A37035:617
A commentary upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the…A commentarie upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the…
A commentary upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the series of the several prophecies contained in that book, deduced according to their order and dependence on each other; the periods and succession of times, at, or about which, these prophecies, that are already fulfilled, began to be, and were more fully accomplished, fixed and applied according to history; and those that are yet to be fulfilled, modestly, and so far as is warrantable, enquired into. Together with some practical observations, and several digressions, necessary for vindicating, clearing, and confirming many weighty and important truths. Delivered in several lectures, by that learned, laborious, and faithful servant of Jesus Christ, James Durham, late Minister of the Gospel in Glasgow. To which is affixed a brief summary of the whole book, with a twofold index, one of the several digressions, another of the chief and principal purposes and words contained in this treatise.A commentarie upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the series of the several prophecies contained in that book, deduced according to their order and dependance on each other; the periods and succession of times, at, or about which, these prophecies, that are already fulfilled, began to be, and were more fully accomplished, fixed and applied according to history; and those that are yet to be fulfilled, modestly, and so far as is warrantable, enquired into. Together with some practical observations, and several digressions, necessary for vindicating, clearing, and confirming many weighty and important truths. Delivered in several lectures, by that learned, laborious, and faithfull servant of Jesus Christ, James Durham, late Minister of the Gospel in Glasgow. To which is affixed a brief summary of the whole book, with a twofold index, one of the several digressions, another of the chief and principall purposes and words contained in this treatise.
Edinburgh: printed by Christopher Higgins, 1658
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.
whereby it appeareth, that the sincerity of an act, and this prevalent comparative degree thereof, may be separated.
Thirdly, That men may love their Idols above all, cannot be denied, seeing men are naturally mad upon their Idols, so Turks love their Mahomet, Baal's Prophets their Baal, even beyond their own lives. Now, may not one love God and Christ, as one may love Mahomet or their Idols? This Argument is also made use of by the forecited Author, to prove that a natural man may love Christ really for kind, pag. 236, 237. And will not this •ame hold in respect of the degree also? Considering that there is as good ground, and more, even in a humane respect, for Historical faith to believe the truth of the being and worth of God, and Jesus Christ, and as much proof and experience of the advantages and benefits that come from him, as there are for any to be assured of the being and worth of Mahomet, Jupiter, Apollo, &c. Now suppose one that formerly loved Mahomet, or Jupiter, above all, should by the force of Historical faith, or some extraordinary deliverance be brought to account of, and love the only true God, as he did formerly love Mahomet or his Idols, could that be accounted to be sincere love, because the object were changed? Supposing still no change to be in the man, nor intrinsickly in the act it self in respect of its kind? and yet upon the supposition foresaid, this act would not be defective in respect of the comparative degree, supposing him to love God now, as formerly he did his Idol: It must therefore be in kind. And may not such acts as have proceeded from Nebuchadnezzar and other hypocrites, upon special and singular appearances of God, be accounted such, wherein there was some kind of reality as to their actual esteeming of God above all; yet still being without sincerity, as the zeal of the Jews was, because God was not esteemed of according to knowledge, that is, as in Christ Jesus: in which respect He hath manifested Himself in His Word, and without which, there can be no degree of love acceptable to Him.
Thirdly, That men may love their Idols above all, cannot be denied, seing men are naturally mad upon their Idols, so Turks love their Mahomet, Baal's Prophets their Baal, even beyond their own lives. Now, may not one love God and Christ, as one may love Mahomet or their Idols? This Argument is also made use of by the forcited Author, to prove that a natural man may love Christ really for kind, pag. 236, 237. And will not this ame hold in respect of the degree also? Considering that there is as good ground, and more, even in a humane respect, for Historical faith to believe the truth of the being and worth of God, and Jesus Christ, and as much proof and experience of the advantages and benefits that come from him, as there are for any to be assured of the being and worth of Mahomet, Iupiter, Apollo, &c. Now suppose one that formerly loved Mahomet, or Iupiter, above all, should by the force of Historical faith, or some extraordinary deliverance be brought to account of, and love the only true God, as he did formerly love Mahomet or his Idols, could that be accounted to be sincere love, because the object were changed? Supposing still no change to be in the man, nor intrinsickly in the act it self in respect of its kind? and yet upon the supposition foresaid, this act would not be defective in respect of the comparative degree, supposing him to love God now, as formerly he did his Idol: It must therefore be in kind. And may not such acts as have proceeded from Nebuchadnezar and other hypocrites, upon special and singular appearances of God, be accounted such, wherein there was some kind of reality as to their actual esteeming of God above all; yet still being without sinceritie, as the zeal of the Iews was, because God was not esteemed of according to knowledge, that is, as in Christ Jesus: in which respect He hath manifested Himself in His Word, and without which, there can be no degree of love acceptable to Him.