the 17th chapter of the book of Revelation annexes to a prophetic vision a particular interpretation, of aftonishing clearness, rendering it a fit key to more obfcure paffages: and the whole taken together fhews, that both thefe prophets give a fingular and circumstantial description of the fame feducing power, confifting of the fame primary diftinguishing characters, fo much infifted on already, as fet forth in Daniel, relating to the place and time of that power's reign, its complex nature and extent, the means of its establishment, its amazing effects and duration; with this advantageous disparity, which it was reasonable to expect, that the prediction of the latest date, while it fully agrees with the former fo far as it goes, fuperadds confiderable new light, rendering the defcription more full and more particular.

II. As to the first complex character, relating to the circumstances of place and time, which circumftances need to be joined to form a distinguishing defcription, but must be viewed apart in reasoning on them; whereas Daniel is fo far particular, as to place the feat of the feducing power he describes, not only in the Roman empire, but in the western part of it, John adds farther light, by placing it very clearly in the metropolis; "the city built on fe"ven hills, that great city which reigneth over "the kings of the earth," Rev. xvii. 9. 18.

Instead of striving to evade this evidence, they who might be thought most interested to do so, at lealt very many of them, being defirous to have it believed, that Peter was at Rome, urge it as one of their chief arguments, fuch as it is, for that opinion, that that Apostle writes his first epistle from Babylon.

If it be faid, That the character of the fituation on seven hills, is common to the western with the eastern metropolis of the empire; in answer to this, 'it is fufficient to obferve the following things.

1. That

1. That the western seems to have been by far more famous for that property as to its fituation. 2. That it appears even from Daniel, as was proved above, that the beaft with ten horns, which is the emblem in John as well as Daniel, reprefents, not the eastern, but the western empire. 3. That the well-known eastern powers that have appeared, the Greek and Turkish empires, are powers to which the other characters in the prophetic defcriptions above confidered, and which are the fame both in Daniel and John, can by no means be applied, not indeed fo much as any one of them.. 4. Whereas there are at least three diftinct characters given of the place defcribed; its fituation on fo many hills; its having in different ages fo many different kinds of government, (of which afterwards), fome of them before the Apostle's time, and fome after; and, laftly, its being in his time the city that ruled the kings of the earth: the first is a very diftinguishing and very notour character of Rome, whether, in the strictest sense, abfolutely peculiar or not; the second and third-diftinguish it from the eastern imperial city; and the third is, in the strictest sense, abfolutely fingular. If it be faid, That the words which feem to make it fo, by a finall deviation from the most natural obvious meaning, may denote the city, which, though it did not rule the earth in John's time, would do fo in future times; it is a fufficient anfwer, that it is an evident rule of interpretation, that the most natural and ufual meaning of words is to be reckoned the true meaning, unless there is fome convincing reafon for deviation from it; which is not the cafe here; and that feeing the expreffions in view, which belong not to the vifion, but to the interpretation, are in the present tenfe, in their moft natural meaning, they must denote the city that was then, or at that present time, imperial. And if it is yielded, or proved, that the defcriptions in view agree to that

to

to which they are applied, according to the most natural meaning of words, and according to rules of interpretation acknowledged in other cafes, the great point is gained: and it will not be needful to inquire into the confequences of forced meanings, forced without any reason, which, though yielded to in this particular, would be far from fupporting the cause proposed to be served by them, confidering the evidence of the other parts of the prophetic defcription for overthrowing it, and the notoriety of the third remark in this paragraph.

But though there were no more to prove, that it is not a future, but a prefent imperial city that is described, present and exifting when the Apoftle wrote, there is a fufficiently decifive proof of it in

10.; which, fpeaking fo clearly of different kinds of governments of that city, diftinguishes them into past, prefent, and future; and exprefsly fays, "five "are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come,' &c. So that no city that was not at that time imperial, can be the city there meant; no city, of which it could not be faid, confiftently with truth, in the Apostle's days, that feveral of its heads or governments are fallen, and one is.

Though it is not fufficient for determining the meaning of the predictions about mystical Babylon, to prove that the place meant must be Rome; yet it might be expected, that even this itfelf fhould

make the adherents of the Romish church much inore inquifitive than they seem to be into the contents of these predictions, were it but in fearch of fome hint, amidst such a series of prophecies relating to that place, of its extraordinary and fingular prerogatives, on which their religious profeffion is founded, fuch as infallibility, and the important things connected with it and when thofe who make the trial, inftead of this, find on the one hand a profound filence on thefe heads, and on the other hand a series of the most aftonishing defcriptions of enormities,

enormities, with fuitable warnings and denunciations of judgements, is there not reafon to apply to many people's inattention to the scope of the predictions what the Apostle applies to the object of it, when he tells, that it made him "wonder with 66 great admiration?" Rev. xvii. 6.

III. After viewing the characters of the place, if we view next those of the time of the rife and reign of the feducing power defcribed, it will appear, that they are neither applicable to the Pagan emperors, the only predeceffors of the prefent Romish power that can be fo much as fufpected with the leaft colour to be pointed at, nor to any that can be fuppofed to be the fucceffors of that power.

1. As it was proved formerly, that Daniel characterises the time from the downfall of the empire, by its divifion into ten kingdoms, recovering their fovereignty by shaking off the Roman yoke; fo John characterises, it by telling very clearly, that the ten horns of the beaft" are ten kings, which had received no kingdom as yet; but would receive

power one hour with the beast," Rev. xvii. 12.; adding, that "these would have one mind, "and give their power and strength unto the "beast," y 13. and it is upon the matter repeated again, y 17. that they would "agree to give "their kingdom unto the beast.”

Though characterising the time, and characterifing the means of acquiring the power and authority described, are both plainly in the words cited, and both demonftrations that it is not the Heathen empire that is meant, the means of power belong to the third character, to be confidered afterwards : and as to the time, it is of fufficient notoriety, that the empire ceafed to be Heathen, and turned profeffedly Chriftian, before it was divided.

2. Whereas in Daniel's time the Pagan, as well as the present Papal Romish powers, were yet to come; in John's time the former of thefe were the

powers

powers actually exifting: whence it follows, that if the great feducer defcribed by him in chap. xvii. and parallel places, is evidently defcribed as one yet to come, it must not be the Pagan emperor that is meant. Now in y 8. it is very plainly declared, that the beast he defcribed was to afcend in future times; evidently implying, that he had not afcended or rifen in John's time: and to fay otherwife, by applying the defcription to the Pagan emperor, is to contradict the Apoftle in a very direct manner.

3. John's defcription plainly afferts, that the Pagan emperor is to be counted the fixth idolatrous, as well as the fixth fupreme fecular head of Rome; that the feventh fecular head would not be of the number of the idolatrous heads; which is notour from history to be the cafe as to the Chriftian fovereigns; and that the feducer, who is the grand fubject of the prediction, would be the eighth fecular, and the feventh idolatrous head.

The proof of this, requires only moderate attention to a very few principles or grounds of argument, partly expreffed in the prediction, partly e-. vident from uncontefted hiftory. 1. John makes idolatry (falfe religion) an effential characteristic of the beaft, and of, his feven heads, as appears from chap. xvii. 3. and from y 1. of chap. xiii. which chapter is very evidently parallel to the 17th. 2. Hence it neceffarily follows, that at any period of time when the empire was not idolatrous, the beaft did not then exift; but it might then be faid, that it was, but is not, (which explains y 8. & 11.; because a beaft full of names of blafphemy, and having heads of that character, is an emblem, not fimply of the Roman empire, but of that empire while idolatrous, &c. 3. When it is declared, that of the whole feven blafphemous heads five were fallen, and that one exifted in John's time, y 10. to 13. it is evidently the fame thing as if it were faid, that the Heathen emperor then exifting was the

E e

fixth,