Works, Book 4 · Letter 9
EPISTLE IX.
Mr. Hayn's Third Letter to Mr. Mede, about several passages in Daniel and the Revelation.
SIR,
I Confess that conference by writing multiplies words, by giving more scope to deliberation; and may justly make you backward to Collations in this kind: But the disquisition and finding of truth countervails all; than which I seek nothing more by this my pains. To that part of your answer received Iuly 22. I have inclosed a Reply; and expect the rest of your Answer formerly intended, when you should return to Cambridge: And now to this present Reply as your occasions will permit. Such Writings as I have seen of yours testifie to me both your plentiful reading, and diligent observation of matters most remarkable therein; as also (I am perswaded) in this Argument: Yet cannot all that yet you have said drive me from my hold. I reverence the Learned on both sides, and will ever give them all duerespect; and will not be found to stand single in any opinion. But the persons of men shall not sway me against the native light of the Sacred Text, which I know makes for me. If Alsted and some others have lest their Masters in some of these points; I think we shall find others, (as Glassius) of equal judgment to Alsted, to run this way. But 'tis to be considered herein, not so much Qui dicunt pro au… contra, as Quid dicunt. And therefore I will not put into the scales mens Authority, but their Reasons: And hope that after your perusal of this present Reply, you will be more inclinable to a different judgment from some of your former Tenets. And thus leaving you to the protection and direction of the God of Truth, I rest,
Your very loving Friend, Tho. Hayne. Octob. 8. 1629. from Christ's Hospital, London.
THE ground of the expectation of the coming of Christ and his Kingdom, was (say you) the near expiration of Daniel's Seventy weeks.
The expectation of Simeon, Anna, and others, of the Magi, Repl.and them of the East, was seventy years before the end of Daniel's Seventy weeks, according to your opinion. For you hold that the Seventy weeks end at Ierusalem's overthrow, which was after Christ's Birth seventy years, Therefore it could not be any mark for the looking for of Christ. 2. At the end of the Seventy weeks, according to your judgment, the City and Sanctuary was to be destroyed, sacrifice ended, and desolation brought on the Iews: Therefore the Seventy weeks (according to your Tenet) is a mark of other matters; not of Christ's or the Saints Kingdom,B…. Iu…. 7. 12. but rather of Vespasian's, as Iosephus saith, which ensued just upon the end of the Seventy weeks.
But in truth Daniel's Seventy weeks end at Christ's death: and seeing Christ was expected to be King of the Iews, all that truly kept account of the Seventy weeks, might rightly conceive that Christ about thirty years before the expiration of the Seventy weeks should be born; and so about thirty years old (which are years fit for publick charge) should enter upon that Kingdom. Of this reason I forbore to write formerly, because I saw that we should differ about the beginning and end of Daniel's Seventy weeks, which would bring on a new controversie between us.
That Christ's Kingdom was (as you affirm) to be revealed in the foreign of the Fourth Kingdom, I see no Text that proves it; nor that Christ's Kingdom should be consummated at the end of the Roman Kingdom. At the end of the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel it was to begin, Chap. 7. And that it was perfected in Christ Iesus is evident; for he overcame the Devil, Death, Hell, and all; and teaches that all power is given him in heaven and earth, that all things bow to him, and that he led captivity captive. Further, I have good ground for to say, that the extirpation of the Fourth Kingdom was one s…re mark of Christ's coming, and his Kingdom: for that only is the mark of the same, Chap. 2. and 7. where that Kingdom is mentioned.
You will not admit the Greeks any Rule after Antiochus Epiph. death, because the Holy Ghost ends their Kingdom in him.
I say the Holy Ghost ends the domineering violence and persecution of the Saints in him; but there were to be clayie feet after him. Stories shew that many Kings of the Greeks ruled after him; and in the end Cleopatra, a woman (as Iosephus saith) of chief Nobility in those times:Ioseph. 15. 5. Xiphil. even Caesar at first umpired between her and her brother, in matters of difference between them. She had the revenue of Iericho and Arabia, and other parts; she killed all her kindred that might stand in her way… and desired Antonie to do the like by them of chief ble…d in Syria, Ioseph. Bell. 1. 13.that she in right of the Greeks might have all. She, with the rest after Epiphanes, were sufficient to express the clayie legs. And that Rule is sufficient, and all that I stand for.
Besides, the Stone as cut out (not as growing to a Mountain) is to fall on the toes: So that if by the legs the Romans be understood, Christ was not to come in their foreign, but at their fall. Evident it is that Christ's Kingdom took place (as frequent mention of it in the New Testament shews) at his first coming, and so began at the beginning of the Roman persecutions, not at the foreign of them; they were abundant and manifold afterward. The foreign of their Empire hath nothing to do here.
You hold still that the Roman Kingdom was revealed to Daniel, but not according to the distinct Fates and Times, as to Iohn. I shewed that the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel was revealed to him most distinctly, for the original, proceeding, strength acts, persecution, sufferings, fall: All the … are revealed to Iohn about the Roman Kingdom. Now if they should both speak of the Roman Kingdom but in these points; … it be true in Iohn, that this Book was opened by none (as you limit it, according … distinct Fates) before by Christ? Therefore the limitation propounded by you cannot hold.
I say not that the Iews after the Apostles times brought in or invented the opinion, That the Romans were Daniel's Fourth Kingdom, but that they endeavoured to perswade it; whoever were the brochers of it, Ionathan Ben Uziel, or any other, surely some of their stamp. And the rather they then did and now do perswade to it, because some Christians by assenting to them give them advantage therein.
If Porphyrie, an enemy to Christians, overcome by the evidence of truth, confessed it; that is a greater confirmation of the truth. The Devil confessed Christ to be the Son of the living God; though the Devil be a liar commonly, yet now he spake that which was most true. Besides, in S. Ierome it appears; that Porphyrie was not alone in that opinion: but that divers others held the same. And in the eleventh chapter S. Ierome goes along with Porphyrie in most things; but addeth this, That Antichrist and his doings were there typed. And in points in which S. Ierome crosseth Porphyrie, his arguments are sometimes but his own bare assertion, sometimes weak. If you please to set the best edge on them that may be,S. Ier. in Dan. c. 11. we will try them. And Porphyrie had Suctorius his Author.
To the writing in a different hand.
You hold Christ's Kingdom to be double; First, Regnum Lapidis, while the times of the Four Kingdoms lasted.
I say, it cannot be in the time of the three former Kingdoms; for it was preached by Christ and the Apostles to be at hand in the time of the Romans: Antiochus Epiphanes his time, whom you make the last of the Greeks, being past well-near, or full hundreds of years before. Besides, I object, That if Christ's Kingdom be set up in the Fourth Kingdom's time, it must be set up in the three formers time also. For it confounded the gold, silver, brass, iron, as well as fell on the clayie legs. Again, if you make the S…one to continue a Stone from Christ's time till ours, and some years after (God knows how long) to smite the feet of the Image; you will make the legs and feet of the Image above 1600 years long, three times and more as long as all the body.
The Second Kingdom of Christ you hold to be Regnum montis, that shall fill the whole earth, to arise when the Image shall be utterly destroyed. 1. I say, This division of Christ's Kingdom is no where in Scripture plainly expressed, though this Kingdom be most frequently handled. If such a thing had been, it would in one place or other, in the various handling of it, have been plainly taught. 2. The Stone spreads it self over the whole earth presently; Their sound is gone into all lands: There were at Pentecost devout men of all nations under heaven, who (the Spirit enabling them extraordinarily) might carry the Gospel into all parts.
The Mysterie you speak of, I conceive not: I am sure of this, That the Stone, Ch. 2. which became a Mountain, is the same with Christ and his Kingdom, Ch. 7. Nor do I conceive how Nebuchadnezzar is a Type of the Gentiles, or Daniel of the Iews: But I am sure that the Iews in good measure had part in Regno Lapidis, as you call it: For the Apostles and many other Christians were Iews, and Paul is told that (not many Thousands only, as some Translations have it, but) many myriads of Iews believed, Act. 21. 20. Therefore you hold amiss, that the Iews had not part in Regno Lapidis.
The Vniversal Kingdom of Christ (say you) is the same in Daniel and the Apocalyps. This is most true. Further, I say this was begun by Christ, when he saith, All power is given to me, &c. go teach and baptize all nations: and so Christ wills that out of all nations subjects should be gathered to him. foreign. Isocrat.And if in nations where the Gospel was preached many assented not, Christ told us that also, Many be called, few chosen.
So then that which you hold will follow, doth not follow, seeing that the ground-work of it is not sound; especially seeing the Vniversal Kingdom of a Thousand years (by Iustin Martyr held, but then contradicted, as he saith; and had he seen what the length of time since hath given us to see, he would, I am perswaded, have been of another mind) and the Arguments for it, though brought in scores,Al…ed. will prove but light, if they come to examination.
To the Appendix.
The First coming of Christ (say you) was while the Fourth Kingdom in Daniel was yet in being; because the Stone was hewen out of the mountain before it smote the Image on the feet.
But I say, the whole Image was standing in the Vision while the Stone was cut out. So by the same reason, the first coming of Christ, and the raising of his Kingdom, should be during the times of the Kingdoms of the whole Image; for the Stone, as it fell on the feet, so it brake all to pieces, the iron, brass, clay, silver, gold. The truth is, that Christ's coming and Kingdom was at the end of the Image, and ruin of the four Beasts; yet did the Stone, that is Christ (so Iust. Mart. and others take it) as he was God, destroy them all by his Instruments; that is, Babel by the Medes and Persians, and those by the Greeks; the Greeks by their own discords, and by judgment given to the Saints in the Maccabees times, and the Romans interposing as friends and associates, not as chief parties.
And for any sound reason that I know we have to the contrary, we may say, that the Stone was cut out of the mountain after the ruine of the whole Image, in the fulfilling of the Vision, though not in Daniel's sight of it. For you will grant, that it was cut out after the fall of the three former kingdoms, and yet did break the gold, silver and brass, by his instruments, and so might also break the iron and clay, though it rose after the fall of the Fourth Kingdom. The reason is alike of both; for as it is said to fall on the toes of the one, so also it is said to break the rest.
In the days of those kings, Object.or kingdoms, Dan. 2. This is the great argument against me.
To it I answer,Answer. That if the words be taken in their strict force, they intimate the days of Babel, Persians, and Greeks also (and not of the Fourth Kingdom only:) which you will not grant. And if foreign signifie after the daies of some of those Kingdoms, (as you cannot but grant) why not of the rest also? Besides, you know the Hebrew particles be exceeding various in their signification; and hardly any particle more than this. Again, the force of it must be sometimes (after:) See Exod. 2. 11. and v. 23. especially, foreign after many days, or in process of time: But (in many daies the king died) cannot stand good. Let it not then seem strange that foreign may signifie [after.]
The Iews expected aright, in the time of Christ's preaching, the Kingdom promised in Daniel, because the 70 weeks were within two or three years at an end, and the Greeks ruinated; but their error was, that they expected that Christ should have a Terrene kingdom: And if any conceived that Christ in his own person should overthrow outwardly the Fourth Kingdom, therein they erred: For Christ tells them plainly, that his Kingdom is not of this world, (which Solomon found a map of vanity;) that the Kingdom of God is within them: A Kingdom far beyond all Promises in phrases of an outward Kingdom. If they had known as much as we, (thanks be to God,) doubtless they would have thought the time long, that Christ should then be come, and 1629. years after, t…e Beast not yet destroyed, nor the Kingdom restored; and that the Fourth Beast should have thrice as much time as the other three Beasts, according to your Tenet.
Not the Pharisees only (Luke 17. 20.) but the Apostles (Acts 1. 6.) enquire about the restoring of the Kingdom to Israel. This was because they saw the fourth Beast slain and destroyed; namely, the Greeks; for the Romans now flourished. It may be, that the not conceiving how the Saints could have a kingdom, and the Romans not be subdued, might make some of them stagger, and be in doubt whether the Romans were not the Fourth. Christ's answers laid together might have made them see the Spiritual Kingdom, and lay hold of that, and not expect a Terrene.
Octob. 8. 1629.