A37035:628
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.
We add, that acts of love that flow from common dispositions in a natural man, may be considered as acts before they be thus prevalent: for, he loves, fears, &c. and so they be acts, although not gracious acts or sincere; but we cannot consider the acts of the gracious habits of love, faith, fear, &c. (as that a man, as renewed, doth love, fear, &c.) but we must conceive them as such to be gracious and sincere: for, they are of the Spirit, and what is of it, is of that kind; and what is but like to a grain of mustard seed, and cannot be considered as less, is yet saving and true Grace, having the qualifications foresaid; the least blossom on that tree being good fruit: therefore there must be some difference in kind between common acts, and these of saving Grace, beside any thing that can be conceived to be in the degree: because in the one, the qualifications may be, and are separated from the act; but in the other, no act can be conceived as influenced by the Spirit, and proceeding from it, but it must be conceived as having these qualifications in it, to wit, it hath a spiritual end, is swayed by a spiritual motive, and acteth from a spiritual principle; and as such, is swayed to such an act. If it be said, that it is the least degree of Grace when it is sincere, that is so to be accounted, that is, when it is so prevalent; and that in that respect no act as such, is in the least degree prevalent, but it is sincere. Answ. That will not satisfy: for, here it is asserted that the act of love as proceeding from these habits, cannot be conceived as an act; but must also be conceived as gracious, and as arising from that root: but according to the other opinion, these may be separated, that is, although love act; yet is it not sincere love, till it act prevailingly; and so it may be considered as an act before it come to that prevalent degree of acting, which cannot be in the other. Beside, if so, then were not saving Grace, Grace, as having a different original from common gifts; but as having different fruits or effects, or different degrees of fruits. For clearing whereof, we may suppose gracious habits to be in one. And, 1. do not the acts of love, faith, fear, &c. proceed from these infused habits; and are they not actings of the New creature? And, •. are not these acts gracious as such?
We adde, that acts of love that flow from common dispositions in a natural man, may be considered as acts before they be thus prevalent: for, he loves, fears, &c. and so they be acts, although not gracious acts or sincere; but we cannot consider the acts of the gracious habits of love, faith, fear, &c. (as that a man, as renewed, doth love, fear, &c.) but we must conceive them as such to be gracious and sincere: for, they are of the Spirit, and what is of it, is of that kind; and what is but like to a grain of mustard seed, and cannot be considered as lesse, is yet saving and true Grace, having the qualifications foresaid; the least blossom on that tree being good fruit: therefore there must be some difference in kind between common acts, and these of saving Grace, beside any thing that can be conceived to be in the degree: because in the one, the qualifications may be, and are separated from the act; but in the other, no act can be conceived as influenced by the Spirit, and proceeding from it, but it must be conceived as having these qualifications in it, to wit, it hath a spirituall end, is swayed by a spirituall motive, and acteth from a spirituall principle; and as such, is swayed to such an act. If it be said, that it is the least degree of Grace when it is sincere, that is so to be accounted, that is, when it is so prevalent; and that in that respect no act as such, is in the least degree prevalent, but it is sincere. Answ. That will not satisfie: for, here it is asserted that the act of love as proceeding from these habits, cannot be conceived as an act; but must also be conceived as gracious, and as arising from that root: but according to the other opinion, these may be separated, that is, although love act; yet is it not sincere love, till it act prevailingly; and so it may be considered as an act before it come to that prevalent degree of acting, which cannot be in the other. Beside, if so, then were not saving Grace, Grace, as having a different original from common gifts; but as having different fruits or effects, or different degrees of fruits. For clearing whereof, we may suppose gracious habits to be in one. And, 1. do not the acts of love, faith, fear, &c. proceed from these infused habits; and are they not actings of the New creature? And, . are not these acts gracious as such?