Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Summary Of All The Arguments For And Against Richard Brothers.
SUMMARY OF ALL THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST RICHARD BROTHERS .
' Concluded from Page 177 . TTTALI-IED esteems those prophecies , particularly of the second JC 1 L "ook , as an abstract or brief chronicle ofthe future fortunes of all Europe ; he looks upon the mysterious depths of Daniel , Esdras , and the Revelation , as now rendered somewhat easy and plain , Mr . Brothers found the
having proper clue to unravel them . This author , in obedience to Brother ' s reference to the Scripture , sat down prepared for the study , in order to read the modern history of Europe in the prophetic records of the Old and New Testament . In respect to the four beasts in the vision of Daniel , Halhed says that they were never altogether justly conceived . Where Rome is really meant Babylon is properly understood , but commentators have ah erred in supposing thr . t Babylon universally and in all cases . siernified thp . samp Rnm ?
Mr . Home thinks that the above writer understands common amsgmas and conundrums much better than the visions and phrases in Holy Scripture ; for instance—both he and Brothers , mistake the meaning of the Holy Ghost descending as a dove , it not being actually in the likeness of a dove , only as a dove -would descend . —" ' Though great ( he writes ) as Mr . Haihed thinks himself in decyphering mysterious and modes of
allegorical composition , he has in a veryforced manner indeed read the modern history of Europe in the prophetic records of the Old and New Testament . "—He takes notice of the great craft that has been made use of in choosing the most intricate parts of the Scripture to answer the purpose of deception . Brothers ( he says ) instead of referring us to the most comprehensive parts of tlie HolScri
y pture , continually refers to the Apocrypha and Revelation . He wonders Mr . Brothers would insert the book of Esdras under the appellation of Apocrypha ( which Greek word signifies writings of uncertain authority ) , as thereby he gives occasion to doubt the veracity of his assertions .- —The prophet Daniel ( adds Mr . Home ) is played upon , and an absolute parody written upon his vision . ( Daniel , ch . vii . v . 2 , & c . )
f he rotir beasts ( in Daniel ) , says Halhed , were interpreted to be four kings- —in vain commentators laboured to seek those kin ° -s in four successive monarchies , but Brothers gives ( he declares ) the clue to the whole mystery in a single word , by writing , " they are four kings now . " The first , he says , is the King of England . - Home , in direct opposition . to this , asserts , that the first beast , Which looked like a lion , was meant for Nebuchadnezzar , who was always characterised as a lion , till the conquests of his army were stopped , or , as the prophet Daniel expresses it , his 'wings plucked , by
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Summary Of All The Arguments For And Against Richard Brothers.
SUMMARY OF ALL THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST RICHARD BROTHERS .
' Concluded from Page 177 . TTTALI-IED esteems those prophecies , particularly of the second JC 1 L "ook , as an abstract or brief chronicle ofthe future fortunes of all Europe ; he looks upon the mysterious depths of Daniel , Esdras , and the Revelation , as now rendered somewhat easy and plain , Mr . Brothers found the
having proper clue to unravel them . This author , in obedience to Brother ' s reference to the Scripture , sat down prepared for the study , in order to read the modern history of Europe in the prophetic records of the Old and New Testament . In respect to the four beasts in the vision of Daniel , Halhed says that they were never altogether justly conceived . Where Rome is really meant Babylon is properly understood , but commentators have ah erred in supposing thr . t Babylon universally and in all cases . siernified thp . samp Rnm ?
Mr . Home thinks that the above writer understands common amsgmas and conundrums much better than the visions and phrases in Holy Scripture ; for instance—both he and Brothers , mistake the meaning of the Holy Ghost descending as a dove , it not being actually in the likeness of a dove , only as a dove -would descend . —" ' Though great ( he writes ) as Mr . Haihed thinks himself in decyphering mysterious and modes of
allegorical composition , he has in a veryforced manner indeed read the modern history of Europe in the prophetic records of the Old and New Testament . "—He takes notice of the great craft that has been made use of in choosing the most intricate parts of the Scripture to answer the purpose of deception . Brothers ( he says ) instead of referring us to the most comprehensive parts of tlie HolScri
y pture , continually refers to the Apocrypha and Revelation . He wonders Mr . Brothers would insert the book of Esdras under the appellation of Apocrypha ( which Greek word signifies writings of uncertain authority ) , as thereby he gives occasion to doubt the veracity of his assertions .- —The prophet Daniel ( adds Mr . Home ) is played upon , and an absolute parody written upon his vision . ( Daniel , ch . vii . v . 2 , & c . )
f he rotir beasts ( in Daniel ) , says Halhed , were interpreted to be four kings- —in vain commentators laboured to seek those kin ° -s in four successive monarchies , but Brothers gives ( he declares ) the clue to the whole mystery in a single word , by writing , " they are four kings now . " The first , he says , is the King of England . - Home , in direct opposition . to this , asserts , that the first beast , Which looked like a lion , was meant for Nebuchadnezzar , who was always characterised as a lion , till the conquests of his army were stopped , or , as the prophet Daniel expresses it , his 'wings plucked , by