

Fourthly, they do symbolize with the Great Antichrist, who use a lawful Authority, Antichrist-like, to serve their own pride, ambition, and external glory. The Apostle saith, I would have written unto the Churches; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence, suffered us not, 3 Joh. ver. 9. Here then, seeing he did love to have the pre-eminence, we may probably conceive, That it was in the lawful Government of the Church; there was an affectation of precedency even in those dayes. And in what times may not the like spirit of pride be in some men, when they are put into place of Rule? We reade also in the Directions of Paul concerning the choice of a Bishop, that he must not be a Novice, lest being swollen up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the Devil, 1 Tim. 3. 6. [Page] It is clear from these words, as also from the whole Epistle, that there must be a Government in the Church of God: and whosoever S. Paul's Bishop is, he must have the principal stroke in the Government. For these words are immediately added: If a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care for the Church of God? The Church of God is Christs house; and the Bishops, Elders, and Ministers of the Church, have their Office by delegation from him, and not from any other Authority. Now such a lawful power as this is, men may sinfully abuse and pervert, to the setting up of their own greatness; and therefore the Apostle doth give this caveat, Not a Novice, lest being swollen up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the Devil. By a Novice, he doth not intend a man yong in years, for Timothy himself was but yong; but he meaneth a beginner in the School of Christ, a Novice in manners: such a one he would not have set over the House of God, lest being swollen up with pride, he fall into the same sin, and the same condemnation as the Devil did, being sometimes an Angel of light. From this instance then it is clear, That a lawful Power may be used in an Antichristian manner. Such beginnings of pride, the Apostle probably might see in those dayes: and these might occasion him to say, The Mystery of Iniquity doth already work. Now whereas some do impute it to this or that Government, that it would be as Tyrannical and Antichristian, as any that went before: Let them not deceive themselves: The Government may be Christs; yet if any do use it to serve their own Pride, Tyranny, or Lordliness, the fault is their own: It lies in the corruption of the Person, but not in the nature of the Office. The superiority of Parents over their Children, of Husbands over their Wives, of Magistrates over the People, are all by Divine Institution; yet the persons may so demean themselves, that they may tyrannize, and if we may so speak it, may Antichristianize. That is a remarkable passage which the Lord hath, concerning Stewards in a lawful power; If that evil servant shall say, My Lord deferreth his coming; and shall begin to smite his fellow-servants, and shall eat and drink [Page] with the drunken: the Lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and will cut him in sunder, and appoint him his portion with hypocrites, Mat. 24. 48, 49. By a Servant or Steward, we may understand Magistrate, Minister, or any other whom the Lord hath intrusted with a lawful Power in Church or Common-wealth. Now if they use this Power illegally and tyrannically; if Ministers cast those out of the Church, who should be kept in; if they keep in those who should be cast out; if they abuse the Power of the Keyes which Christ hath committed to their custody; if they use the Discipline of the Church, meerly as a Rod to smite their fellow-servants: In such a case as this is, we may say, That in respect of their persons, the Elders of the Church may resemble the Great Antichrist, and may symbolize with him in his Pride and Tyranny; yet for all this, the Office is Christs, and it is from God by divine Institution. It were then a very profitable point, that the Friends and Followers of the Separation, who to justifie their practise, do call this Antichristian, and that Antichristian, would distinguish betwixt the several forms and kindes of Antichristianity. For as I have made it appear by the course of this Chapter, some things are directly Antichristian, and other things are onely Antichristian by consequence and reduction: So also some things are Antichristian in respect of the Office it self, and other things onely have the form of Antichristianity, meerly because of the evil carriage of the person in a lawful Office. These things are specially to be noted. And so much concerning the several particulars which are truly Antichristian by Analogie and Reduction. Let us now go to the third point,

CHAP. XIV. What those things are which are [...] onely by the position of some Circumstances, as they are truly Christian by the position of others. The Conclusion of the whole.

[Page]

THere be two things especially, that here need to be inquired into. The first is concerning the Compulsive Power of the Supreme Magistrate in matters of Religion, whether that be Antichristian yea or no? The second is, Whether it be Antichristian, to maintain the future glory and splendor of the Church of Christ upon the Earth? For some do think, that this position will bring us back again to the Riches and Magnificence of the Popish Church. In these two cases we are carefully to distinguish: for such may be the Circumstances, that these things may symbolize with the Antichristian Patern; and such they may be, that they may set forth, decypher and express that future glory of the Church as it shall be.

First, concerning the Coercive power of the Magistrate, we do then acknowledge his Coercion to be Antichristian, when he shall constrain men to subject their Consciences to those things which are directly contrary to the Laws of Christ. And of this we have largely spoken in this Treatise, when we had occasion to make mention of the two-horned Beast, and of his compelling all men to receive a Mark in their Forehead, and in their Right-hand. There is no doubt to be made, but Compulsion in this case is directly Antichristian. Secondly, Rites and Institutions of Humane Invention, though perhaps they may seem to be more innocent, yet it doth coast too near upon Antichristian Tyranny, to compel the Consciences of men to these things. For the Ceremonies of the Church of England, when they stood in their vigour, men did judge [Page] diversly of them. Some did esteem them to be Antichristian; others did beat them as burthens; and a third sort judged them harmless and inoffensive. But yet among those who did give the fairest Interpretation, there were some who did think it very hard, that men should be compelled, that the godly Ministers should be deprived, and that so many sincere Christians should be subjected to persecution in the Ecclesiastical Courts; that no tears or prayers would prevail, but that they must either yield, or suffer the greatest extremity. The instance of the curious Glasses of Pollio the famous Roman, is well known: It had been better they had been broken, then that the Servant should have been so cruelly beaten. But now that power is laid aside. Thirdly, in points more remote from the foundation, where the Scriptures seem to run as clear for one opinion, as for the other; it is very hard in these lesser scruples, that they who have the power in their hands, should hang the Consciences of other men at their girdles. Oftentimes it may come to pass, that they who have the Authority, have not the Truth on their side; and they who have the Truth in the main, may be dark in some particulars, and may need a better light. In this case then, must they who dissent be compelled to yield, or be censured as Rebels against the Laws of the State? This would be an hard Censure; yet I will not call it directly Antichristian, though the practise may come somewhat too near that method, and may resemble it very much.

But here an Objection may be made concerning the present Heresies which are now in the Land, What should be done to the suppression of these?

I will not enter into the bowels of this Question, it being so largely and learnedly handled by others in several Treatises which are now in the hands of all men. My desire is, onely to keep close to the point of Compulsion, so far forth onely as it hath the formality of Antichristianism. Therefore as to the present Sects, I think it necessary to distinguish between the persons who are Leaders meerly upon Principles of Conscience, and those who are led by them. For the persons [Page] who are Leaders, it is expedient also to distinguish betwixt their first Principles, and the absurd Deductions and Consequences drawn from those Principles. Now for those persons who are Leaders of others meerly upon Principles of Conscience, I think it necessary, that Compulsion should be more sparingly used, and greater care should be to give satisfaction. For some Doctrines I believe are now on foo [...], which have tolerable Principles, though they have ill Consequences. I will give one instance: The Doctrine of the Millenaries for many hundred years, from the times of Hierom and Augustine, hath gone for an error in the Church of God. But to speak truly, the error lies in the Consequences, and in the ill deductions of falshoods from true Principles: For in it self it is true, that Christ shall reign upon the Earth a thousand years, and this reign shall begin at the dissolution of the Antichristian Kingdome. This is the scope of Rev. 20. and it is a hard thing to compel a man to deny such a truth, so plainly delivered in the Scriptures. Yet I must needs confess, as heretofore, so now, men have mixed this truth, with many falsities of their own invention. Yea, there is scarce an opinion which conscientious men do follow, but there is some one Principle or other, which doth chiefly incline them to be of that belief. It were good then, that the conscientious at all seasons were cited to make Confession of their Faith, and to render a Reason of the hope that is in them; and that there should be a more moderate use of Compulsion. But this Question I leave to the large Disputes of others, who have copiously handled the subject. Now we will come to the other Point, where Coercive Power is necessarily to be used.

Secondly, the use of the Coercive Power is so far from being Tyrannical or Antichristian, that it is most necessary for the suppression of Blasphemies and Reproaches against the known Truth of God: For some fall into a contrary extream, they think all Compulsion to be illegal. And hereupon they are for an absolute, boundless, and universal Toleration of all Opinions; never considering the Circumstances, but desperately [Page] passing from one extream to another. If they did well consider the matter, there is no ground for Toleration of Blaspemous Opinions, rightly so called: For perhaps some, either through passion, or ignorance, or both, may bestow such an opprobious Title upon the Truth. We have a clear instance for this, in the glorious state of the Church mentioned by Zachary: And it shall come to pass, when any shall yet Prophesie, then his father and his mother that begat him, shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest lyes in the Name of the Lord. And his father & his mother that begat him, shall thrust him through when he prophesieth, Za [...]h. 13. 3. It is clear, that these things are spoken concerning the glorious times of the Church at the call of the Jews; when the Lord shall pour upon that Nation the Spirit of Grace and supplication; when they shall look to the Messiah whom they have crucified; when there shall be a Fountain opened to the House of David, and to the Inhabitants of Ierusalem, for sin and for uncleanness. Their chief sin, is their enmity against the Gospel, and the justification of their Ancestors for the Crucifying of Christ. When this sin shall be mourned over and pardoned, then the Lord doth promise, That all Idols shall be taken out of the land, and such zeal shall be to the Truth, that the Parents themselves, rather then fail, should concur to the coercion of such a Son, who should prophesie lyes in the Name of the Lord. But there is a great question touching this expression, His father and mother that begat him, shall thrust him through. This cannot be taken according to the letter, for it belongs only to the Magistrate to have the power of life and death. We are to expound this phrase, according to the analogie of the Old Testament, where the Parents were to bring their Son to the Elders of the Gate. And so proportionably in the times of the New Testament, when all other means should be tryed in vain, the Parents themselves shall bring their Son to the Civil Magistrate, to suffer, rather then the truth it self should suffer. Many have endeavored to avoid the force of this Scripture, and to illude it by distinctions; but for my part, I cannot see but it is of great force against fundamental errors, rightly and truly so [Page] called, which tend to the apparent and manifest ruine of the Doctrine of Salvation, and to the great hurt of the Souls of men. Though the affections of Parents are tender towards their Children, yet in those wonderful times, the Prophet doth insinuate, that they shall be more tender to the truth, and to the welfare of the Church of God. In a comparative sense then, it is said, That his father and mother that begat him, shall thrust him through. Further, though a Toleration may be granted to tender Consciences, yet the profane, the careless, and those that never minde the Salvation of their Souls, ought not to be left to their free indifferency; the Magistrate should use Com [...]ulsion to them, to bring them to the Publick Worship. For if we travel through the Land in the length and breadth thereof, we cannot probably presume any other, but that the greater part would desire rather to live like Heathens, without God, and without Christ in the world. If that be true which is spoken of some places, it is much to be lamented, That the people are left destitute of the means of their Salvation. Let the richer sort pay no Tythes, or, that which is equivalent, have them at an easie rate: Let the Youth have their pleasures and pastimes upon the Lords-day; I believe it matters not much with these, whether there be any publick Worship or no. If it be wholly at their choyce, the Church, or the Publick-place of Meeting, may well be left for Jack-Daws, or such like Birds, to build in: So little do they minde the means of their Salvation. In such a case, I conceive, the Supreme Magistrate, the Keeper of both the Tables, the Vicegerent of Christ upon the Earth, is to compel men to come to the Publick-places of Worship. So did the godly Kings of Iudah; and so have the Christian States and Governments ever done; they have demolished the Monuments of Idolatry, established the Publick Ordinances, and have compelled the more ignorant and rude sort to wait upon the means of their Salvation. And this I take to be the meaning of the Parable, When the Lord sent forth his servants to invite guests to the Wedding; go out into the high-ways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled, Luke 14. ver. 23. [Page] Here two Questions are to be demanded: The first is, What is meant by the guests that did lie in the high-ways and the hedges? Secondly, Why should compulsion be used rather toward them, then to the two former kindes? For the guests that did lie in the hedges, we must necessarily understand the ruder and more ignorant sort of people, as the wanderers and beggars from door to door. Of these we cannot give a reason, what rule of Marriage they do observe, what difference there is betwixt father and childe: we may probably presume, that the greater part of them live without God, and without Christ, without the consideration of Heaven or Hell, or the future state of the Soul hereafter. These are the guests that lie in the high-ways and in the hedges. Now why is it that Compulsion should be used towards these, rather then the other two kinde of guests? The reason I take it is this, That they have not a tolerable discretion to judge of that which is good for their Salvation; and therefore compulsion should be used towards such brutish kinde of men. And though they would lose their own Souls by what lies in them, yet the Magistrate or the Minister should not lose them. For the two former kinde of guests, the one was of a more civil education: for being invited to the Marriage, they did all plead their necessary imployments; one had married a wife, another had bought five yoke of Oxen, and a third had bought a parcel of Land. The inordinate affection to some one worldly thing or other, is the true cause why men do not come to Christ, to take him as their Lord and Husband. Though they have a minde to come, yet they are loth to deny such a particular profit or pleasure that is dear to them. Now concerning these, we reade, That the servant was not to compel them to come to the Wedding; only the Lord said, None of these shall taste of my Supper. They who refuse the offer of Christ, for the injoyment of any worldly thing, it is just with Christ to refuse them. The second kinde of guests were the blinde, the lame, the poor, the maimed, who did lie in the streets and lanes of the City: These, out of the sense of their own misery, did come to the feast, and there needed no [Page] compulsion. So then, the force of the whole Parable is this, That the ruder sort of people, which are under the care and custody of the Magistrate, are in a special manner to be compelsed to Worship God, and to wait upon the means of their Salvation. But lest any should think that this Parabolical Divinity is not of such force, as to conclude the Point, we have many other places to prove, That those that are in Authority have a power to compel those that are under them to worship God, and to call upon the Name of the Lord. What else should be the meaning of those words in the fourth Commandment, In it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter; thy man servant, nor thy maid servant, thy cattel, nor thy stranger which is within thy gates? Exod. 20. 10. Here we may demand the reason, why these words are extended to Children and Servants? What have Parents and Masters to do with their sanctifying of the Sabbath? All Expositors upon the place do give this reason, That the Parent or the Master do not rightly worship God themselves, unless they take care that they also do worship him, who are under their Authority and Jurisdiction. The command that concerns the duty of Servants, is given to Masters. That is therefore a most excellent speech of Augustine, Tom. 2. Ep. 50. where speaking of the duty of Kings, out of the second Psalm, he hath these words: Therefore (saith he) how do Kings serve the Lord in fear and trembling? No other way, but by prohibiting and punishing those things which are done against the commands of God. He doth serve God after one manner as he is a man, and after another manner as he is a King. As he is a man, he serveth him by living religiously; as he is a King, he serveth him by establ [...]shing such kinde of Laws with convenient rigour, as do command things that are just, and forbid things unjust. Even as Hezekias served the Lord, by destroying the Groves, and the Temples of Idols, and the High-places, which were built against the Commandments of God: As Josiah served the Lord, by doing the same things which Hezekiah did: As the King of the Ninevites served the Lord, by compelling the whole City to humble themselves, and intreat the face of God. And going on in passages of the [Page] like nature, he concludes with this Epiphonema, In hoc ergo serviunt domino Reges in quantum sunt reges, cum ea faciunt ad serviendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges. In this therefore Kings do serve the Lord, so far forth as they are Kings, when they do those things for his service, which otherwise they cannot do but in relation as they are Kings. This passage, worthy to be written in letters of Gold, is cited by Zanchy in his Work concerning the Attributes of God, in the Preface to Casimire, Palatine of the Rhyne. There he sheweth, That it is the duty of a Christian Prince, principally to take care in his Dominion, that Religion be taught out of the pure Word of God, according to the first Principles of the Faith, which others call, The Analogie of Faith. And the pure Word of God being established, he saith also, That it concerneth the Prince or the Ruler, to take care that the people wait upon the means of their Salvation. And this is that which we have so largely stood upon, when we have spoken of the Reign of Christ upon the Earth, in sundry parts of this Treatise; we have not followed the Conceit of them who are for a personal Reign. This noteth onely the coming in of the States, Governments, and Dominions of the Earth to own the Gospel, and to set it up as a Regent-Law. To my understanding then, this matter is plainly expressed, Ier. 3. 17. At that time shall they call Ierusalem the Throne of the Lord; and all the Nations shall be gathered unto it to the Name of the Lord to Ierusalem: Neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart. In these words he doth speak of the glorious state of the Church in the latter times: It cannot be meant of the Jewish Church, before the coming of Christ; nor of that literal kinde of worship, as it appeareth ver. 16. They shall say no more, The Ark of the Covenant of the Lord; neither shall it come to minde, neither shall they remember it, neither shall they visit it, neither shall that be done any more. It is manifest then, that these things are spoken concerning the happy estate of the Church in the times of the New Testament. But in what part of the times of the New Testament, must these things be fulfilled? It is clear from the Context, That he speaketh [Page] of the call of the Jews: In those days the house of Iudah shall walk with the house of Israel, ver. 18. This is meant of the glory of the Church in the latter days. But what are the means that the Lord hath sanctified, to the introducing of this glory? They are expressed in these words, I will give them Pastors after mine own heart. He doth speak of the Civil Pastor in the Common-wealth, as well as the Spiritual Pastor in the Church. David was a Pastor after the heart of Christ himself, when he chose him to feed and govern the People of Israel. Such Pastors there shall be in the latter times; and by such the Lord will bring in the glory of the Church. The like passage is in the Prophecy of Isaiah, when he speaketh of the Churches glory that shall be: I will make all thy officers peace, and thy exactors righteousness, Isa. 60. 17. The word in the Original is, [...] all thy visitation peace: It noteth the visitation of the Prince, as a Nursing Father, that hath care of the Church. And further it is added, Thine exactors righteousness; the word in the Original is, [...] a Taskmaster, one that driveth on the work; which implieth, as there shall be Magistrates, so there shall be use of a Coercive Power in those glorious times. And therefore this passage is immediately added, Violence shall be no more heard in thee: The Magistrates shall themselves be so holy and righteous, that they shall not oppress, and tyrannize; and they shall also be so impartial and sincere, in the use of the Sword, that they shall keep down and suppress all exorbitant and lawless courses. I have the more carefully noted this Point, because many in the times that we now live, are of opinion, That all Coercion and Compulsion in matters of Religion, is absolutely to be laid aside. And because they reade, when the Beast did bear rule, that he did compel all the world to receive a Mark; and that none might buy nor sell, but they that had the Mark in their Forehead, and in their Right-hand: thereupon they gather, That all Coercion in matters of Religion, is after the Antichristian form. And because they would stand far enough from that Patern, they think it best, and most comporting with the future glory of the Church, to leave all to a boundless Toleration, Nay, some learned men of good note have gone [Page] so far, that they look upon the Edicts of Constantine, and the succeeding Princes, as upon the Bottom-stones of the Tower of Babel. And their ground is this, Because the Laws which the aforementioned Princes did make, for the suppressing of Blasphemies and Idolatries, were afterward perverted, and turned against the true Members of Christ, in all Antichristian times. We willingly yield, That great care is to be used in this matter; yet withall we are to consider, That the use of the Coercive Power, as it is truly Christian by the Position of some Circumstances, may be Antichristian by the Position of others: the Circumstances do vary the case. The Papists are not Antichristian in this, as they compel men to come to the Publick Worship of God; for some godless and wretched men would never worship God, nor call upon his Name: but their Antichristianity lieth in this, as they compel men to an Idolatrous Will-worship of their own devising. They are not Antichristian in that, as they hold the Government of the Church to be Monarchical, or that there is one Oecumenical Bishop of all: so Christ is the true Head of the Church, and the great Bishop of our Souls, 1 Pet. 2. 25. and Chap. 5. v. 3. But their Antichristianism lieth in this, as they make the Bishop of Rome Universal Bishop, and do compel all men to be subject to his Laws, as to the Laws of Christ. We must distinguish the Coercive Power; for it may be either Christian or Antichristian, as the Circumstances do stand. Nebuchadnezzar did set up an Image, and commanded all the States of his Empire, under pair of death, to fall down and worship it. In this act of Compulsion, he did come in the nearest resemblance to the Beast in the Revelation, and was no doubt a Type and Figure of the Antichrist that was to come. But this doth not hold in every kinde; for afterward we reade, that the same Nebuchadnezzar did make a Decree, That every Nation and Language that should speak any thing against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, should be cut in pieces. In this case we cannot say, That the exercise of the Compulsory Power is Antichristian; unless we will make it Antichristianism, to restrain Idolaters, that they should not blaspheme the Name of the [Page] true God. I might here take occasion to make mention of the Law made by the King of Nineveh, and his Nobles, That all under that Government should fast, and pray; and that they should turn every one from the evil of his ways. Though here was the use of the Compulsory Power, yet none can say, that they did symbolize with Antichrist, in his Tyranny over the Consciences of men. The Lord did turn from the greatness of his wrath; and the commendation of their Repentance is upon record, in the story of the Gospel. From all that hath been said, we may conclude, As the exercise of the Coercive Power about matters of Religion, may in some cases be Tyrannical and Antichristian; so the practise of it in others, may be holy, and truly Christian: and men do unadvisedly jumble and confound those things together, which should be distinctly laid down.

Secondly, many in these times, think the Doctrine of the Reign of Christ for 1000 years, and the glory of the Church, too nearly to resemble the Antichristian Pomp and Magnificence. Now, say they, these things cannot be applied to the Christian Church; for as long as she is in this vale of tears, she is liable to continual sufferings. And indeed, the practise of men hath been some way sutable to this opinion: for seeing the great riches, splendor, magnificence, and state of the Church of Rome; that her Merchants are the great men of the earth: they have set upon such a way of Reformation, in casting out Romish Idolatries and Superstitions, that they have left the true Church of Christ poor enough. In many places the Maintenance is so bare, that the Ministers have scarcely wherewithall to keep them upon the work. In their Conscience, the glory of the Gospel-Church must stand in penury and want of outward things, because the Romish Antichristian Church hath enjoyed these things in so great plenty. But in this point, to my understanding, they are greatly deceived: for the Prophets, and Iohn in the Revelation, do everywhere speak of the glory of the Church that shall be; that the Kings shall come to the beauty of her rising; that they shall be Nursing-Fathers; that they shall bring their glory to her. Mr. Burroughs [Page] in his Lectures upon Hosea, is very solid and copious upon the point. And if these things be truly explained, we may finde great comfort in the predictions of the Prophets. But let us come to the Book of the Revelation, and we shall there see things more clearly made cut. It was the speech of the Saints at the destruction of the Whore of Babylon, Let us be glad and rejoyce, and give honour to him: for the Marriage of the Lamb is come, and his Wife hath made her self ready, Rev. 19. 7. Now in the next Chapter it is explained, what is meant by the Lambs Wife: These are the words of the Angel to Iohn, v. 9. Come hither, and I will shew thee the Bride, the Lambs Wife. And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great high Mountain, and shewed me that great City, the Holy Ierusalem, descending out of Heaven from God. Here then it is clear, that the New Ierusalem, or the Gospel-Church, in relation to her felicity in the latter days, is termed, [...], that Great City, in opposition to the greatness and magnificence of the Church of Rome, or the Whore of Babylon, which hath everywhere in the Prophecy such a transcendent Title ascribed to her. The scope of the Text doth plainly shew, that the Church upon the Earth shall injoy times of great glory.

But the great Question is, concerning the New Ierusalem, Whether this be meant of the state of the Church upon the Earth. To the clearing of this, let us look to the scope of the whole Prophecy. In the Twelfth Chapter of the Revelation, we reade, and the first Verse, That a Woman was clothed with the Sun, and the Moon was under her feet, and upon her head a Crown of twelve stars: And she being with childe, cried, travelling in birth, and pained to be delivered. By the woman, is meant the Primitive Church, as she was in travel with all Nations, to bring forth her Christ-like issue; and by the Dragon with seven Heads and ten Horns, we must necessarily understand the great persecuting Empire of the Romans, which for 300 years did endeavor to devour her Childe. When she was delivered, the next attempt was, to drown her with a stood of Barbarous Nations that came out of the North. After this, she fled into the Wilderness, and was there fed 1260 [Page] days: So many years the Church was under Antichristian persecution. When these times were ended, and the Whore of Babylon burned, then began the marriage of the Lamb, and the New Ierusalem came from God out of Heaven, as a Bride adorned for her Husband. All these are but Emblems and Figures of so many several changes and varieties, that the outward Visible Church should meet withall upon the earth. She doth very much resemble the Moon, in her several forms and appearances. The outward Visible Church is one and the same in substance, but she is distinguished according to different relations, in sundry changes of time. These things are so clearly delivered in the whole body of the Prophecy, that no further question may be made. But to the Point in hand, concerning the future glory that the Church shall injoy in the later days, let us compare it with a passage in the Prophecy of Zachary. The Prophet in the Vision looked, and beheld a man with a measuring line in his hand, Chap. 2. ver. 1. Men go to measure when they build Cities and Towns: and this is spoken in relation to the waste of Ierusalem, mentioned in the former Chapter, ver. 12. How long wilt thou not have mercy on Ierusalem, and the Cities of Iudah, against which thou hast indignation this three score and ten years? In opposition to this waste of the Church in all the times of the Babylonian captivity, the Prophet in the Vision did see a man with a measuring line in his hand, to measure Ierusalem, to see what is the breadth thereof, and what is the length thereof. The same things are spoken in effect, Rev. 21. 15. The Angel had a golden Reed, to measure the City, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof; and the City lieth four-square, and the length is as large as the breadth. And he measured the City with a Reod, twelve thousand furlongs. All these figurative expressions, do set forth the repair of the Church, in opposition to her waste, in all Antichristian times. For in the beginning of these times, the Angel was commanded to rise, and to measure the Temple of God, and the Altar, and them that worship therein: but to leave out the Court that was without the Temple, and not to measure it: for it was given to the Gentiles, and the holy City should they tread under [Page] foot forty and two moneths, Chap. 11. ver. 1, 2. The whole time of the Beasts Kingdome, was the space of treading down the Holy City, by Antichristian Gentiles. In opposition to the waste, and conculcation, the Angel doth measure the walls of the New Ierusalem, and doth foretel the repair of the Church, and the restitution of that glorious state, which she shall have in the latter times. Much more might be spoken to the same purpose; but this shall suffice to shew, that the Tenet of the external glory of the Church, will not bring us back again to Popery: neither is it absolutely so in all, although it may be Antichristian in the position of some Circumstances onely. What if Rome Antichristian be called, The Great City, that ruleth over the Kings of the Earth; Is not the New Ierusalem the Great City, that cometh down from God out of Heaven? What if Rome Antichristian be the Woman that is adorn'd with gold, and silver, and precious stones, Chap. 17. Is the Bride the Lambs Wife altogether destitute of these Ornaments? Are not the streets of the City all of gold, like to transparent glass, Rev. Chap. 21? What if Rome Antichristian be the City, whose Merchants be the great men of the earth, Rev. Chap. 18. Is not the New Ierusalem that City, of whom also it is foretold, that the Kings of the earth shall bring their glory to her? Do not all the Prophets (specially the Prophet Isaiah) speak of the call of the Jews, and of the glory of that Church that shall be in the latter days? From all that hath been said, we may conclude, though the outward splendor of the Church may be Antichristian in some cases, it may be truly Christian in others.

CHAP. XV. Concerning th [...]se things that are not Antichristian, [...]ut are onely falsly so called by the Separation.

[Page]

VVE will not go over all the Points, but insist onely upon those that are of greatest moment; to wit, Magistracy and Ministery. By these we may judge of the rest.

For the standing of the Magistracy, they take it to be Antichristian, because they have a power over other men; and the Beast, his Heads, and Horns, in the Revelation and Daniel, they finde by reading, That these do signifie Empires, Dominions, and the Kingdomes of the world. But herein they are greatly deceived; For in the Prophecies aforesaid, the Beasts, and their Horns, do not absolutely signifie Empires & Dominions, but Idolatrous Empires and Dominions; and not absolutely Idolatrous Empires, but such Empires and Dominions which do Lord and Tyrannize it over the Church of God, and do try the faith and patience of the Saints. By many passages of the present Discourse, we have sufficiently cleared the Point, That when Christ shall begin his Reign upon Earth, this will not be with the abrogation of all Magistracy, Power and Authority; onely the Authorities and Governments shall acknowledge him (as indeed he is) the onely Lord and Head of the Church. The Reign of the Lamb is immediately opposed to the Reign of the Beast: as therefore the Beast, in the times of his Empire, did not disannul the Being of Governments, though they were under his Power and Headship; no more will the Reign of the Lamb abrogate, and take away the Governments of this world, though they are made subject to his Laws. Magistracy is the Ordinance of God: they are guilty of a foul error then, whosoever they be, that shall go about to pluck up Magistracy, under the colour and pretence of an Antichristian Encroachment.

But this engine now a-days is more principally used against [Page] the Ministery; the great designs to throw the Ministery out of the consciences of the people: and therefore they are told again and again, That the Ministers are Antichristian in their Titles, in their Ordination by Bishops, in their Maintenance by Tythes, &c. For Antichristianism in Title, to make this good, they reckon up a defamed Catalogue of Names; the Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Parsons, Vicars, Curats. But to this, abundant satisfaction is given, as by others, so by the old Non-conformists themselves, and specially by Mr. Ball, in his Answer to Canne. Among many other passages, these are his own words, pag. 45. To contend about the Name of Parson, is vain and fr [...]valous: but if we speak of the Office and Ministery, as it is exercised by the godly, learned, and painful Ministers of the Church of England: for the substance thereof, it is instituted of Christ, acknowledged by all true Churches in the world, ever since the first Plantation of the Christian Church; known by all Reformed Churches at this day, and so maintained by the Nonconformists. Against the Name, some it may be have taken exception; and against the pride, idleness, and covetousness of others, much hath been written: but that the Office it self of Parson or Vicar, as they preach the Gospel of Iesus Christ, and administer the Sacraments, according to the institution of Christ, and w [...]tch over the flock committed to their charge; that this Office, I say, sh [...]uld be condemned as Antichristian by the Non-conformists, is notoriously f [...]lse, and the contrary is apparently known to your self. In many passages of that learned Treatise, this point is solidly disputed, and the Reader may there finde, That many things are termed Antichristian, which are not, but are falsly so called by the Separation. But touching the Ordination by the Bishop, there is a greater accusation: The Pulpit-guard Routed hath these words: You your selves have concluded the Bishops Antichristian in their Calling, and is yours Christian? You had your outward Calling from them, a [...]d can they give you that they never had themselves? If the Bishops were true Ministers, and did rightly ordain, why then did you preach them down as Antichristian? This being the principal Objection, it hath an Answer already in sundry Treatises; so that my pains may be spared in the point. Onely [Page] because the present Discourse is concerning this subject, what is Antichristian, and what is not: we will propound these Quaeres to them that differ. First, in case the Ministers as ordained by Bishops, are Antichristian; yet a great part of the Ministery in being, did never partake of such an Ordination: they were made Ministers when the Bishops were not. Secondly, though the Diocesan Bishop was not put down as Antichristian; yet none can say, That the formality of Antichristianism, was or is primarily and immediately seated in him. For, as I have shewed in all the passages of the Treatise aforegoing, the formality of Antichristianism d [...]th stand in the Universal Headship; and this began to be set up many hundred years after the times of the Diocesan Bishop. All that can be said, he is Antichristian, so far as he doth symbolize with the Great Antichrist, in Lordliness and Tyranny over the Church and People of God: and how much better are they, that drive the trade of I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, I am of Cephas? Surely in respect of their pride, singularity, and affectation to make rents and schisms in the Church, they also may be termed Antichristian by Analogie and Reduction. Thirdly, it is absolutely false, that the Ordination of Ministers did formerly depend onely upon the Bishop: For by the Laws and Usages of this Church, he could not Ordain without the assistance of other Ministers; and the execution of his Office, as to this point, was not so much as Lord Bishop, but as Minister and Elder in the Church. Fourthly, let it be supposed, that the power to Ordain had been wholly seated in the Diocesan; the error and corruption in the instrument, doth not disannul the institution of Christ. Ordination of Ministers is from Christ alone, though the mean to transmit and convey it, is from Men. Fifthly, if any should go so far, to cast away their Ordination, because they have received it by the means of the Bishop; must not they by the analogie and force of the same rule, be driven upon this rock, To renounce the Sacraments, and all other Ordinances of Christ, when they conceive that they are applied by the hand of evil Ministers? And what is this but plain Popery, to make the Ordinance of Christ wholly [...]o depend upon the personal worthiness [Page] or unworthiness of the administrator. For the maintenance of the Ministers by the Tythes, they are most frivolous to affirm, That this is an Antichristian provision. For what if this way of allowance hath been used in Antichristian times, and hath been conveyed to us by the means of Antichristian men; shall we therefore abdicate and cast it away as Antichristian? By the same rule, we must renounce the Articles of our Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Lords Prayer, our Priviledges that we hold by Magna Charta, our Lands that we possess in Capite, and Socage; and what not? for these have been used in the times of Antichrist, and have passed down to us by the means of Antichristian men. By all that hath been said, it is clear, That many things are called Antichristian, which are not so, but are falsly so termed by the Seperation. Yet nevertheless, if Ministers or others have in any kinde acknowledged an Authority, which is directly or indirectly, mediately or immediately Antichristian; so far as they have more or less acknowledged it, so far they ought to mourn or repent. Antichristianism is a sin more directly and immediately against the Kingly Office of Christ: for which cause he hath denounced such heavy Judgements against it, as we have formerly shewed. So far forth then as a man doth submit to an Authority, and to the Laws made by an Authority that is contrary to Christ; so far forth he doth sin against Christ: for this in effect, is to put him out of place, and to entertain his enemy in his room. Now this no pious man can or will do, but he will easily apprehend it to be a piercing and wounding of Christ; and for this he will go forth into the porch, and weep bitterly. Thus I have divided the matter between two Extremes: Though Ministers and others are not to leave their stations; yet as they have in any kinde sinned against the Authority of the true Head and King of the Church, they have so far forth cause to judge themselves, that they may not be judged.

FINIS

POSTSCRIPT.

[Page]

Courteous READER,

ALthough about two years since, at the request of a Friend I lately reviewed it; yet this Treatise of mine was finished certain years ago: Since that, it hath met with many hindrances; and now I believe (had not another occasion brought me up to the City) it had neither at this time come into publick view.

All things considered, the whole series and continual succession of impediments of years past, and now onely the opportunity offered: By this I am induced to believe, the publishing of these things, is not so much by Humane Counsel, as by Divine Providence.

Perhaps, Gods Work is now set on foot, for the deliverance of his poor afflicted People: and it may be, in this juncture of time, some passages in this Treatise may be subservient to such ends. The Wise-man saith, Words spoken in due season, are like Apples of Gold in pictures of Silver. By the things that I have written, thou mayest understand how, and in what manner, those Princes and Potentates of [Page] the Earth do sin, Whosoever they be, that hold up the Name and Headship of the Beast, in direct opposition to the Name and Headship of the Lamb. Thou mayest further understand, how greatly they do aggravate their sin, that compass Sea and Land, that make search and inquisition into every corner, and persecute unto the death, all that will not live in subjection to this Name or Headship. Hereby also thou mayest be informed, what sympathy, what bowels of affection thou shouldst shew to those that live under the Tyranny of the Beasts Kingdome. For i [...] on the one side, poor Souls do Worship the Beast, receive his Mark and Name; Christ (as he hath cause enough) doth denounce the most grievous Judgements against them; On the other side, if they refuse to subject their Consciences to his Papal determinations; such is the hard condition of many Countreys, that it is the loss of all, yea of life it self. This is the Glassie Sea mingled with fire, through which the Saints have passed; which also they are yet in passing. But how few of us are sensible of their hard condition? How few do mourn for the affliction of Ioseph? If that be true, that the Members of the Protestant Churches abroad are in imminent danger; If they have been lately Massacred in Piedmont, without sparing Age or Sex; If they are bleeding in Switzerland, divers there having been put to death for no fault, but being Protestants; If the designes be upon the whole Interest by the Popish Party, almost in all places of Europe: Then we have reason to condole with our Brethren in their Sufferings. And the reading of the present Treatise, will help us more clearly to see, and judge of that which is the cause of the Quarrel. We shall see also, what is the Minde of Christ concerning these things, and to what issue they will be brought at the end of all.

Hereby also thou mayest be advertised, to beware of the Opinion of such, that make the Christian Magistrate the Fountain of all Church-Power: This is to set up a Civil Anti-Christ, in the stead of a Spiritual. Christ is the Head of his own Church; and therefore he hath appointed Laws, by [Page] which his Kingdome is to be governed; Censures, by which his rebellious Subjects are to be punished; and Officers, to dispense those Censures. If there be no such Name or Headship, What should be the meaning of the Apostle, when he speaketh of the Incestuous Corinthian? Concerning him that hath done this deed; in the Name of the Lord Iesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my Spirit, with the power of the Lord Iesus, to deliver such a one to Satan, 1 Cor. 5. 4. And in that other place, Now we command you, Brethren, in the Name of the Lord Iesus, that you withdraw your selves from every Brother that walketh disorderly, 2 Thess. 3. 6. And in that Scripture, Whatsoever ye shall binde on earth, shall be bound in heaven: for where two or three are gathered together in my Name, I will be in the midst of them, Matth. 18. ver. 18, 19, 20. In these several places, the Name of Christ is his Power and Headship in and over the Church his own House: which is not onely opposite to the Name of the Beast, but in an inferior degree, to that Spiritual Power and Supremacy which some would give to Princes and Potentates of the Earth. The London-Ministers in their Vindication, do speak to good purpose, when they say, Christ Iesus is the onely Head of the Church, governing it not onely inwardly and invisibly, by the working of his Spirit, but outwardly also and visibly, as a Political Ministerial Body. In which he hath appointed his own proper Ambassadors, Assemblies, Laws, Ordinances, and Censures, to be administred in his Name, and according to his own way, pag. 4. By this account then, they must be judged to come neer a very dangerous Errour, whosoever they be, that take this Name and Headship from him, and give it to Temporal Princes. Calvin and other friends of ours, have been much offended at the Title that was given to Henry the Eighth and his Successors: And our Adversaries also have hereby taken occasion to insult over us. For these are the words of Wadesworth, in a Letter of his to Mr. Bedell: N [...]r will I (saith he) insist upon the passions that moved King Henry violently to Divorce himself from his lawful Wife; to fall out with the Pope his Friend; [...]o Marry Lady Anne Bullen, and soon after to Behead her; to disinherit [Page] Queen Mary, and to inable Queen Elizabeth; and presently to disinherit Queen Elizabeth, and to restore Queen Mary; to hang Catholicks for Traytors, and to burn Protestants for Hereticks; to destroy Monasteries; to pill Churches: Were these fit beginnings for the Gospel of Christ? I pray was this man a good Head of Gods Church? For my part, I pray our Lord to bless me from being a Member of such a Head, or such a Church, pag. 11. Now what saith Mr. Bedel to all this? You demand, saith he, if this man King Henry were a good Head of Gods Church? What if I should demand the same touching Alexander the sixth, Julius the second, Leo the tenth, or twenty more of the Catalogue of Popes, in respect of whom King Henry might be Canoniz'd for a Saint? But there is a story in Tullies Offices, of one Lutatius, that laid a Wager, That he was (bonus vir) a good man, and would be judged by one Fimbria, a man of Consular Dignity. He, when he understood the case, said, He would never judge that matter, lest either he should diminish the reputation of a man well esteemed of; or set down that any man was a good man, which he accounted to consist in an innumerable sort of excellencies and praises. That which he said of a good man, with much more reason may I say of a good King; one of whose highest excellencies, is to be a good Head of the Church. And therefore it is a question which I will never take upon me to answer, Whether King Henry was such or no, unless you will before-hand interpret, &c. pag. 131. He hath some other passages concerning the use of the Authority of the said King, in doing things that were good, and in removing the Popes Tyranny: Which Acts of his (saith he) whosoever shall impartially consider of, may well esteem him a better Head to the Church of England, then any Pope these thousand years, pag. 132. But for my part, I conceive here are two Questions to be answered; Whether that King were rightly and truly a Head of the Church at all? That being granted; the second, Whether he were a good one, yea or no? To determine these Questions, I am clearly of Fimbria's judgement in that other case. As on the one part, I am loth to diminish the lawful Power of Princes, which they have, they ought to have, and ever had, in disposing [Page] the affairs of the Church: so on the other side, I conceive, That it is too high to call Hen. 8. or any other Supreme Magistrate, an Head, much more a good Head of the Church; the eminency, transcendency and sublimity of that Prerogative belonging to Christ alone. Our Princes have used such a Title; and in the sense of the Statute, in a moderate way, the people have ascribed it to them, to wit, a Spiritual Power, Authority and Jurisdiction, that ever have belonged to Kings and Princes, which David, Solomon, the Kings of Iudah, and Christian Emperours have ever exercised in their respective Dominions. This, no doubt, hath been the sense of wellmeaning men; and so Mr. Bedel doth expound it in the forementioned place, and pag. 56. But for my part, being inlightned and better informed, I pray God such Titles be no more used; and let that passage, Next under thee and thy Christ, in all Causes Ecclesiastical, in these His Majesties Dominions, Supreme Head and Governour; Let the exuberancy of such a Title, pass among the iniquity of our holy things. Our godly Friends have been offended at it; our Enemies have insulted; Experience hath shewed much danger in the use of it; and the present Treatise, I doubt not, will shew what an evil thing it is, to take away the Prerogative of Christ, and to make other Heads of the Church in his room. Of all men living, the Erastians have greatest cause to look to this: For let Princes be once told, That there is no Church-Government in the Word of God, and that they themselves are the sole Fountains of Church-Power; By this means it will be effected, That the Name and Power of Christ over his own Church will be plucked down, and the Name and Headship of Princes will be onely set up. In matters of this nature, if you give an Inch, men will take an Ell. Rather for acts past, we should often think upon that expression of the Prophet, I will pour upon the House of David, and the inhabitants of Ierusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication; and they shall look to him whom they have pierced, Zach. 12. 10. Christ is not onely pierced in a literal sense, when his body is run thorow with a Spear; but he is pierced also, when his Name [Page] and Headship is taken away from him, and given to another. So far as a whole Nation have been mediately or immediately, directly or indirectly implicated and involved in such a sin; so far I believe they ought to mourn. If this be not done, God perhaps may rebuke us, when our Armies go forth against those that Worship the Beast, and uphold his Name and Headship, in enmity to the Government of Christ. Though not in the favour of the enemy, yet we may be chastised for our own faults, and the Lord may be provoked to appear against us. When the Lamb went forth on his white Horse against the Beast and his Armies, the Armies that followed, were upon white Horses cloathed in fine linen, white and clean, Rev. 19. 14.

Further also, by the process of this Discourse, information may be given to certain in these Times, who being led by the meer shew and colour of some passages in the Prophesies, do think it a part of their duty, to level Magistracy, abolish Laws, and to turn all things up-side down, in Church and Commonwealth. Of such I may say, That they mingle the precious Truths of God, with Fables of their own commenting. In the Metamorphosis of Ovid, we reade of the Beginning of the World, of the Chaos, of the Giants heaping of Pelion upon Ossa, of Deucalions Flood, of the Four Ages, of the Golden, the Silver, the Brazen, and the Iron Age. These things are not all Fictions, because they have some ground of truth in the Scripture; neither are they all truths, because they are mingled with Fictions of the invention of man. Of the same kinde are some Authors, who are for the Fifth Monarchy; they think, that the setting up of the Kingdome of Christ, will be the Dissolution of all Earthly Kingdomes. But by the purport and whole drift of the present Discourse, they may understand, That the Kingdome of Christ is not contrary to Governments, Powers and Authorities, purely as such; but onely to Governments as Idolatrous, as Tyrannical, as contrary to the Laws of Christ, and of his Church. In the Prophecy of Daniel, the Empire of Babel is resembled to a Lyon; of Persia, to a Bear; of Greece, to a Leopard; [Page] of Rome, to a Beast of divers shapes. All these Monarchies erected and set up on the ruines of the Davidical Kingdome, are parallell'd to so many Beasts. Bu [...] to what Beast shall we resemble (in its right constitution) the Davidical Kingdome it self? In the Book of the Revelation, the Angel doth expresly say, That there were eight Kings; and yet the Beast had but seven Heads, Chap. 17. How can this be? I have fully proved, That the Dynasty, Race and Succession of the Christian Caesars, do make the seventh Roman King, but no Head of the Beast. Therefore the Mediatori [...]n Kingdom of Christ is not contrary to Governments, as such; neither is nor ever shall be built upon the ruines of Governments, as Governments, but upon the ruines of Governments onely as Tyrannical, and opposite to the Laws of the Gospel. There is no such cause then, why solid and judicious men in these dayes, should set aside this kinde of Learning, which is so much for the Credit & Authority of the Christian Magistrate. And for the Government of the Church in some Points (if I am not mistaken) there is in this Prophecy as strong, if not stronger proof then in any other Book of the New Testament. As for Example: Though Bishops are put down, the Service-Book taken away, the Ordination of Ministers brought neerer the Rule; all this being done, men are not pleased. What is the cause of the Difference? The difficulty lies in the Church-state. Robinson and others of that way, do plead, That we have no Example for a National Church in the New Testament; and the bringing in of whole Nations by the power of the Magistrate, this is the principal Rock of Offence. I confess it is true, that we have no Example of a National Church in the Apostles time. For how could all Nations come in at that particular instant, when the greater part of them did still remain in their Idolatries, and the Emperors themselves were the greatest Enemies of the Church? Now if we apply our selves to the Book of the Revelation, we shall plainly see, how the Spirit doth foretel, That after the Preaching of the Gospel, the Church should fall under grievous Persecutions, in all the times of the Pagan Caesars: when that time is ended, [Page] the Empire it self shall become Christian. What else should be the meaning of that expression? Now is come Salvation and Strength, and the Kingdome of our God, and the Power of his Christ, Rev. 12. 10. This doth note no other, but the setting up of the Gospel in the Throne, in the times of Constantine the Great. After these things, he sheweth the fall of the Empire, and the rising of the Ten Kings, by the Emblem of a Beast with ten Horns, that came up out of the Sea, Chap. 13. ver. 1. This Beast doth signifie the Roman Tyranny in the last and the Antichristian Edition. And he further addeth, in the latter times of this Kingdome, that the Eternal Gospel shall be preached to every Kindred, Tongue and Nation, Chap. 14. ver. 6. & 7. Then also, the deceived Kings shall be undeceived; and, The Kingdomes of this world, shall become the Kingdomes of our Lord, and of his Christ, Chap. 11. 15. That is, those Kingdomes which formerly were the Kingdomes of the Beast, shall become subject to the Laws of Christ, and of his Gospel. Here is a plain Example (though not in the Age of the Apostles) of whole Christian Nations in the times of the Gospel. I willingly yield, That the preaching of the Gospel is that by and through which, primarily, and immediately, Churches are gathered: yet by the Authority of the Magistrate, the same Gospel also is countenanced, Laws are made, Parishes are divided, Ministers maintained, and the Body of the Nation brought to attend to that which is, or at least may be, the mean of their Salvation. I cannot think, but with great horrour, what would ensue, if the Designs of some men should take place: It would be the very Abaddon and Apollyon to the Church of God. But let us look what is spoken of the Kings of Europe, They shall hate the Whore, and make her desolate and naked, and shall burn her flesh with fire, Chap. 17. If they shall hate the Whore, then they shall destroy the Idolatries and Superstitions of that Church, which they did formerly so love and admire: and on the contrary part, they shall countenance the Gospel, bring in their People, and do as much for the Church of Christ, which they did formerly persecute and hate. Of the New Ierusalem it is said, The [Page] Kings of the Earth shall bring their glory to her, Chap 21. But lest any should think, That this is meant onely of the Glory of the Church in Heaven; Let sundry passages of the Prophet Esay be considered: The scope of all whi [...]h is to shew, That the Kings of the Earth shall bring their Glory unto the Church. There is much spoken also of the coming in of whole Nations, of the Conversion of Kings, and the adorning of the Church by the bounty of Kings: Reade Chap. 60. per totum, with many other places.

If these things were rightly considered, men would not have such prejudices against a National Constitution, and setting up of the Gospel, by the Authority, Power and Command of Kings and Princes. What shall we make of the Reign of Christ upon the Earth? Is it not directly and diametrally opposite to the Reign of the Beast? And the Reign of the Beast, let the Angel himself, together with our own experience, shew, wherein the formality and the being thereof doth consist. So he speaketh: The Horns which thou sawest are ten Kings, which have received no Kingdome as yet; but receive power as Kings one hour with the Beast: These have one minde, and shall give their power and strength unto the Beast: These shall make war with the Lamb, but the Lamb shall overcome them; for he is the Lord of lords, and King of kings, Rev. 17. ver. 12, 13, 14. The effence of the Kingdome of the Beast lyeth in the Confederacy of Kings, and in their yielding themselves to the Name and Headship of the Bishop of Rome. This is the Reign of the Beast upon the Earth. So by the Rule of Proportion, the Reign of Christ and of the Lamb shall be in the holy association and concurrence of Christian Princes, to set up the Gospel of Christ, his Name and Headship, as the Regent-Law among the Nations. From all that hath been said, it is cleer, That this Doctrine is not contrary to the Authority of Magistrates; nay, it is most forcible and effectual to establish the Laws and Government of the Church.

Upon the same grounds I do here desire to speak a word or two; and Oh that I could speak it with tears! The Reformation in Germany, and now lately in England, hath been, [Page] and yet is much deformed, by abalienation of the Churches Revenue, and in passing away that which former Ages have bestowed (I may speak of a great part at least) upon the preaching of the Gospel. These are Scandals to the Enemy. Let our Consciences in the mean while judge, Whether this be not a Scandal given, rather then a Scandal taken: Whether we do not open the mouthes of the Enemies of the Lord to speak evil of the Reformation: And whether we are not faulty in this Point. Moses went in Gods way, and by his Command, and it was a glorious work to deliver Israel from the Bondage of Egypt: yet withall, when he was in the discharge of so excellent a work, then the Lord stood in the Way to kill him, Exod. 4. 24. Our Armies are going forth against the Enemies, and the Prote [...]ant Armies are like to go forth more and more: These are the times, or at least do border upon the times of the Su [...]per of the Fowls, of the great Vintage, of th [...] Bat [...]el of Armageddon. There are like to be great Commotions of State, Army against Army, in the times of the end of the Beasts Kingdome. And therefore by collation of all Circumstances, we cannot be fat off from the performance of all that hath been foretold. It is meet for us to see our own sins, and specially that which I have hinted, before we go on in the Lords work.

These things I have thought good to annex by way of Appendi [...]. My purpose is not to speak any thing to please, or di [...]please any Party: Neither can I tell, how any Party will be pleased with me: it may be I may displease all. However, I do desire to please mine own Conscience, in delivering that which I conceive to be a Truth of God.

There is one thing whi [...]h I think meet more [...]ully to explain my self in. I have, in the preceding Treatise, made it a good part of my work, to prove the Roman to be the Fourth, and the last Metal Kingdome; and that the Roman doth begin in the consideration and notion of such a Kingdome, when the Church, and the Con [...]inent of the Church, came under the Dominion and Soveraignty of the People of Rome. This I know the followers of Iunius will not away with; and [Page] many learned men in these times do follow this way of Interpretation. But because we will not unnecessarily controvert, and make our selves more enemies then needs; we will be content to say, That the Roman doth begin at the end or ending of all four Metal-Kingdomes; and where they end, in the method, order, and way of account, the Roman doth begin. And whereas we have endeavored, Chap. 6. pag. 116. to prove the beginning of the Roman as The fourth Metal-Kingdome, to be at that instant of time, when the Church came under the Dominion of that People; the same Arguments (mutatis mutandis) will prove the beginning of the Roman, at the end of all four Metal-Kingdomes. And so the followers of Iunius and we shall agree in the substance of the Interpretation. Let us compute the Name or Universal Headship of the Bishop of Rome, (as Decreed and Enacted under the Emperor Phocas) and in that series and way of account, it will be 666 years from the beginning of the Roman, as that great Empire doth succeed, at the end of the four Metal-Kingdomes. Here is the Name of the Beast, and the Calculation according to the Number of a Man, according to the Divisions and Parts of the Body of Man in Daniels Image. If we go either way, the Account will be made good.

FINIS.

Information about this book

Title statement

A plain and easie calculation of the name, mark, and number of the name of the beast ... humbly presented to the studious observers of Scripture-prophecies, God's works, and the times / by Nathaniel Stephens ... ; whereunto is prefixed, a commendatory epistle, written by Mr. Edm. Calamy.

Stephens, Nathaniel, 1606?-1678.

Edition statement

1656

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2004-05 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A61453

ID [STC]

Wing S5450

ID [STC]

ESTC R17480

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

12166047

ID [OCLC]

ocm 12166047

ID [VID]

55320

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61453)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 55320)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 116:6)

Source

— A plain and easie calculation of the name, mark, and number of the name of the beast ... humbly presented to the studious observers of Scripture-prophecies, God's works, and the times / by Nathaniel Stephens ... ; whereunto is prefixed, a commendatory epistle, written by Mr. Edm. Calamy., Stephens, Nathaniel, 1606?-1678., Calamy, Edmund, 1600-1666..

Extent

[23], 305 p.

Printed by Ja. Cottrel, for Matth. Keynson ... and Hen. Fletcher ...,. London :: 1656.. (Errata: p. [23].) (Reproduction of original in Union Theological Seminary Library, New York.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.