Page images

hended under their Founders and Governours; and of this Opinion are not only St. Jerom, among the Ancients, but even Vatablus, Pererius, &c. among the Moderns. 2dly, Though we should grant, that Four Monarchies are to be understood by the Four Beafts, and by confequence a long Succeffion of Princes, yet will it not from thence follow, that Antichriftian Kingdom (precisely taken) must be fo too. For the long Duration and Continuance of the Four made fuch a Succeffion neceffary; but the fhort Reign of Antichrift being limited to Three Years Six Months, muft neceffarily terminate in one fingle Perfon; who, by being called a little Horn, Chap. 7. 20. must be explained of one Perfon, as the Ten Horns are afferted to be Ten Kings, v. 24. and (fays St. Jerom upon Dan. 7.) fhall arife from among the Ten Kings, who shall destroy the Roman Empire, and divide it between them; (and a little af ter) who fhall not be as fome imagine, the Devil himself, but a Man in whom the Devil fhall dwell corporeally, as man vaca II. THIS was alfo II. The uncontro- From the verted Doctrine of the Primitive Church; Fathers of by which I do not mean, that it was ever theChurch. eftablished by the Authority of Councils, much less made an Article of Faith: But that all the Fathers who wrote about Antichrift, who were neither few in Number, nor of the leaft Repute in the Church, nor at great diftance from the Apoftolical Age, were of this Opinion. Amongst whom were to mention na more) St. Irenæus, ing out a Head unit Cyril Direct thise Anarchists of

[ocr errors]

From the Jews.

Cyril of Jerufalem, Hippolytus, Origen, the Author of thofe Writings commonly attributed to Lactantius, Methodius Patarenfis, Ephrem Syrus, Sulpitius Severus, &c, nor do we find that they were ever blamed, much less cenfured for this Doctrine. And their Authority must certainly weigh with those who have any Reverence for Primitive Antiquity, and will judge impartially of the Truth of Things. It will be here needless to quote the particular Paffages of thefe Writers, which favour this Opinion, becaufe we fhall be forced frequently to have recourfe to them upon the following Heads.

III. THIS was alfo, and ftill is, III. The Opinion of the Jewish Writers upon this Subject, particularly Rabbi Jacob, in his Book entituled, Abcboth Rochel, published by Hulfius, under the Name of Theologia Judaica; as alfo Rabbi Aben Ezra, Rabbi Solomon and Kimchi, upon the Pfalms and Prophets; and the Hebrew Chronicon, entituled Seder Olam. In all which you meet with abundance of fabulous Stories concerning his Parentage, Birth, Education, Size, c. which we are no otherwife concern'd with, than as they prove the Opinion of the Jews to have been, that the Antichrift which they expected was to be a fingle Perfon, not a Society, Church or Monarchy. To which alfo may be added, the many remarkable Teftimonies of the Sybilline Oracles, which are full of this Doctrine. TheTypes of $7. THE coming of this Man of Sin dutchrift. has been variously prefigured and typified


both under the Law and the Gospel (even as our Bleffed Lord alfo was) by many diabolical Oppofers, of the Truth and People of God; fuch were Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod the Son of Antipater, Simon Magus, Nero, Julian the Apoftate, and Mahomet, &c. In the Hiftory of the Lives of most of the afore-mentioned Perfons, are to be found fuch Circumftances, and as it were Marks of Antichriftian Oppofition, as may warrant fuch a Perfuafion. The fierce Perfecutions raised by Antiochus Epiphanes against the Jews, who were at that time the Peculium, or Visible Church; as also his Prophanation of the Sanctuary and Temple of God, related at large 1 Macc. 1. were fuch as have made many of the Modern Expofitors, who were prejudiced against the Doatrine of a perfonal Antichrift, apply all thofe Places of the Prophet Daniel to him, which were by the Ancients apply'd to Antichrift. And who is moreover diftinguished by the Author of that History, with this remarkable Epithet, Audilen pica, a /inner in 'Pila; Words deeply emphatical, and that exprefs grain. a very great degree of Corruption. The Hiftory of Herod is full of Antichristian Characters; as Firft, his fetting himself up for the Chrift, or at leaft affenting to those that did, falfly applying to him that Prophecy of Jacob, Gen. 49. 10. That the Scepter fhould not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between bis Feet, till Shiloh Should come; finding that the Scepter was taken from Judab, and tranflated to him. Thefe were they who were called Herodians, not


[ocr errors]

as Origen and fome others imagined, upon a Civil Account, but as St. Jerom, Epiphanius, and Theophilact afferted, because they held Herod to be the Meffiah. Which alfo our Bleffed Lord feems to hint at, Mark 8. 15. bidding his Difciples to beware of the Leaven of Herod; by which the Disciples understood, Matth. 16. 12. the Doarine, &c. Secondly, (not to mention his Cruelties to his own Friends, largely defcribed by Jofephus) his murthering Forty young Men, with their Mafters Fudas and Matthias, who in their Zeal to the Worship and Honour of God, pulled down the Golden Eagle, which he in Contempt of Religion had fet up upon the Porch of the * Ant. lib. Temple, Recorded by Jofephus *. Lastly, 17.cap.12. His Diabolical Defign to murder the Blef fed Infant, whom he looked upon as the Rival of his Hopes and Kingdom; which Cruelty extended fo far, as to murder (if what is Recorded by the Athiopick Liturgy, and Greek Menology be true) Fourteen Thoufand Infants; and amongst the rest his own Son, as the Hiftorians of thofe Times atteft. What we have before obferved of Simon Magus, fetting himself up as God, is fufficient to juftify our making him one of the Antichriftian Types; (not to mention his dark Magical Power and Knowledge, whereby he deceived and bewitched the People of Samaria, who looked upon his mighty Works to be Proofs of his Divinity, Acts 8. 11.) which blafphemous Exaltation of himself, because it may feem to fome not to be fairly proved by that. Text of Scripture

Ap. I.

$ 34.P.SI. Edit.

[ocr errors]





Scripture which I have before produced, p. 112. I fhall mention a Paffage or two out of fome of the early Christian Writers, who lived not long after his own Times. St. Juftin Martyr * tells the Emperor, that this Simon Magus had been efteemed as a God, even in his own Imperial City of Rome mentioning alfo an Infcription which he had feen upon a Statue, which he took to be his, with this Infcription, Zípore Déw oústw. The fame has been related upon his Authority, by Irenæus, Tertullian, and other later Writers. Which, tho' Valefius in his Notes upon Eufebius † has endeavoured to † Eccl. invalidate, fancying it to have been a Mi Hift. Lib. ftake in that Holy Father, proceeding from his not understanding Latin; alledging, that the Statue mention'd by him was lately dug up, with this Infcription, SEMONT SANGO DEO FIDIO. Yet he has been clearly anfwered by the Learned Church-Critick Tillemont, and fo has Vid: TilMr. Le Clerk, under the borrowed Name of lement. Thereponus, who afferted the fame as Vale Defenfio S. Auguft. fius; and fince by our Learned Countryman adverfus Dr. Jenkins. Origen understands that Ex- pherepon: preffion of his being called the great Power animadv. of God, of his being called the Christ, as I 176. have explain'd it, p. 96. And further, the Celfum. Fragments of his own Writings teftifie as Lib. VL much; amongst which is that particularly, p. 282. Ed. quoted by St. Jerom, in his Commentary, upon thefe Words, in the 24th of St. Matth. Many fhall come in my Name. Simon the Samaritan (fays he) whom we read of in the Acts of the Apoftles, has left us this Tefti





[ocr errors]
« EelmineJätka »