A16102:27
Apocalypsis A brief and learned commentary upon the revelation of Saint John the apostle…Apocalypsis A briefe and learned commentarie vpon the reuelation of Saint Iohn the apostle…
Apocalypsis A brief and learned commentary upon the revelation of Saint John the apostle and evangelist, applied unto the history of the Catholic and Christian Church. Written in Latin by M. Francis Junius Doctor of Divinity, and professor in the University of Heidelberg: And translated into English for the benefit of those that understand not the Latin.Apocalypsis A briefe and learned commentarie vpon the reuelation of Saint Iohn the apostle and euangelist, applyed vnto the history of the Catholicke and Christian Church. Written in Latine by M. Francis Iunius Doctor of Diuinitie, and professor in the Vniuersitie of Heidelberge: And translated into English for the benefit of those that vnderstand not the Latine.
London: printed by Richard Field for Robert Dexter, 1592
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Now remaineth the last Argument, which seemeth to charge him that he favoureth the heresy of the Chiliastes, whereupon divers thought that Cerinthus made this book and fathered it upon some of the Apostles. But for mine own part, though I grant that the Chiliastes have abused many testimonies out of this book, yet I can not yield to that, and think that some heretics should make it, unless some man he able to show me, that those places can not fitly he taken in any other sense: or else what book is there, that we may receive? And that those places are otherwise to be taken, divers learned men have showed long ago: so that the like hath be fallen this book as did to the Epistle to the Hebrews, which some man rejected very obstinately, because it seemed to make for the Novatians: where as in deed they ought rather to have accused their own ignorance. Moreover, seeing Cerinthus had many other mad and wicked opinions, as that, he denied that God made the world, and taught that Christ was borne of Mary, and Joseph, as all other men are borne, and maketh Christ, and Jesus two distinct persons: how cometh it to pass that he sprinkled none of this Foul holy water amongst the rest in this book? But he was so far from so doing, that contrariwise there may be divers arguments taken out of this book against those errors: so that it may appear by this one reason, that Cerinthus was not the author of this book. And again, where as he speaketh of the thousand years, he mentioneth no one jot of those things, which Cerinthus so impudently chattered of. For where is there any mention of that riot which Ceriathus talketh of? where is that cating? drinking? where are those marriages and pastimes? where are the sacrifices and holy days ⟨image 10⟩which should be kept at Jerusalem? Therefore this is a vain and a foolish argument. And seeing these things are so, though I would not stiffly stand in contention forth authors name, yet I rather judge it to be John the Apostle, then any other mans: For besides that it appeareth to be very ancient, and the learnedst and the godliest of the old Fathers doubt not, but it was Johns.
Nowe remaineth the last Argument, which seemeth to charge him that hee fauoureth the heresie of the Chiliastes, whereupon diuers thought that Cerinthus made this booke and fathered it vpon some of the Apostles. But for mine owne part, though I graunt that the Chiliastes haue abused many testimonies out of this booke, yet I can not yeelde to that, and thinke that some heretikes should make it, vnlesse some man he able to shewe mee, that those places can not sitly he taken in any other sense: or els what booke is there, that we may receiue? And that those places are otherwise to be taken, diuers learned men haue shewed long agoe: so that the like hath be fallen this booke as did to the Epistle to the Hebrewes, which some man reiected very obstinately, because it seemed to make for the Nouatians: where as in deede they ought rather to haue accused their owne ignorance. Moreouer, seeing Cerinthus had many other mad and wicked opinions, as that, hee denied that God made the worlde, and taught that Christ was borne of Marie, and Ioseph, as all other men are borne, and maketh Christ, and Iesus two distinct persons: howe commeth it to passe that hee sprinkled none of this Foule holy water amongst the rest in this booke? But he was so farre from so doing, that contrariwise there may be diuers arguments taken out of this booke against those errours: so that it may appeare by this one reason, that Cerinthus was not the authour of this booke. And againe, where as hee speaketh of the thousand yeeres, hee mentioneth no one iote of those things, which Cerinthus so impudently chattred of. For where is there any mention of that ryote which Ceriathus talketh of? where is that cating? drinking? where are those marriages and pastimes? where are the sacrifices and holy dayes