A37035:988
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.
In the third place, this will appear from the considering of the answers that generally are given by them to these places of Scripture alleged, whereby it is concluded that a Bishop and Presbyter are the same; which are generally one of these two, 1. Some say, that though the office in the Primitive times was distinct; yet the titles of Presbyter and Bishop, were common. But we have found already this to be a miserable shift: because, 1. This identity of the names so circumstantiated, proveth the identity of the offices as was said; 2. Because these places do not only apply the titles indifferently; but do indifferently apply the duties, qualifications, and every other thing that belongeth to such officers, and offices; and there is nothing spoken of the one in Scripture, but it is also spoken of the other, neither any thing required as a qualification in, or duty from the one, but is also done in reference to the other, and that expressly. A second answer, is that of Scotus, and some others who follow him, in lib. 4. sententiarum, distinct. 24. question unica; where he endeavoureth thus to remove that Objection, because (saith he) at first Believers were few, and so few Ministers were needful, and it was not necessary that there should be Officers instituted in every degree; but (saith he) when the Believers did multiply, then it was necessary. Where there is a double fault, 1. That contrary to the Scripture it is asserted that then the Church was not numerous, when as yet very soon the Apostles were necessitated to choose Deacons for their help. 2. That it supposeth, that when the Church is less numerous, there may not only be fewer Officers, but that she may want some wholly of such and such a degree. Add, that it supponeth de facto, that the Church in the Apostles days was not so completely constitute in respect of the kind of Officers as afterward: which is altogether inconsistent with that perfect plot-form of the Church in the Primitive Apostolic times. And when such answers are made by the learnedest of that party to such Arguments, what is it, but indeed the granting, upon the matter, that there was no such distinction, or distinct offices of Bishop and Presbyter in the Primitive times in use and practice in the Church?
In the third place, this will appear from the considering of the answers that generally are given by them to these places of Scripture alledged, whereby it is concluded that a Bishop and Presbyter are the same; which are generally one of these two, 1. Some say, that though the office in the Primitive times was distinct; yet the titles of Presbyter and Bishop, were common. But we have found already this to be a miserable shift: because, 1. This identity of the names so circumstantiated, proveth the identity of the offices as was said; 2. Because these places do not only apply the titles indifferently; but do indifferently apply the duties, qualifications, and every other thing that belongeth to such officers, and offices; and there is nothing spoken of the one in Scripture, but it is also spoken of the other, neither any thing required as a qualification in, or duty from the one, but is also done in reference to the other, and that expresly. A second answer, is that of Scotus, and some others who follow him, in lib. 4. sententiarum, distinct. 24. quaestione unica; where he endeavoureth thus to remove that Objection, because (saith he) at first Believers were few, and so few Ministers were needful, and it was not necessary that there should be Officers instituted in every degree; but (saith he) when the Believers did multiplie, then it was necessary. Where there is a double fault, 1. That contrary to the Scripture it is asserted that then the Church was not numerous, when as yet very soon the Apostles were necessitated to choose Deacons for their help. 2. That it supponeth, that when the Church is lesse numerous, there may not only be fewer Officers, but that she may want some wholly of such and such a degree. Adde, that it supponeth de facto, that the Church in the Apostles dayes was not so compleatly constitute in respect of the kind of Officers as afterward: which is altogether inconsistent with that perfect plat-form of the Church in the Primitive Apostolick times. And when such answers are made by the learnedest of that party to such Arguments, what is it, but indeed the granting, upon the matter, that there was no such distinction, or distinct offices of Bishop and Presbyter in the Primitive times in use and practice in the Church?