ºrrºwn W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyywy w w y WWW w Y
# Tappan Presbyterian ASSOClation
: LAIR R A PV
: . B 425567 3.”
; Presented oy HUN. D. BETHUNE DUFFIELD. #'ſ.
From Library of Rev. Geo. Duffield, D.D.
i
3: sº º Sº, , , , ...
- “sº.
SEMPER
(
(
- ... 2 4 «- 2
, $ºzyrow
Jºo




13 S
(24-7
kT
tº-12.
THE NAME AND NUMBER
OF THE BEAST.
L. AND J. sesley, Thames pitton, surney.
:* AATEINOx, ; LATEINOS ;
OR, THE
ONLY PROPER AND A PPE L L ATIVE N A M E OF THE
M A N,
whose PROPHETICAL NUMBER IN GREEK NUMERALs, is
x83', or 666; Rev. xiii. 18;
DEMONSTRATED TO BE
THE ECCLESIASTICAL MARK or NAME of the BEAST,
WHO HAD
“TWO HORNS LIKE A LAMB, AND HE SPAKE AS A DRAGON ; ”
Rev. xiii. 11—18;
BEING NONE OTHER THAN
THE POPE OF ROME :
Whose CHURCH, and KINGDOM are, even NOW, INTRINSICALLY, and
APPELLATIVELY,
L A T I N.
“LATEINOS NoMEN habet SExcento Rum SExAGINTA SEx NUM ERUM : ct valide
veris IMI LE est, quoniam Noviss IM U M REGNUM HOC Han ET Vocabulu M. LATINI
enim sunt qui Nu Nc REGNANT.” IRENAE. Lib. v. Cap. xxx. p. 440.—Edit. GRAB E.
Zmºre?re, Kai Eö9%aere. MATT. vii. 7.
BY THE REV. REGINALD RAB ETT, A. M.
OF QUEEN’s college, CAM BRIDGE, AND VICAR OF Thop Nron, LEICESTERSHIRE,
&
* * *
--- - - - - -–tº–-
PUBLISHED BY R. B. SEELEY AND W. BURNSIDE :
AND SOLD BY L. AND J. SEELEY,
FLEET STREET, LONDON.
MDCCCXXXV.
º
*
s
rt3* ,tº-
t - , \
- . .) *. - •'.
ar, ‘’’’ ‘’’ A. Z.,
• '. 3. "/? 3 2
PREFATORY ADDRESS
TO
PROTESTANTS.
It is not a new subject to which I now invite your spe-
cial attention, but the establishment of an old one ; yet
the Barrier of prejudice is as high as Babel, and
Jnbelief is as in the days of Jerusalem, so that men
will not believe a Matter, though a Man declare it
unto them. Nevertheless, the Word of God is true,
and changeth not, and the wisdom of Solomon testi-
fieth, that, "“It is the Glory of God to conceal a
thing; but the honour of Kings is to search out a
Matter.” Now the secret of the * Number “ 666 ''
is “a Matter” not only befitting the Ministers of the
Gospel to understand, and “search out,” or limited
to the Apostolic Age : but it most especially con-
cerned the “ten Kings” (and Kingdoms) which had
* “one mind” and “gave their power, and strength,
and Kingdom unto the Beast,” namely, the Papal
! Prov, xxv. 2–5. * Rev. xiii. 18. 3 Ibid xvii. 13, 17.
#
PREFATORY ADDRESS
Roman Hierarch, during the predicted period of
* “1260 Days” of Prophetical years. We know,
then, that Protestant England was formerly one of the
“Ten Kings” and Kingdoms, which supported the
Ecclesiastical Tyranny of Papal Rome, but that she
has been providentially broken off from the galling
yoke and dominion of the Papacy for upwards of
three centuries past, and has protested, (solemnly,
and nationally protested,) against the Theocratic
and Despotic Power, (both temporal and spiritual,)
of the Sovereign Roman Babylonish Pontiff, as
Luther, Calvin, Wickliff, Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer,
and a Host of Reformers and Martyrs have wit-
messed by a good confession before God, and before
“a cloud of Witnesses,” even unto the Death. O,
then, that it might be the good pleasure of our Sove-
reign Lord, the King of Great Britain, with his
Counsellors of State, and the Nobles of these Realms,
(as it was of KING JAMES I. in his “Premonition,”
and of * Lord John Napier, Peer of Marchiston,
in the year 1593,) to “search out this Matter,” and
to see whether Protestantism or Popery can stand
the Test of Scriptural Investigation. Since the days
of the GLoRious REFoRMATION, THE BIBLE has
been the joy of our Land ; it has been the bright
resplendent SUN in our Religious Firmament; dis-
pelling the dark clouds of Popery, Ignorance, and
barefaced Infidelity: it has been a Light of Glory
* Revelations xii. 6, 14. -
* “A plain discovery of the whole Revelation of St. John, &c. By John
Napier, Lord of Marchiston.” Fifth Edition. Edinburgh. 1645.
TO PROTESTANTS.
to those who sat in darkness and the Shadow of
Death ; its genial Rays have been shed in rich abun-
dance (not only over the British Isles, but over the
whole surface of the Globe,) by the agency of the
British and Foreign Bible Society, the Missionary,
and many other religious Societies; the Holy Scrip-
TUREs having been Translated (not into the Latin
Vulgate for the [Now] Church of Rome, but) into
upwards of 160 different Languages and Dialects.
The British Reformation Society is lending its
Salutary aid for Ireland, a Country, the People of
which, if moderately instructed in the Holy Scriptures,
would, by the grace of God, presently discover the
Horrors and Deformities of Popery, cast away its
galling chains, which are infinitely worse than the
fetters of Africa, (for the fetters of the soul, are
worse than those of the body,) and leave its dark,
deluding, and mysterious Priesthood, as the People
of England did at the glorious Reformation, and
also in the well-known Period of 1688, since which,
(TILL Now,) Popery has hid her Dragon Mouth in
ENGLAND, Scotland, and WALEs, and skulked off
to the unhappy shores of IRELAND, and this, this
is the cause of Ireland's woes. Ye cannot serve
God and the Pope / Shall we, then, as Protestants
of Great Britain, in this enlightened and religious
Age, assist in bringing back the “Dark Ages” of
Popery P Shall we allow the Word of God again
to be “clothed in sackcloth,” that is, limited to the
Language of Popery, which is LATIN ? Shall we
1 Revelations xi. 3.
# *
PREFATORY ADDRESS
foster the “cunningly devised Fable,” that the Pro-
testant Religion and Popery are the same in sub-
stance 2 No, my Protestant friends, this is the
“ device of Satan,” causing you to “ BELIEVE A
LIE” as you will easily perceive in St. Paul’s fore-
warning to the Thessalonians, which, when you
have read, Remember that is the eract Portrait of
the Pope and Popery as drawn by the Pen of Inspi-
ration : * (“for whatsoever things were written
aforetime were written for our learning, that we
through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might
have hope l’’)
* “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together
unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be
troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by
letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at
hand. LET No MAN DECEIVE You BY ANY MEANS :
for that day shall not come, Except there come
A FALLING Away first, and that MAN of SIN be
revealed, the SoN of PERDITION ; who opposeth and
evalteth himself above all that is called God, or that
is worshipped: so that HE As GoD sittETH in the
TEMPLE of GoD, shewing himself that HE Is GoD.
Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I
told you these things 2 And now ye know what
witholdeth that HE might be revealed IN HIS TIME.
For the MYSTERY of INIQUITY doth already work :
only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken
out of the way. And then shall THAT WIcked be
* Romans xv. 4. * 2 Thess, ii. 1–12.
TO PROTESTANTS.
wevealed, whom THE Lord shall consume with the
Spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the
brightness of his coming : even HIM, whose coming
is after the working of Satan with all power and
signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness
of unrighteousness in them that perish ; BECAUSE
they received not THE Love of THE TRUTH, that they
might be saved. And For THIS CAUSE GoD SHALL
sEND THEM STRONG DELUSION, that they should
BELIEVE A LIE : that they all might be damned who
BELIEVED NOT THE TRUTH, but had pleasure in
unrighteousness.”
We see then the Reason why the Papal Antichris-
tian Power has arisen ; namely, to verify this
prediction, and others coincident with it, as set forth
in the Book of the Revelation of St. John ; for, as
the Primitive Christian Church was founded on
“THE TRUTH,” so it was foretold by St. Paul that
the time would come when a “falling away” from
“THE TRUTH " would “FIRST’ take place; “ because
they received not the love of THE TRUTH.” “And
for this cause God shall send them STRoNG DELU-
SION, that they should BELIEVE A LIE.” Now what
“STRONGER DELUSION" could be “sent” to any
man, or Nation, than the “belief’ that the Pope
of Rome is the true Vicar of Christ, at the same
time that he is the TRUE ANTICHRIST 2 What
greater “LIE * can be “believed?” what greater
“deceivableness of unrighteousness” can be set forth
to men, than their “believing” that the Pope of
Rome, who is the “Mystery of Iniquity,” is the
PREFATORY ADDRESS
“Mystery of Godliness” and the representative of
Christ 2 when at the same time St. Paul calls him in
the above words; “The Man of Sin,” “the Son of
Perdition,” “the Mystery of Iniquity,” “that
wicked,” to be revealed, who opposeth and ea'alteth
himself above all that is called God, or that is wor-
shipped; so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of
God, (viz. St. Peter's at Rome,) “shewing himself
that he is God.” And will ye not believe that the
Pope is very Antichrist 2 If ye will not, may I not
well say unto you, what Christ said to the Jews on
another occasion: “Ye do err, not knowing the
Scriptures 2" for the Event has followed the Pro-
phecy as clearly as the Sun at noon-day, and this
Prophecy of the coming of the “Man of Sin” is
accordingly fulfilled by the Revelation of the Pope
at Rome, he being the Beast with “* Two HoRNs
like a LAMB, and HE SPAKE as a “ DRAGON ; ”
a character most clearly foretold, but not fully re-
vealed 'till the sirth Century, that is, in the Reign
of the Emperor Justinian, A. D. 533. Those, there-
fore, who consent to purchase the pardon of their
Sins from the Pope for money, or from his Cardinal
Legates, or from the Priests of his Roman Church,
and those who remit them at such a price, are not
“the children of God,” but of Simon Magus, the
Magician, and will receive his Reward, ” “because
they think that the Gift of God may be purchased
with money : ” and “ because God hath sent them
strong delusion to believe this lie.”
* Revelations xiii, ll. * Acts viii. 20.
TO PROTESTANTS.
Lend your Ears, then, Protestants of England,
and consider attentively that it is “the Honour of
Kings,” as the “nursing Fathers of the Church,”
to understand and “search out ’’ the “MARK,” or
“NAME” of the “MAN’’ whose Number is “666,”
to avoid his Punishment; for it is written by St.
John, “If any man worship the Beast and his
Image, and receive his Mark in his forehead, or in
his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the
wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture
into the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be
tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of
the holy Angels, and in the presence of the Lamb :
and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever
and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who
worship the Beast and his Image, and whosoever
receiveth the MARK of his NAME.” Remember,
then, that the ‘‘MARK’’ or “NAME’’ of this Beast,
is, LATEINos; forasmuch as Papists have canonized
the LATIN Language for the special use of the
CHURCH of Rome, at the Council of Trent; and all
Europe knows that they Latinize in every thing of
an Ecclesiastical mature, and that, not of Command-
ment from Christ, or his Apostles, but from their
own free choice: wherefore, those who are the strict
followers of the Pope “worship” him, by kissing
his Foot, which is an indispensable ceremony at
Rome; they acknowledge Him, and none other, as
their rightful Sovereign ; they adopt his Latin
Language, (which is the Mark of unity among
* Revelations xiv. 9—ll.
PREFATORY ADDRESS
Papists,) and pronounce him to be the true Vicar of
Christ: therefore, as the Pope is the successor of the
Pagan LATIN or Roman Emperors in their literal
Kingdom, and Office of “Pontifer Marimus,” and as
he has canonized their Latin Language, in preference
to the Italian, and GREEK original, so is the Pope
in every possible sense the Image of old Rome; for
Papal Rome has adopted Image-worship without
end, and those who do not literally “worship” the
Person of the Pope by kissing his foot, acknowledge
his right to this “worship” and therein “receive the
Mark of his Name,” and consequently come under the
above condemnation. Let History then furnish us with
the melancholy details of the Life and death of Car-
dinal Beaufort, for one example; and of the great
Cardinal Wolsey, for another, of those miserable and
infatuated beings who have “strengthened themselves
in the strength of the Pope, and trusted in the shadow
of Rome,’ and who have most implicitly “received” the
Latin Ecclesiastical “ Mark,” and say if Papal Rome
can give infallible comfort in a dying hour? Did
not “ God send them STRONG DELUSION that they
should believe a lie?” in despite of all that Papists
have endeavoured to persuade Protestants to the
contrary, saying, “ there is no salvation out of the
Church of Rome?' Wolsey's own signature was
‘Card”. Ebor. Miserrimus ; ' and this would be the
general, the universal signature of Papists, (“Mis-
errimus—the most wretched,’) if the heart would
speak out: for they have not “subscribed with their
* Isaiah xliv, 5.
TO PROTESTANTS.
hand to the Lord, saying, I am the Lord's ; ” but to
the Pope, their Sovereign Pontiff, who is the
“ MAN ?” who hath “Two HoRNs like a LAMB, and
HE SPAKE as a DRAGON ; ” who “deceiveth them
that dwell upon the Earth: ” yet his Name is
LATEINos and his Number “666.” ”If “Paul's
spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city"
(Athens) “wholly given to IDolatry;” or, as it is
in the margin, “full of IDols: ” and Athens was at
that moment in a Pagan state; how would the
Apostle's spirit be stirred in him, if he were to behold
the City of Rome in its Papal state 2 for it is
“wholly given to idolatry,” and “full of idols : ”
would he not brand it with “Amathema Maran-
atha 2 ° *
Be it known unto you, therefore, my Protestant
friends, that under the Reign of Popery, the clouds
of divine vengeance hung over England thickening
with wrath, as was manifestly the case in the Reigns
of Queen Mary and the Stuarts; and are not Spain,
Portugal, Italy, and Infidel France, exhibited to
our view as specimens of the miseries of Popish
Aingdoms in our time? If they be not, tell me
where they may be found? Shall we presume to
say that Ireland is an eaception ? Can any good
thing come out of Rome? Did any country of
Europe ever prosper under Popery 2 The man who
can believe it, is ignorant of his Bible, of History,
and of himself, and is an Infidel in principle, and a
liberal in heart, and would as soon patronice the
* Rev. xiii. 1 1, 12. * Acts xvii. 16.
PREFATORY ADDRESS
KoRAN as THE BIBLE. The Church of Rome is a
Church of Blood, as St. John predicted of her :
* “I saw the woman drunken with the Blood of the
Saints, and with the Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus.”
*“And IN HER was found the Blood of Prophets and
of Saints, and of all that were slain upon the Earth.”
Does not the History of the infernal Tribunal and
Prison-House, called by the Pope and his Councils,
the “Holy INQUISITIon,” furnish us with the foul
fact 2 Do not the bloody Papal wars and massacres
of hundreds of thousands of Christians throughout
all Europe Exceed the blood shed in the wars of
nations for national conquest ? If then Protestant
England expects the continuance of peace and pros-
perity, temporal and spiritual, she will away with
Popery as with the Plague, by prayer to God on the
one hand, and by every legitimate means on the other;
for the Protestant Throne of England can never be
established in righteousness by the friends of the
Papacy, for they are the secret, dark, and deadly
enemies of God and the King, as the Jesuits have
ever proved to England and the surrounding nations.
Look at her children in our British Houses of Par-
liament / are they not impudent children, answerable
to their Mother, Rome 2 who is called by St. John,
by way of eminence, * “MYSTERY, BABYLoN THE
GREAT, THE MoTHER of HARLOTS AND ABOMI-
nations of The EARTH.” This was the theolo-
* Rev. xvii. 6. * Ibid. xviii, 24.
* Ibid. xvii. 5.
TO PROTESTANTS.
gical opinion of King James the First, as set forth
in his Royal ‘ Premonition’ to Protestants, pages
309, 310, in these words, “This place,’ (viz. Rev.
xvii. and xviii.) says the King, ‘doth clearly and un-
deniably declare that RomE is, or shall be THE SEAT
of that ANTICHRIST. For no Papist now denieth
that by BABYLoN, here, Rome is directly meant,”
&c. What is it then which Irish Papists demand
from the Protestant Government of England? Re-
ligious toleration? No, they know not toleration ;
for Rome Papal has ever been, and will always be
INToler ANT. PERSECUTION is the essence of her
evistence; for this is her sovereign remedy for those
whom she denominates Heretics. The evil Spirit of
Antichrist is in her, and therefore, she “goeth about
as a roaring lion seeking whom she may devour : ”
for seeing that she “received not the love of the
truth,” “God hath sent her stroNG DELUsion that
she should BELIEVE A LIE : ” and now she propagates
the “lie ’’ which her unbelief produced, by “the
working of Satan with all power, and signs, and
lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of un-
righteousness.” Nevertheless, God hath not left him-
self without a witness in these times, for wheresoever
the Gospel is faithfully preached, Popery can never
take deep root, nor raise her scarlet banner; for
though she may howl and roar, yet “the Lion of the
tribe of Judah '' is our defence, and He it is who
* Sec Bishop Moreton's Church of Rome. Chap. iv. sect. 15. page 74.
Second edition, London, 1628.
PREFATORY ADDRESS
giveth us “ the victory over the Beast, and over his
Image, and over his Mark, and over the Number of
his Name.” Ignorance is the fruitful soil of Papists,
as weeds grow most luxuriantly where cultivation is
neglected, and this remark is abundantly true with
reference to the Irish peasantry; but give these poor
people the Bible, in their own Native Language,
which the Popish Priests have so long and rigidly
kept from them, with the same liberty of conscience
which Protestants have in England, and the Priests
of Rome will soon perceive, as when St. Paul preached
at Ephesus, that their Papal * “craft is in danger,”
for they know that “ by this craft they have their
wealth.” The Ecclesiastical Polity of Rome is, to
keep the Bible as a sealed book; to which end they
have it in the Latin Language, which is unknown
to any but the learned ; and therefore poor and igno-
rant Papists look upon the Bible as a Book of Mys-
teries, which none but the Priests of Rome can
possibly understand or unfold. However, St. Paul,
who was a free-born Roman, and the chief Apostle of
the Gentiles, and wrote the Epistle to the Romans,
would not suffer the Apostles to speak in an “un-
known tongue’’ (which Latin is), “ in the Church ; ”
and England, better instructed since THE REFORMA-
Tion, has followed the precept of St. Paul, by giving
the people THE BIBLE in their own native Tongue,
which has immortalized our Nation above every other
Nation in Europe. And I feel pleasure in stating,
(though I hope I shall be excused for expressing it
* Rev. xv. 2. * Acts xix. 25, 27.
TO PROTESTANTS.
here,) that one of my Ancestors, in the time of James
the First, was engaged in the present Translation of
our English Protestant Bible, as set forth in the
general Introduction to Bishop Mant's Bible in the
following words—
“In the conference held at Hampton Court in
1603, before King James the First, between the
Episcopalians and Puritans, Dr. Reynolds, the
Speaker of the Puritans, requested his Majesty that a
New Translation of the Bible might be made,’ &c.
‘The names of the Persons, and places where they
met, together with the portions of Scripture assigned
to each Company, were as follows, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, º
4th, 5th, 6th. To the last mentioned Company (the
6th), consisting of seven individuals, the Epistles of
St. Paul, and the other canonical Epistles, were
assigned at Westminster, namely, 1st. Dr. William
Barlow, of Trinity Hall in Cambridge, Dean of
Chester, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln ; 2nd Dr.
Hutchinson; 3rd. Dr. Spenser; 4th. Mr. Fenton;
5th. Mr. Rabbet ; 6th. Mr. Sanderson ; 7th. Mr.
Dakins. The work was begun in the spring of
1607.
It does not appear to me that any one Commen-
tator has ever placed the subject of the Number 666
beyond the possibility of future Controversy, for
old Dr. Henry More, after he had so clearly esta-
blished the ancient use of the Diphthong, or Broad
ei, in Lateinos, has followed after, and approved the
Square Root System of Mr. Potter, thus leaving the
only Proper and Appellative Name LATEINos to the
PREFATORY ADDRESS
attack of Papists and others, by involving the subject
in new speculations and difficulties, which have mul-
tiplied so greatly and continuously, that there appeared
to be no end to them ; but there can be only one
successful person, and that was IRENAEUs, who lived
in the second century, and who was almost con-
temporary with St. John, being the Disciple of
Polycarp.
If it should be thought by any that I have been
too severe in my animadversions on any Individuals
whose Names are set forth in this work, I can only
say, that (excepting Popery) it has been far from my
intention ; but that as the Persons herein mentioned
have publicly written their opinions on this Number
666, which are now before the world, therefore, it
became necessary for me, in the vindication of
Irenaeus, to bring forward their Names, and to show
how inconsistent their various speculative opinions
are with each other, and with the words of St. John.
If truth be not distinguishable from error, of what use
is God's word to any Nation or Individual 2 But as
the Holy Spirit has expressly assured us, concerning
the Book of Revelations, that, “ If any Man shall
add unto these things, God shall add unto him
the plagues that are written in this Book: and if
any man shall take away from the words of the Book
of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of
the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from
the things which are written in this Book:” on the
contrary, it is said by St. John, ““Blessed is he that
* Rev. xxii. 18, 19. * Ibid. i. 3.
TO PROTESTANTS.
readeth, and they that hear the words of this pro-
phecy, and keep those things which are written
therein : ” wherefore, to say the least, it must be
more eaſpedient to honour God by the confirmation of
that which HE hath spoken, by his inspired servant
St. John, seconded as it is by the Christian Father
IRENAEUs, than that which any man hath written,
whether negatively, positively, or injudiciously against
it. If then I have been led to a more perfect under-
standing and clearing of this Number xás', 666, from
its manifold polemical incumbrances, as weeds that
surround a choice plant, and prevent its appearance
and growth; it is because GoD hath enabled me more
diligently to “search out the matter,” and to “show
the interpretation ” of this Mystical “MARK" or
“NAME,” which is, LATEINos. To GoD, then, be
the glory, and to his Name the praise, for this “wis-
dom” and “understanding.” That this Treatise on
the Number 666, may be made useful to the serious
inquirer after TRUTH, and the turning of many from
the Kingdom of Papal darkness, to the Kingdom of
God's dear Son, is the earnest prayer and desire of
your humble servant for Christ's sake,
§ REGINALD RABETT.
Bramfield Hall, Suffolk,
June, 1835.
INTRODUCTION.
As so many eminent Authors have already preceded
me with their various opinions (and I might say
endless speculations) concerning the Proper and
Appellative Name of the Beast, which is declared by
St. John to be that of “a MAN,” and the “ Number
of his Name *— “ Sir Hundred Threescore and
Siv,” [in Greek character, x{q,] it might perhaps be
supposed, either that the NAME of the MAN could
not be ascertained by the means of “ Wisdom" and
“ Understanding; " or, that the subject has been
already so far exhausted, that nothing more could
possibly remain to be stated by any future writer.
Such, an inference, however, may rather be expected
from those who heedlessly adopt the speculations of
fanciful men, than from the careful Investigator of
Religious Truth.
Pilate indeed said to Christ, ” “What is TRUTH 2."
but he did not wait for an ANswer. May I then be
* Rev. xiii. 18. 2 John xviii. 38.
vi INTRODUCTION.
allowed to hope that such inconsistency and such want
of candour will be carefully avoided by all my readers?
Should the Subject of the NAME and NUMBER of the
MAN be deemed by any UNIMPoRTANT, I must then
shelter myself under the auspices of
ST. John the Divine . . . and of the pious and
learned IRENAEUs: of Hyppolytus Martyr... Aretas
... Feuardentius ... Ticonius ... Primasius ... Wi-
tringa ... Bengelius... Piscator... Grotius... Fun-
gerus ... Vignier ... Broughton ... Potter . . . Mede
... Poole ... Diodati... Down ... Dr. Henry More
... Bishop Newton. . . Lowman ... Daubuz . . . Leigh
... Brightman... Durham ... Whiston... Dr. Fulke
... Pyle ... Kershaw ... Bishop Dounhame. ... Gal-
loway... Jurieu... Dr. Wells... Dr. Cressener...
Dr. Hales ... Dr. Gill... Dr. Wall... Reader...
Lord Napier ... Archdeacon Wrangham... Matthew
Henry ... Burkitt ... Flemming ... Dr. Doddridge
... Dr. Guise . . . Scott ... Fuller . . . Bicheno . . . .
Kett . . . Dr. Adam Clarke ... Faber . . . Professor
Lee... Wm. Cuninghame, Esq. . . Fry. . . Gauntlett
... Jones ... Butt ... Simpson ... Keith . . . Croly. .
Dr. Parry . . . Dean Woodhouse . . . Thurston . . .
Archbishop Laud... Cardinal Bellarmine ... Bishop
Walmesley . . . . Bishop Bossuet . . . Calmet. ... and
many other writers whose Names I have omitted,
for these may surely suffice to show the importance of
the subject in the esteem of men who have thought it
worthy their careful investigation; although their
conclusions have generally been more in accordance
with their own favourite views, than consistent with
INTRODUCTION. vii
those of Holy Writ. Much instability of opinion
must necessarily have been produced by successive
publications of men distinguished by an equal variety
of sentiment and versatility of talent: in proof of
this position I will venture to adduce the following
illustrative examples.
The confession of MR. CRoly, in the year 1827,
is the following.
* “It may have been known to the reader, that the
Number of the Beast, “the 666,” has evercised more
intellects than perhaps any on E problem, sacred or
profane, that ever perplewed the human mind. Whole
treatises have been written upon it. It occupies a
considerable space in almost every Commentary on
the Apocalypse. The inquiry and the FAILURE
began so early as IRENAEUs, in the second century,
and have been perpetuated to our days by a multitude,
among whom were many of the most undeniable
learning and sagacity; HITHERTo No SATISFACTORY
solution HAS BEEN GIVEN.’
The foregoing remarks of Mr. Croly are compara-
tively true: but IRENAEUs evidently had the Proper
and Appellative Name of the MAN, [LATEINos,
upon his lips when he said, ” “LATEINOS NoMEN
HABET SEXCENTORU M SEXAGINTA SEX NUM ERU M .
et valde verisimile est, quoniam movissimum Regnum
Hoc habet Vocabulu M. LATINI enim sunt qui
* CRoly on the Apocalypse, “The Vision of the Church.' page 222.
London, 1827.
* I RENAF. Adver. Haeres. lib. V. cap. xxx, page 449. Edit. Grabe. Oxon.
| 702.
b 2
viii INTRODUCTION .
NUNc REGNANT ; ' and although this Christian Father
has conjectured Three Names, viz. TEITAN, LATEINos,
and ETANeAx, before the Event [Ante Eventum,
that is, before the Rise, Progress, and Establishment
of the LATIN PAPAL CHURCH of Rome, which had
neither place nor power to rise till after the downfall
of the old Rom AN IMPERIAL Power, which was
jlourishing in the SEconD CENTURY, in which IREN-
AEUs lived and wrote. Yet AFTER the Event, [Post
EventuM,] that is, after the full Revelation of the
“MAN of SIN,” the “SoN of PERDITION,” in the
year A. D. 533, according to the ' Imperial Edict of
Justinian to Pope John, the old Pagan Roman
Power being already destroyed by Barbarians, the
PAPACY began to rise out of the Roman or LATIN
EARTH : and what IRENAEUs only conjectured in the
Second, is manifest enough in the Nineteenth Century,
inasmuch as the Appellative Name Aarévos is every
way applicable to the Roman or LATIN ‘ PontiFEx
MAXIMUs, as well as to every individual Papist
through the whole duration of the LATIN PAPAL
KINGDoM, and, therefore, Mr. Croly is mistaken in
his assertion concerning ‘the FAILURE of IRENAEUs,'
who has, on the contrary, given us the true Appella-
tive of the numbered MAN in the proper and descrip-
tive Name, LATEINos.
It is here worthy of remark, how very far superior
the conjecture of IRENAEUs on this Name and Number
666, was (even before the Rise or Ea'istence of the
PAPAL HIERARCHY), to that of any other writer who
* CUNINGHAME on the Apocalypse, page 201, second edit. London, 1817.
INTRODUCTION. ix
has succeeded him ; so much so, that those who have
followed him have invariably traced the numbered
Beast to RomE ; while all others who have gone into
devious labyrinths and foolish speculations, have lost
his proper and descriptive Name, in their failure to
convince themselves that the iota circumflewed, as tº,
is equivalent to the Diphthong or broad ev or , in
LATEINos, which it certainly is, according to the best
Ancient Orthography both among the GREEKS and
LATINs, as Aarévvos, Azrqvos, Aari vos. For autho-
rities, see CHAPTER XV. . t ..
I shall next transcribe the opinion of the learned
VITRINGA concerning the No. 666, as set forth by
Mr. Croly with the observations of the latter; for I
believe that, in point of intrinsic wisdom and research,
the former takes the precedence of almost all other
Authors since the time of Irendºus ; although I have
certain objections to VITRINGA himself concerning
the Name DPYTN3, ADoNIKAM, inasmuch as in that
View he follows not the erample of IRENAEUs.
| ‘VITRINGA, undoubtedly a man of understanding,
and of the most extensive learning, approaches it
with an almost superstitious awe. His apostrophe is
solemn and eloquent.’
‘‘‘Here is wisdom, let him that hath understand-
ing count the Number of the beast.” Yes, here is
wisdom. Let the man, gifted by grace with such
gifts, here display the acuteness of his genius, the
clearness of his sagacity, the depth of his spiritual
knowledge, things, which fall to the lot of few ; but
* Croly on the Apocalypse. Pages 223–225.
X INTRODUCTION.
for which he who by grace possesses them, will here
find abundant exercise. If I have made any progress
in the knowledge of divine things, which might be
supposed from my long study and labour, and from
the office, publicly conferred upon me; I still dare
not presume so far upon my ability and knowledge,
as to arrogate that highest rank of intelligence and
sagacity, (supremum illum intelligentia et perspica-
citatis gradum,) which the Holy Spirit seems to
demand in those who are destined to explain the
‘ number.” For nothing can be more evident, than
that an intellect of a higher and more divinely
awakened kind, (divinioris et praºstantioris mentis
acumen,) is here demanded, than in interpreting any
other part of this book of prophecy.’
“He proceeds to say, that he might “modestè
declinare,” give up the attempt from a justified feeling
of humility ; but that the reader naturally expects
some elucidation. He then goes through a crowd
of the conjectures of his predecessors, names, Hebrew,
Greek, Latin ; numbers squared and cubed ; dis-
proves them all, and finally rests upon the extraordi-
nary guess opy">, for the equally extraordinary
reason that Adonikam is said in Ezra,” to have had a
family of sia hundred and sixty-siv.’
My 1st Objection to the NAME, ADoNIKAM, is,
that although it is the Name of a MAN, nevertheless
it ought to have been written in GREEK LETTERs,
as Ačovik&p, and not in HEBREw, as DDºSTS, accord-
ing to the ORIGINAL TEXT of St. JoHN . . . xàº;',
! Ezra ii. 13.
INTRODUCTION. xi
and the ea'ample of IRENAEUs, whose THREE Names
are all of them written in Greek Characters, as
Tèvrav, Aarévvos, Evav%as.
My 2nd Olyection is, That although ADoNIKAM
is the name of a MAN, it cannot be applied in an
APPELLATIVE or DESCRIPTIVE SENSE to any TEM-
PORAL Or ECCLESIASTICAL POWER, or KINGDOM
whatsoever, either in St. John's time or since ; and
that the individual Hebrew Letters of the Name of
this Man are very far from producing the Number
666. The hypothesis of VITRINGA seems rather to
set us upon finding the Number of a Hebrew Family
consisting of 666, than the Greek Number of a
Man's Name; for the Family of Adonikam, after
their return from Babylon, were registered by Ezra
at 666, but by Nehemiah, at #667, therefore, it
will be necessary to decide which of the two Prophets
was the best Registrar. But the individual Letters
of the Hebrew Name Adonikam produce the Number
765, consequently there is an end to the Name at
once, in reference to the words of St. John which is
to “count the Number” contained in the Name,
and that Number is 666.
Mr. CROLY may anticipate my objection to his
hypothesis from my answers to FABER . . LEE . . and
CLARKE–and may I not add Mr. Croly's own
observations, viz. that 8 “The FIRST ERROR of the
comMENTATORs” “ has arisen from their DISREGARD
of the PLAIN MEANING of the ORIGINAL.” This
Mr. Croly tells us in the year 1827; and it had been
* Ezra ii. 13. * Neh. vii. 18. & Croly on the Apocalypse. Page 226.
xii INTRODUCTION.
well had he only attended to “THE PLAIN MEANING
of THE origiNAL” as IRENAEUs has done, whose
Testimony is subversive of Mr. Croly’s “INQUISI-
Tion,” although Mr. Croly informs us, that, * “The
words LATEINos and Rom11th are USELEss; and
belong to THE HEAP of MERELY cuRIOUS coinci-
DENCEs.” If the two latter Names “belong to the
HEAP of MERELY cuRIOUs coincidences,” where
shall we class Mr. Croly's story of “THE INQUISI-
TION ?” Shall we venture to affirm that IT is a
“FAILURE 2'' It is plain enough that the word
“INQUISITION" is not a GREEK but ENGLISH word:
nor is it the NAME of A MAN : nor does it contain
the No. 666, according to “the plain meaning of the
Original” Teat, and, therefore, it cannot subserve
the purpose intended by St. John, which is, by the
means of “wisdom” and “understanding” to dis-
cover the name of a MAN the individual Greek
Letters of whose Name must (when counted) exhibit
the evact Number x&g' or 666, and, withal, it must
be a Name descriptive of the mysterious character
of the MAN, otherwise there can be no “coincidence”
between the Name of the Man and the “ Number
of his Name.” I may now add—
The confession of the Rev. G. S. Faber, in the
gear 1828, in his * “Sacred Calendar of Prophecy.”
“Many have been the speculations, relative to the
Name thus darkly propounded ; some very plausible,
and others very absurd : but we shall vainly hope
| Croly on the Apocalypse. Page 228. * Ibid. Page 227.
* Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy. Vol. iii. b. v. p. 226.
INTRODUCTION. xiii
for success in explaining the sacred enigma, UNLESS
we ATTEND Most STRICTLY to THE TERMs in which
it is conveyed.”
Notwithstanding this confession of Mr. Faber, he
has bewildered both himself and others, by endeavour-
ing to reconcile contradictions : whereas, if he had
only contented himself with his own RULE, as above,
(which he had followed pretty closely in his first
work, entitled “A Dissertation on the Prophecies
relative to the Great Period of 1260 years,” wherein
he confirms the name Aargavos with all his might,)
he would have done well ; because, it was consistent
with the “terms” of St. John, and “most strictly”
corroborated by the early testimony of the Christian
Father . . IRENAEUs, who lived in the second century,
and who evidently believed “the NUMBER of a Man”
to imply the ‘ name of a MAN, which latter cannot
be said in any respect concerning Mr. Faber's hypo-
thesis of ApostATÉs, because it has not the least
semblance to the Name of any MAN.
The confession of Dr. Burton in his Notes on the
Greek Testament [Rev. xiii. 18, concerning the
very numerous speculations relative to the mystic
Number 666, is as follows:
[“Tov apºpov.] Irenaºus mentions the word
Aarévvos, the Letters of which make up the No. 666:
but the same number has been eaſtracted from so
many other words, that it is USELESs to ATTEMPT the
SoLUTION.” - .
The Confession of Calmet in his Dictionary under
* Faber's Dissertation on the Prophecies, &c. Vol. ii. p. 328,335.
xiv INTRODUCTION.
the head ANTICHRIST, (after mentioning a variety
of Names, Epithets, Words, and Sentences, in
which the Number 666 is supposed to have been
discovered,) is to the following Effect :
“Almost all Commentators have tried their skill,
without being able to say PositiveLY, that any on E
has succeeded, in ascertaining the TRUE MARK, or
the NUMBER of HIs NAME.”
The Confession of Dean Woodhouse in his “An-
notations on the Apocalypse” in the Year 1828, con-
cerning the Number of the Beast, is as follows,
“The Number of the Beast.”
“The consideration of this article has been kept
back, and assigned to this its present place, because
I felt it out of my power to pursue it with the same
hope of success as those that have gone before. For
I MUST STILL conFEss, as I did in my former
work, MY INABILITY TO Solve THIS ENIGMA.”
The Dean then observes,
“With respect to the methods of interpretation
hitherto employed, the first instance that occurs is
that of Irendeus, who by the assortment of the
Letters, of the Greek Alphabet, used numerically,
obtained the names of Aarévvos, Evav02s, and Tévrav.
He preferred the first of these, but had little or no
reliance upon it. His object must have been the idol-
atrous Rom AN or LATIN EMPIRE. Bishop Newton,
and many others among the commentators, have
adopted this word” (Aarévos) “as involving the
* Woodhouse's Annotations on the Apocalypse, p. 304, 306, 307.
INTRODUCTION. XV
discovery required, applying it to the Latin Church
and Papal Hierarchy.”
“But this mode of calculation has fallen into
discredit, by the fact, resulting from experience,
that there is no end to the multitude of names which
may be composed by such fabrications; and that
not only the antichristian Chiefs, but the most
eminent of our reformers may be, and have been thus
designated by their adversaries.”
“Archdeacon Wrangham has the merit of dis-
playing in a very small compass, a learned and
critical view of many attempts in the ancient lan-
guages, and by various modes of calculation, to
devise names applicable to the mystery of the Number
of the Beast. The facility with which these adapta-
tions are made, has occasioned an infinite number
of them. “Scarcely,’ says he, “ has a single contro-
versy started up, in which this accommodating num-
ber (666) may not be ranged on either side.’”
“And we may add,” says the Dean, “that NoNE
of them afford that satisfactory conviction which
attends the PERFECT Discovery of an HIDDEN MYs-
TERY. There is wanting that flash of illumination,
that lively sense of having passed from darkness to
light, which so delightfully affects us upon the solu-
TION of a well-ForMED ENIGMA.”
“However, the learned Archdeacon has not yet
thought proper to relinquish entirely the mode of
computation practised by Irendeus, and has presented
us with the word Arogatns, thus acquired.”
It had been well if Dean Woodhouse had confined
xvi INTRODUCTION.
himself to the terms of his own CoNFESSION.— “I
MUST STILL conFess,” says the Dean, “as I did in
my former work, MY INABILITY TO SOLVE THIS
ENIGMA; ” but he should not have thrown a direct
STUMBLING-Block in the way of * “STUDENTS IN
PROPHETICAL scripTURE,” by insinuating that the
“ MoDE of cALCULATION '' (used by IRENAEUS)
“HAs FALLEN INTo DiscREDIT.” I would not in-
vidiously wish to inquire by whom, or through whom,
‘‘ THIS MODE OF CALCULATION HAS FALLEN INTO
DiscREDIt ; ” but I would only here observe, that as
St. John wrote his “Book of THE REveLATION’’
in the GREEK LANGUAGE, and “ the NUMBER of
THE MAN,” is written in GREEK CHARACTERS,
x{c', so the presumption is that the NAME of the
MAN must likewise be written in GREEK CHARAc-
TERs answerable to the GREEK NUMBER—and as
IRENAEUs was the Disciple of PolycARP, and Poly-
CARP of St. JoHN–and that IRENAEUs was con-
fessedly a GREEK FATHER of great distinction, who
has left us his opinion in the writing of THREE
Names in GREEK LETTERS, viz. Aarévvos, Tewtav,
and Evzvºas, we are therefore justified in believing
that the Hebrew, Arabic, Latin, French, German,
Spanish, Italian, English, and all other Languages
must be out of this Question. Further; “THE MoDE
of cALCULATING " GREEK NAMEs and NUMBERS
does not stand upon the sole opinion of IRENAEUs;
but was well known before St. JoHN's time, or that
* Woodhouse, page 304.
* See the Dean's Title Page to his Annotations on the Apocalypse,
INTRODUCTION. xvii
Apostle would not have thus written the No. 666,
by xàº'; wherefore, this present “ MoDE of cALCU-
LATION" remains unassailable until we are favoured
by the Discovery of a better “ MoDE of cAL-
CULATION.”
The GREEk Version of the OLD TESTAMENT
called “the SEPTUAGINT,” was written long before
the commencement of the CHRISTIAN AFRA, and we
find that the Number 666 occurs Twice in that
Version written at full length, ifaxário tºnkovra gº, [See
EzRA ii. 13 ; 1 KINGs x. 14,] hence it is clear
that the GREEKs had a MoDE of cAlculating at
that time, or how could they have expressed those
Numbers in writing? In proof of this position Dr.
S. T. Bloomfield in his English Notes appended to
the GREEK TESTAMENT, on this GREEK NUMBER
xás' has quoted HEINRICH.
Rev. xiii. 18. Tºy 3plºy rºw ºváparoc.] “This (says
Heinrich) is to be explained from the Cabbala of the
Jews, and that part of it called Gematria. It
means the number which is made up, by reducing
the numeral power to each of the LETTERs of which
the name is composed, and bringing it to a sum total.
That ART, now held in merited contempt, was IN
THE TIME of the ApostLE held in GREAT Honour
not only among the Jews, but also the GREEKS, as
we may collect from ARTEMI.D. ONEIR. i. 12.” See
more “in HEINRICH's elaborate Ea'cursus IV. on
the whole passage.” -
Consult also the following authorities,
SCAPULA in Append. ad Leavicon. “DE GRAE-
xviii INTRODUCTION.
coruM NOTIS ARITHMETICIS com PENDIUM, Ex HA-
DRIANI AMERotis scriptis,” and “HERODIANI DE
IISDEM TRACTATUs.”
Bishop Dounhame: “De Antichristo.” Lib. vi.
Cap. 4. as quoted in Dr. H. More's Works. Page 594.
Dr. Adam Clarke's Commentary on the 18th
verse of the xiiith chapter of the Revelations, wherein
are set forth a great variety of ancient evamples of
the ‘mode of calculating’ among the Greeks.
St. JeroME's Commentary on Amos concerning
the mode of calculating 2.Épača, and geºga;, also on
Zechariah concerning the mode of calculating
errakiaxeduovº and Xºtatiovov;. [See Hierony, Cap. 3.
Comment. in Amos c. 3. and ibid. Comment in
Zachariah. c. viii.]
LAMY's apparatus Biblicus. – “Concordantia:
Litterarum Hebraicarum et Graecarum. P. 349.
Edit. LUGDUNI. 1723.
See the Table of the 24 Greek Letters, with the
Three erurmaa, considered arithmetically, and a
Table of the Combination of Numbers, set forth at
the end of this work, and in almost every Greck
Grammar.
See also other evamples of GREEK NUMERALs set
forth in the viith CHAPTER of the REvelATION of
St. John, in the following (with many other) Edi-
tions of the GREEK TESTAMENT, as 'pub' for 144
and 2 g’ for 12.
* Rev. vii. 4. * Ibid 5–8.
INTRODUCTION. xix
Novum Testamemtum Graece. ARGENToratium. Apud Wolfium. A. D. 1524
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graecum. VENETIIs. Melchioris Sessae... A. D. 1538
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graece. BAsiles. Apud Nicholaum
Brylingerum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. D. 1548
. Graecum. Ex Bibliotheca Regia. LUTETIAE. A. D. 1549
. . . . . . Graece et Latinë. Ad Romanae correctionis
amussim LUGDUNI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. D. 1612
... . . . . . Graecum Variantes Lectiones tam ex manu-
scriptis quam impressis Codicibus col-
lectae, &c. Studio et Labore Stephani
Curcellaei RAPHELENG11... . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. D. 1658
©
Added to which our Lord Jesus Christ is, by St.
John styled A and 0, i. e. “THE FIRST’’ and “THE
LAST,” inasmuch as 2xpo (A,) being the FIRST Nume-
ral Letter of the Greek Alphabet, is, with peculiar
propriety, applied to our Lord Jesus Christ; and
opeya (0) being the LAST Letter of the Greek Alphabet
is, with equal propriety, applied to CHRIST, as being
“THE LAST.” ‘Eyw espa tº Akºl rºo, & IIPOTOx kai: ExXATOx
Rev. i. 8, 11 ; xxi. 6; xxii. 13. Wherefore, we may
very properly annex to these facts, certain other words
of St. John, viz. “THY Word Is TRUTH.” John
xvii. 17.
And last of all I shall instance :
The Confession of Professor Lee, as exhibited in
his “ Dissertations on Prophecy” in the Year 1830,
wherein he expresses a doubt, whether this Number
Xàs' is not a “false reading.” -
The Professor thus writes: -
1 “Whatever the NUMERALs 666 may mean, we
cannot have the least difficulty in ascertaining the
scope of the passage. Irendºus gives (AATEINox)
| Lee's Dissertations on Prophecy. Rev. xiii. Diss. ii. Sec. iii. p. 328.
XX INTRODUCTION.
Lateinos among other interpretations, and this he
applies to the Roman power, which, according to
the numerical character of the Greek Letters, com-
posing it makes up the number 666. Various
other attempts have been made to ascertain these
Numbers, and to fix the Person here meant, which I
pass over; because I Doubt whether ANY RELIANCE
whATEveR can be placed on such A METHoD of
DEDUCTION: and, when I BELIEVE that the PAssage
can be satisfactor ILY made out witHout IT, MY
op1NION Is, that we NEED NOT TROUBLE ourse Lves
conceRNING IT. I am not without My Doubts,
however, whether THIS is not A FALSE READING, and
whether IT has not been INTRod Uced by some EARLY
copyist, for the purpose of filling up what HE might
have supposed to be ELLIPTICAL. The passage Now is:
&piðº, yāg &věpárov čari, kai 3 &pišpº; &vrov Xès': and,
TAKING Away the NUMERALs, we shall have kai ;
3pºpº, atrºv, parallel to the same Evangelist in Chap.
viii. 44. kai 3 rathp &vrºv, which has given abundance
of trouble to the Commentators.”
It is true that Professor Lee has (in the foregoing
words) alluded to IRENAEUs from the mention of his
Name, and that of LATEINos; but can we reasonably
suppose, therefore, that the Hebrew Professor had
carefully read over, or studied, what that Greek and
Christian Father had written on the subject of the
Number 666, when he expressed his “ Doubts con-
cerning the authenticity of it, by insinuating that it
is “A FALSE READING,’ and questioning whether
ANY RELIANCE whATEveR can be placed on SUCH
INTRODUCTION. xxi
a METHoD of DEDUCTION ?’ Surely he could not;
because IRENAEUs has given us the THREE identical
GREEK NUMBERS Xàs', in the precise manner in
which they are set forth in the Text of all the
authentic copies of the Greek Testament : *karaxxâxos
$vy kål rô #vopaz &vrov čes rºw &piðpºv xás'.
And not only has IRENAEUs given us the THREE
Greek Numerals xàs', but he has likewise assured us
in the most unequivocal Terms that the Number 666,
was delivered by those who had seen St. John ‘face
to face,’ as well as set forth in ALL THE ANCIENT,
the MOST APPROVED, and old ScripTUREs, and that
it was the true Number of the Beast : * His autem
sic se habentibus, et IN OMNIBUS ANTIQUIs et
PROBATISSIMIs et VETERIBUS Scripturis NUMERö
Hóc Positó, et Testimonium perhibentibus his, qui
FACIE AD. FAC1EM JoANNEM v1.DERUNT, et ratione
docente nos, quoniam NUMERUs NoMINIs BESTIAE
secundum GRAECORUM ComPUTATIONEM per LITERAs
qua in Eo sunt, SExcENTOs hahebit, et SEXAGINTA,
et Sex.' Furthermore, as if with a view to remove
all possible Doubts which might be subsequently en-
tertained concerning the PERFECTION of the Number
666, and to guard us against any spurious NUMBER,
we have his testimony in affirmation of the former,
in opposition to the latter: ** Oportet itaque tales
discere, et ad VERUM recurrere Nominis NUMERUM :
wt NoN IN PSEUDoPROPHETARUM Loco DEPUTENTUR.
Sed scIENTES FIRMUM NUMERUM qui à ScRIPTURA
* Irenae. lib. V. cap. xxix. p. 446. * Ibid. cap. xxx. p. 447.
* Ibid. cap. xxx, p. 448.
C
xxii INTRODUCTION.
ANNUNTIATUS EST, id est, SExcENTORUM SExAGINTA
SEx,' &c. Moreover, having summed up the Iniquity
and Apostacy of the Numbered Beast, IRENAEUs con-
cludes by saying, in the words of the Ancients :
* * Et propter hoc IN BESTIA vENIENTE recapitulatio
sit Universae Iniquitatis et Omnis Doli, ut in EA
(scil. BESTIA) confluens et conclusa Omnis Virtus
Apostatica, in caminum mittatur ignis. CoNGRU-
ENTER autem et NoMEN EJUS, habebit NUMERUM,
SExcENTos SExAGINTA SEx,' &c. IRENAEUs has
still further certified to us by three several Examples
that the NuMBER Qf the Beast is 666, as he says:
* * EYANeAx enim NoMEN habet NUMERUM de quo
quaeritur : ' . . . . * Sed et LATEINos NoMEN habet
SExcENTORUM SExAGINTA SEx NUMERUM,' &c.: ...
* Sed et TEITAN,' &c. &c. As then IRENAEUs was
one of the Christian Fathers who wrote ea pressly
AGAINST ALL HERESIEs, (* contra omnes Haereses,')
surely it is charging Irenæus, and THE HOLY SPIRIT
with deliberate falsehood to * DouBt,' * whether THIS
NuMBER x£ς', or 666, is mot A FALSE READING.'
MEDE is mot simply content with the words of
St. John, but inserts parenthetically (lest we should
be unmindful of the Divine Agent who indited
these Numerals) * INqUIT SPIRITUS.' . . . ** Hic est
sapientia.' (INQUIT SPIRITUS) * Qui intelligentiam
habet, computet Numerum Bestiæ : numerus enim
hominis est ; et Numerus ejus 666."
Shall we then excuse the Professor for his mom
' Irenæ. lib. V. cap. xxix. p. 446. * Ibid. cap. xxx. p. 448, 449.
3 Rev. xiii. l8.
| NTROI) UCTION. xxiii
eramination of this subject? What can we say ?
It is most extraordinary that one so highly gifted
with the knowledge of many languages should not
have perceived the Truth of this Number, so plainly
exhibited before his eyes in the reiterated words of
IRENACUs, and so very often referred to by the
earliest and best Commentators who have written
upon the Number 666. I most assuredly thought
that the Professor of Hebrew had more veneration
for this Christian Father than to relinquish his
Testimony upon so important a point, without a
sufficIENT vouchER, but that Voucher is evidently
wanting, and therefore, I must leave the Professor (as
I have done in another part of this work) to second
Reflections, more substantial and satisfactory. As I
have answered Professor Lee more at large con-
cerning the SPURIOUS NUMBER xus', or 616, so I
must refer my Reader to that place. [See CHAPTER
XIII.]
As Mr. Potter's hypothesis concerning the
Square Root of the Number 666 has been so greatly
extolled by the learned Dr. Henry More, Mede, and
many celebrated Divines, I shall notice it in this
place, and endeavour to show that it is untenable
upon scriptural grounds, and that an Algebraical or
Geometrical solution of the Number xfº' is foreign
to the Interpretation. St. John informs us that the
* “NAME of the Beast ’’ “Is the NUMBER of a
MAN,” “ and HIS NUMBER is 666.” Now as we
* Potter's Interpretation of the Number 666. Printed at Oxford. 1647.
* Rev. xiii. 17, 18.
C 2
xxiv INTRODUCTION.
have already established from IRENAEUs the correct-
ness of the Number 666; so we can equally establish
the incorrectness of Mr. Potter's hypothesis; for, as
the Number 666 is not a perfect Square Number, so
no perfect Square Root can be eartracted from it.
It is manifest that the Method pursued by Mr. Potter
is merely to find the nearest Square Number to the
Number 666, which he would blindly lead us to
suppose is 625, the Square Root of which being 25.
Thus, by Multiplying the Square Root (25) into
itself, and adding 41, we shall have the Number 666,
which is true enough. But be it remembered that
the Number 676 is a Square Number, the Root of
which is 26, and which, when multiplied into itself,
with 10 subtracted, will produce the Square of 666.
And because the Number 666 is not a perfect Square
of any Integral Number, and that the Number 26 is
nearer to the Square Root of 666 than the Number
25, therefore, the Number 26 is to be preferred to the
Number 25, if the Square Root system be allowed to
prevail. But what, I would inquire, has St. John
said about the Root of the Number 666.2 or, what
concerning the Cube Root of the Number 666 ° or,
what concerning the Square Root of the Number
666.2 The Apostle merely says, “ Here is wisdom.
Let him that hath understanding count THE NUM-
BER of the Beast; for it is THE NUMBER of a MAN,
and HIs NUMBER is Six HUNDRED THREEscor E
AND SIx.” We are plainly instructed by the Holy
Spirit in these words in what way our “wisdom" and
1 Rev. xiii. 18.
INTRODUCTION. XXV
“understanding” are to be exercised, viz. to “count”
THE NUMBER: ” not to extract the Cube or Square
Root of the Number 666. Is it possible to imagine
that St. John could intend that the “NUMBER of the
MAN,” or the “NUMBER of HIs NAME,” should be
written upon a stone of 25 Cubic Inches, or 25
Square or Solid Feet, or 25 Furlongs 2 Or, is it
possible that the inspired Apostle could allude to the
Perimeter, Altitude, Thickness, or Breadth of the
“ MAN ?” Strange as such questions may appear,
yet they are involved in the solution of the Number
666, by means of the Cube and Square Root / If the
hypothesis of Mr. Potter be correct, then the Number
25, being the Square Root of the Number (666—41,)
the Number 25 (as the object sought) must become
the substitute of the or IGINAL NUMBER 666, the
Number 666 being of no other apparent use, than to
ExTRACT the SQUARE Root of the Number 625, and
to add the Fraction . The result of such an
hypothesis must be this, That as the two Greek
Numerals we are equal to the Number 25 ; because
k' = 20 and e = 5; so the two Greek Numerals
xe' squared, must be equal to, or become the Re-
presentatives of the Three Greek Numerals xàs',
or 666, the admission of which hypothesis would be
to allow our adversaries the Romanists, double and
treble vantage ground, because such a Cabbalistical
Mode of Calculation is nothing more than they
would desire, for they know full well that the adoption
of this Square Root System, would be in effect to root
up the Truth of St. John's hypothesis concerning the
xxvi INTRODUCTION.
Number 666, inasmuch as no perfect or settled NAME
of a MAN could be thence derived, no sound conclu-
sion be drawn from such Algebraical deduction, such
immeasurable and indeterminate Premises. Ex. Gr. If
41 must first be subtracted from the original Number
666 of St. John, the square Root produced from that
Number, not being an integral Number, but Frac-
tional, it is therefore, incomplete, and it is certain that
there is no way of making the Number 25, the Square
Root of the Number 666, but by the addition of a
Fraction of #: so we are left in this deplorable
dilemma at last, that 25 is NOT the square Root of
666, neither indeed can it be, because of the Imper-
fection occasioned by the necessary subtraction of
41, from the original Number 666. If the Num-
ber 25 were the genuine square Root of the
Number 666, we should nevertheless be subject
to this difficulty of Decision, as to which of the
Two Greek Numbers xé, or x&g', should be
accounted for the genuine Number of the Beast P
that is to say, whether the Root of the Number 666,
which (according to Mr. Potter's hypothesis) would
be zé, should be the Key to the interpretation,
because wé is the Root of 625, being equal to 25 ;
or, the origiNAL NUMBER xàº. 2 If we should say
the former Greek Number, then the latter must be
evcluded; if the latter, then the former must be
e.vcluded : So that we shall have arrived at no cer-
tainty at last, by the adoption of the square Root of
the Number, for the Number itself. If Mr. Potter
had endeavoured to prove, by the production of
INTRODUCTION. xxvii
examples, that the Square Root was practised by
the Greeks when they sought to “count THE
NUMBER” of a Man's Name, then we could have
discovered how far such a system harmonized with
ancient Greek custom, in reference to the subject
under consideration; but as we know before-hand
that no such Mode of calculation was ever used by
the Greeks, or alluded to by St. John, when calcu-
lating the Number of the Name of a Man, so we
are bound by the inspired words of St. John, and
the example of Irenaus, &c. &c. as well as the autho-
rity of the Greeks themselves, to reject such an
Algebraical and Cabbalistical Mode of calculation
and interpretation; for St. John merely instructs us
to . . . * “ count the Number” (not to extract the
Square Root) of the Beast’s Name.” Ex. Gr. If I
were asked to “count the Number” 1000, would any
one suppose that I should be led to understand by
such a plain requisition, that I was to eartract the
Square Root of that Number? It would be the
height of absurdity 1 and yet this is the sum and
substance of Mr. Potter’s renowned hypothesis.
What analogy can there be between ‘the Name of
a Man, and the Number of his Name,’ and the
Square Root of a Number which is not a perfect
Square P A greater perversion of Mathematical
Knowledge, as connected with the Holy Scriptures,
could not have been set on foot. I have elsewhere
noticed that the three Numerals which St. John had
used to denote the Mumber 666, were Greek, as
* Rev. xiii. 18.
xxviii INTRODUCTION.
xás', and that the Name of the Man, corresponding
with them, must likewise be written in Greek Letters,
as Irematus has certified, and, therefore, the Method
of calculating Greek Names, which was in common
use among the Greeks, in the time of St. John, must
for ever exclude the Square Root System. In the
sequel it will appear that the Square Root hypothesis
has evidently been introduced by Mr. Potter to
accommodate (not what St. John has said concerning
the Number of the Beast, which is 666, but) an idea
relating to certain supposed coincidences between the
sia following matters pertaining to the Church of
Rome, and the Square Root of 625, which is 25.
* “ 1. Five and twenty Gates, whether taken
literally, or mystically for Churches to baptize in.
“2. Five and twenty Angels, that is, Pastors.
“3. Five and twenty Titles or Parishes.
“4. Five and twenty Cardinals.
“5. Five and twenty thousand Furlongs, the
Perimeter of which Cube is the Circuit of Rome, as
the Perimeter of the Cube twelve thousand Furlongs
is the Circuit of Jerusalem.
“6. Five and twenty Articles of the Creed which
should be the Food of the Tree of Life to all Believers.”
But I have already shown that the Number 26 is
nearer the Square Root of 666 than the Number 25,
and that the Number 666 is not a perfect Square of
any Integral Number, and, therefore, to accommo-
date this Idea of Mr. Potter, with the Square Root
hypothesis, we shall have this ludicrous result.
1 See More's Works. Book v. Chapter 16. Sect. 8, p. 135. London, 1708.
INTRODUCTION. xxix
1. 25 Gates, plus the Fraction of a Gate or Church
to baptize in.
2. 25 Angels or Pastors, plus the fraction of an
Angel or Pastor.
3. 25 Titles or Parishes, plus the fraction of a
Title or Parish.
4. 25 Cardinals, plus the fraction of a Cardinal.
5. 25 Ibid.
6. 25 Ibid.
We conclude, therefore, that as 25 is the Square
Root of the Number of 625, and not of 666, so the
Square Root hypothesis of Mr. Potter, (ingenious as it
may appear,) vanishes; for it is not tenable even
upon Mathematical Principles, much less upon Scrip-
tural ground.
I shall conclude my observations on Mr. Potter's
scheme by a brief Memoir of the Author and his
Treatise on the Number 666, which is written in
Pencil by some one on the inside cover of a copy of
his work in my Possession.
“Francis Potter, born in Wiltshire, educated at
Oaford, succeeded his Father in the Living of Kil-
mington, Somerset, 1637. He was elected F. R. S.
for a curious hydraulic engine he presented to that
learned body : he was eminent as a Painter, but his
Treatise on 666, Oaford 1642, does not reflect much
credit on him as a Commentator, rejecting, as he
did, the obvious Name Azrévvos, and having recourse
to a Surd Root, which is absurd.”
Daubuz has rejected the celebrated Name AATEINox
and preferred the two Hebrew words nºr)" signifying
XXX INTRODUCTION.
Roman, and mno signifying Mystery (avg-ipo) both
which words produce the Number 666, according to
the numerical value of the Hebrew Letters of which
they are composed; but as ‘RoMAN and ‘MYSTERY”
are not Names of Men, so they must both be re-
jected on that account, according to the Text of St.
John ; “The Name of the Beast, or the Number of
his Name " . . . “ is the Number of a Man.” More-
over: the Name of the Man must not be sought
after in the Hebrew Language, but in the Language
in which St. John wrote his Book of the Revelation,
which was GREEK, and the Number 2.Ég', which is
Greek, must be counted according to the Mode of
Greek calculations which existed in St. John's time,
of which many examples have been adduced. How
far the Hebrew word nºrm may serve for identifying
the Kingdom of the ‘Roman Ecclesiastical Beast,
is another point; but it is certain that it is not the
NAME of a MAN, and, therefore, the Number 666
cannot be established without it be accompanied with
some special proper Name. Besides which it is so
palpably absurd to have a Greek Number given us,
as x&g', and then to turn to the Hebrew Language to
explain it. If it were a Hebrew Number which was
given us by St. John, as DD, then a Hebrew Name
would have sufficed for the interpretation ; but a
Greek Number must have a Greek Name, as ante-
cedent and consequent. If any two Names of Men
could be found in the same Language in every respect
applicable to the “Mark,” “ Name,” and “Number
of the Beast," it would be an argument why twenty
I NTRODUCTION. xxxi
or fifty Names might be found for the same purpose;
but there is only one Name of a Man which can fully
and satisfactorily unfold the AEnigma, whosoever
may be the discoverer of it, and it must be in ‘GREEK
not in Hebrew (characters,) as Irenaeus testifies.
I have merely mentioned the Names of Croly . . . .
Vitringa . . . Faber . . . Dr. Burton. . . Calmet . .
Dean Woodhouse ... Professor Lee ... Potter . . .
and Daubuz in this part of my Work, with an
intent to show that in the very nature of their
Opinions and Confessions the subject of the Number
666 was not incontrovertibly settled, although noticed
and written upon by them, and also to demonstrate,
that as long as any one additional writer of fair pre-
tensions can be allowed space enough to conjecture
some new name, in any Language which is not Greek,
with any tolerable hope of success; or, invalidate the
Number xãº" by the production of an opposite one,
or the Mode of calculating it by some Cabbalistic
art of the Square or Cube Root; so long the Number
of the Man, which prima facie, imports the Name of
the Man, cannot be declared by any to rest beyond
the reach of future disputation. If then what Irenaus
wrote conjecturally in the second Century, be not
enough to convince us of the certainty of the Name
LATEINos in the nineteenth, (and his Testimony has
been corroborated again and again by subsequent
writers in every age,) vain must be the attempt of
any Modern Writer to begin the Task ; for the MAN,
* Irenae. lib. V. cap. xxx. p. 447. edit. Grabe. Oxon. 1702. and chap. xiv.
p. 167. line 14, &c. of this work.
xxxii ge INTRODUCTION.
(whose enigmatical Appellative Name is by the hypo-
thesis Aarévos, and his Number xàº' or 666,) began
his ecclesiastical Reign, at Rome, A. D. 533, and,
consequently, the “1260 Days” of Years expired
A. D. 1792. Those, therefore, who upon eaſisting
evidence will not acknowledge the Name Aarévvos to
be the true Appellative of the Numbered Beast, may
as reasonably Question the Fact whether the City of
Jerusalem be really destroyed, or not, even though
the Event has verified the prediction. It would, I
repeat, be equally inconsistent to Question the fact
whether the PAPAL-ANTICHRIST, who is “ the Man
of Sin,” “revealed,” be actually revealed at Rome,
or not, although a stream of concurrent Testimony,
beginning with Christ, St. Paul, and St. John, and
followed by Irendºus, has flowed down to us in the
course of those remarkable Events which constitute
the fulfilment of the prediction, according to the
time appointed. Surely, then, we may with the same
certainty look for the destruction of that Papal-City,
Rome, in which the Papists glory so much, as the
Apostles awaited the destruction of Jerusalem, or any
other predicted Event.
It is most grievous to notice the numerous specu-
lative errors which have from time to time arisen,
and been most extensively circulated through the
medium of men of Talent, concerning the Number
666, causing the almost eatinction of the ort Ho-
GRAPHY . . NAME . . NUMBER . . and GREEK MODE
of CALCULATION, if we suffer ourselves to be distracted
by the conflicting testimony of Faber . . . Wrang-
INTRODUCTION. xxxiii
ham . . . Clarke . . . Bellarmine . . . Grotius. . . and
Bossuet, for the orthography : of Calmet . . . Dr.
Burton . . . and Croly, for the NAME: of Professor
Lee and Archbishop Laud, for the NUMBER ; and
of Dean Woodhouse . . . Potter . . . Daubuz and
others, for the MoDE OF CALCULATION. But happily
we are not bound by their opinions, being exhorted by
St. Paul to “prove all things,” (that is, not to take
them upon trust without sufficient examination,) and
then to “hold fast that which is good.” The more
steadily, therefore, we look into the word of God,
the more plainly we shall perceive the truth of these
words : “one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass” . . .
“till all be fulfilled.” Neither then the NUMBER
nor the NAME of the Beast shall in any wise pass
away, till the Time of his predicted reign be fulfilled,
and HIS PROPER NAME fully discovered, and applied
in an appellative sense to the MAN and HIS KINGDom
which are the special subjects of the prophetic Num-
ber 2.Ég' or 666.
It is most certain that many scriptural words,
names and Teats have been so perverted from their
original meaning and intention ; that instead of esta-
blishing the Truths they were intended to convey to
the mind, they have been cunningly laid as a Foun-
dation for the most serious Heresies and destructive
Errors. Wherefore it is most necessary that we pay
the strictest regard even to the value of LETTERs, as
well as words, &c., when such fearful consequences
have resulted from too easy an acquiescence in those
matters which on a little investigation are found to
xxxiv. INTRODUCTION.
be palpably wrong, and equally subversive of Reason
and Holy writ and which ought never to have gained
Credence till their merits had been more fairly
canvassed.
Many have been the unavoidable interruptions
which I have met with since the commencement of
this work in the year 1830, arising from Parochial
Duties and other Engagements. That such a Work,
however, was wanted may be reasonably inferred
from the confessions of some writers, and the pal-
pable failure of others. But whether the good
Providence of God has enabled me to place the
subject of the Number 666 in that intelligible and
unanswerable point of view, which is so desirable, is
another question. That it is the Proper Name of a
MAN, which is here demanded, is an ariom which
cannot be denied. “The NAME of the Beast ’’ ‘‘ is
the Number of a MAN ; and his NUMBER is Six
HUNDRED THREE Score AND SIx:” and that, that
Name is A&révvos, is, I believe, equally clear. I
can, however, conscientiously affirm, that my sincere
and sedulous study has been to set the subject of the
“Name” and “Number” beyond the possibility of
alteration, and to effect the paramount establishment
of the Name of “a MAN,” namely, LATEINos,
as the true and on LY appellative of the Numbered
Beast, (Rev. xiii. 18.) and having strenuously at-
tempted this, I must leave it to the candour of my
Readers in general, and the supporters of Religious
Truth in particular, to give their unbiassed Verdict
according to the umerring and unchanging Word of
INTRODUCTION. XXXV
God, THE STANDARD to which I have constantly
appealed in Confirmation of what has been advanced.
As the Promise of God made to Daniel the Pro-
phet was, that, at '“THE TIME of THE END"—
“KNowLEDGE SHALL BE INCREASED ;” so may this
promise abide with God's people and be believed ;
for He is a God who cannot lie : and they who wait
on Him shall know assuredly that this sacred Enigma
was written by the finger of God, at the hand of St.
John, to the intent that Papal Rome, the Mystic
Babylon of the Revelations, might come into remem-
brance before God, at “THE TIME of THE END,”
viz. the “1260 Days” of Years, which are Now
FULFILLED.
* Daniel xii. 4.
C O N T E N T S.
PA O. E.
INTRODUCTION . g & g . iv to xxxv
CHAPTER I.
The subjecT proposed g © e l—8
CHAPTER II.
Introductory Remarks on Mr. Faber's hy-
pothesis of Apostates, with objections 9–23
CHAPTER III.
OBJECTIONs to Mr. Faber's hypothesis
continued, with Observations on the
EPISEMON g’ and the contRACTION g . 24–39
CHAPTER IV.
Further observations on the numerical
CYPHER denominated errangov Tav, or
V, or G, or g', as used to denote the
NUMBER 6, and to supply the vacuum
occasioned by the absence of the obso-
LETE AEOLIC DI-GAMMA . e . 40–50
d
xxxviii CONTENTS.
CHAPTER V.
On the Result of that Branch of Mr.
FABER's hypothesis, which IDENTIFIES
the EPISEMON 5' with the contRAction g
CHAPTER VI.
On the THREE EPISEMA, with a numerous
selection of authorities for the use of
the MARK [•] over the EPIs EMON or
CYPHER g’
CHAPTER VII.
On the PROPER USE of the MARK or AC-
cENT, when placed above or below
the errankov Tav, or CYPHER g’, with the
probable origin and use of the said
EPIs EMON
CHAPTER VIII.
Containing allusions to the ANCIENT nu-
merical use of the D1-GAMMA, as
connected with the subject of the
EPIsłMon g’
PA Glº.
51—-60
61–72
73–82
83–89
CONTENTS.
xxxix
CHAPTER IX.
On the proper DISTINCTION to be observed
BETweeN the use of the THREE EPIsèMA,
viz. eriankov Tav, Kornia, and Xaviru, and
the 24 LETTERs of the GREEK Alphabet,
in the designation of NAMEs and NUM-
BERs ; together with some remarks on
the necessity of retaining the ExACT
NOTATION OF HOLY WIRIT
CHAPTER X.
Two TABLEs illustrative of Mr. FABER's
word APOSTATEs, exhibiting its pal-
pable inconsistency with the true Num-
ber xãº", or 666
CHAPTER XI.
Examples proving the want of IDENTITY
in the word ApostATES, as applicable
to any ONE PARTICULAR LAPSED CHURCH
or PERSON ExcLUsiveLY
CHAPTER XII.
Containing a REFUTATION of Dr. ADAM
CLARKE's hypothesis of n Aarovº 32a weta
“The LATIN KINGDOM '
90–100
. 101–107
. 108–143
. 144–158
xl CONTENTS.
PAGE
CHAPTER XIII.
Remarks on the SPURIOUs Number xus',
or 616, which is mentioned by Professor
LEE e G g ſº © . 159—165
CHAPTER XIV.
Five REASONs drawn from IRENAEUS, esta-
blishing the moral certainty of his or-
thography in the NAME Aarévvos, with
further remarks on the opinions of
Archbishop LAUD and Professor Lee . 166–178
CHAPTER XV.
Observations on the DIPHTHONG, or the
BROAD, or CIRCUM FLEXED IOTA in the
Name Aarévvos, Aardvos, Aari vos, that
is, et, or d, or . ſº g e . 179–192
CHAPTER XVI.
Of the authenticity and propriety of the
Name Aarévvos, as applied to the MAN, s
whose NUMBER is xãº", “666.”. . 193—222
CHAPTER XVII.
The general argument for the Name
Aztévvos as definitively and ExCLU-
siveLY DEscRIPTIVE of “The MAN
of SIN,” further confirmed. * . 223—234
CONTENTS. xli
PAGL
CHAPTER XVIII.
RomanisM summarily conFRONTED with
Holy Scri PTURE . e e . 235–259
CHAPTER XIX.
The subject recapitulated, with a brief
notice of the various LATIN TITLES
assumed by the PAPACY . e . 260–273
CHAPTER XX.
An historical account of the ELECTION,
PROCLAMATION, and CoRoNATION of
PoPE INNocent XIII. (as recorded by
Edward WRIGHT, Esq.) illustrating the
GENIUS of Pope RY . e Q . 27.4—306
I. Table of Numerals.
II. Scale of Combinations.
THE NAME AND NUMBER
OF THE BEAST,
LATE IN O S.
“Tº ONOMA rā 9mptov’”—“APIGMOx ANePOTIOT gari, kai 3
APiemox Attor xàs'.” -
“The NAME of the beast”—“ is the NUMBER of a MAN ; and
his Number is 666.”—Rev. xiii. 17, 18. -
CHAPTER I.
THE SUBJECT PROPOSED.
SINCE the time of IRENAEUs, who was a contemporary
with PolycARP, the disciple of St. JoHN, the true
investigation of the secret name but given number of
THE MAN which the Apostle has propounded for our
solution by the means of “wisdom ' and “under-
standing,” has always been a subject deeply interest-
ing, though perplexing, to the minds of the most
learned and pious Commentators of Divine Revela-
tion, as the numerous works extant on this particular
point will clearly demonstrate. St. John, however,
says plainly '—“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath
* Rev. xiii. 18.
B
2 CHA PTER I :
understanding count THE NUMBER of the beast : for
it is the NUMBER of a MAN ; and HIS NUMBER is
six HUNDRED THREE score and six,” or “666.”
Thus from the Apostle's eahortation “Let him that
hath understanding,” and his expression, "“Here
is the mind which hath wisdom,” (as well as from
the ea amples of IRENAEUs, HIPPolytus MARTYR,
and others,) we know that a sober attempt to
solve this scriptural enigma is perfectly justifiable.
As “the Number of a MAN ?’ must necessarily (ac-
cording to the ancient mode of Greek calculations
and of St. John's expression) imply the NAME of
a MAN ; the Apostle has made them coincident.”
Tº ONOMA rā 9mpſe # rºy APIeMON rà ONOMATOX ATTOT.
* The NAME of the Beast, or THE NUMBER of HIS
NAME: *-and this NAME and NUMBER of the Beast
he declares to be “ the NUMBER of a MAN.” *
APIeMOX .... ANOPOTIO'ſ earl. “It is the NUMBER of a
MAN.” Kai : APIeMox Artor xfs'. “And HIS NUMBER’’
[or the Number of Him] “666.” That is to say,
“The Number of a Man,” is, by a proper ellipsis, put
for ‘the Number of the Name of a Man,” according
to the opinion of Irenaeus. Therefore, it will be
absolutely necessary to abide by THIS APosTolic
RULE in the investigation of the NAME of the MAN,
the alphabetical LETTERs of which, when taken
separately, (according to the mode of Greek compu-
tation), must contain the given arithmetical Number
of the Beast in the strictest possible manner, in order
that a stop may be put to the multiplicity of vague
! Rev. xvii. 9. * Rev. xiii. 17. * Ibid. 18.
THE SUBJECT PROPOSED. 3
speculations, which have gone forth into the world
during the present age of the Church, through the
fertile imaginations of various learned writers on
Prophecy. And such is my purpose, with the
firm hope of supplanting, by the means of scriptural
truth, by sound argument, by classical and ancient
Arithmetical Authorities, all those Words, Names, Epi-
thets, Titles and Sentences, (excepting Aarévos) which
have hitherto been produced in favour of the Number
666; but which are as foreign to the “Wisdom" and
“Understanding ” of which St. John speaks, as they
are orthographically, hypothetically, and otherwise
incorrect. For at the outset it is evident, not only
from the words of ST. John, that the characteristic
‘MARK' . . . of the Beast must be the PRoPER NAME
of some “MAN, '' (implied in His enigmatical
Number, 666); but St. Paul also speaks in an
especial manner of “the MAN of SIN "—“the SON
of PERDITION,” to “be revealed in his time.” . . . .
# ANGPoſiox rà, duapita;, & TIOX rā; 3roxetz; ; which
character most fully portrayed the Person of the
Pope of Rome. Thus as CHRIST is the Name of A
MAN 2 (; xPixTox), so also similarly the Appellative
of his great Opponent is that of a MAN, as we know
from the masculine prefix of the definite Article”
& ANTIXPIXTox, and, therefore, if we can find the
proper name of a MAN, which is answerable also in
an Appellative sense, to the descriptive MARK, NAME,
and NUMBER xàs', or 666; as also characteristic of
* 2 Thess. ii. 3. * “The Man Christ Jesus,” 1 Tim. ii. 5; Rom. v. 15.
* 1 John ii. 22,
B 2
4 CHA PTER I :
“ the MAN of SIN "–“ the SoN of PERDITION ; ” and
kar’ &oxy, ‘ the ANTICHRIST ; ' then, let us not doubt
of full success : as we may be assumed to have the
“Wisdom” and “ Understanding ” requisite for dis-
covering as decisively as possible, the secret name
of that scriptural enigma, which is brought to light
in the Proper Name Azrāvoc, LATEINos ; for it
contains the true NUMBER, Xès', or 666—is the
NAME of a MAN, and exhibits the indelible MARK
of the Beast, which is LATIN.
I. I purpose to commence this subject, or
Treatise, by some critical Remarks on the opinion
of the Rev. George Stanley Faber, relative to the
Number xfs', or 666, the enigmatical Name of which
he imagines he has discovered, to a moral certainty,
in the Greek word Amroç-atºm; [APOSTATEs, as he
writes.” “I am much inclined to think, that, even
independently of other objections, the very phraseo-
logy of the Apostle shuts out every Name which has
been adduced as the Name of the Beast, save on LY
the single Name ApostATEs.” But Mr. Faber knew
well, at the very time he was recording this opinion
for publication, that the Word (not ‘Name ’) Apos-
TATEs, would, most clearly and unequivocally produce
the far greater (and much more legitimate) Number
1160, which completely destroys the certainty of the
lesser Number 666, the former being by 494 above
the Number mentioned by St. John ; and it is most
evident that ApostATEs cannot by any possible
| Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. Chap. iv.
Page 237.
THE SUBJECT PROPOSED. 5
means be converted into the Proper Name of a MAN.
It is, moreover, monstrous to suppose that Apos-
TATÉs can be limited to contain the true Number
666, and also eatended to the much greater Number
1160, at the same moment, and, therefore, the word
APostATEs lies open to a twofold objection.
1st. That Apost ATEs is not the PRoPER NAME
of a MAN, but a word of the most indefinite signi-
fication, and therefore cannot contain the Number
of a MAN, or be the proper Appellative of the Num-
bered Beast, because such a word might be rendered
applicable to every Apostate or Apostacy.
2ndly. That ApostATEs does produce LETTER BY
LETTER, the true and undoubted Number 1160, and
is, therefore, plainly irreducible to the far inferior
Number 666; because “things which are equal to the
same, are equal to one another.’ This word Arorarnº,
therefore, must be as remote from conclusiveness,
upon a point so long the subject of Theological
Controversy, as the Number 1160 is, from the
Number 666.
II. I intend to prove that the opinion of the learned
Dr. Adam Clarke, who supposes that he has fully
deciphered the Proper Name of the numbered Beast,
or MAN, in the words or sentence, n Aarwn Bariñeta,”
“THE LATIN KINGDOM ; ” (which words or sentence,
by computation of the LETTERs of the Greek Alphabet,
Letter by Letter, will produce the ea act number xfs',
or 666; but NoT the Proper Name of a MAN,) must
be rejected, as Not being answerable to the “wisdom"
* Dr. Adam Clarke's Commentary on Rev. xiii. 18.
6 CHAPTER I :
}
and “ understanding ” of which St. John speaks in
reference to “the NAME of the Beast,” which “is
the Number of a MAN.”
III. I shall then show that the theory of Professor
Lee of Cambridge, who doubts the correctness of
the Number xfs', or 666; because “ In the times
of IRENAEUs ANOTHER Number was found—616, or
xus': ' is not supported by earlier or better authority
than that of ARCHBishop LAUD, and the ** Codices '
of ‘ PETAVIUS.’
It may be necessary to offer something in this
place, by way of apology for troubling the Public
with the revival of an old, and, what may appear to
many, a worn out subject. But, as the three preced-
ing Authors, some of the most recent writers of note
in the present age, who have ventured to differ from
IRENAEUs, in reference to the orthography of the
NAME Aarévvos, as well as the Number itself, all of
them differ in their opinions from each other, so they
cannot ALL be correct, however learned and ingenious
their separate systems may be. Consequently, until
some on E leading Name of a MAN be found, which
can bid defiance to alteration, both in point of ortho-
graphy, number, and identity, the true solution of
the enigmatical Number and Name of the Beast,
must remain doubtful, and liable, in some way or
other, to objection, alteration, and fresh speculations.
To establish a specific Name of a MAN, upon the
* Lee's Dissertations on Prophecy, Diss. II. Sec. iii. Chap. xiii. Page 329.
* See Wetstein Notae Criticae, Canon xxiii. P. 36 and 37, appended to
Greek Testament, Amsterdam, 1711.
THE SUBJECT PROPOSED. 7
surest and most conclusive Premises, is therefore my
OBJECT and anxious desire in this little work; which
object, I most firmly believe, I have ultimately
attained, through much patient investigation of the
subject, and the help of many classical and ancient
Authorities, fairly admissible and conclusive on this
point, as will appear in the sequel of this Treatise.
I must here be allowed to remark, that, with all
due respect for Mr. Faber, I cannot comprehend
how “Homogeneity,’ ‘The System of Counter Ele-
ments,’ ‘The Doctrine of Chances,’ the arbitrary
substitution of certain words for others of opposite
meanings, the reciprocal use of a Greek erigºpov, or
cypher, for a Greek stenographical contraction, or
Ligature of two distinct Letters ; assertions without
proof, unfair quotations, and the parallelisms of
texts, which, by comparison, are obviously different
in their significations are allowable or necessary,
in the elucidation of the Names and Numbers exhi-
bited in the Prophecies of the Holy Scriptures. Yet
such is the ingenious, or rather ambiguous and
complex style which Mr. Faber has adopted in his
endeavour to establish his favourite word APOSTATEs,
to the rejection of the ancient and generally approved
NAME Aarévvos, [LATEINos] as used by Irenaeus in the
second century, which Name, when written in Greek
Letters, is, I firmly believe, the oNLY proper Name
of a MAN, that will (when used as an Appellative)
satisfactorily exhibit the Mark, Name, and Number
of the Beast. It not only identifies the descriptive
character of the ‘MAN, whose Number is 666, but
8 CHAPTER I.
every individual Member of the LATIN Papal kingdom,
each of whom may very properly be styled a Latin,
inasmuch as every Papist is bound, in his allegiance
to the Pope, to acknowledge the Divine and Canonical
uses of the LATIN Language in the public service
of the Roman Church ; notwithstanding its being a
Dead, and (according to the words of St. Paul) “an
Unknown Tongue,” to the common people, and there-
fore antichristian, and to be denounced as an Anti-
apostolical and Heretical practice.
CHAPTER II.
INTRODUCTory REMARKs on MR. FABER's HYPOTHESIS
of APOSTATES, witH objecTIONs.
I shALL now commence with the word Atos-arms,
(APosTATEs,) or the hypothesis of the Rev. George
Stanley Faber concerning the Number xàs', or 666;
to which end I shall proceed to consider the ‘Four
distinct Articles, under which (Mr. Faber informs us)
‘the terms descriptive of the sacred enigma are set
forth : they are as follow—
‘’ The NAME of the Beast is a certain Mark, or
Stigma or Character: which is figuratively said to be
impressed upon him, which exhibits the component
Letters of his Name, and by which he is emphatically
distinguished.” º
‘The NAME of the Beast is the NAME of BLAS-
PHEMY."
‘The NAME of the Beast compreh ENDs the NUM-
BER of the Beast : and that NUMBER is declared to
be 666.’
* Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. Ch. iv. P. 227,
10 CHAPTER II :
* The NUMBER of the Beast, or the NUMBER 666
produced by the LETTERs of his NAME, is the NUMBER
of a MAN.”
To the first and third of the foregoing ‘Articles'
I am not unwilling to give my assent; but the Second
Article affirms that ‘ the NAME of the Beast is the
NAME of BLASPHEMY ; ' and we are further in-
structed by Mr. Faber, that, ‘BLASPHEMY denotes
Apostacy,” “But even in the ordinary language of
the Gospels,’ says he, “no less than in the Prophetic
language of the Apocalypse, BLASPHEMY denotes
Apostacy. The NAME, therefore, of Blasphemy Is
the NAME of ApostAcy: ' ' Accordingly, Apostacy
is the appellation prophetically bestowed upon it by
St. PAUL.’ ‘The Name, then, of the Beast, being
the Name of Blasphemy or Apostacy, must be a
Name descriptive of the Apostatic worship foretold by
St. Paul.’ ” “Hence we may conclude, that the Name
of the Beast, or the Name expressive of Blasphemy,
must be some such Greek word as is equivalent in
English to THE BLASPHEMER or THE APOSTATE.’
** Now there are two Greek words, which bear the
requisite signification, BLASPHEMUs and ApostATEs.
[8Azapnuo; and Arosarns.] But merely to bear the
requisite signification is not alone sufficient. To
determine the point, whether either of these two
words be the intended Blasphemous Name of the
Beast, we must resort to what the Prophet remarkably
* Faber’s Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. ch. iv. p. 231, 233,
234, 239, 240.
2 Ibid 233. * Ibid 234.
ON M R. FABER's HYPOTHESIS. 1 1
calls the wisdom of calculating or of summing up
their respective arithmetical Letters.’
* With respect to the word BLASPHEMUs, when
mechanically subjected to this process, for it admits
not of any particular wisdom in calculating, it brings
out the Number 1051. Hence it must be rejected :
because, though it answers to the test exhibited in
the Second Article, it is found incapable of answering
to the test exhibited in the Third Article.’
“But the word ApostATEs, when (as the Prophet
speaks) wisely and not superficially subjected to the
same arithmetical process : that is to say, when
calculated, as written contractedly in its less obvious
Greek form, and not as written uncontractedly in its
more obvious Greek form, brings out the precise
Number 666.’ *
And Mr. Faber winds up his Argument by
saying— -
* “The Number of the Beast is the Number of the
Beast's Name: whence, analogously, the Number of
a MAN is the Number of the intended MAN's Name.
But the Number of the Beast's Name is 666 : and
this same Number 666 is declared to be also the
Number of a MAN. Therefore the Number 666,
which is comprehended in the Name of the Beast,
is also comprehended in the Name of the particular
MAN to whom the Prophet alludes. Now the Name
of the Beast, being the Name of Blasphemy, is not a
Proper Name, but a Descriptive Name. Therefore,
analogously, the Name of the MAN must be a De-
* Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, vol. iii. p. 239, 240.
12 CHAPTER II :
scriptive Name, exhibiting his Character, not a
Proper Name specifying his Personal Individuality.
‘Such being the joint nature both of the Beast's
Name and of the MAN's NAME, it is evident that
the descriptive Name of the one must be identical
with the descriptive Name of the other: at least, on
what is called the DocTRINE of CHANCEs, the PRE-
SUMPTION is so strong as to AMoUNT to a MoRAL
CERTAINTY. The NAME, therefore, of THE MAN,
like the Name of the Beast, Is APOSTATES : ’ &c.
It is highly favourable to my opinions that Mr.
Faber has drawn the conclusion of his Argument from
“THE DocTRINE of CHANCEs,’ and I think, by a candid
examination of the subject, it must appear that the
premises are of the same nature, according to such
presumptive Mode of Reasoning as that exhibited in
the foregoing words; for, the truth of such an un-
qualified Assertion as that which is set forth in
Mr. Faber’s Second Article, viz. That ‘ the Name
of the Beast is the Name of Blasphemy: ' and else-
where, that ‘ BLASPHEMY denotes Apost Acy'—is
* PRESUMPTION enough ; because it must depend
upon the PRoof of Three Things, whether or
not such an Argument amount to a Moral
Certainty.’
1st. Whether “ BLASPHEMY denotes A Post Acy.’
2ndly. Whether Blasphemy or Apostacy are either
of them the Descriptive Name” of the Numbered
Beast or MAN, even if it cAN be proved that the
latter word Atos-arms, in its contracted form, contains
the true Number 666, which is most doubtful.
ON MR. FABER'S HYPOTHESIS. 13
If it be allowed for the sake of argument, that
Atos-arms “ when written contractedly, in its less
obvious Greek form,” is equal to 666, yet when
written ‘ uncontractedly ’ (Aroa rarms) in its more
obvious Greek form,” it is invariably equal to 1160;
therefore, the same word is both equal to the Number
666 and the Number 1160 : which is preposterous,
because it is contrary to sound reasoning and ortho-
graphy, and more than Mr. Faber would admit, in
reference to the NAME Aargavos ; or any other Name,
or word, at variance with his own hypothesis.
Moreover, it is evident that if the word ‘Blasphemy'
can be proved to ‘ denote Apostacy,” still Apos-
tacy cannot be proved to denote the NAME OF A
MAN, and the Number would be of no possible use,
unless the Name of the MAN were first found, for
even according to Mr. Faber's fourth Article, the
Number must be elicited by the individual ‘Letters
of the Name.’ ‘The Number of the Beast, or the
Number 666 produced by the LETTERS of His NAME,
is the Number of a MAN.’ -
3rdly. Whether it be legitimate to use the Greek
stenographical contraction of sigma and tau s or
ar, and the stenographical episémon, or cypher, s' or
‘i, called by Greek Grammarians era muoy Tav, in the
same manner ; for the contraction s is never used to
denote Numbers of any kind, and its equivalent
LETTERs ( ; and r ) are equal to 500; but the
episemon s' is only used as a stenographical
cypher to denote the Number 6, without any ne-
cessary reference to the LETTERs of the Greek
l4 CHAPTER II :
Alphabet. [See the Tables at the end of this
Work.]
It is manifest enough that EACH of the THREE fore-
going points is eatremely doubtful; so much so,
that they may ALL be fairly and legitimately dis-
puted; and yet the whole force and strength of Mr.
Faber's argument hangs upon their separate and con-
joint validity: and why, therefore, should the ancient
and correct orthography of Irenaeus concerning the
Diphthong or et be impugned or discarded for such
novelty and uncertainty as that which Mr. Faber has
proffered to us as a substitute for Aarévvos ?
From Mr. Faber's fourth Article it appears that he
has literally refuted his own Argument; for he says,
“The Number of the Beast, or the Number 666
produced by the LETTERs of HIs NAME, is also the
NUMBER of a MAN.' Now it would not be suspected
from Mr. Faber's fourth Article, that he did not
intend to adhere strictly to the individual LETTERS
of the Greek Alphabet, but it is a FACT that the
whole force of his argument depends upon an uncer-
tainty, that is, whether it be legitimate to use an
eriankov, or cypher, in the place or room of two dis-
tinct letters, viz. the errankov Tav, or cypher s or G, in
the same manner as the Greek contraction s or ar;
and until this point is cleared up in the most satis-
factory manner possible, his whole argument is liter-
ally good for nothing, because it wants proof, which
is “the one thing needful” in the case. Who then
is to be the Umpire to decide whether or not we must
be compelled, in obedience to Mr. Faber's ipse divit,
ON M R. FABER'S HYPOTHESIS. 15
to use the word Arosarnº, according to the strictest
rules of orthography, ALways in its contRACTED
FoRM, when calculating the NUMBER of THIS worD? If
the contraction s and the episèmon s' are proved to be
synonymous in terms and equivalent in value, in refer-
ence to the Number 6, THEN the said word APostATÉ's
in its contracted form is equal to 666: but the word
Aroazzºn; in its UN contRACTED for M is without any
condition, restriction, or limitation, universally
equal to the Number 1160, which is 494 above the
given number of the Beast. [See Table on Arorarnº,
Chapter X.] If it can be proved that the ortho-
graphy of Irenaeus is incorrect, (which I think im-
possible, see Chapter XV. concerning the Diphthong
ei or 3) still his MoDE of eliciting the number is by
taking the individual Greek LETTERs of the NAME,
as they appear in the Greek alphabet, separately, and
Not contractedly, leaving the three erianka, or cyphers,
and all stenographical contractions or Ligatures of
letters in their respective places: and if we are to
decide the merits of the question by the EXAMPLES
of Irenaeus, Hippolytus Martyr, Aretas, &c. which
are supported by Mede, Dr. Henry More, Bishop
Newton, Dr. Adam Clarke, and all the learned com-
mentators, THEN Mr. Faber's hypothesis must, of
necessity, fall to the ground. - .
It appears to me that Mr. Faber's scheme is objec-
tionable in the following particulars, which will be more
clearly seen by referring to his ‘Sacred Calendar of
Prophecy,” [Vol. iii. from page 225 to page 242] as
compared with the following remarks.
16 - CHAPTER II :
Objection I. That as ApostATEs is not the Name
of a MAN, therefore, it cannot contain the NUMBER
of a MAN, and, consequently, cannot be the Appel-
lative of the Numbered Beast; and this is corrobo-
rated by Mr. Faber's own words, viz. That ‘The
Number of the Beast is the Number of the Beast's
Name; whence, analogously, the Number of a MAN
is the intended MAN's NAME. But the Number of
the Beast's Name is 666 ; and this same Number 666
is declared to be also the Number of a Man. There-
fore the Number 666, which is comprehended in the
Name of the Beast, is also comprehended in the
NAME of the PARTICULAR MAN to whom the Pro-
phet alludes.' But how can Apostates be proved to
be “the NAME of the particular MAN to whom the
Prophet alludes,' if no MAN ever bore such a parti-
cular NAME? What analogy can there be between
the NAME and NUMBER of a MAN, where no proper
or definite NAME is given of him whereby his Identity
and ‘Descriptive Character' may be discovered ?
An ANoNYMoUs or nameless MAN is therefore the
character portrayed by Mr. Faber, which is absurd.
Objection II. That Mr. Faber has asserted in his
second Article that “ The Name of the Beast is the
Name of Blasphemy.' [Page 229.] But the Apostle
John merely says that “ upon his ’’ seven “heads "
were the Names or “ Name of Blasphemy,” Rev.
xiii. 1. Besides which 8xagºngo; neither contains the
Number of the Beast, nor is it the Name of a MAN ;
and if it be true, as Mr. Faber asserts, that, ‘The
Name of the Beast is “ the Name of BLASPHEMy,"
ON M R. FABER's HYPOTHESIS. 17
consequently the Greek word BLASPHEMos must
contain the Number 666 of the Beast : but it has
already been acknowledged by Mr. Faber [Page 234],
that ‘ Baagønuo; brings out the Number 1051. Hence
it must be rejected; because though it answers to the
test exhibited in the second Article, it is found in-
capable of answering to the test exhibited in the third
Article.’
Objection III. That the word 8×arpnpos is made
“homogeneous ' with Anos-arms, without any sufficient
scriptural or other authorities, beyond the ipse dia.it
of Mr. Faber, who declares that ‘Blasphemy denotes
Apostacy,” although it is certain that a Man may be
a blasphemous character without Apostatizing from
the faith of Christ; for no man can be said to be an
Apostate from the Faith, who never embraced it;
neither can a Man be an Apostate from Judaism,
Romanism, Mohammedanism, or any thing else which
he never professed to believe; and although Pagan
Imperial Rome, (which is represented by the first
secular or Blasphemous Roman Beast,) persecuted the
Apostles and primitive Christians to death, during the
three first centuries of the Christian AEra, yet is she
not chargeable with Apostacy, but only Idolatry,
Persecution, and Blasphemy. -
Objection IV. That if ApostATEs be admitted as
the ‘homogeneous' substitute of BLASPHEMOS, still
the former word cannot, either in its contRACTED or
uncontracted form, produce the Number 666, because
of a necessary numerical HIATUs occasioned by the
spurious introduction of the enignuoy or cypher s for
C . -
18 CHAPTER II :
the Number 6, among the LETTERS of the word
ApostATEs, but which is not the Stenographical
Ligature or Contraction of sigma and tau, s or ar,
but merely a cypher:-And, because of a REDUN-
DANcy of Numbers occasioned by the uncontracted
numerical use of the Two separate LETTERs, sigma
and tau, which are unitedly equal to 500, instead of
6. [See my Table on Apostates, Chapter X. as also
the Table of the 24 Greek Letters, with the 3 eruangz
at the end.] -
Objection W. That the word ApostATEs is an
epithet or title far too general and indefinite to answer
the purpose intended by the “wisdom * and “ under-
standing ” of which St. John speaks, in reference to
the NAME of the Beast, which unless it be the PRoPER
NAME of a MAN, and applicable in every other respect
to the character of the Beast, cannot be the Proper
(or Appellative) Name of the Beast, whose specific
Number in Greek numerals is 666, or xàs'.
Oljection VI. That in calculating the LETTERs in
the word Arorarms, by the mystical ‘ calculative’ use
of the Greek stenographical contraction s (which is
equivalent to two distinct Letters, viz. sigma and tau,)
as if it were synonymous with the Greek eriangov or
cypher sº, and equal to 6, contrary to the custom of
every Greek writer extant, and the example of Irenaeus,
which was to calculate the LETTERs of the NAME of
the MAN, or Beast, Letter by Letter, according to
the established custom of the Greeks, Mr. Faber has
departed from the plainest rules of Grecian ortho-
graphy, and numerical calculations.
ON MR. FABER's HYPOTHESIS. 19
Objection VII. That if it be legitimate to use the
contraction s as the representative of the Emanuov Tav,
or cypher s (of which practice we have no example
on record) much more is it legitimate to use the
sigma and tau, UNCONTRACTEDLY, according to the
universal custom of the ancient Greeks, when calcu-
lating the Names of Men, cities, or words of any
kind, after the manner of Irenaeus, Hippolytus Martyr,
Aretas, &c. [See Dr. Adam Clarke's observations,
in his Commentary, relative to the Mode of Calcu-
lating the Greek numerals, Revelations xiii.; also
Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon; Lamy's Apparatus Bibli-
cus, Book II. Chap. v. Page 311. See also the Tables
at the end of this work, and the authorities. Quoted in
my Preface in answer to Dean Woodhouse.]
Objection WIll. That the exiangov Tav, or stenogra-
phical cypher s', is not only made the representative
of the Greek contraction s or ar, in calculating the
Number 6, without any classical or grammatical au-
thority for such supposed ‘homogeneity;” but, more-
over, the little Mark () over the exiangº (s") is
prudently omitted; which mark clearly “denotes it to
be a cypher, and not the Greek contraction of sigma
and tau : for when the mark is above the exampov, then
it denotes sir—as sº = 6; but when the said mark
is below the episémon, then it denotes sia thousand,
as s = 6,000 : Mr. Faber has therefore been guilty
of a very serious omission.
Objection IX. That the two numerical episemons,
(or entanua), which by Grammarians are called Korra
and Xava, the characteristics of which are s or ; ;
C 2
20 - CHAPTER II :
and 2', are by Mr. Faber termed, ‘ two Conven-
TIon AL MARKs,’ which is no proof of the integrity
or fidelity of his orthography; and even when the
Names of these two episèmons are given him by
grammarians, he prefers inventing other terms to
explain them. However, if the terms “ two CoNVEN-
TIONAL MARKS ’ may with propriety be applied to
the two episèmons Korra and Xavri, it follows as a
consequence, that, as the entangov Tav, or sº, is equally
distinguished by its given appellation, so the latter is
also a THIRD “Convention AL MARK,' and, there-
fore, according to Mr. Faber's own opinion it is no
Letter, nor the contraction of sigma and tau. But
it is well known that these three characters, or
cyphers, viz. eriankov Tav.... Korra.... and Xaviri, have been
severally introduced among the 24 letters of the Greek
Alphabet to make up units, tens, and hundreds, and
not as ligatures of certain distinct letters. [See
Table of the 24 Greek Letters, with the three erranga,
considered arithmetically at the end.]
Objection X. That the fatal consequence of ad-
mitting Mr. Faber's opinion to be correct, in render-
ing “homogeneous” the episemon s' and contraction s
will be that we shall have the new style of making 6
equal to 500, and 666 equal to 1160, which is well
worthy of what Mr. Faber terms, ‘The wisdom of
calculating,’ ‘ wisdom in computation,’ ‘ calculative
wisdom,’ &c. &c. [See Faber's Sacred Calendar of
Prophecy, Pages 234, 235, 237.]
Objection XI. That Mr. Faber has not proved that
| Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. chap. iv. p. 236.
ON M R. FABER's HYPOTHESIS. 2 l
the Greeks did anciently use the contraction of sigma
and tau, s, with which to express the Number 6.
Nor has he on any on E occasion, throughout his
Two publications on the word Arosarns, used the term
erianwov, or enriankov Tav, concerning the character or
cypher s” or G, upon which so much is built, that the
‘Sacred Calendar of Prophecy’ has been thought
worthy to supersede another work, which he had for-
merly published, in two volumes, on the ‘ 1260 Days
of Years; ' and now he has added a third to establish
the second, which is entitled “Recapitulated Apostacy.’
Objection XII. That the epsilon (e) in Azriyos, is re-
jected by Mr. Faber, upon the authority of Lycophron,
and his commentator Tzetzes, as Mr. Faber says:
* “As for the word LATINUs, it cannot be the name
of the Beast; for, in the first place, it is not a de-
scriptive name of blasphemy; and, in the second
place, it does not contain the fated number 666.
That number can only be elicited from it, by writing
it with the broad es, Aarewog. But I much incline to
believe, that no instance can be found, in which it is
ever thus expressed by a Greek writer. The form
employed, is, I believe, uniformly Azrivos. If Lyco-
phron writes ºrép Azriyov, his commentator, Tzetzes,
subjoins &rº Aarlyov. Lycoph. Alex. 1254.’ *
My objections to the above mode of reasoning are
as follows:–
1st. Mr. Faber calls the proper Name LATINUs,
‘the word Latinus; ” but because Latinus is the
* Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V chap. iv. p. 237,
and 238.
22 CHA PTER II :
Proper Name of a Man, (and not simply ‘a word,”)
therefore it can be the Name of the Beast, inasmuch
as St. John informs us that “ the NAME of the beast
. . . . is the number of a MAN.” And this is corro-
borated by the testimony of Irenaeus, who has made
use of the name LATEINos, and two other proper
IlameS.
2nd. Mr. Faber tells us that LATINUs cannot be
the name of the Beast, because it is not a descrip-
tive name of Blasphemy; but as BLASPHEMY is not
a proper name of a MAN, so it cannot be the proper
name of the Beast; besides which Mr. Faber has
confessed that 8×arpngo; does Not contain the number
666, but the number 1051.
3dly. Mr. Faber informs us that LATINUs cannot
be the name of the Beast, because ‘it does not con-
tain the fated number 666; but in this Mr. Faber is
also much mistaken, (as will hereafter appear,) for
a circumflewed iota ( ; ) is generally, if not always,
equivalent to a diphthong or broad ei or 3 ; and as
old ENNIUs, who lived before the Christian AEra,
wrote the name LATINUs by ‘Popolei tenuere LA-
TEINEI,' so his authority (though LATIN) is tanta-
mount to certainty, and justifies the orthography
of Irenaeus. As Mr. Faber had previously written
on the number 666, in favour of the name LATEINos,
in his work entitled ‘The Great Period of 1260
Years,” Vol. II. from Page 330 to 335; he must
have known that Dr. Henry More and Bishop
Newton had already quoted old ENNIUS, and other
* * Numerus Hominis' being put for ‘Numerus [Nominis] Hominis.”
ON MR. FABER's HYPOTHESIS. 23
writers, in favour of the use of the diphthong or broad
e, or d, as used by Irenaeus. However, many more
authorities will be hereafter produced, to establish
the diphthong beyond all possibility of future contro-
versy. Moreover, the iota in Azrivos is written by
Mr. Faber with an acute accent, as ( ; ), instead of a
circumflew accent, as ( ; ), which is contrary to all
Greek precedent; because the iota in Aarivos is, by all
ancient Greek authors, written with a circumflew
accent ; and a circumflex accent, over a vowel, gen-
erally, if not always, indicates the contraction of a
diphthong, as , e, or 7. Eusebius writes the name
of Irenaeus, by beginning it with the Diphthong
et, Espywatos.
Objection XIII. In wrongly quoting Irenaeus, con-
cerning the name Tăray, by writing it Tºray, and so
leaving out both the epsilon (e) and circumflew
accent (" ), and substituting an acute accent, as ( ' )
which denotes an incorrect, or at least a careless
mode of quotation, on the part of Mr. Faber: which
is scarcely excusable in writing polemically on a NAME
and NUMBER which have been so much and so long
the subject of interminable speculations.
CHAPTER III.
oBJECTIONS To M.R. FABER's HYPOTHESIS continued,
witH observations on THE EPISEMON sº AND
THE CONTRACTION Sr.
Even if the ancient use of the diphthong or broad ei,
or d, instead of the iota circumflewed, as ( ; ) in the
name Azrivos, be considered sufficient, on the ground
of modern orthography to set aside the legitimate
establishment of that proper name of a Man, for the
number 666; what critic would not object to the
manifold inaccuracies of Mr. Faber, in reference to
the word APostATEs, &c. &c. as stated in the thirteen
preceding Objections ! With every wish to allow all
due merit to the observations of Mr. Faber, I cannot
for a moment suppose that Irenaeus, who professedly
wrote ‘against all Heresies,’ (‘contra omnes Hae-
reses,’) would have deliberately made choice of two
names out of three, viz. TEITAN and LATEINos, each
of which contains the diphthong or broad e, or d, if
such orthography were inadmissible in his day,
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 25
or earlier, either among the ancient GREEKS or
ROMANs, and, therefore, I must conclude that,
as that Greek and Christian Father has made no
apology for the two-fold use of the diphthong
or broad sº, that his orthography is correct in
these two Names ; and that Dr. Henry More,
Bishop Newton, and others, have judiciously fol-
lowed his example, and quoted Ennius as an autho-
rity for such usage. It is my intention to bring
forward, in my remarks upon the name Azrewos, a
multiplicity of proofs, both Greek and Latin, in favour
of the ancient use of the diphthong “ or 3; seeing
beforehand how impossible it is to retain the word
APOSTATEs under any circumstances, the noun
being too general with regard to identity — the
orthography being spurious, and utterly inapplicable
as the name of any Man; and thus wholly at
variance with the words of St. John. In the only
legitimate manner of calculating it as a word (for
name it is not), the number produced by its individual
Greek letters will amount to 1 160, instead of the
number 666.
Although Mr. Faber says that, ‘‘ even in the or-
dinary language of the Gospels, no less than in the
prophetic language of the Apocalypse, Blasphemy
denotes Apostacy: and consequently the name of
Apostacy describes the peculiar nature of the Beast's
religion: yet is it abundantly evident, even if it can be
proved that ‘Blasphemy denotes Apostacy, that, still
| Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. chap. iv. p. 231.
26 CHAPTER III :
neither Blasphemy nor Apostacy denotes the name of
a MAN, and, consequently they must be rejected, ac-
cording to the words of the Apostle John, who says
that, “the NAME of the Beast” is “ the NUMBER of a
MAN.” Hence it is apparent that IRENAEUs has
followed the literal words of the Apostle, by the
use of three proper names, viz. Lateinos, Teitan,
and Euanthas : while the utmost that can be
said of such words as Bazoºnºo; and Arosarn, is, that
they are Titles or Epithets of opprobrium, and not
names of men; for where do we read of a Pagan,
Jew, Mohammedan, Christian, Roman Catholic, &c.
whose name was either Apostates or Blasphèmos ?
How then can either of them “denote ’ the Proper
name of any ‘particular man'? And without the
Name, ‘ the number of the man' (which is de-
clared to be 666), cannot be properly ascertained;
for ‘the number of a man’ must necessarily imply
his name, or he would be an anonymous, or
nameless character, and the absurdity of suppos-
ing that there ever was a man of celebrity in the
world without a name is too palpable to need a
remark. St. John, therefore, consistently with the
“wisdom" and “understanding” of which he speaks,
makes the name of the man, or number of his name,
synonymous; because, the name of the Beast is
evidently the proper and appellative name of some
particular man, whose name is identical with the
given number 666, or xfs'. Even the Papists of the
traitorous Seminary at Rheims, have consented that
the name of ANTICHRIST shall be that of ONE special
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 27
MAN, and of a peculiar name, after the following
manner. They thus expound.
* Rev. xiii. 18. “It is the number of a Man.”
‘A MAN he must be, and not a Devil or Spirit, as
here it is clear, and by St. Paul, 2 Thess. ii., where
he is called “ the MAN of Sin,” (and in the same
paragraph, the Rheimists say,) ‘ANTICHRIST, who
by his description here, and in the said epistle to the
Thessalonians, must be on E special MAN, and of a
PARTICULAR PROPER NAME, as our LoRD JESUS IS."
To whichever of the * two Beasts the MARK,
NAME, and NUMBER belong, it must be noted that
neither 8×arpnº, nor Arosarns is an appropriate word;
for neither of them contains the alphabetical number
666, much less does either of these words import
that species of “homogeneity’ which can make it
appropriate to the name of a MAN, a point that
calls for the exercise of that “ wisdom" and “ un-
derstanding ” in regard to the discovery of the
enigmatical NAME of which the Apostle speaks.
Hence, however exact the arithmetical number in
Aroazarn; may seem to be for 666, (supposing withal
that the errango, or cypher s' and the contraction s,
may be reciprocally used for the number 6,) still it is
evident that even then it cannot prove the point at
issue, and, therefore, must be rejected. Even should
it be admitted, for argument's sake, that ‘ Blas-
phemy denotes Apostacy,” and that APOSTATES con-
* Dr. Fulke's Annotations on the New Testament. Rhem. 9. Rev. xiii. 18.
* Rev. xiii. 1, 11.
28 CHAPTER III :
tains the true number 666; it would not follow as
a consequence that Apostates denotes the Name
of a Man, and if not the Name, the Number itself
can be of no avail, for the number must imply
the name also ; for if it would, then it must follow,
as cause and effect, that every Greek word, when
‘subjected ' to some mechanical' or fabricated
arithmetical “process' similar to that which Mr.
Faber has acknowledged and adopted, must produce
the number 666, and become ‘ descriptive’ of the
MARK, NAME, and CHARACTER of the numbered
Beast. This, however, would be to admit a degree
of latitude which St. John has not allowed us; for
the Apostle has restricted “ the NAME of the Beast ’’
to “the NUMBER of a MAN,” which is declared to be
“ 666,” and this is the ne plus ultra of the matter.
Therefore, whenever the imagination of any one
would wander from this particular “ wisdom " and
“understanding,” it is highly justifiable to call such an
one to order for a palpable digression and of such a
deviation Mr. Faber is certainly proved guilty. I
have already noticed that by Mr. Faber's 4th Article,
&c. he has literally refuted his own hypothesis by the
unsoundness of his premises which are utterly unten-
able, because inconclusive.
In opposition, therefore, to Mr. Faber's opinion, I
affirm, in unison with the words of St. John and the
e.vample of Irenaeus, that it is the NUMBER and NAME
of a MAN for which we must seek, and not an in-
definite Epithet or Title of Opprobrium, such as
ApostATEs, which is far too general a characteristic
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 29
to be admitted as canonical, even by the Rheimish
College of Jesuits, who would soon retort the charge
and character of Apostates upon ALL National
Churches not in strict communion with their own
Mother Rome ; of which Bellarmine, Baronius,
Arnoua", and others have given us special proofs.
Even Bishop Bossuet has not been unmindful of
the supposed value of this word APOSTATES in
its ‘contracted form,” for he had used the con-
traction *s as if it were the errangov or cypher
s', in a similar manner with Mr. Faber and Arch-
deacon Wrangham, long before it made its unin-
telligible appearance in the “ Sacred Calendar of
Prophecy.’ But the number 666, or x&s', must
decidedly be elicited from some Proper and Appellative
Name (i.e. of one common to MANY MEN of the
SAME ORDER and degree, such as the PAPAL SUcces-
SION,) which is both the NAME of a MAN, and will
contain the number 666; for the Apostle says—
Qöe XO'DIA £arív: O & Xav NOTN lºngia dºro roy APIOMON rºv
Gºplov. APIGMOX yap ANOPOTIOT ori, kai 3 Ap,0p8; ATTOT
Xès'. “ Here is wisdom. Let him that hath under-
standing count the number of the Beast: for it is
the NUMBER of a MAN, and his number is SIX
HUNDRED THREE score AND six.” Unless then the
proper NAME of the Beast, will, by the individual
LETTERS of HIS NAME, produce the exact number
666, and afterwards become the proper-APPELLATIVE
*
* See also a work published at Lyons, in 1817, entitled, “Les Précurseur
de l’Antichrist.’
30 CHAPTER III :
of some certain cecelesiastical MAN, whose character
in a descriptive sense fully corresponds with that
of the Beast, there can be no real identity between
his number and his name, which is absolutely ne-
cessary according to the words of St. John. But if
in the NAME Aarewo, we can find the only Appel-
lative of a MAN, which can with strict propriety
be applied to a professed Ecclesiastical Man, we
shall have attained our object; for there must be
an entire correspondence between the Mark, Name,
and Number of the Beast, or why should the
Apostle John have mentioned them conjointly 2
! “ The MARK, or the NAME of the Beast, or the
NUMBER of HIs NAME?” . . . . “Is the NUMBER of a
MAN ; and HIs NUMBER is sia hundred threescore
and sia.”
Now in the Succession of Popes we have an eccle-
siastical Hierarch of the Highest Possible Degree,
a self-exalted MAN, the very LATIN MAN, who
vaunteth himself to be the ‘ PontiFEx MAxIMUs,'
and who "“sITTETH in the TEMPLE of GoD,” at
Rome, even 3 “the MAN of Sin,” “the SoN of
Perdition,” who is also seated on the * “ seveN
MoUNTAINS ’’ of Rome, and whose temporal and
ecclesiastical ‘Imperium in Imperio’ has been coeval
with the predicted “ 1260 Days” of Years (com-
mencing with A. D. 533, and ending A. D. 1792),
i. e. * “a thousand two hundred and threescore days”
or “a Time, and Times, and half a Time; ” Or,
1 Rev. xiii. 17, 18. * 2 Thess. ii. 4. 8 2 Thess. ii. 3.
4 Rev. xvii. 9. * Rev. xii. 6, 14. and xiii. 5. compared with Ezek. iv. 6.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 31
“forty and two months.” The character of the
Pope also is in the highest sense applicable to the
predicted # Aroraatz of St. Paul, though ApostATES
is neither his figuratively impressed NAME, nor
does it contain his enigmatical Number 666, for he
is a LATIN Antichristian, Autocratical and Theo-
cratical MAN, *“whose coming is after the working
of Satan with ALL power and signs and lying wonders,
and with ALL deceivableness of unrighteousness,”
even HE who hath * “Two HoRNs like a LAMB, and
SPAKE as a DRAGON.”
Furthermore, I would contend although Mr. Faber
has asserted that, ‘ even in the ordinary lan-
guage of the Gospels, no less than in the prophetic
language of the Apocalypse, BLASPHEMY denotes
APOSTACY,” that he is perfectly unauthorized in em-
ploying the word A.PostATEs as the substitute or
representative of BLASPHEMos, because he has given
us no substantial parallel passages from the Holy
Scriptures (to which he would appear, in terms both
general and particular, to “refer his Readers), nor
from Dictionaries of acknowledged authority, to prove
that these Two words are ‘homogeneous” or sy-
nonymous in signification. Confessedly, however,
very much depends upon the propriety of such arbi-
trary usage; for if no limits were assigned to the real
and specific meanings of words and names, there
would soon be an END to their established usage
*
* 2 Thess. ii. 3. * 2 Thess. ii. 9, 10. * Rev. xiii. 11.
* Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. chap. iv. p. 231,
and Vol. i. Book I. chap, i. p. 17.
32 CHA PTER III :
altogether; and an inappropriate signification should
be a sufficient reason for the rejection of any word
or NAME, without contending about its orthography
in respect of ‘ calculative wisdom,” (an expression
which Mr. Faber has adopted in this difficult case),
or, indeed, any other wisdom. In my humble
opinion, there is no more reason for the commutation
of the word BAzapnºo; for Atros-arms, or the conversion
of sigma and tau into the contRACTION s (which is
subsequently identified with the stenographical
eriangov or cypher s',) than there would be for the
production of any other Greek word framed with
the aforesaid Greek contraction, which although it
might contain the precise number 666, would never-
theless be fatally distant from the NAME of the MAN.
Mr. Faber's argument, therefore, savours more of
ingenuity than grammatical correctness, or of sound
reasoning.
It is manifest enough that although Mr. Faber
has asserted - that ‘Blasphemy denotes Apostacy,’
and has deliberately substituted the one word for
the other, viz. Atos-arm; for 8A2a-pnºos—but by what
metamorphosing Rule I must leave him to explain,
and finally adopted APOSTATES as a word more
suited to his own taste, (for Blasphèmos he neces-
sarily acknowledges will not produce the Number
666 of the Beast), he immediately rejects as insuff-
cient the ancient and generally approved NAME
Azrivos, as used by IRENAEUs, on account of a supposed
orthographical error, that is, upon the surmise that
the ( , ) in Aarºvos is redundant; although it will be
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 33
proved hereafter by many classical and ancient ex-
amples, that it is not redundant ; and although Mr.
Faber has brought forward ‘ Lycophron and his com-
mentator Tzetzes in support of such rejection, and
thereby silenced, as he supposes, the authority of
Irenaeus, as a bad grammarian, he begins de novo
by instituting a specimen of incomparable orthography,
namely, by endeavouring to establish the promiscuous
use of the sigma and tau, contractedly, (s, or ar,)
with the CYPHER or chARACTER T, or sº, called by
grammarians exiangov Tav, or episemon s'; whereas
the LETTERS of the Greek stenographical contraction
s, if taken separately in calculating numbers, (which
is the only legitimate method of using them,) are
equal to 500, because sigma (a ) is equal to 200,
and tau ( t ) is equal to 300; but the enlankov Tav, or
CYPHER s', is only equal to 6; and the difference
between 500 and 6 is obvious enough—because the
whole is greater than its part : * but how can an
exignpoy or stenographical CYPHER, which is numer-
ically equal to 6, possibly rank with, be equal to, or
used for Two distinct LETTERs of the Greek alphabet,
which are equal to 500 2 Yet this is the conclusion
to which we must come, if we admit Mr. Faber's
Statement.
* “I cannot,” (says Mr. Faber) “refrain from no-
ticing the very singular manner in which the con-
traction or cypher s came to be employed for the
purpose of expressing the Number 6.’
*Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. ch. iv. p. 238.
D
34 CHAPTER III :
Thus while he most carefully avoids all mention of
the TERM eria mºov, Or eria"Mov Tav, the distinguishing
appellation of the Greek stenographical cypher sº,
which is no contraction at all, but upon which the
whole of his hypothesis is built; he classes the Greek
contraction of sigma and tau ( ; ) with the steno-
graphical era nuov, or cyphers', as if they were one and
the same character. However, he admits that the
character in question, which represents the number 6,
is a ‘CYPHER ; ' but if it be a cypher or eriangow, it is
mo LETTER, nor a contraction of LETTERs: for a
regular Greek contraction or ligature is an abbre-
viated or stenographical form of writing two or more
betters. Mr. Faber has very prudently abstained
from advancing a single example of this ‘very sin-
gular manner’ of employing the ‘contraction or
cypher’s, “ for the purpose of ea pressing the
number 6; ' neither can he prove that such ortho-
graphy was admissible in ancient times among the
Greeks : for this episémon s', and the contraction s,
has each of them its proper appellation and ap-
pointed situations. As a substitute for the ancient
AEolic digamma to denote the Number 6, the cha-
racter s is placed between the letters e and g; it is
one of the three episèmons, introduced in each of
the three ranks of the 24 Greek Letters, on account
of their deficiency to make up UNITS, TENs, and
HUNDREDS, viz. erua mºov Tav . . . . . Korra and Xavits.
But the contraction s is universally placed among
the Greek contractions between p and v, it being
an abbreviation of the two letters, sigma and tau,
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 35
consequently such Greek contraction of two letters
can have nothing to do, (as a contraction,) with
the separate or individual letters of the Greek
Alphabet, among which it never has any place, and,
therefore, cannot by any possible means be entitled to
any numerical value, unless the said stenographical
contraction s be proved to be of one and the same
import with the exiangov Tav, or cypher sº, which
is impossible ever to be done. It is therefore evi-
dent that neither the enlankov Tav, or cypher sº, nor
the contraction s were ever used in the calculation
of NAMEs or words; for it would be contrary to
common sense and to their known orthographical and
numerical uses, to remove them out of their respec-
tive places for purposes so fictitious and illegitimate,
and it would be as reasonable to call the LETTER O,
in the English language, and the CYPHER 0, or the
LETTER I and the FIGURE 1, by the same appellation,
on account of their apparent similarity. But this
similarity does not constitute their ‘homogeneity,’
because their offices are different, the one being em-
ployed in orthography, and the other in calculation,
so that when we see the one among Letters, and the
other among figures, we are able at once to distin-
guish their respective uses and appellations, and the
same thing may be said of the era wow Fav (s") and the
contraction (s).
It is certain then that there is more reason for
retaining the (e) in the name Aarévos, than there
can be for Mr. Faber's process of identifying BLAS-
PHEMos with APOSTATEs, converting sigma and tº
ID 2
36 CHAPTER III :
(a7) into the contraction (s) in the word Arcalarnº,
writing it contractedly Atos-arms, and finally using the
said contraction s, as if it were the errangov or cypher
s', for each LETTER must be taken SEPARATELY
and NoT contractedly, in calculating words or names,
according to all Greek authorities extant, and the ex-
ample of Irenaeus; and to depart from this established
custom or rule approaches nearly, in my opinion, to
an impeachment of God's perfect word. For if such
spurious orthography, etymology, homogeneity, &c.
as Mr. Faber has introduced on the present subject,
be allowed to pass current for orthodoxy, whilst
Irenaeus is overlooked in silent contempt; the result
must be that there will be an END to all ancient
authorities and established rules of calculating Greek
NAMEs, words, &c. although there must have existed
some known and STANDARD RULE, as well in the time
of St. John as of Irenaeus, or why has the Apostle
furnished us with the sacred number xàs', 666, and
exhorted us to “count the NUMBER 2 ”
I will readily admit that there is a legitimate pro-
priety in using the era nuov Tav, or cypher sº to denote
the number 6, in unison with the 24 LETTERS of the
Greek Alphabet, when calculating NUMBERs, but
NEveR when calculating the NAMEs of MEN, nor even
words of any description; and I say so for this
plain and obvious reason—that an enignuov, or cypher,
is no LETTER or LETTERs ; or why should it be de-
signated by Greek grammarians errangov Tav, or errankov
only 2 It were useless to have given this character
or cypher a distinct appellation and form, if it were
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 37
not for a specific use; and not to preserve this distinc-
tion is to introduce confusion among the 24 GREEK
LETTERs, the THREE exiangz, and the general Greek
CONTRACTIONS Or LIGATURES.
I will also admit that one form of the enlankov Tav,
or cypher s', bears a singular resemblance to the
form of the regular contraction of sigma and tau,
or s ; but this is likewise the case with the cyPHER
nought 0 and the LETTER O, in the English lan-
guage ; yet it would be preposterous to admit that
because the Greek or English characters before men-
tioned resembled each other in form and appearance,
that, therefore, they must be synonymous with each
other, which is contrary to FACT; because they were
originally designated by different appellations, which
they retain to the present day. Mr. Faber must
therefore search into the Records of Antiquity
to disprove the existence of such a truism. And
until it is settled beyond dispute that the aforesaid
eriankov or cypher s is synonymous with the regular
Greek contraction s (or aſ); or that it may be or-
thographically and numerically used As the represent-
ative of sigma and tau, when written contRACTEDLY,
there must ever remain an ambiguity on the subject ;
for it is most obvious from all Greek grammarians and
lexicographers who have noticed this stenographical
cypher sº, that, whatever resemblance it may bear to
the Greek contraction s, the former has a peculiar
definite situation and appellation allotted to it, in
order to distinguish its numerical Use, Form, Name,
and Locality, as well from that of the contRAC-
38 CHAPTER III. :
Tion s, as from the regular LETTERS of the Greek
Alphabet, among which the episèmon s' has no
positive station, neither has it any place whatsoever
among the stenographical contractions or ligatures
of the Greek Letters, of which there are very many—
and when the errangov Tav is used in unison with the
24 Greek Letters of the Alphabet, to denote the
Number 6, then it is immediately placed between e
and g in the numerical space occasioned by the
absence of the obsolete AEolic Di-gamma, which was
anciently used to eaſpress the Number 6, but the
LocalſTY of which was FAR ENough R.E.Moved
from sigma and tau. Therefore, until this ambiguity
is cleared up, Arorarn, can never, by the spurious
and unorthodox use of the episèmon s', as if it were
the numerical representative of the contraction s,
produce the genuine Number 666. Consequently,
after all the pains and labour which Mr. Faber has
taken, which are certainly very great, in order to
confirm the use of the word Apostates as the sup-
posed figuratively impressed name of the numbered
Beast or Man, it is most unequivocally true that Mr.
Faber’s orTHogRAPHY, ETYMology, Homogen EITY,
&c. are infinitely more objectionable than those of
Irenaeus, whose testimony he has so complacently
rejected : for the word ApostATEs is not only erro-
neous because of a necessary HIATUs produced on the
one hand by the spurious introduction and use of the
episèmon s'; and a redundancy of numbers, occa-
sioned by the calculating of the individual Letters of
the word on the other: but the word itself, which is
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 39
certainly not the NAME of any MAN, admits of far
too general an application to any lapsed church or
schism, which is in a state of Apostacy from the
Faith, (aroalaria Tng rivews) though totally distinct from,
and unconnected with the Roman or LATIN Church,
of which I shall give sundry examples hereafter,
leaving it to the candour of Mr. Faber and my other
Readers, to judge whether there be sufficient force in
my Remarks.
CHAPTER IV.
FURTHER OBSERVATIONS ON THE NU MERICAL CYPHER
DENOMINATED etia nºoy T, OR V, or G, or sº, As
USED TO DENOTE THE NUMBER 6, AND TO SUPPLY
THE V ACU U M OCCASION ED BY THE ABSENCE OF
THE OBSOLETE AEOLIC DI-GAMMA.
I SHALL now proceed more particularly to point
out the marked and necessary distinction existing:
between the extankov Tav, or stenographical cypher sº,
and the contraction or ligature of sigma and tau, s.
In truth, I cannot imagine any thing more pre-
posterous than an attempt made, in this age to prove
that an errankov or stenographical CYPHER, or INDE-
FINITE CHARACTER may be ORTHOGRAPHICALLY used
as the legitimate representative of Two DISTINCT
LETTERS of the Greek Alphabet in the formation of
the NAME of a MAN, or indeed of any word, words,
or sentences, which are simply composed of LETTERs,
unless it be first of all admitted that the said errangov
observations on THE THREE GREEK CYPHERS. 41
or stenographical cypher may and ought to have
assigned to it a numerical value equal to that
which those Two distinct LETTERs, (contractedly,)
are supposed to represent in calculation. For ex-
ample: If the episemon or cypher g' may be legiti-
mately used as the representative of sigma and tau,
contractedly, g, as in the word Atos-arms; then it
follows as a natural and necessary consequence, that
the said errankov, or cypher s', being of the self-same
power as the said two Letters sigma and tau, the con-
traction g must be equal to the said numerical power in
calculating those two Letters uncontractedly aſ, i. e.
500; for it is useless to affirm that the errangoy or
cypher g' is allowed for the purpose of representing
the two Letters x and T at one time, and yet that it
has not the same power as those two Letters at
another time, which would be a palpable contradic-
tion in terms, and, therefore, if the errangov or cypher
g" may in every case be considered as equal to, or
used in the same manner as the contraction or liga-
ture ; or 21, then the errankov or cypher 5' must in
every way be equal to the contraction g : but the
ettanºoy or cypher g' is not in any possible case equal
to the contraction g, because the former is equal to
the Number 6, and the latter (in its contracted form)
signifies no number, but in its uncontracted form is
equal to 500 ; therefore, if the episèmon s' is the
supposed representative of sigma and tau < or gl,
as the latter Two LETTERS are equal to 500, so
must the former (as the representative of the latter,)
be equal to 500; because “things which are equal to
42 CHAPTER IV :
the same are equal to one another.' But as the
exiangov or stenographical character º' is a cypher,
and no letter, or letters, of the Greek alphabet, and
is used for the number 6: so it cannot possibly be
the true representative of the well known contraction
or ligature g, either in Letters, Identity, Utility, or
orthographical appellation, because of its distinct
locality, appellation, and numerical uses, as set forth
in the Greek grammars. The episèmon g’ is never
classed with the 24 letters of the Greek alphabet, nor
is it to be found among the numerous Greek contrac-
tions or ligatures of certain definite letters, and the
only place where it is to be found is in the UNIT Class
of Numerals, which consists of this Cypher, with
the Eight First Letters of the Alphabet.
It must be observed then that the cypher g', called
by grammarians eriangov Tav, or episèmon g is used
as a numerical character, that it existed in St.
John's time, and was invented to supply the place
of the obsolete AEolic di-gamma or double gamma,
anciently used for the number 6. The three char-
acters or cyphers denominated extankov Tav, 6. . . .
extankov Kotta, 90... and entia nºoy Xavits, 900, have been
collaterally used not As, but in unison with the Letters
to make up their deficiency, for the purposes of common
calculations, and not for the unintelligible and unor-
thographical use of making the word Arorarn; subserve
the object of Mr. Faber's hypothesis, which would
* See three examples of this numerical episemon s' in Irenaeus, lib. V.
c. xxix. p. 446 and 447. Edit. Grabe, Oxon. 1702.
OBSERVATIONS ON THE THREE GREEK CYPHERS. 43
convert the cypher G', equal to 6, into the contraction
g equal to nothing, though its component Letters are
equal to 500. If it could ever be established that the
erionºv or cypher, or character g', may be used in the
same manner as sigma and tau, contractedly and
wncontractedly, (as it may be without doubt, if it
can be proved equal to, or homogeneous with the
contraction g,) that is, first with the power of 6, or
6,000;-them, 500, or 500,000, just as it may suit
the taste of the writer, (and if it be possible that the
two letters of the contraction 3 or aſ may be used
separately when the number of any name is to be cal-
culated; for names are always composed of Letters,
and Not Cyphers,) then there would be no end to
the vain and frivolous speculations which must ensue
from such arbitrary use of a quadruple power, and
consequently, no Greek word, or name of a Man,
which had the Greek contraction g in it, could ever
produce any specific or satisfactory number, on
account of the capricious use thus made of the
episèmon g’, as identical with the contraction g. For
as the episèmon g is already equal to 6, and 6,000;
if the episèmon g’ be equal to the contraction g, the
latter is also equal to 500, and 500,000, because
sigma and tau, which are equal to the contraction
g, are separately or uncontractedly equal to the latter
numbers, according as the Mark (similar to an acute
accent, as ',) is placed above or below them. [See the
Table at the end. J Who, then, on these data is to
decide the merits of the question at issue? Mr. Faber?
or Grecian antiquity ? Surely the latter | | |
44 - CHAPTER IV :
The three Episèma or Stenograghical Cyphers
have no necessary or specific affinity, reference to,
or dependence upon the 24 Greek LETTERs, either in
contracted or uncontracted form, being totally inde-
pendent of them, because the latter are alone used in
calculating Names, &c.; nor are the three erianka any
of the regular contractions, or abbreviations, or
ligatures of certain Greek letters ; as is manifest by
their distinct appellations and irregular ev-alphabet-
ical situations, when they are used among the Greek
letters for the purpose of calculation. Mr. Faber,
with all his ingenuity and logic, cannot find the Two
stenographical cyphers, Korra, which is denoted by
the characters T...s...} and Xavri, which is written
2', either among the regular Greek contractions
of letters themselves, in any Greek Learicon or
Grammar extant: for each of these stenographical
cyphers has a certain definite and independent
appellation, which it most distinctly retains, when
used among (not for) the letters of the Greek Al-
phabet in calculating numbers, and this is their only
legitimate use, for they have nothing to do with the
genius of the Greek language or of Grecian ortho-
graphy; nor indeed are they ever seen in any Greek
words or names of any kind, and therefore must be
rejected from such equivocal position, because if they
are once made to correspond with, represent, or
usurp the places of the LETTERs, they are no longer
of that specific use for which they were primarily
invented and adopted as numeral characters or
cyphers.
OBSERVATIONS ON THE THREE GREEK CYPHERS. 45
Moreover, if the emangov or cypher g' were in truth
the same character as the Greek contraction of sigma
and tau, or g, why then is the former called extankov
Tav, or episèmon g’, by Grammarians? Is it not for
the sake of distinction, and that we may avoid
such a confusion of orthography as that which
Mr. Faber, Archdeacon Wrangham, Bishop Bossuet,
and others have introduced in the spurious use of the
episèmon g’ for the contraction g in the word
Arorarnº, by supposing them to be of one and the
same numerical value? The truth is, the episèmon
g" is a cypher and numerically equal to 6, or 6,000;
but the stenographical contraction of sigma and tau,
g, is of no numerical value whatsoever; for if it were
equal to the latter in Letters, it would also be equal to
it in numbers, i. e. 500, or 500,000, which we know
from all grammarians and lexicographers is not true.
Moreover, if the episèmong" were derived from the stock
of the ancient AEolic di-gamma, “ by rounding off its
angles,’ as the learned Dr. Marsh, Bishop of Peterboro’
(although combated by Mr. Faber,) concludes, from
its being used in thesivth place among the letters, when
calculating the Number 6 by means of one single cha-
racter; (instead of the two separate letters, alpha
and epsilon, (2é) or béta and delta, (88) which are
commonly used to denote 6 in names;) then it
proves worse than nothing for Mr. Faber's very
whimsical argument, which rests upon a mere PRO-
BABILITY ; and this even according to his own
admission. I consider, therefore, that Mr. Faber
has asserted much, but proved nothing satisfactorily:
46 CHAPTER IV :
and that it would have been far better if he had left
this numerical enigma as he had stated it in his'
first work on this subject, in which he very properly
sanctioned the opinion of Irenaeus concerning the
name Aarévos. It would, I repeat, have been better
if he had not commenced de novo, by introducing the
subject in a most unintelligible point of view in his *
“Sacred Calendar of Prophecy,” by the use of the
word Aroa rarms, which, in my humble opinion, is the
most unsatisfactory substitute which he could have
chosen, knowing, as he must have known, how much
polemical discussion had been already ventured to no
settled purpose on this sacred enigma.
There is reason to admit that the era nuov, or Steno-
graphical cypher r", is very properly used to denote
the number 6 in calculating numbers indifferently,
and, that, in one form of it out of four, it bears
some tolerable resemblance to the contraction g; it
may be likewise noticed that one form of the SIGMA
(s) out of four has also a tolerable resemblance to
the contraction g, as well as the episèmon s', but
they are not very difficult to distinguish ; besides
which, the meaning of the Greek word errnuov, if I
mistake not, implies, I might say determines, that it
ought to have a mark (similar perhaps to an acute
accent) either above or below it (s' or ;) as its
distinguishing characteristic, and with which it is,
* Dissertation on the Prophecies relative to the great period of 1260
Years. Vol. ii. p. 335.
* Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. chap. iv. from p. 240,
to 242.
observations on Trie Three GREEK CYPHERS. 47
or ought to be, invariably written, so that it may be
described in Latin phraseology—“Signum, in quo
aliqua sunt signa, quibus ab aliis discernitur.” This
SIGN or MARK Mr. Faber has very prudently omitted
in the same way that he has left out the circumfler
accent () over the iota in the name Aarévvos after
having rejected the epsilon ()—he has also omitted
the epsilon and circumflew accent over the iota in the
name Tºrray by writing it Tºray, which shews at once
that he is more ready to reject a letter ... circumflea-
accent .... and mark ... merely because he wishes that
they should not be there, than he is to bring for-
ward authorities to prove that his orthography is
legitimate.
But I never can admit, without very substantial
proof, the propriety of metamorphosing the eriangov
or cypher g' into an identity with the Two LETTERs
x and T, of which the contraction g is decidedly
composed, and then using them ad libitum ; for how
can an episèmon or cypher be wrested into an equa-
lity with two Letters but by a forgery of Ortho-
graphy 2 since it is evident that two stenographical
characters which are decidedly different in their
appellations, meaning, use, and numerical value can
never be one and the same character at the same
time; but the moment it is the one, it ceases to be
the other: so that either the extankov or cypher & Is
the regular contraction g (or aſ) or it Is Not. Now
the era nuov or cypher with the mark above it (3') is
equal to 6; and the same errankov by a subjoined mark
(s) is equal to 6,000; and the regular contraction
48 * CHAPTER IV :
g being equal to two separate letters a and r, which,
when used separately or uncontractedly in calcu-
lating names, words, &c. (the method always
adopted by the Greeks in reference to the 24 letters
of the Greek alphabet) are equal to the combined
numbers of 500, or 500,000; but the contraction
of a/, i. e. g., is never used to denote any number, and
therefore, whatever resemblance the episémon may
bear to the contraction, or the contraction to the
episemon, they are in reality no more assimilated to
one another than the Cypher nought 0 is to the
Letter O.
It must therefore be difficult to conceive how con-
cinity, homogeneity, or any similar process can
amalgamate these two distinct characters together;
for every Greek student must know that the contrac-
tion g is an abbreviation or ligature of two letters;
but that the era nºoy Tav, or cypher g’, is merely an
arbitrary character occasionally introduced between
E and z to represent 6, in lieu of the obsolete AEolic
di-gamma, and as the substitute for A and E (26)
when it is more convenient to represent the number
6 by ONE NUMERICAL CHARACTER or cypher than
by Two separate letters ; which letters (viz. a and e)
are generally used for the number 6, when the
cypher g' is not employed. Moreover, if the exianuov
Tav be used by grammarians as a double letter
belonging to the Greek Alphabet, then of course it
must be the ancient AEolic di-gamma revived in some
* See the Table of Numbers at the end of this work.
OBSERVATIONS ON THE THREE GREEK CYPHERS. 49
stenographical form of it; but it is certain that it
was anciently used for 6, being put in the 6th place
among the letters, viz. between e and g, and this
circumstance would not in the least facilitate Mr.
Faber's argument, because T or TT, and s or aſ, are
obviously different from each other. It is evident,
therefore, that the enignuoy Tav, or Cypher s”, with a
MARK over it similar to an acute accent, demon-
strates that it is a cypher, and nothing but a
cypher, and numerically equal to 6; but to make
the stenographical episèmon g’, synonymous with
the abbreviation of sigma and tau <, which is
unquestionably equal to two separate letters, is
to make 6 equal to 500, and 6,000 equal to
500,000, a result preposterous enough where “wis-
dom” and “ understanding” are to be in special
exercise. And as Mr. Faber has so ingeniously dis-
covered that “Blasphemy denotes Apostacy,” per-
haps he can equally demonstrate in what manner the
two letters x and T may be made to denote the
emangov Tav or cypher sº, a discovery which very
happily has not yet been made by the learned in the
past or present generations; although the ingenuity
and subtilty of the learned Bishop Bossuet and
other Romanists have been employed in order to
produce such a belief among the credulous. How-
ever, the Apostle Paul exhorts Christian men to
“ Prove all things” ... and then ... to “hold fast
that which is good,” and by this rule, Bishop
Bossuet, and an anonymous writer who has pub-
1 1 Thess. v. 21.
E
50 CHAPTER IV.
lished a work, entitled “Les Précurseurs de l’Anti-
christ,” at Lyons in 1817, Mr. Faber, his coadjutor,
Archdeacon Wrangham, and others, must re-examine
their premises, which are founded on FICTION and
720t 072 FACT.
CHAPTER V.
ON THE RESULT of THAT BRANCH of MR. FABER's
HYPOTHESIs, which IDENTIFIES THE EPIsèMon s'
WITH THE CONTRACTION Sr.
To set up and establish de novo, that because one
form of the episemon G', and the contraction g, are
somewhat similar in appearance, they are therefore the
same in utility and purpose, is to do violence both to
common sense and experience. It is contrary to all
grammatical precedent as it respects orthography,
and decidedly tends to undermine and vitiate the
Integrity of the Greek characters, by confusing the
LETTERS, CYPHERs, and ContRACTIONs together,
which have for generations past been preserved
distinct, as well in use as in appellation. Moreover,
such a commixture would lead the divinity student
into the most useless and perplexing ambiguities
upon SETTLED Points; and here I shall perhaps be
excused for introducing some remarks upon the
futility of Dr. Adam Clarke's endeavours to prove
E 2
52 CHA PTER V :
from the ARABIc tongue that the original" HEBREw
word tº machash, which the SEPTUAGINT trans-
lators have rendered by "opis, was not the SERPENT,
but the APE or OURAN-ouTANG. How preposterous
truly are the modern criticisms vented both on a
NAME and an EPIs EMON, against the most indubitable
testimonies of Holy-writ, Grammar, and long-esta-
blished use ! How arrogant and contemptible the
ingenuity, arguments, and assertions of learned men,
who aspire to the appearance of more wisdom than
ever the Spirit of Inspiration vouchsafed to Moses,
or to CHRIST, and his ApostLEs, who, in allusion
to the words of Moses, have applied the” word
"opis (which has no other meaning than that of
SERPENT,) to the DEv1L and SATAN. Whatever
respect then, or deference may be due to the learning,
piety, gifts, and opinions of Dr. Adam Clarke as an
oriental scholar, Biblical critic, and commentator, it
is nevertheless evident that the unprecedented latitude
which the learned Doctor has taken in explaining the
HEBREw word tºrſ, NACHAsh, "opis, or SERPENT,
which tempted.” Eve, has not contributed to the
satisfaction of the religious world, any more than
pleased those of his own communion. The Doctor,
to supply a fancied deficiency in the HEBREw
Original, has, by recourse to the ARABIC and its
derivatives, (because IT seemed more to serve his
particular purpose,) sacrificed truth to a vain ima-
gination. To this end he has put his etymological
* Gen. iii. i. 4. * Matt. x. 16. 2 Cor. xi. 3. Rev. xii. 9; xx. 2.
* Gen. iii. 1, compared with 2 Cor. xi. 3.
OBSERVATIONS ON THE NACHASH. 53
genius to the stretch to find out meanings never
contemplated by the sacred penmen. But as the
Greek Septuagint has rendered the Hebrew word
win; by opi; or SERPENT, and the Greek Tert of the
New Testament has admitted the same reading—
&; ; OTIX Etav čánwárnaev čv rā travovpyiz abrā,-“As the
SERPENT beguiled Eve through his subtilty,” &c. it
must be the imperative duty of every Christian to
receive this sure and infallible testimony of the Holy
SPIRIT by the hand of the Apostle PAUL, who,
although he wrote his Epistles to the primitive Chris-
tian churches in Greek, was nevertheless, a JEw,
as he says, in comparing himself with other apostles—
“I suppose I was not a whit behind the very
chiefest apostles.” “Are they HEBREws? so am I.
Are they ISRAELITES 2 so am I. Are they the seed
of ABRAHAM 2 so am I.’” —And concerning circum-
cision, and the Tribe from which he sprung and the
Sect to which he belonged—he says, “Circumcised
the eighth day, of the Stock of IsrAEL, of the
TRIBE of BENJAMIN, an HEBREw of the HEBREws;
as touching the LAw a PHARISEE.”* Moreover, St.
Paul in declaring his Conversion, has informed us
of the name of the city in which he was born, the
person by whom, and the manner in which he was
educated, from which we may infer that he was
learned in the “LAw of the FATHERs,” and in his
defence of the Gospel he declares himself a Jew, and
spoke to the people in the HEBREw Tongue, after
the following manner, “And when there was made
* 2 Cor. xi. 5, 22. * Philip. iii, 5.
54 ty. CHAPTER V .
a great silence, he spake unto them in the HEBREw
Tongue, saying, Men, Brethren, and Fathers, hear
ye my defence which I make now unto you, (and
when they heard that he spake in the HEBREw
Tongue to them, they kept the MoRE sileNCE ; and
he saith,) I am verily a man which am a JEw, born
in TARSUs, a City in C1LICIA, yet brought up in
this City,” (viz. Jerusalem) “at the feet of Ga-
maliel, and TAUGHT according to the PERFECT MAN-
NER of the LAw of the FATHERs,”’ &c. Now then
it is most unreasonable to suppose that St. Paul, who
was a Jew, and an inspired Apostle—and who calls
himself an “HEBREw of the HEBREws” —and de-
clares that he was “taught according to the PERFECT
MANNER of the LAw of the FATHERs,” could have
been ignorant of the 3rd Chapter of the Book of
Genesis, wherein the Original Curse was pronounced
upon the tº Nachash or "opis, or Serpent: seeing
that the same Apostle wrote his EPISTLEs to the
CHURCHES in GREEK, with which LANGUAGE, there-
fore, he must necessarily have been thoroughly con-
versant. It is clear enough what was the opinion
of St. Paul concerning the Nachash or Serpent,”
and to disbelieve his Testimony is to invalidate the
TRUTH of GoD's WoRD, which is a hazardous ev-
periment. Furthermore—as ALL the APOSTLEs were
endued with the miraculous GIFT of Tongues” by
the Agency of the Holy SPIRIT, under whose imme-
diate influences they spake with New Tongues on
the day of Pentecost, and by whose instrumentality
* Acts xxi. 40; xxii. 1–3. * 2 Cor. xi. 3. * Acts ii.
OBSERVATIONS ON THE NACHASH. 55
they were subsequently enabled to write the NEw
TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES, (and ALL ScripTURE is
given by INSPIRATION of God,” “) so THEY would
have been able, in enditing the Gospels, EPISTLEs,
and the Book of Revelation, to have discerned what
was “the MIND of the SPIRIT,” in reference to the
word tº Nachash, which, by the Septuagint, is
translated "opis, and to suppose the contrary of this,
is to believe MAN rather than GoD, and to place
Dr. Adam Clarke upon higher scriptural ground
of INSPIRATION and INTERPRETATION, than CHRIST
or his ApostLEs ; for, if the Holy Scriptures be
the STANDARD of divine knowledge and truth, then
it is clear enough that the novel Opinion of the
learned Doctor is GROUNDLESS; for it not only
comes under the class of “ Doubtful DISPUTA-
TIONS ;’” but under the censure of God himself, con-
cerning whose sacred “ or AcLEs “ St. Paul says,"
“Let God be true, but every man a liar.”
Again: St. John in his Revelations has afforded
us an additional testimony to the word Obix as being
originally applicable to the NACHASH or SERPENT."
K&t 36Affºn 3 Apákov 6 p.éya;, & Obſ2 & 3pxãios, 3 kaºuevo,
As4éoxos, kai : Xaravās, 3 radºvāv rºw oikovkévny any, .... Kai ...
3 Oºix, &c. “And the great DRAGON was cast out,
that old SERPENT, called the Devil, and SATAN,
which deceiveth the whole world: ”—“And” ... “ the
SERPENT,” &c. Also the same evangelist has re-
peated his testimony on this subject in similar words,”
2 Tim. iii. 16; 2 Peter i. 19—21. * Rom. viii. 27. * Rom. xiv. 1.
* Rom. iii. 2 and 4. - * Rev. xii. 9, 15. * Rev. xx. 2.
56 CHAPTER V.
Kai ékpārna e rºw Apakovra, rov OblN row Apxàov, 3, £ar, Algéoxo;
K& Xarayås-“And he laid hold on the Dragon, that
old SERPENT, which is the Devil and SATAN.”
Moreover, Christ admonished his Disciples to be"—
ppävipas &; 3. OfFIX—“Wise as SERPENTs,” no doubt
in allusion to the expression of Moses; and can it be
doubted that He knew the character and proper
designation of THE NACHASH 2 To do so would be
scepticism indeed! We have then the concurrent
testimony of CHRIST, St. PAUL, and ST. JoHN; and
to deny their threefold testimony (as well as that
of the Septuagint,) concerning “the old Serpent’”
is to make the Holy SPIRIT the author of falsehood.
CHRIST imputes to the orix or SERPENT—“ Wis-
dom.” ST. PAUL “guile” and “subtilty,” and St.
John “deceit; ” but Dr. Adam Clarke has not ad-
vanced any proof in favour of the imaginary wisdom
of the Monkey species ABove the SERPENT. Where-
fore, as the Greek word Oºix never means an Ouran-
outang, but only a SERPENT, and Dr. Adam Clarke
has not proved his point in the least degree from the
HEBREw, surely the ARABIC meanings can never be
considered conclusive, while they are AT v ARIANCE
with the origiNAL TEXT of the GREEK TESTAMENT:
for if we admit that the ARABIC derivation ought to
be preferred to the HEBREw use, we shall pre-
sently establish the PAPAL SYSTEM, of preferring
the LATIN translation to the HEBREw and GREEK
ORIGINALs. -
I now leave the Nachash of Dr. Clarke to its fate,
* Matt. x. 16.
observ ATIONs on The CYPHERS CONTINUED. 57
and proceed more at large to consider the complete
inconsistency of Mr. Faber in the very erroneous
view he has taken of the exiangov Tav or cypher g',
which demonstrates his orthography to be utterly
spurious, and indefensible before the correctness of
IRENAEUs whose orthography MUST stand, until some
far more accurate grammarian than Mr. Faber shall
arise to supplant it. -
It is evident that Mr. Faber has carelessly or
intentionally omitted an important point (to which I
have already alluded) connected with the enlankov or
cypher g', viz. that it ought always to have an accent or
Mark of distinction placed above or below it : how
else are we to know its numerical value? When the
Mark is placed above, it is equal to 6; but when the
Mark is placed below, it is equal to 6,000—thus
Xés' is equal to 666, but x&s to 666,000, the
proof of which I have shown more clearly in an
Alphabetical and Arithmetical Table at the end of
this work. How then the literary world can know
when the entangov or cypher g' used without the
Mark denotes 6, and when 6,000, remains for
Mr. Faber to demonstrate | | And little as may
be thought of this omission, the fact is, that it
destroys the stability of his argument; for when the
THREE eruanaa or CYPHERs are used numerically among
the Greek LETTERs, then this Mark is the distin-
guishing characteristic of each in calculation, with-
out which there would be no means of ascertaining
the precise number belonging to any NAME, word,
&c. unless the number were written in words at full
58 CHAPTER V :
length, as ičakário ##covra £5, instead of the numerals
/
xás.
Indeed there is no satisfactory reason which can
be given for the use of any one of the three erranko, or
cyphers, in lieu of the regular LETTERs of the Greek
alphabet, when calculating the number contained in
the NAME of any MAN, Woman, City, Church,
Kingdom, &c. : for the same reason which would
admit one eriankov to such ALPHABETICAL use and
order, would likewise admit the other Two : but
happily no instance or evidence can be adduced for
such promiscuous use among the ancient Greeks,
nor was ever dreamed of till the Rev. George
Stanley Faber, Archdeacon Wrangham, Bishop
Bossuet, and others, invented this unintelligible
scheme; and their authorities are sufficiently mo–
derm, and co-eval with Dr. Adam Clarke's in-
terpretation of the triº Nachash, and in my
opinion quite as absurd. I would therefore plainly
put the question to Mr. Faber, and ask him how
the numerals xºrr' could possibly produce the number
666 ° and this is surely coming to the point | He
would answer, no doubt—Put s and r together, and
make a contRACTION of them—thus g ; but when
this is done the contraction g must remain a con-
traction, and (whatever resemblance the EPIsèMon
g' may have to the contRACTION g) the errankov con-
tinues an errangoy from the nature of its use. And it
has been proved that the contRACTION & is equal to
the Two separate LETTERs ar, and the two separate
letters at are equal to 500, therefore the contraction,
OBSERVATIONS ON THE CYPHERS CONTINUED. 59
if used as a numeral, is equal to 500—add to each
the letters xf—and “if equals be added to equals
the wholes are equal'... xfor is equal to xàº; ; but
x£at is equal to 1160, therefore xຠis equal to
1160, and by Mr. Faber's hypothesis x&g' is equal to
x£g ... therefore 666 is equal to 1160, ‘the less to
the greater which is absurd' ... therefore the CYPHER
or EPISBMon is Not equivalent to the contRACTION :
and thus we PRove that the conclusion of Mr. Faber
is not founded upon true premises.
Moreover, as the ancient AEolic D1-GAMMA for-
merly occupied the 6th place among the LETTERs of
the Greek alphabet, so it was then used numerically
for sia, and possibly for this reason, that as the
single gamma (being the third LETTER) was used for
the number 3, so the di-gamma was used for 6,
because twice 3 = 6. Furthermore, as the di-gamma
was originally put in the siath place among the
Letters to denote 6, so it is more than probable that
the episémon g’ which has occupied the 6th place (of
the obsolete di-gamma) must be equal to 6. And on
the same ground, if, (as Mr. Faber supposes,) the
contraction g be the same character as the episèmon
s'—then the contraction g is also equal to 6. But
I have shown that a and T in their UN contRACTED
form are equal to 500, and 500,000, and that
the episémon g’ or sº, is equal to 6, and 6,000,
and therefore some mode of clearing up these glaring
incongruities, and of establishing their quantities
and qualities according to some consistent rule,
must be sought ... this Rule Mr. Faber has either
overlooked or rejected.
60 CHAPTER V.
After sundry other observations, Mr. Faber very
complacently instructs us in the following manner:—
** IV. At the close of these remarks, I cannot
refrain from noticing the very singular manner in
which the contRACTION OR CYPHER g came to
be employed for the purpose of expressing the
Number 6.’
If Mr. Faber himself ‘ cannot refrain from noticing
the very singular manner in which the contRACTION
OR CYPHER g came to be employed for the purpose
of expressing the Number 6; how can we refrain
from noticing ' his most astonishing singularity in
coupling the exiangov Tav, or CYPHER g’, with the
contRACTION of a and r, or g, and omitting the
MARK over the EPIsèMon G', as if no such Mark
had ever existed, which Mark however denotes it, in
the clearest manner possible, to be the EPIsemon or
cyPHER g’, and NOT the contraction of a and t or g.
Mr. Faber has also left out the e both in Aarévos,
and Tétrav, together with the circumflew accent,
Aarivo:... Tºray, and has written them each with an
acute accent as Aartyo;... Tºray, contrary to the ex-
ample of Irenaeus, and all the other Greek writers.
He has also converted BAzapnuo; into Atos-arm;; and,
lastly, he has employed the errankov Tav, or cypher g’
as the representative of the contRACTION g in the
word Aroazzºns. Hence we infer that there is no sort
of fairness, either in his argument or orthography.
* Faber’s Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, Vol. iii. Book V. Ch. iv. P. 238.
CHAPTER VI.
on THE THREE EPISEMA, witH A NUMERous
SELECTION OF AUTHORITIES FOR THE USE OF
THE MARK () over THE EPISEMON OR CYPHER
G'.
THERE are two other erianwa or cyphers, (besides
the era nºoy Tav. V. G. or g") the first of which
is called Korra, the characters are thus written
T. G or /, with the Mark above , it is equal
to 90 ... and below , to 90,000 . . . and the
second cypher is the eriankov Xavri, the character
of which is 2' (so called because composed of the
ancient rºyuz inverted, with a part of the greek ºr
enclosed) and with the Mark above 2 it is equal to
900, but below 2 it is equal to 900,000. Now then
as the Apostle John wrote his Revelations in the
Greek Language, in which Book the number x&g'
or 666 is found, and as he informs us there that
Jesus Christ is “the Axpa” (A) and opeya (0)
* Rev. i. 8, 11, 17; xxi. 6; xxii. 13.
62 CHAPTER VI :
“The FIRST and the LAST,” therefore we conclude
that the two LETTERs, A and 0, were the First and
Last Letters of the Greek Alphabet in the days of
St. John ; but the era wºoy or cypher called Xavir. 2' is
evidently placed by Grammarians after o, which is
the last Letter of the Greek Alphabet, and, therefore,
though apparently composed of two separate Letters,
yet we know that it cannot be used for such two
letters, inasmuch as that it is neither to be found in
the Greek Alphabet, nor among the numerous greek
contractions, and that it is always placed after Queya;
it must therefore be a forgery to attempt the inser-
tion of this character within the limits of the greek
alphabet in the present day. As for the episémon
Korra. . . . T. s or , it is clear enough that it has
neither the appellation of, nor resemblance to any
Greek Letters, or Contractions whatsoever, and
consequently cannot be admitted among either of
them, but is only used occasionally to denote 90, or
90,000. It may be observed here that the last form
of the Korra is somewhat like the Hebrew 2 lamed.
Why then should Mr. Faber be so zealous as to
prefer one particular form of the exiangov Tav, or
cypher g' when it has, I believe, three other forms,
and it would be difficult, if not impossible, for him
to decide which of them approximated the nearest
to the original character ? If however he could
determine the point to the greatest possible nicety,
still the era wºov would continue to be the era nºoy or
cypher g' to the last. I should be glad therefore to
learn from Mr. Faber what double letters of the
observ Ations on THE CYPHERS CONTINUED. 63
greek alphabet the two last mentioned emanga (viz.
Korra and Xavn) may be entitled to hold in the alpha-
betical scale of the greek LETTERS or table of con-
TRACTIONs 2 For if the substitute of the obsolete
84-yappa, which is now styled eriankov Tav, or g" may
be revived with the established novel power of two
distinct letters—aiyua and raw . . contracted—why
may not the other two strianka or cyphers assume the
form and value of double letters, or the ligatures
of such? (viz. Korra, the characters of which are
q. G or . . . . and Xavri, the character of which
is 2".) Till the precise and individual value of
these two latter emignao be established beyond con-
troversy, I conceive that Mr. Faber's argument
proves nothing for the “homogeneous' interchange
of 8Azapnko; and Arorarns, and his subsequent calcula-
tion of the enignuov or cypher g' as if it were the true
and undeniable Representative of the contraction gº
or at ; which is most absurd, because the errankov or
cypher g has not been proved to be the legitimate
and orthographical representative of the contraction
in calculating names of Men, cities, words, &c. For
the same reason that would raise the era nuov Tav or
cypher g' to the rank and numerical value of the
contraction g, which is equal to two Letters, would
also raise the extankov Korra. . . . and exiangov ×awr, to a
similar rank and numerical value with certain con-
tractions or Ligatures of certain other Letters.
Such a system however must inevitably do away with
the present order and established value and intention
of the three era muz or numerical cyphers, which were
64 CHAPTER VI :
merely introduced for numerical purposes and to
supply the deficiency of the Greek Alphabet which
consists of twenty-four Letters.
If Mr. Faber had wished to make a complete
NAME of a MAN, answerable to the “wisdom '' and
“ understanding ” of which St. John speaks, it is
certain that he would have had recourse to the
twenty-four LETTERs of the greek alphabet, and
to them only, in the same manner Irenaºus has,
by the production of three proper names as
Evav02; . . . Aarčivo; . . . and Tsiray . . . and in which
method IRENAEUs has been followed by HIPPoLYTUs
MARTYR . . . ARETAs . . . and all judicious commen-
tators who have written upon the Number 666; but
to render the word Bazapnaos synonymous with Arosarnº,
and then to convert the errangov Tav or cypher s' into
the contraction g, is no mark of a scholar; for
after all is said and done, APOSTATES must remain an
indefinite and ANoNYMoUs character, having nothing
whatever to do with the name of a MAN–whereas
it must be remembered that it is the NUMBER con-
jointly with the NAME of a MAN of which St. John
speaks; for the NUMBER of a MAN must imply the
NAME of a MAN, and the NAME of the MAN must
imply the LETTERS of HIS NAME, and the LETTERs
of HIS NAME must contain “the NUMBER of HIS
NAME * which is declared to be x86-' or 666, but of
which a numerical exia nuov or cypher can be no legiti-
mate PART ; because, by the spurious use of the
episèmon G' as the supposed representative of the
contraction of at or ; in the word Arosarn, an HIATUS
observations on THE CYPHERS CONTINUED. 65
is thereby produced by the ABSENCE of THE con-
TRACTION & which is equal to two letters; viz.
o and t: or a REDUNDANCY of NUMBERs is pro-
duced by the retention of the said two Letters in
their UN contRACTED form, whereupon comes the
destruction of Mr. Faber's opinion . . and, therefore,
the indefinite word Arorary; or Atroalarm; in its Con-
TRACTED or UN contRACTED form, can have nothing
to do with the NAME or NUMBER of THE BEAST,
which is that of a MAN, whose proper and Appella-
tive Name has been better conjecTURED upon more
authentic PREMISEs by St. Irenaeus, &c.
It may be noted here that when any of the fore-
going along, are used in unison with the LETTERs
of the greek alphabet, they INVARIABLY specify
NUMBERs and not LETTERS or contRACTIONs of any
sort or description, and that therefore, according to
the Greek mode of calculation, they ought to have a
small Mark, similar to an acute accent, over them
as g’ or UNDER them as s and so with the other two
€ºria’ſpºo, (viz. Kotta and Xavri) in order to shew their
distinct numerical power, i. e. whether they are
meant to denote 6, or 6,000 . . . 90, or 90,000 . . .
900, or 900,000. And this little Mark, or Dot,
or Accent (, , -) in whatever form it may be made is
enough, not only to distinguish the episemon s' from
the contraction g (which latter has no such Mark,
or Dot, or Accent belonging to it at any time, and
consequently no such number as the episomon G',
because the Mark is the distinguishing character-
istic of the number represented by it) but it equally
F
66 * * CHAPTER VI :
demonstrates the insufficiency of Mr. Faber's argu-
ment and orthography; for the omission of this
Mark renders them null and void, [see my remarks
annexed to the TABLE of the GREEK LETTERS, &c.
at the end of this work], and if this subject were
propounded to the most learned Grecians for their
impartial decision, I have not the smallest shadow
of a doubt that they would immediately give their
verdict in favour of retaining this distinctive Mark.
At all events IRENAEUs in the three following instances
uses the MARK ABOVE the EPISEMON g’.
* karaXMAw; oty k&l rô ºvop.o. o.ºrºv čes tºy &pièpºv
xés'.
And in speaking of the height and breadth of Ne-
buchadnezzar's image, he writes— -
Méxpt; 3 Å rāv Našovzobovča'ap &vaşağärz eiköy, firi, tºo; pºv,
éixe tºxãv čákovra, eſpo; 8: rnxów º'.
And in expressing his opinion concerning what the
Number of the Name of the Beast should represent,
in whom all apostacy, and injustice, and wickedness,
and false prophecy, and deceit, would concentrate, he
says—
rºw &piºpºv, 3; #ipnroºi, a nºo.ſvovari ră ăvăporos, ét; ây avykepa Aasrat
Töv - érôv Träora &tos-20 ſo, kai 38trix, Kai Tovmpia.
See also the Works of GALEN in 3 vols. folio,
(Greek,) published at BASIL 1538, wherein the
episemon g (with the Mark over it) is of frequent
OCCUlrren Ce.
* IRENA. Lib. V. cap. xxix. p. 446,447. Edit. Grabe. London, 1702.
AUTHORITIES For THE MARK (‘). 67
GREEK GRAMMARS.
The following GREEK GRAMMARs have the Mark,
or Dot, or Accent placed above the episemon G', when
denoting the Number 6, viz.
The Port Roy AL GREEK GRAMMAR.
A most copious Greek Grammar, entitled, “ UNI-
vERSA GRAMMATICA GRAEcA. Per Alexandrum
Scot, Scotum. LUGDUNI, 1614.’ Page 637. . . . g'
• . . . ekºm-
A very copious GREEK GRAMMAR, published in
PARIs, 1655, entitled, “ Nouvelle Méthode pour
apprendre facilement LA LANGUE GRECQUE.’ Livre I.
page 16, 17.
A GREEK GRAMMAR, published at PARIs, 1649,
entitled, “Les Declinaisons Grecques.’ Page 226.
A GREEK GRAMMAR, published at Goud A, in
South Holland, in 1684, by Joannes Verwey.
Page 10. *
A WesTMINSTER GREEK GRAMMAR, printed by
Bonhamus Nortomus, 1634; another by John Red-
amayne, 1647; another by Edward Leedes, Master
of the Grammar School at Bury in Suffolk, 1690;
all of which, with many others, have the Mark over
the episemon g’.
68 - CHAPTER VI :
GREEK LEXICONS, &c.
Also : in ScAPULAE LExicon," under the head
“ De Gracorum Notis Arithmeticis compendium
ex HADRIAN1 Amerotis scriptis” ... and ...... ‘‘ HE-
RodiANI de iisdem tractatus :” we have the epise-
mon g’ with the mark, or accent, or dot over it as
in the following examples, wherein the said episèmon,
when used to denote the Number 6, or any GREATER
number connected with SIx, is so written.
III.<' é8 . . . . . . VI. 6. sex.
AIII.is' ekkaiºeka. XVI. 16. sexdecim.
AAIII.ks' eikoa, if... XXVI. 26. viginti SeX.
AAAIII.As-' . . . . . . . . XXXVI. 36.
AAAAIII-tº-' . . . . . . . . XLVI. 46.
|A|III.v." © º O O e º 'º º LVI. 56.
(AAIII.5' ........ LXVI. 66.
|A|AAIII.os.' ... ..... LXXVI. 76.
[AAAAIII.xx' ........ LXXXVI. 86.
Also: in a Learicon entitled, “Padagogus Gracus,
sive LEXICON Latino Graccum,” &c. by Jacobus
Bayer. (Editio Quarta.) MogunTIUM. 1741. In
Appendia.
Tabula et Notae Numerorum.
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . III.
Also : Stephens's Greek Concordance of the New
* ScAPULA in Appendix ad Lexicon. Edit. Genevae. An. 1616.
/ 69
AUTHORITIES FOR THE MARK (').
Testament—** Stephani CoNcoRDANTIÆ Graeco-
!atinæ Testamenti Novi.” (Editio secunda.) GE-
Nevae. 1624, has the- mark over the episèmon,
as s'.
GREEK TESTAMENTS.
So also : the following EDITIoNs of the GREEK
TeSTAMENT, British and Foreign, have the mark
placed over the episèmom q' in the number x£s'
|Novum Testamentum Græcè. ARGENToRATiUM. Apud Wolfium. A. d. 1524
.................. Græcum. VENETius. Melchioris Sessæ.. A. D. 1538
................. Græcè. BASILEAE. Apud Nicholaum
Brylingerum. . . . . . . . . o • o • o • e e • • • • . . A. D. l548
.......... . . . . . . . . Græcum. Ex Bibliotheca Regia. LUTETIAE. A. D. 1549
• • ........ . . . . . . . . Græcè et Latinè. PARISIis. Apud Ro-
bertum Granlon. . . . ............ . . . . A, D. 1549
Testamentum Novum, &c. Bezæ Annotationes. Genevae... 1564
c * A • D. 1589
Novum Testamentum Græcum. Excudebat. Henricus Stephanus A. D. 1576
...... ........ . . . . Græcè et Latinè. Ad Romanæ correctionis
amussim LUGDUNI. . . . . . . . . . . . . , • • • • A. D. 1612
... .. .. ........ Textui Græco conjuncta est versio Latina
Vulgata, summorum Pontificum, Sixti
V. et ClEMENTis VlII. LUTETIAE PA-
RISIORUM. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . • • • • • • A. D. 1628
• • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . cum Versione Latina Ariæ Montani, auc-
tore Johanne Leusden. AMstelodAM I. A. D. 1698
• • • . . . . . . . Græcè. Joannis Gregorii, &c. nuper Archi-
Diac. Glocestriensis. OxoNlI. . . . . . . • A•
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Græcè. Wetstenius. AMstelAEDAM t . • A.
Novum Testamentum Græcum. Christianus Schoettgenius.
VRATISLAviae, vel JLIPSIAE . . . . ... . . . . A. d. l 765
Yo
, 1703
ID
Also ; the Greek Testaments of ERASMUs, MILL,
GRIESBACH, BLooM FIELD, VALPY, with many other
editions, have the mark over the episèmon q'.
70 CHAPTER VI :
So that upon the whole we may rest satisfied,
from the unanimous authorities of GRAMMARIANs,
LEXICOGRAPHERs, New TESTAMENT Editors, and a
three-fold use of the episémon by IRENAEUs, that
this Mark, similar to an acute accent, would have
been obsolete or suppressed had it been immaterial
to the designation of the eriankov or cypher s' as
distinct from the contraction & ; but its past and
present retention (even in PAPAL EDITIONs of the
Greek Testament), is conclusive enough for my
argument. Furthermore, this episemon g is PLACED
by Grammarians BETweeN e and 3, when used as a
numeral to express 6; but if it be true that it is
none other than the contraction g (or a 7,) how is it
that we do not find the episèmon g’, placed BETweeN
p and v in the regular TABLE of GREEK contRAc-
TIONS 2 What, then, can be clearer than that this
episemon g’ is not the same as the contraction g?
Can it be consistent with reason to suppose that its
true place is BETweeN Epsilon (e) and Zeta (,) at
one time, and between Rho () and Upsilon (v) at
another? I must confess that such loco-motive
arrangements are beyond my comprehension, yet
Mr. Faber uses the “ contRACTION OR cyPHER” as
synonymous; but Lycophron and his Commentator
Tzetzes, must settle this point with him. It is
certain that the same thing cannot be predicted of
the other two erianuz—viz. Korto, and 22virt, for they
are no where to be found among the twenty-four
GREEK LETTERs of the Alphabet, nor in the TABLE
of the GREEK ContRActions, and, therefore, they
observations on The cyPPfers continued. 71
must remain stationary. I would further observe,
that when the episémon s' cannot be used for the
Number 6 among the Letters for calculating Names,
&c. then the letters a and e are its equivalents in
number—as (aé;) because aſ equals 1, and é equals 5 ;
or else 88 or y/ would equally produce the Number 6.
And if neither the episemon s', nor the LETTERs 2é,
&c. are used to denote the number 6, then the
"monosyllable # is its legitimate substitute ; so that
there is no sort of difficulty in making the Number 6
with the Letters of the Greek Alphabet, without
having recourse to the episemon g’. In short, the
24 LETTERs of the Greek Alphabet are always suffi-
cient to calculate any numbers contained in Names
of Men, Cities, Kingdoms, &c. without the intro-
duction of the three enºrmºz, which are used only in
calculating NUMBERs. The simple circumstance of
the episémon g’ having been numerically placed BE-
TweeN the 5th and 7th Letters of the Greek
Alphabet to denote 6, shews most clearly that it is
neither one, nor two Letters, nor the power of either;
but a distinct character introduced into the va-
cuum of the di-gamma, arbitrarily filled up, when it
is more convenient to express the Number 6 by
one cypher, than by two separate letters, which are
equal to it in point of numerical value—viz. zé' or
88' or yy'. -
Mr. Faber has not produced one single example
of the assumed use of the exiangov or cypher g’ for
the contraction s, which, in truth and reason, he
ought to have done in order to satisfy the old school
72 CHAPTER VI.
of Divines, as well as to ground an Argument for
discarding the Epsilon () in Aarévvos; and when
he has done so, we shall be better prepared to
agree with him about the further propriety of inter-
changing the word Baagønuo; with Arorarns, for which
I cannot see any justifiable reason, either on scrip-
tural or on classical ground.
CHAPTER VII.
ON THE PROPER USE OF THE MARK OR ACCENT,
WHEN PLACED ABOVE OR BELOW THE emornwov Tav,
or, CYPHER g’, witH THE PROBABLE ORIGIN AND
USE of THE SAID EPISEMON.
FROM the abundant evidence given in the preceding
Chapter, it may be considered conclusive, that the
MARK being placed A Bove the EPIs EM on g’, when it
denotes 6 among the Letters of the Greek alphabet
is then the CHARACTERISTIC distinguishing it from
the form of the stenographical contraction of a and r,
or g, which never has, nor can have, any such Mark
either over it or under it at any time or place ; for it
is always the same in form and value wherever you
may find it in words, whether in the beginning or
middle of a word. It is only one form of the
enlankov or cypher g', which has induced Mr. Faber
to suppose it to be of the same import with the
contraction g, but the other three forms of it T. V. G.
are so totally dissimilar to the unchanging form of
the contraction g, that there is not the slightest room
74 CHAPTER VII :
for comparison or confusion. Moreover, as I have
said before, all grammarians place the well-known
contraction g in alphabetical order, among the
sigmas, i.e. between Rho and Upsilon, and Not
between Epsilon and Zeta, as is always the case
when the episémon or cypher s is brought forward to
denote 6, and consequently put in the 6th place;
and it may therefore be concluded, from the sITUA-
TION of the episèmon, when used among the letters,
that it is either derived from the AEolic Digamma,
and ought to be pronounced—Episémon Gau ... Tav
... Tav ... as a Classic of great reputation supposes:
or it is a stenographical form of the Di-gamma F,
by ‘rounding off its angles, in the writing of
running-hand; and ARoSE out of the original form
of the di-gamma,’ which is the opinion of the learned
Dr. Marsh, Bishop of Peterboro’; and I am inclined
to believe that both these opinions are correct, be-
cause the episémon T or g' occupies the very place
of the ancient Digamma, and is used for the same
numerical purposes, namely, to denote 6—and that
EveRY CAPITAL LETTER in the Greek Alphabet, (of
which the Digamma was formerly one) has a sm ALL
chARACTER to represent it, and generally two or
three others: (vide Greek Grammars) besides, the
Greek term extankov being annexed to it, demonstrates
that it is different in appellation from any of the
GREEK LETTERs, or CoNTRACTIONS, for although
every small Greek Letter, as 2, 8, y, 8, &c. is entitled
to a Mark above and below it for arithmetical pur-
poses, yet we are never accustomed to call them,
THE PROBABLE ORIGIN OF Tav. 75
episemon a' ... or episémon 6' ... or episemon Y ... or
episémon 8', &c. It appears to me that the av (which
may be omitted) is put after the episèmon by Gram-
marians to give it a hard or long sound—to distin-
guish it from the single gamma—and to give us the
proper pronunciation of the character, as Gau,
Tav, Tav.
The Latins have sometimes used the AEolic Di-
gamma T, by turning it upside down to express the
LETTER V, and it is very probable from this circum-
stance that the AEolic Digamma (designated by
Grammarians Episèmon T or Episèmon Tav) has
obtained its present Grammatical appellation of ...
Tav ... both from its similarity to the Roman Letter
F, and its being occasionally used to represent the
Letter V.
I will here give one example from Hubert Goltzius’
Thesaurus," for such ancient usage—‘ I, Digamma
AEolicum, pro V. ut AMPLIAJIT TERMINAHIT Q.
DIGII. JUCIENTUTI. OCTA&I.A. VII. HIR EPULON. XV.
HIR. s. F. Adverte hic AFolicum digamma i, con-
tineri ea figura, quali ab Imp. Ti. Claudio adjectum
tradit Priscianus. Claudius enim prioribus litteris
tres adjecit, teste Suetonio, qui in vitā ipsius ita
refert: Novas etiam commentus est litteras tres, ac
numero veterum, quasi maximè necessarias, addidit.
De quarum ratione cum privatus adhuc, volumen
edidisset, mox princeps, non difficulter obtinuit, ut
in usu quoque promiscuo essent. Extat talis scrip-
tura in plerisque libris, ac diurnis titulisque operum.”
* Goltzius. Thesaurus Rei Antiquaria. P. 285. Edit. Antwerp, 1644.
76 CHAPTER VII :
It may be presumed then that the episémon g' is
some distinct character of an arbitrary form, in-
troduced for arithmetical purposes, and for arithme-
tical purposes only : for what reason can be given
that the said episèmon should have two different
appellations, and occupy two distinct situations 2
Can it be supposed that amid such a vast variety
of stenographical Contractions or Ligatures of
Letters, the Contraction g was the only proper cha-
racter to represent the errangov Tav, or Cypher g'?
when, before the introduction of the said episèmon—
the Di-gamma was used to denote the number 6–
and as or 38', or yº' would at any time specify 6, as
far as it respects the LETTERs of the Greek Alphabet.
It is evident that as the errangov or Cypher g' is the
local representative of the Di-gamma in calculations,
and that the Di-gamma or its representative is no
part of the contraction & ; so there can be no more
reason alleged for choosing the contRACTION &
(which is most certainly and unequivocally composed
of, and equal to Two DISTINCT LETTERs,) than there
would be for choosing ae', which are Two DISTINCT
LETTERs, to denote 6, for this plain reason, that
if Mr. Faber's hypothesis were true, then the con-
traction g would not only denote the Nos. 6 and
6,000, but since the contraction g is equal to the
Two SEPARATE LETTERS aſ, the contraction 5 would
also denote 500, and 500,000, which is most ridi-
culous, because the contraction g is never used for
arithmetical purposes. As for the two stianuz or
Cyphers Korra and Xavir, they are evidently not in a
THE EPIsèMon & Not A contRACTION. 77
form common to any known Letters or Contractions,
but distinct characters—and the episèmon xan, 2.
is wholly supplementary to the Greek Letters and
Contractions, and is neither one Letter nor two
Letters, though perhaps compounded in form of
parts of two. It must therefore be acknowledged
that the two episèma, or Cyphers, Korra and Xavir,
which are occasionally used amongst the Letters,
have been admitted into alphabetical (or rather ev-
alphabetical) order, for no other than arithmetical
purposes ; that is, to denote TENs, and HUNDREDs;
and consequently that the extankov Tav, or Cypher sº,
which has been adopted for arithmetical purposes
only, viz. to denote UNITs, can be no more necessary
to the framing of a Word, or Name of a MAN, than
either Korra or Xaviri would be, which is not at all.
Therefore I am bold to say, that Mr. Faber will
scarcely venture to try the experiment with the two
latter era muz, though he imagines he has succeeded
so well with the former. So much then for those
probabilities which Mr. Faber informs us, amount to
“ moral certainties.” It is highly probable that the
eriangov Tav, or Cypher g', has been formed from the
ancient di-gamma T by ‘rounding off its angles,” (as
Dr. Marsh thinks); but if not, there is no more
reason why we should marvel at the similarity of
the episèmon gº to the contraction g, than at the
dissimilar forms which anciently existed between
the same Letter; for example, take Sigma, X, a.s., c.
It were just as reasonable and necessary to endeavour
to account for the already-evisting difference between
78 CHAPTER VII :
the four several forms of the sigma, as between the
four several forms of the episèmon Tav, that is,
T. W. G. s. Custom having fully confirmed their
optional use and value, which is enough so far as
concerns Antiquity and Orthography.
We shall perceive then, at one glance, the proper
use of the Mark or Accent, when it is placed, first.
above and then below the episèmon g’ or s, as also
when applied to the small Letters of the Greek
alphabet with regard to the NUMBER • Xès' or 666,
whereby we shall see the defect and inconclusiveness
of Mr. Faber’s argument.
1st. With the two Greek Letters x and 5 *}: x8-’ = 666.
below x5s = 666,000.
D º
above xia' = 1,160;
below x{al = 1, 160,000.
[. l
the episemon s', with the Mark . . . . . .
2nd. With the 2 Greek Letters x and 5, and
the Letters which represent the con-
traction sº, viz. a7, with the Mark....
3rd. With the 2 Greek Letters x and 8, º: x82e' = 666.
ith the 2 l * ~~~ :
W1 etters ae’ will produce, below x525 = 666,000.
! [.
with the Mark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thus it is evident that although Mr. Faber has
exchanged 8Aarºnkos for Arorarms, with a view of ob-
taining the number 666 of the MAN, yet, on account
of the difference existing between the episémon g’ and
the contraction s, both as to their proper epithets,
local situations, and numerical product, the word
ApostATEs, when fairly or UNcontRACTEDLY written
in GREEK LETTERs bids defiance to the legitimate
establishment both of the NUMBER 666, and the
NAME of A MAN, which cannot certainly be made
REFUTATION of Bishop BossueT, &c. 79
out by any rendering of the word. It therefore must
be entirely rejected, as erroneous in regard to ortho-
graphy, numerical value, and every other quality
which is essential for its reception. But Aarévos,
which is the true name of a MAN, and every way
answerable to the Number 666, remains as firm as
ever, notwithstanding the ingenuity which Mr. Faber
has exercised with a view of supplanting it by the
indefinite word APostATss.
Furthermore; I naturally recoil from this mode of
giving our enemies, the Romanists and others, so
important a vantage ground, which we undoubtedly
should, were we tacitly to give up such, or any other
material point in orthography or divinity. For
allowing the followers of Socinus to reject the De-
Jinite Article 3 and to substitute the Indefinite, (see
Bishop Middleton on the Greek Article; ) or per-
mitting Bishop Bossuet, and other Romanists, the
vicarious, arbitrary, or indiscriminate use of the
eriankov or cypher g' (as if it were actually and truly
the contraction g or a], and used to denote 6,)
would be a similar point of concession, and much too
important an one for us to yield. Let us recollect
that as Protestants we have nationally separated
ourselves from the Church and Communion of Papal
Ičome, and that on account of this our National
and Ecclesiastical Separation, the Church of Rome
has most summarily branded us with the appellation
of ApostATEs and HERETICs, &c. Yet surely an
Ecclesiastical separation from the Church of Rome
*eeds not imply Apostacy or Heresy on our part,
80 CHAPTER VII :
retaining as we do every jot and tittle of the OLD
and NEw TESTAMENTs, together with the Liturgies,
Formularies, &c. of the ancient Greek and Chris-
tian Churches, rejecting nothing but the false and
base traditions of Men, even the dross of their
LATIN or Papal superstitions, and thus using the
pure word of God (in plain English) in a Language
fully understood by the common People, -as did the
primitive Christians. The Roman or LATIN Church
(for so she is proved to be at this very hour—
‘LATINI enim sunt qui NUNC Regnant,') will meet
with an insurmountable difficulty in attempting to
apply the Name Aarévvos to Us, for wF LATINIZE in
nothing ; but she in every thing of an Ecclesiastical
Nature and Purpose. And thus because we have
renounced all civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction
with Papal Rome and her LATIN Hierarch, there-
fore, we are as a French Roman Catholic would
say, ‘De hors de l'Eglise’—without the pale of the
Church. If, however, we are desirous of finding
out the true Name of the MAN, whose given arith-
metical Number is xás", or 666, we must search for
the NAME of such a MAN, and then having disco-
vered such Name, we must endeavour to apply it to
the ‘Number of his Name” by just arithmetical
computation, that is, by placing every individual
Letter of the Name, as each stands in its regular
order in the Table or Scale of the Greek Alphabet,
with the precise Number of each Letter severally
annexed, which will then decide whether the name
of the MAN will produce the given number xàs', or
STRICT AD HERENCE TO THE LETTERS. 81
666; and if it will Not produce the precise Number
by the individual Letters of his Name, it must be
rejected as insufficient, and this is the simple process
to which EveRY NAME must FIRST be subjected.
But to introduce an episèmon or cypher as the re-
presentative of two distinct Letters in a Man's name,
is to produce an Hiatus or Vacuum in the LETTERS
of THE NAME, and thereby destroy the validity both
of the name and the number of the Man. It is
most curious that out of the two Greek Letters x5
and the oNE episémon G', xãº", Mr. Faber should
have chosen to convert only the episèmon or cypher
g’ into two Letters and then leave the Two
genuine LETTERs x5' to shift for themselves, as
though the episèmon or cypher sº had more to do
with establishing the authenticity of the name of the
Man, than the regular Greek Letters, which com-
pose his name, and this directly at variance with the
established rules of Greek orthography and numerical
calculations. It is evident therefore that we must, in
the first instance, have recourse to the 24 Letters of
the Greek Alphabet, and to them only; for the Name
of the Man must contain the LETTERs of his Name,
and those Letters the NUMBER of his Name (what-
ever that Name may be) in the same legitimate Mode
of Calculation as earhibited by IRENAEUs, of which
he has given us Three Evamples, and to do other-
wise is to act in opposition to his high authority and
every other Greek precedent. If however it were
merely an arbitrary number UNconnecteD with the
NAME of A MAN, &c. then we might exercise the
G
82 UH A PTER VII.
discretionary power of using freely and unrestrict-
edly the THREE exiangz in conjunction with the 24
Letters of the Greek Alphabet, the former of which
are merely introduced to make up Units, Tens,
and Hundreds. I have already shown that there
are three different ways in which to denote the
Number 6.
First, by means of the cypher, called by Gram-
marians etruo-mºzov Tav, or sº.
Secondly, by means of the monosyllable éé.
Thirdly, by means of the Letters—ae, or yy', or
98’, any two of which may be used in the names of
Men, &c. to denote six.
What then can be clearer, more intelligible, and
satisfactory 2 And yet Mr. Faber is not content to
go on in the straight road of Greek orthography, but
prefers rather to plunge into a labyrinth of obscurity
into which no one can safely follow him.
CHAPTER VIII.
CONTAINING ALLUSIONS TO THE ANCIENT NU MERICAL
USE OF THE DI-GAMMA AS CONNECTED WITH THE
SUBJECT of THE EPISEMON s'.
IF Mr. Faber had discovered the Name of a Man, in
which there were Two GAMMAs, yy, or y/, and had
then resorted to the expedient of using the A-yappa T,
for the said two single gammas, there might have
been something plausible in the argument, because
the ancient Di-gamma was formerly put in the sixth
place among the regular Greek Letters, and had the
power of sia in calculating numbers; but to attempt
the admission of two dissimilar Letters (sigma and
tau, sº or a 7) in lieu of it, is so foreign to the purpose,
that if we were to try the proof we must in the end
acknowledge that 6 is equal to 500, and 6,000 equal
to 500,000. It must be admitted then, that if this
Episèmon s' be any thing beyond a Cypher, it must
be some one stenographical form of the ancient
G 2
84 CHAPTER VIII :
AEolic Di-gamma; and this admission would put an
end to Mr. Faber's argument, which, by his own
confession, rests upon supposition, or doubt, or
rather ‘the Doctrine of Chances.” If the ancient
Di-gamma were revived according to its primitive
form, place, and use, it would be numerically equal
to six, but could not make the two Letters a and r,
contractedly, or uncontractedly, because double
gamma, as T, or two gammas, as, yſ, yy, &c. would
never denote s or a 1: but the Letters aſ and t are
positively and undeniably equal to the Greek con-
traction s because the contraction g contains the
Letters or and T, and, as Letters which are equal to
the same Letters are equal to one another, both in
numbers and in every other reference; by the same
rule of argument, contractions which are equal to the
same contractions are also equal to one another.
But the numerical exionpoy or cypher s being no
letter, nor Letters, nor the regular contraction of
Letters, can neither be equal to the contraction g nor
its representative Letters ; for were it otherwise, the
episémon s' having been once acknowledged as the
stenographical ligature of a and T would imme-
diately cease to be a cypher by becoming a contrac-
tion, (as may be seen by considering its common
appellation, position, and numerical use,) and conse-
quently must cease to be employed for the Number
6. But I have already shown that the episèmon or
cypher G' is not only used for the Number 6, but
that the same episémon (with the Mark below) sis
also used to denote 6,000 : what then is the use of
THIE NU MERICAL USE OF THE DIG AM M A. S5
insisting on the similarity of the episémon gº to the
contraction g, but to confound the two characters
by endeavouring to produce a belief that they ARE,
or may be used As synonymous terms or characters ?
Much in the same manner as we are told that ‘Blas-
phemy DENOTES Apostacy.’ Whereas, by retaining
the ancient individual use of the 24 Letters of the
Greek alphabet, with their several numerical values
attached to each letter, there can be no possible
mistake concerning the number of the name of any
Man / / As we find the place of the ºriankov Tav or
cypher g' to be between e and g, and Not between
p and v, in the Table of Greek Contractions ; so we
may fairly conclude that it is an arbitrary character,
just as easily as we can that the Two EPISEMA Korra
and Xawns are arbitrary characters, because they are
neither of them to be found among the contRActions
or LETTERs.
If we permit the exiangov Tav, or cypher s', or G, to
pass current in orthography for the well known
contraction of a and t, or g, we must in reason
admit the other two cyphers, Korra, T, S, or ;", and
Xavri, 2', to an equal rank and numerical value
among the LETTERs, so that they also may assume
the specific Form and Power of certain known
Letters in the Greek Alphabet, which is too prepos-
terous to admit; for, as I have already shewn, they
are both of them supplementary to the 24 Letters,
and resemble none of the regular Greek contractions
of LETTERs, but are placed in the three Ranks of
numerals, ea-alphabetically; therefore to attempt
86 CHAPTER VIII :
their admission among them now, would be like the
conversion of the Nachash or Serpent into a Monkey
or Ouran-outang, (as Dr. Adam Clarke has done in
the nineteenth century of the Christian aera, to the
astonishment of the religious world,) and thus there
would be no end to the useless ambiguities and con-
fusion thereby introduced in the value of the Greek
Letters by the arbitrary admission and vicarious sub-
stitution of the three Episèma for regular letters.
As the three Episéma have never been so used in
ancient or modern times—viz. Letters for Cyphers,
and Cyphers for Letters, so there can be no suffi-
cient reason given why they should now, for the first
time, be admitted to such arbitrary use, unless it be
to accommodate Mr. Faber's opinion ; for he argues
with more plausibility than truth, there being a simi-
larity in one form between the enignuoy or Cypher g',
and the contraction g. But Grammatical Inves-
tigation will show the positive necessity there is for
drawing a broad line of distinction between the one
and the other, when an instance of orthography is to
be determined. It is obvious that one form of the
avywa (s) is somewhat similar to the Contraction g, as
also to the episèmon s'; but they are easily to be
distinguished from each other; the episèmon g’ being
always used with a Mark, and never without it,
because it is a numerical Cypher. The Contraction
g is never seen with a Mark—and the sigma (s) is
known by the top part of it being somewhat shorter
than the two former characters, and it has a Mark
appended to it only when used as a numeral.
THE NUMERICAL USE of THE DIGAMMA. 87
1st. The Character or Cypher called
by Grammarians etruo-mp.ov Tav, Or g T. V. G. s'.
2ndly. The Contraction of the two
letters, sigma and tau, º, as
seen in the Table of Contractions - - - 27 g.
3rdly. The Four several formations
of the sigma. tº º tº - X. a. C. g.
Therefore it will be absolutely necessary, not only
to preserve an apparent distinction in point of Form,
as set forth in the Greek Grammars, but likewise
their several and well-known appellations, situations,
and numerical value, by which they are always dis-
tinguished from one another, and to act otherwise is
to introduce ambiguity and confusion in the place of
that orthographical order and Harmony which existed
before, and this derangement is but a poor apology
for that indeterminate species of Orthography which
Mr. Faber has propounded to us in the word Atos-arms,
a word thus proved to be totally inapplicable and
inadequate for those purposes and intentions for
which it has been in these aftertimes, brought for-
ward by him, to supplant the most ancient and gene-
rally approved name of a MAN, even Aarévvos.
Furthermore—as not one of Three Episéma has, as
far as I know, ever been admitted into the Alphabet
of any Greek Grammar extant—or into the Tables
of the Greek Contractions or Ligatures of the
Letters, not even into Mr. Valpy's Greek Grammar
which has the ancient Di-gamma (F) so conspicuous
on the Title Page, we may safely conclude that the
extankov Fav, or Cypher º' is not considered by Gram-
88 CHAPTER VIII:
marians as a contraction of two Letters of any kind,
but merely a stenographical character introduced into
the sixth place for the obsolete Di-gamma, by which to
denote six under one character, when calculating
Numbers, instead of ač or any other two letters as y
or 88–which will equally produce the number six in
names of Men &c. &c. It is therefore manifest that
the Three ºrianka are numerically used (conjointly
with the twenty-four letters of the Greek alphabet)
for the obvious purposes of calculating numbers but
not for NAMEs, seeing that they can never be requi-
site for that purpose. Therefore, as the ancient
Grecians never used the three Episèma in the same
manner as Mr. Faber has introduced on E of them, he
has therein acted contrary to all Greek precedent
concerning the use of the episèmon g’, which he has
so ingeniously foisted into the word Atos-arms, but
which has, in every point of view proved less than
nothing for his opinion, which is most ambiguous
and inconclusive if the Greek Letters only are to
decide the merits of the Question at issue: that they
ought so to decide is palpably evident from the sound
and orthodoar erample of IRENAEUs. How much
soever, therefore, Arosarns may serve for any other
point, it most certainly does not contain by the indi-
vidual arithmetical computation of the LETTERs, the
NUMBER mentioned by St. John, which is xàs' or
666, or “ Sir hundred Threescore and Sia: ;” and
therefore it cannot be the true Mark or Name of
the MAN, because it does Not produce the NUMBER
of his Name, which point is the sine quá non of the
THE NUMERICAL Use of the DIGAMMA. 89
subject. It matters little what Mr. Faber has written
against the orthography of the NAME Aarºo; as set
forth by Irenaeus, which may nevertheless be termed
the Stereotyped appellative Name of the MAN,
and contains by PROOF of the most indisputable
orthography, the true Number of the Beast, and is
illustrated in all other respects by the strong clear
light of scriptural allusion, and therefore I will ven-
ture to say by way of happy and exulting anticipation,
“ Wirescit vulnere VERITAs 1 ° and that although,
“ Tempora mutantur, Mutantur Homines,” yet—
“WERITAs eadem Manet! !!”
CHAPTER IX.
ON THE PROPER DISTINCTION TO BE OBSERVED
BETweeN THE USE OF THE THREE EPISEMA, viz.
era nuov Tav . . . Kotºro. . . A ND Xavri-AND THE 24
LETTERS OF THE GREEK ALPHABET IN THE DE-
SIGNATION OF NAMES AND NUMBERS ; TOGETHER
WITH SOME RE MARKS ON THE NECESSITY OF
RETAINING THE EXACT NOTATION OF HOLY-WRIT.
As the enignuov Tav, or Cypher g’ appears to be placed
in the Revelations of St. John, (chap. xiii. v. 18) with
a Mark over it, xfs', such mark is clearly meant to
denote that it is a numerical character, (for so the
very word exiango, by derivation seems to imply, viz.
er, in addition, and anºz, a sign or mark,) and Not
the contraction of sigma and tau. I have before noted
that the contraction g can never have a Mark over
it in the beginning or middle of words, Names, &c.
Moreover, the contraction g (because of its locality
in the Table of contractions, between p and v,) is NOT
an episemon any more than the episémon s' can be a
CLASSIFICATION of THE THREE EPISEMA. 91
contraction, (because of its locality between e and g
and its distinguishing appellation when used among
the Letters.) Therefore, wherever the marked
exiangov or Cypher s is found (as in the present in-
stance) in the No. 666. Xäg', or in any other GREATER
or less number, ending with the episemon s' with the
Mark above it signifies six, and with the Mark
below 5, 6000; but the separate letters of the con-
traction g with the Mark above, equal 200 and 300,
as with the Mark below they equal 200,000, and
300,000; and by the combination of such a variety
of numbers as 6 . . . 6000 . . .200. .300 . . 200,000 . .
300,000 attached to the same character, (and its
representative Letters) no one would venture to decide
upon any given number; and therefore it will be
absolutely necessary to observe the Rules of Gram-
mar on this subject in order to distinguish the true
number of the episèmon, from the spurious one
allotted to the contraction. I will venture to affirm,
that there is no evample on record (except in Mr.
Faber's and Archdeacon Wrangham's use of the
episèmon g for the contraction g in the word Aro-arms,
and in which their adversaries the Roman Catholics
had PRECEDED them, for the same use of the epise-
mon; it is impossible to prove such a thing ! Will
Mr. Faber, or Archdeacon Wrangham, undertake
to prove that "7 are equal to, or may be used to
denote six in calculating Numbers ? Let us see how
the novelty looks I See also the TABLEs illustrative
of the fallacy of Mr. Faber's word APosTATEs,
CHAPTER x, of this work.
92 CHAPTER IX :
A’= . . I
ºr’— . 8 0
o'- . 7 O
a 7'- . . 6
a' = . . 1
7’— 3 0 O
n’= . . 8
s'— 2 0 0
6 6 6
Every person well acquainted with the ancient
Mode of Calculation among the Greeks, must know
that no two Letters so low down in the Greek Al-
phabet as a and t can possibly be used to denote sir,
because the lowest Number that is allotted to a is
200, and the lowest that is allotted to r is 300 ; and,
therefore, how the said two Letters together can be
made equal to the small number 6, must be matter
of great astonishment, and require explanation.
Yet such is the ratiocination of Mr. Faber (with his
coadjutor Archdeacon Wrangham), because he com-
placently uses the episèmon g’ as though it were the
legitimate or orthographical representative of the
contraction s (‘ the contRACTION OR cyPHER,”)
which it certainly is not, inasmuch as the episémon
or cypher 3 could not be admissible in the calcula-
tion of the Name of a Man, or any other Name,
where LETTERs alone are concerned. It seems then
that Mr. Faber must have prejudiced his under-
CLASSIFICATION of THE THREE EPISEMA. 93
standing against this view of the subject, because it
would be as easy for him to prove that aſ is equal to 6,
as that the contraction g is equal to 6, inasmuch as
they both lie open to the same objections as regard
orthography; for, the same reason that would make
the FIRST equal to 6, would make the Second equal
to 6, because Letters which are equal to the same
Letters are equal to one another; but this method
of equalizing the contraction and episèmon, must
necessarily introduce what may be well termed a
* System of Counter Elements,’ because it is equally
subversive of common sense and evperience.
If Mr. Faber should still insist on the legitimacy
and propriety of the indiscriminate use of the enignpo,
Tav or cypher g’ for the regular contraction g, then
I must have CLASSICAL ExAMPLES and authorities
for such arbitrary use among the ancient Greeks,
(but Mr. Faber’s “Sacred Calendar of Prophecy’
does not furnish us with one such evample,) and
then having produced such examples as a preliminary
step, I should also desire to have an explanation of
the orthographical use of the two other episéma, viz.
Korra and Xaviri, which have hitherto been employed
to denote Numbers, but not as a component Part
of the LETTERs of any PRoPER NAME. If the
episémon or cypher g’ be the acknowledged Repre-
sentative of the contraction ºr or a 7, then it may with
equal propriety be thought that the episèma Korra
and Xavri, may also, by some ingenious process, be
made to represent certain Diphthongs or Letters :
so that by acknowledging Mr. Faber’s argument to
94 CHAPTER Ix :
be grounded on sound principles, and to have its full
weight in regard to the arbitrary use of the cypher g'
for the contraction ºr, it will be very difficult, I may
say impossible, to decide on the precise value of the
other two Episèma ; otherwise than they are at
present determined by Grammarians and Lexico-
graphers. Surely then it is evident, according to
evisting orthography, that the three erranga are arbi-
trary numerical signs, Hieroglyphical characters, or
Stenographical Cyphers, occasionally introduced
among the 24 Greek Letters, for the sole purpose
of denoting particular numbers, (and this provision
is made on account of a deficiency in the Greek Al-
phabet,) but they are by no means the representatives
of Letters, having nothing to do with them, which
is clear from the ex-alphabetical situations they
Occupy.
My principal object in insisting so strongly on the
preservation of the essential and apparent distinction
between the three erianga and the 24 Letters, is, that
there may not hereafter be any further doubt con-
cerning their respective uses; but that when NAMEs
of MEN, &c. are calculated, the LETTERs only may be
used; and when Numbers are to be calculated then
the three episema and Letters may be conjointly used.
Thus we shall preserve a decided distinction between
the three numerical episèma and the 24 regular
Greek Letters, with the various contractions or
ligatures of those Letters; so that holding their
respective places, order, value and appellation, they
will not be mistaken, or usurp the rank of each other
cLASSIFICATION of THE THREE EPIsèM.A. 95
in the long established scale, use, and station in the
Greek Alphabet, Table of Contractions, and the
three ranks of Numerals, which Mr. Faber's opinion
had begun to disturb. The “wisdom " and “un-
derstanding,” of which St. John wrote, [Rev. xiii.
18.] in reference to the discovery of the Name of the
MAN, from his enigmatical Number xís' or 666,
must be in accordance with the then known RULES
of numerical orthography, or why should Mr. Faber
take upon himself to object to the orTHoGRAPHY of
IRENAEUs by the rejection of the e in the NAME
Aarévos, as though it were redundant? It can only
be upon the supposition that Irenatus was a bad
Grammarian in using the Diphthong or broad et or
q, instead of the CIRCUMFLEX iota, ; ; but the latter
is generally, if not always, equivalent to a Diphthong.
If Mr. Faber, Dr. Adam Clarke, Cardinal Bel-
larmine, Grotius, and a variety of other critical
writers are justified in publishing to the world that it
is not legitimate orthography to write, or use the
Diphthong or broad d or et, in the name Aarévos,
although numerous authorities from the Classics and
Fathers can be adduced in vindication of its common
wse both among the ancient GREEKS and Romans;
much more are we justified by informing Mr. Faber,
Archdeacon Wrangham, Bishop Bossuet, &c. that
the contraction s is Not the numerical Representa-
tive of the emanpov Tav or cypher g', until sufficient
classical authorities are adduced to prove their coin-
cidence. The Scholar's guide to the solution of this
subject is the examination by comparison of the two
96 CHAPTER IX :
characters, according to their established use, as set
forth in the different Greek Grammars, Lexicons,
Testaments, Commentators, &c.
That PAPIsts, especially the JESUITs, should en-
deavour to uphold their own spurious anti-apostolic,
anti-catholic, or LATIN Church, by such novel
inventions as the one to which Mr. Faber has
resorted, is not much to be wondered at ; because
the said Latin Church tolerates (in the broad day-
light of Literature, and in the meridian Sun-shine
of Religious Liberty,) the APOCRYPHAL Books as
equally CANoNICAL with the Books of the OLD and
New TESTAMENTs, which is more than the Jews
themselves have ever admitted at their very worst
period. But such a papistical precedent is no argu-
ment for a Protestant or Christian Minister; for
the Jew is still a living witness against such apo-
cryphal admission, even though he be ignorant of
the true SHILoh. Is not the eria wºow Tav Or Cypher
s' an Apocryphal character according to Mr. Faber's
view of it? Surely it is, because it cannot be two
characters at the same time! And is not the con-
traction 3 tantamount to canonical ? that is to say,
a Character concerning which there is no sort of
doubt evisting " It appears very evident to me that
Mr. Faber has given his enemies, the Romanists,
more vantage ground than he has taken for himself
in his whimsical argument, because the word Arorarns
is NOT the Name of a Man, does not contain the
number xàs' or 666, and that the Romanists may
turn round upon us, as Bishop Bossuet, and others
cLAssi FICATION of THE THREE EPISEMA. 97
have done, and declare that every Church which is
not in their Latin Communion is an ApostATEs.
If Mr. Faber had considered more of the MAS-
SoFA or Masoretic System of the ancient Jewish
Doctors, whereby they have numbered the Sentences
or Verses;–the words; and every one of the Letters
of the Hebrew Teat: he must have known the
extreme tenaciousness of the Jews as to the alteration
of a single Jot or Pod (the least of all the Hebrew
Letters,) or even Tittle or vowel point (~). And it
was no doubt with reference to this well known and
established Rabbinical Doctrine or System, that
Christ said to the Jews, (in accommodation to their
traditional Integrity of every individual Letter of the
Hebrew Scriptures,) “Till heaven and earth pass,
one Jot or one Tittle shall in no wise pass from the
Law, till all be fulfilled.” And the wonderful
manner in which the whole of the Old Testament
Scriptures have been preserved through so many
Generations, amidst such a variety of Jewish Wars,
Bondages, Captivities, National Revolutions, and
Dispersions, may well be accounted as the work of
God and one of the greatest of miracles ; for it most
clearly manifests the power and watchfulness of JE-
Hova H over his own sacred word even to the very
LETTER or TITTLE of it.
If the Jews then have been so punctilious in pre-
serving entire every LETTER and Tittle of the HE-
BREw Scriptures, shall we, as Christians, be less
punctilious in the preservation of every LETTER and
* Matt. v. 18.
H
98 CHAPTER IX :
CHARACTER of the GREEK TESTAMENT TEXT 2 God
forbid | Has Christ said—“Heaven and earth shall
pass away, but my words shall not pass away : ” and
shall it not come to pass? Yea, verily we know
then by parity of Reasoning, that there is as much
need and propriety of retaining as strictly as possible
the true value of each one of the Greek Letters, and
Contractions, and the numerical Episèmon g’, with
their proper Marks and appellations, set forth in
the original Greek Testament Scriptures, as there
was for the retention of every individual Hebrew
Letter of the Old Testament writings; for without
this accuracy, the fidelity of the Number 2.Ég' or
666, could never be fully and satisfactorily deter-
mined by the Church of God, (whose guide is wisdom
and understanding.) And supposing the THREE
numerical Episèma, or Cyphers, could have an
indefinite meaning allowed them, first intending one
thing and then another—first Cyphers and then
Letters and contractions—and vice versa, as the case
may seem to require, or as the fanciful imagination
of each individual writer may lead to their adoption,
then indeed they would be constantly exposed to
alteration, and consequently to objection. Thus the
ablest interpreters of Prophecy would always be at
issue as to the true NAME and NUMBER of the Apoca-
lyptic “MAN”—who is “ The Man of Sin,” “The
Son of Perdition,” even when the true Name of the
Beast was found, the existence of which uncertainty
is too abundantly evident from the endless specula-
tions already eatant concerning the mystical Name
cLAssi FICATION OF THE THREE EPISEMA. 99
of the Numbered Man. If, however, the orthography
of IRENAEUs had been more fully vindicated concern-
ing the DIPHTHONG or BROAD et or d in Aardvos, No
other Name of a MAN would have been demanded,
because it is every way suitable to the character
spoken of by St. Paul and St. John. It will there-
fore be seen in the sequel of this work, how impor-
tant it is to attend to the most minute points in any
matters relating to the Holy Scriptures, and that
Orthography forms no inconsiderable part in the
establishment of the Name of the Man whose
proper and descriptive Name is unquestionably and
indisputably Aarévvos.
If the episemon g were written in any one of the
Three following allowed forms to denote the Number
6, viz. G. V.T. it would materially alter the com-
plexion of the cypher G' and place Mr. Faber in a dif-
ficult position to determine its provimity to the con-
traction g which has only one form, and which Mr.
Faber has purposely overlooked, or carelessly rejected,
together with the established adoption of the Mark
or Accent (), which at once denotes that it is an
episemon, and used for 6, and Not the contraction s.
These, with many other omissions, have ruined the
credibility of his argument, which Rests upon the
Presumption that the word Arorary; may be substi-
tuted for 9Xarºnaos, and that the episèmon g is the
literal and numerical representative of sigma and tau,
contractedly, which it is not. .
I take it for granted then, that any one of the four
following forms of the same character T. W. G. g'
H 2
100 CHA PTE [º IX.
(whether it be the Æolic Digamma, or the episèmon,
its stenographical and numerical representative) may
severally and individually be used to denote the No.
6, and from which, by a comparison with the Letters
s and r uncontractedly, and contractedly, it will
therefore be my endeavor to show to the Reader in
the following ScALE or TABLE of the word Apos-
TATEs ; first with the LETTERS and contraction, and
secondly, with the LETTERs and the Four several
forms of the said digamma or episémon, that Mr.
Faber's argument is not substantial, but wholly
defective, inasmuch as ApostATEs is a word which
does not even contain the Number 666, and I have
already shown that it is not the Name of a Man, and
likewise that it is too general or Indefinite a word to
answer the purposes intended by the Apostle. There-
fore as a matter of course, it must be entirely rejected.
There cannot be a sufficient reason given why the
Digamma or Stenographical erronao, or cypher g’ (in
this individual Form of it,) should be preferred to any
one of the other three forms, in reference to any NAME,
any more than that it would not be legitimate ortho-
graphy to retain some one form of the rºyaa (x. a. s.c.)
to the Rejection of the other three forms, and therefore
we must content ourselves with the rights and privi-
leges of Antiquity which are abundantly sufficient,
and they are truly subversive of Mr. Faber's specula-
tion. -
CHAPTER X.
TWO TABLES
ILLUSTRATIVE OF MR. FABER's word
APOSTATES,
EXHIBITING ITS PALPABLE . IN CONSISTEN CY
WITH THE TRUE NUMBER
Xès' or 666.
or nothing.

I.
An arithmetical TABLE of the word Aroorarm, with the Mark above.
1st. with the two Letters a and r", uncontractedly; and
2ndly. with the said two Letters contractedly,
A . . . . a' = . . 1
P . r' = .. 80
O . . . . o' = .. 70
S .... <' = . . 200
T .... r" = ... 300
A . . . . a' = 1
T .... r" = ... 300
É . . . . .' = . . 8
S .... <' = . . 200
1160
Subtract the No. of the Man 666
494
Remainder too many by
Remainder too many by
aS, St.
A e e e e a' – º 1
P . Tr' = 80
O e © º o' – © 70
QN w 200
ST. . . . ar' = } 300
A a’ = I
T o º r’ == 300
E . . . . n' = . . 8
S e s' F • e 200
1160
Subtract the No. of the Man 666
494
ºmº-
A o tº G a' := e e I
P . . . . r" = .. 80
O e o' F e e 70
ST. • e e S = • 500
A . a' = . . T
T º T' F e e 300
É e e º & º' F • e 8
S e e o & c’ – e. e. 200
1160
Subtract the No. of the Man 666
Remainder too many by 494



II.
An arithmetical TABLE wherein is shown the Inconsistency and moral Impossibility of using the eriornºov
Tao, or Cypher s” as the literal and numerical Representative of a yua and raw contractedly (;) in the word
Atros-arms.
3rdly. with the Letters, and 4 different forms of the same Episémon, in lieu of the 2 Letters o' and t'.
A . . . . a' = . . 1 A . . . . & F • e I A . . . . d - e e 1 A . . . . a' F • e al
P . . . . ar' = Q Q 80 P e e e Q m’ = © e 80 P . . . . ar' = © O 80 P e e º Q Tr' F • e 80
O © e º e o' = O © 70 O © º O e o' = © e 70 O e e º 0. o' = ... • 70 O to e º e o' - e. e. 70
g' - e. e. 6 G’ F • * 6 T F • e 6 V F • e 6
A. tº e o e a' = © o I A . a' = 4- © I A © O. a’ = © 0. I A . . . . a' F • I
T © e º O r’ - e. 300 T o e - e. r’ = e e 300 T © e o º r' = e G 300 T e e º O +/ - e e 300
E tº º m’ = ſo 8 E Q Q @ & n' = © 8 JE Gº O C & º' = 8 E © O © & n' = © C 8
S © º ç’ = . 200 S © C. g’ - e e 200 S e e º 0 ;' = O 200 S o o o $ - o 200
G66 666 - 666 666
Subtract the episèmon -', 6 Subtract the episèmon 6 Subtract the **) 6 Subtract the **) 6
because it is not ar.. G as before . . . . . º T as before . . . . . . V as before . . . . .
and there will be a de- fici f Si d a defici f Six 660|and a defici f Six 660
ficiency of Six . . . . . . 660 and a deficiency of Six 660 and a deficiency of Six and a denciency of Six



104 - CHA PTER X :
As the first of the foregoing Tables, including
three forms of the word Apostates, presents us with
LETTERs arithmetically redundant, that is by 494;
so are the four latter evamples DEFICIENT, in the
second Table, (not in Numbers, but in LETTERS,) to
the amount of 6, which consequently destroys the
Integrity of the Number of the Man which is
declared by St. John to be 666 and Not 660: and,
therefore, it must be obvious that all words or
Names of Men, &c. are composed of LETTERs, and
LETTERS on LY ; for without the LETTERs there
could be no production of a compleTE word or
NAME OF A MAN, according to the earisting rules
of Grecian Orthography; because the introduction
of the exiangov or numerical cypher g’ among the
Letters of the Word (or Name) would thereby pro-
duce a chasm or HIATUS to the destruction of the
said Word (or Name.) Ex. Gr. Apog’ATEs....
APOSATES .... APO'FATES .... APovATEs, &c. &c.
Furthermore, if it can once be proved that it is
legitimate orthography to introduce one episémon
into a MAN's NAME, I will venture to prove also that
it is equally legitimate to introduce the whole three
episèma in like manner. Suppose, for example, that
a certain number was proposed from which a Name
was to be elicited, but in which were three Letters
and the three episèma, as a 3 x 2 g’—which would
collectively (with the Mark above and below) pro-
duce the number 1002; would any person in his senses
attempt to find the Name of a Man, or any other
Name composed of Greek Letters from this given
IN CONSISTENCY of ApostATEs. 105
Number 4 37 2 , ;", or 1002, by the use of the
Three Letters a 3% in conjunction with the three
episema 2 || " ? It would surely be more reasonable
at least to metamorphose the number x&g' into the
Name of a Man / And why has Mr. Faber selected
the episémon G' and not used the Two real Letters
x and $ in the word Arortary; 2 Is it not because
the two Letters x and 8 have nothing to do with the
NAME, but on LY the NUMBER of the MAN. The
Number xàº' consists of two Letters and one episè-
mon, which are numerically put to represent—
X # g’
ef
{{akāa to {{nkovro. £8.
that is, “Sia. Hundred Threescore and Sia: ; ” but
x and 8 have nothing whatever to do, either in ap-
pearance or reality with any one Letter, or two
Letters, in the word Aroazarns, and yet the episémon
ç' must be torn from its numerical station to make
a FRACTION of the word Atos-arms. Why then should
we not add the two Letters x and 5 which compose
the greater part of the Number 666? For in truth,
if it can be legitimate orthography to use the
episèmon s' in the Name of a Man, so it must be
to use the two Letters x and * with the other three
forms of the episèmon, viz. T, V, G, as also the
other two episema, viz. Korra and Xavir. But I have
already shewn the impossibility of such admission.
And therefore it is extremely strange to observe the
extravagancy to which men will run, in order to
attempt to prove a point which never can be proved
106 CHAPTER X :
by sound argument and orthography, which are alone
sufficient; for such only are consonant with “wis-
dom” and “understanding.”
The following small Table exhibits the Number
xés' of St. John, and demonstrates the necessity of
using the Mark above the episèmon g’ which is
then equal to 6; but if we have the Mark below
the episémon sº the result will be that we shall
produce the far greater Number 6,000,” and thereby
produce by ONE SINGLE CHARACTER, or episémon,
5334 more than the Number 666. Ex. gr. 5334+
666 = 6000, and by placing the Mark below the
whole Number 2.É; we shall have 665,334 MoRE
than the origiNAL NUMBER 666.
xás' x{s
x = 600 x = 600,000
# = . 60 # = . 60,000
s' = .. 6 * = .. 6,000.
T666 666,000
And if we allow the episèmon s' in the Number
xés' to be used for the contraction of at, or s, we
shall have this additional result, that as the episèmon
g" is the representative of the contraction g, so is the
contraction g the representative of g7, and con-
sequently we shall see at once the incongruity of such
supposed numerical equality; because the word
Aroglavns, uncontractedly, with the Mark above and
below is 494 beyond the given Number 666, and
* Sec the Table of Apostates.
INCONSISTENCY of ApostATES. 107
the same word, uncontractedly, with the Mark
below, is 1,159,334 beyond the Number 666, and
therefore the contraction g in the word ApostATES
must be given up according to the established Rules
of Grecian orthography as connected with the Mode
Qf ALPHABETICAL Numeration.
x£at' x867
x. = 600 x = 600,000
# = . 60 f = . 60,000
a' = 200 º = 200,000
T' = 300 * = 300,000
cºmmºns mºsº ºmºmºmº
1,160 1,160,000
CHAPTER XI.
EXAMPLES PROVING THE WANT OF IDENTITY IN
THE worD APOSTATES, AS APPLICABLE TO ANY
ONE PARTICULAR LAPSED CHURCH OR PERSON
EXCLUSIVELY.
THE following examples may suffice to illustrate that
there is no sort of Identity between the word APos-
TATES and any one particular lapsed Church, or
Man, but such as is likewise applicable to, or syno-
nymous with many Apostacies, and therefore Apos-
tates cannot be either the Proper, or Descriptive,
or Appellative Name, wherewith the Latin Roman
Pontiff (with every individual in his Latin Church)
is to be Marked or Named; for HE is in truth as
much an ANTICHRIST as he is an Apostates or Blas-
phēmos, embodying the three characteristic Titles
put together, with many other scriptural attributives,
such as, “ The Man of Sin,” “The Son of Per-
dition,” “ The Wicked One,” “ The Mystery of
Iniquity,” &c.
JEWISH CHURCII THE MOTHER CHURCII. 109
I. That the Jewish Church," or CHURCII OF
JERUSALEM,” was the Primitive Christian or Mother
Church of all Churches in the world, in the Days
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and his Apostles, is evident
from the testimony of INSPIRATION ; for it was in
the CITY of JERUSALEM that Christ first planted
his Gospel, and gave a Commandment to his Dis-
ciples that it should be from thence preached among
ALL Nations,” “ beginning at Jerusalem,” and in
unison with this Commandment we read of the
Apostles Paul and Barnabas enjoining, in the strictest
manner, the implicit observance of this Divine In-
junction given them by their Lord and Master, as it
is written,* “It was NECESSARY that the word of
God should FIRST have been spoken to YoU, (i. e.
the JEws.) And it is an undoubted truth, that no
Gentile was federally admitted into the Christian
Church till after St. Peter was commanded in the *
Vision of the great sheet knit at four corners to go to
Caesarea and instruct Cornelius in the gospel, as we
read.” “They travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus,
and Antioch, preaching the word to NoNE but unto
the Jews on LY: ” so that the Jewish Christian
Church (of which the primitive Apostles were the
'lively stones, pillars, and foundations,) was the
* Acts xi. 19, 22.
* See ‘The Ancient Liturgy of the Church of Jerusalem, being the
I,iturgy of St. James, compared with the Account given of that Liturgy by
St. Cyril in his fifth Mystagogical Catechism, and with the Clementine
Liturgy, &c." London: Printed by James Bettenham. 1744.
* Luke xxiv. 47. * Acts xiii. 46. * Acts x. * Acts xi. 19.
* 1 Pet. ii. 5. Gal. ii. 9. Rev. xxi. 14. Matt, xix. 27, 28. Luke xxii. 28–30.
1 10 CHAPTER XI :
only Church for some time, and She it was who
became instrumental in the conversion of the Gentile
Nations to God, and therefore was, (in priority of
Time,) the Mother Church to them all ; but the
same Church may now (as for centuries past) be
styled 8 Il Apos tates from the Faith (Atro-acta rā; IIſrews),
because the Jews have nationally rejected Christ
and renounced Christianity, and, therefore, God has
destroyed their magnificent city JERUSALEM, in
which they gloried so much, and given them up, for
an allotted period, to Judicial blindness, according
to the words of St. Paul ; * “But seeing that ye
put it from you, (the word of God,) and judge
yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn
to the GENTILEs.” However this APOSTATES is not
final, for our Lord has limited the time by saying,
* “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,
until the Times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” So also
the Apostle Paul says, in addressing the Gentile
Christians of Rome in a way of caution, that, * “If
the FALL of them be the Riches of the World, and
the DIMINISHING of Them the RICHEs of THE GEN-
TILEs ; how much more THEIR FULNESS 2"–“ If the
cASTING Away of Them be the Reconciling of the
World, what shall the RECEIVING of THEM BE, but
LIFE FROM THE DEAD 2 ”—“They also, if they abide
not in unbelief, shall be graffed in : for God is able
to graff them in again. Blindness in part is hap-
pened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be
* Acts xiii. 46. * Luke xxi. 24.
* Rom. xi. 12, 15, 23, 25, 26, 32.
RESTORATION OF JEWISH CHURCH. 1 11
come in. And so all Israel shall be saved, as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion THE DELI-
VERER, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.”
“God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he
might have mercy upon all.” As the Jews were
confessedly the FIRST, so it is to be believed that they
will be the Last Harbingers of Messiah’s glory; for
although Christ was given as 1“a Light to lighten the
Gentiles; ” he was nevertheless to be the “GLORY
of HIS PEOPLE Israel:” and this latter event has not
3yet come to pass, nor indeed the former but in a
limited sense ; and, therefore, we may fairly conclude
that there is much good reserved for this ancient
people of God, when * “ the Vail shall be taken
away,” for Babylon and Zion must shortly change
places, it being said to the former, * “Come down
and sit in the dust; ” but to the latter, “Arise,
shine; for thy Light is come, and the glory of the
Lord is risen upon thee.” “In those days it shall
come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all
Languages of the Nations, even shall take hold of
the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go
with you: for we have heard that God is with you: ”
and then, 5 “The earth shall be filled with the
knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters
cover the sea.” *
II. The GREEK, or GENTILE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
was, in the days of the Apostles, a true Catholic and
Apostolic Church, and second in order of Time and
* Luke ii. 32. * 2 Cor. iii. 16. * Isaiah xlvii. 1; lz. 1.
* Zech. viii. 23. * Hab. ii. 14.
I 12 CHAPTER XI :
Dignity; nevertheless her past and present lapsed
(I might say semi-barbarous) state, constitutes her an
ApostATEs from genuine Christianity, even though
she is separated from the communion of the Latin
Church of Rome, because she has left her primitive
Faith, and the simplicity of the Gospel of Christ,
by being turned to “Old Wives' Fables.” More-
over, it does not certainly appear that Rome was
even the First Gentile Church. Add to this, that
in the time of ConstanTINE the GREAT, the Greek
Church of Corinth (which was under the Ecclesias-
tical jurisdiction of the Roman Emperor,) claimed
ascendancy over the Church of Rome, a circum-
stance which seems strongly to corroborate the belief
that the Greek Church was Antecedent to the Roman
or Latin. And that the GREEK Church was prior
to the LATIN is fairly confirmed by the circumstance,
that the New TESTAMENT (the far greater portion of
it at least) was originally written in GREEK for her
use: As therefore we believe that the Jewish and
Greek Churches preceded the Latin, the Church of
Rome instead of being the Mother Church of Chris-
tendom, as she impudently professes herself to be, is
no more than the THIRD, and not literally that, be-
cause she has seceded from the primitive Christian
Church of Rome, both in Faith and Practice, by pub-
licly teaching the People in an “unknown Tongue,”
namely in LATIN, contrary to all Apostolical custom
and injunction. The Church of Rome is not men-
tioned in St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, nor is
SHE once named throughout the whole of the New
RISE OF PA PAL CHURCH. 1 13
Testament, unless she is meant by “the Church at
Babylon,” which is nothing in her favour; and as
for the Name of St. Peter it does not occur in the
salutation of St. Paul in his xvith Chapter to the
Romans, wherein the Names of many Persons are
mentioned, and which, (among numerous others,) is
a tacit Proof, that neither the Church of Rome, nor
the Name of St. Peter there, were objects of such
special veneration as they are now made to appear by
the spurious Latin Church of Rome; besides which,
during the three first Centuries of the Christian
AEra, Rome did not take the precedence of other
Christian Churches; but “the falling away,” or
breaking up of the Old Roman power, prepared the
way for the “falling away" of the Christian
Church, which took place according to thc predic-
tion of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Thessalonians,
by the Rise, Progress, and establishment of the second
or Papal Roman Beast in the same SEAT and CITY
which the first or Pagan Roman Beast occupied be-
fore him, of which the Pope is now the Sovereign
Representative, being by profession the “PontiFEx
MAXIMUs '' of the Romans—“ Vicar of Jesus
Christ upon earth”—and “RULER of THE WoRLD."
III. That the LATIN CHURCH (or CHURCH OF
RoME,) which is more commonly known by the
appellation of Roman CATHoLic, (though Catholic
in no other sense than LATIN,) is also a complete
ApostATEs from the Church of Christ, which ex-
* 1 Peter v. 13.
I
1 14 CHAPTER XI :
isted at Rome in the days of St. Paul, and to which
the Apostle addressed his inspired Epistle. This
LATIN (not Apostolic) Church, began to rear her
lofty Head from the dust of ecclesiastical obscurity,
(i. e." out of “the EARTH"—the Roman Earth) in
the time of Constantine the Great, who granted
some temporal advantages and ecclesiastical immuni-
ties to the then Bishop of Rome, (though that Chris-
tian Emperor never intended, nor suspected that his
early patronage would be so vilely perverted in after-
times, to such sacrilegious purposes as it has been)
and this Latin, Papal, Antichristian and Apostate
Bishop of Rome, was fully established in his Hierar-
chical Seat, in the Reign, and * by the EDICT of the
Emperor JUSTINIAN, A. D. 533, to Pope John, and
afterwards confirmed by the unhallowed instrumen-
tality of the Edict of the Regicide-Emperor and
Usurper Phocas, to Pope Boniface, about A. D.
606; and this was the origin, this the unhallowed
Found ATION of Papal Supremacy in subsequent
ages, which has been exercised to so great an extent
during the predicted period of “1260 Days” of
Pears, that we may say, the Papal Roman Beast
has exercised” “ALL the power of the first " (Roman
Imperial) “ Beast.” The Apostle Paul, in his Second
Epistle to the Thessalonians, Chap. ii. 3rd and 6th
verses, prophetically warns them of the Rise, Pro-
* Rev. xiii. 11.
* See the Edicts of the Emperors, Justinian and Phocas, quoted by “Cun-
inghame on the Apocalypse,' from p. 202 to 208. See also, “Drue Cres-
sener's judgments of God upon the Roman Catholic Church,' p. 54.
* Rev. xiii. 12.
PROGRESS OF PAPAL ERROR. | 15
gress, and Establishment of the Theocratic Power of
“the Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdition,” who
would “be revealed in his Time,” and that they
(the Thessalonians) knew what withheld His rising,
viz. the eatistence of the Imperial Roman Sove-
reignty, but that when “the Man of Sin ’’ was fully
“ revealed,” he would then be seen “SITTING IN
THE TEMPLE of God,” to which St. Peter's Church
at Rome, and the character of the Pope as the
pretended Vicar of Jesus Christ, (or rather, Ruler
of the World,) bear the most circumstantial and con-
vincing Proofs at this very Hour. However, the
same Apostle tells us, that the Revelation of the
“Man of Sin” would not take place,” “Except
there come a FALLING Away FIRST,” ºr &y tº ºn
Aroraatz rpärov, and accordingly we find that after the
Seat of the Imperial Government at Rome was
earchanged for that of ConstanTINopLE, and the
ancient Roman power began to decline and fall,
under the hands of Barbarians, then by craft and
usurpation the Old City Rome, by gradual and almost
imperceptible degrees, fell into the possession of the
Bishop of Rome, and, from his subsequent conduct
in “For BIDDING MARRIAGE * to all the clergy of
his Latin Church, and “Command ING” the Laity
“To ABSTAIN FROM MEATs " on Fridays and Satur-
days throughout the year, the Papacy by these characte-
ristic Decrees, has verified to the Letter the words
of the Holy Spirit.” Tº 8: IIvăvua pārā; Aéyet, ºr 3, talápot;
! 2 Thess, ii. 3. * 1 Tim. iv. 1.
I 2
1 16 CHAPTER XI.
kapāl; Aroºrov/zíTINEX rº, IIſrea;. “. Now the Spirit
speaketh eagressly, that in the latter times some shall
depart from the faith: ” By— “For BIDDING to
MARRY, and commANDING to abstain from MEATs,”
which interdicts continue in force in the Papal
Roman Church, even at this day, and, therefore, we
know that the Spirit of God has expressly declared,
that her conduct in such matters is a full and direct
“ departure from the Faith ” of Christian Men; and
consequently Rome, furnishes the TINEX to whom
St. Paul refers as Apostatizing & talápot; kapots. So
also the character of “the Man of Sin” is equally
portrayed by St. Paul, and one reason (among
many others) why the Pope may be designated “the
MAN of sIN,” is, that he professes to have absolute
power to “forgive sins,” ” a prerogative which be-
longs to God only; and for the exercise of which the
Jews stoned Christ, and afterwards put him to Death.
Yet the Pope from his Ecclesiastical Chancery issues
his Indulgences at a market price to every applicant,
whether residing in the City of Rome, or the Anti-
podès of his pretended universal kingdom, and there-
fore, He, as the Dur Gregis of Romanists, is “The
Son of Perdition,” even as Judas Iscariot,” (who
sold his Lord and Master) is so called, “none of
them is lost, but THE SON of PERDITION.” * We
conclude, therefore, that the ExISTENCE of the Pagan
Imperial Power was the true and undoubted Barrier
to the previous Rise of the Pope, who is doubtless
in the plenitude of his character and Ministerial
1 Tim. iv.3. * Mark ii. 7, compared with John x. 33. "Johnxvii. 12.
THE POPE THE MAN OF SIN. 1 1 7
exaltation; the “” MAN" alluded to by St. John,
and foretold by St. Paul, *even “the Man of Sin,”
“The Son of Perdition ; ” The Roman or LATIN
Pontifical MAN ; for two such Potentates as the
Roman Emperor and the Pope could never have
reigned together in the same City, at the same time;
but soon after the decline of the Imperial Dignity at
Rome, then the Latin, or Roman, or Italian Hie-
rarchy began to arise, the Bishop of Rome having
succeeded to the very Seat and Government of the
ancient Roman Emperors, and withal using the
Pagan Imperial Title of “PontiFEx-MAXIMUs,”
whereby we know that HE is THE ANTI-CHRIST, in-
asmuch as the Church of Rome has most impudently
exalted herself above the Jewish and Greek Churches
(which were both of them prior to her in point of
Ecclesiastical Antiquity, and Spirituality of Mind,)
by a pretended Right to Supremacy, Infallibility,
CEcumenical Power, and vaunting Herself to be the
Mother Church of the whole Universe. Thus SHE
(infinitely more than the Jews of old) has “made
void the Word of God,” not only “by her “Tradi-
tions,” but by limiting the Use of the Holy Scrip-
tures to the LATIN language, among those of Her
communion, and by thundering out her LATIN Papal
anathemas, from the Rom AN VATICAN PALACE,
against all Emperors, Kings, Princes, and Poten-
tates, who may dare to impugn her Latin (or rather
Blasphemous) innovations. APOSTATE, however, as
this LATIN-CHURCH is from everything which is fairly
* Rev. xiii. 18. * 2 Thess, ii. 3.
1 18 CHAPTER x1 :
denominated Christian, yet in vain will such a word
as ApostATES be expected to produce the true Number
or characteristic name of the Second Beast, which
must be that of a MAN, for nothing else will suffice,
and therefore, neither Words, nor Sentences in Greek,
which seem to be peculiarly appropriate, (such as
the following,) and which contain the ea'act Number
666, can be admitted, for the plainest Reason, that
mone of them can be converted into the PRoPER
NAME OF A MAN, and, therefore, cannot be the true
MARK of the NUMBERED BEAST, and consequently
must be rejected as insufficient, even as the word
Arorains has been rejected for a similar Reason.
Exxxnario. Iraxiko. Italian Church.
H Aaruyn Baarixeia. The Latin Kingdom.
Geog eupal emu yams- I am God upon Earth.
Kako; Oomyos. Bad Guide of the way.
I NAP
PROPRIATE SENTENCEs, &c. 1 19
E’ = . . 5 º
k' 2- . 20 ". = ... 8
k’ = .20 A = . 30
A’ -: . 30 * •. - ... I
/ sº-º- &
*" = .. 8 THE . = 300
a’ – 200 & – ... 10
I t” – e v’ - . 50
TALIAN ..., 10 LATIN ...,' 8
Cº., = . . I ; := e e
I’ = — . .2
CHU º ... 10 º ©
RCH. r' = 300 KING- a' = ... 1
a' -: • - 1- a’’ -- 200
* — / =
* = . 30 dom. , ... 10
* = . 10 “ x' = .30
K' = .20 e' = .. 5
a' = ... 1 º = . 10
a' = ... 1
666
666
/
e = .9
‘. = . . 5
O = . 70
I AM s' = 200
/
E - ... 5
i' = . 10
GOD tº' = . 40 K’ = . 20
** = . 10 2' = ... 1
UPON e" := • .. 5 & ** = . 20
ºr’ – . 80 o” == . 70
* — & =
Earth. ... Tº". bad . . .
T' = ... 3 of = .70
a' = 3 =
= . . 1 ... 4
* GUI tºº
,' = . 10 DE. º' * ... 8
/ = ... 8 y º-sº ... 3
g’ = 200 * = .70
ogg ;" = 200
666
120 CHAPTER. XI :
Many other examples of Greek Names, Words,
and Sentences might be adduced, which contain the
Number 666, but they are not applicable to the
general scope of the Prophecy under consideration,
such as–
Tetray, Titan ... Ovarios, i. e. Ulpius Trajanus ...
Tevampixos, Gensericus ... Eva,0as, Euanthas... Maoperts,
Maometis ... Beyeburros, Benedictus ... Apwoupe, Nego ...
Aapºrers, Resplendens ... & Nikarns, i. e. Victor ... IIaxa.
Backayos, Jam olim invidus ... Ayreºog, ... AA767; 8A2.Éepos,
Were nocens ... Apwo; Abikos, Agnus nocens, &c. &c.
The Hierarchy of Rome is built upon an apparent
“homogeneity' between the Greek name IIérpes, PETER,
and the word IIérpa, Rock, in the address of Christ
to his Servant Peter in the following words—l “I
say unto thee, That thou art PETER, and upon
this Rock I will build my Church, &c.”—but there
need not much penetration to discover from the
English Language the dissimilarity between PETER
and Rock, for every Letter is manifestly different,
though in the original Greek, as well as in the
Latin, French, and Italian Languages, they have
some resemblance to each other. In each of these
Languages, however, the one is always written in the
Masculine, and the other in the feminine gender,
the first being the Name of a Man, the second
that of a Rock or Stone, importing the firmness and
strength of FAITH in Christ, which is very justly
compared to so durable a substance as Rock or
1 Matt. xvi. 18.
PETER NOT THE ROCK. 121
Stone, (as it is elsewhere to Iron, viz. an Anchor).
I will give them separately :
“Xi is IIérpos, kāl Św, raûrm rº Ilérpg,” &c.
“Tues Petrus, et super hanc Petram,” &c.
“ Tues Pierre, et sur cette Pierre,” &c.
— Pietro — Pietra.
“Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock,” &c.
Note then, that it was Faith in Christ which
JPeter confessed, and Not the NAME or PERson
of PETER which is here meant: for our Lord did
not say—‘THou art Peter, and upon THEE, Peter,
I will build my Church: * but Thou art PETER, and
upon THIS Rock (viz. FAITH) I will build my
Church.” That our Lord spake of FAITH in Him
under the motion of a House built upon a Rock, is
evident from the concluding words of his Sermon on
the Mountain.” “Therefore whosoever heareth
these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken
him unto a wise man, which built his House upon
A Rock,” (ºr rºy IIérpay :) “ and the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat
upon that House ; and it fell not ; for it was
founded upon A Rock.” (ºri rºy IIérpay.) And St.
Paul illustrates this in the following words addressed
to the Ephesians”—“Ye are built upon the Founda-
tion of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ
himself being the CHIEF CoRNER Stone: in whom
all the BUILDING fitly framed together groweth unto
an holy TEMPLE in the Lord : in whom ye also are
builded together for an HABITATION of God through
* Matt. vii. 24, 25; kukc vi. 47, 48. * Ephes. ii. 20–22.
122 CHAPTER XI :
25
the Spirit: ” and to the Corinthians he writes"—
“For we know that if our earthly House of this
Tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of
God, an House not made with hands, eternal in
the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring
to be clothed upon with our House which is from
Heaven.”
St. Peter himself testifies that believers in Christ
the “Living STONE” are “lively stones,” built up
a spiritual House,” “To whom coming, as unto a
LIVING STONE, (Aſºo gåvra) disallowed indeed of
men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as
lively stones (Aſºo gåvres) are built up a spiritual
House (ºikos ºvevaarikº.) an holy priesthood, to offer
up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus
Christ.” “Wherefore also it is contained in the
scripture, Behold I lay in Sion a chief CoRNER-
STONE, (Aíðoy &kpoyoviaiov,) elect, precious: and he
that BELIEVETH on HIM shall not be confounded.
Unto you therefore which BELIEVE He is precious,
but unto them which be disobedient, THE STONE
(Aſºor) which the builders disallowed, the SAME (vros)
is made the Head of the Corner, and a STONE of
stumbling, and a Rock of offence. (K& Aido, ºpogkipparos,
K&t IIérpa. rkavčáAov.)
St. Paul thus writes to the Hebrews,” “ Christ
as a Son over HIs own House; whose House are
we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing
of THE HoPE firm unto the end.” -
St. Paul in writing to the Romans, says,” “That
"2 Cor. v. 1, 2. * 1 Peter ii. 4–8. 3 Heb. iii. 6. "Rom. ix. 30–33.
CHRIST THE ROCK, 123
THE GENTILEs, which followed not after righteous-
ness, have attained to righteousness, even the right-
eousness which is of FAITH. But Israel, which
followed after the law of righteousness, hath not
attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore?
Because they sought it not by FAITH, but as it were
by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that
Stumbling-Stone; as it is written, Behold, I lay in
Sion a Stumbling-Stone and Rock of offence: (Aſ8ow
rpookéºparos, k&s IIérpay akavö4×ov) and whosoever BE-
LIEveTH on HIM (Atôow ká IIérpow) shall not be
ashamed.”
Now the true Rock, or Stone, or Found Ation
on which believers must build their House or HoPE
of Salvation, is the Spiritual Rock—CHRIST-and
Christ alone (and not Peter IIérpos, neither the Latin
Papal Church of Rome,) as is evident from the
words of St. Paul to the Romans (as above), and
his address to the Corinthians in the following
words!—“Moreover, brethren, I would not that
YE should be ignorant, how that all our fathers
were under the cloud, and all passed through the
sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud
and in the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual
"meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink;
for THEY drank of that spiritual Rock (8k rvevkarikºi,
IIárpaº) that followed them: and that Rock was
CHRIST.” (# 8: IIérpa iv 3 Xpiarás.) Here, then, we
notice that the rvevpariko IIárez, the spiritual Rock
(CHRIST) was with HIS CHURCH in the wilderness
* I Cor. x. 1–4.
124 CHAPTER XI :
before PETER (IIárpoº) was born, and although Simon
had the , name CEPHAs (which is a Chaldee and
Syriac word,) given him by Christ, without any
testimony to Jesus as the Messias, in these words"—
“Thou art Simon the son of Jonas: thou shalt be
called CEPHAs, (or Kephas,) which is by interpreta-
tion, a STONE.” Yet, Peter, after the death of
Christ his Master, fully and publicly declared
before the Jewish” Rulers, and Elders, and Scribes,
and Annas the High Priest, and Caiaphas, and
John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the
kindred of the High Priest,” who “were gathered
together at JERUSALEM,” that He (Peter) was Not
the Stone on which Christ would build his Church,
as his own defence witnesseth : * “Then PETER,
filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye
Rulers of the people, and Elders of Israel, if we
(Peter and John) this day be examined of the good
deed done to the impotent man, by what means he
is made whole; be it known unto you all, and to all
the people of Israel, that by the NAME of JESUS
CHRIST of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God
raised from the dead, even by HIM doth this man
stand here before you whole. This is THE STONE
(; Aſºvº) which was set at nought of you builders,
which is become the Head of the Corner. Neither
is there salvation in any other: for there is NoNE
oTHER NAME under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved.” Neither is there any
other Mediator,”—“There is ONE GoD, and ONE
* John i. 42. * Acts iv. 5, 6. 3 Ibid, 8–12. * 1 Tim. ii. 5.
CHRIST THE ROCK. 125
MEDIATOR between God and Man, the Man Christ
Jesus.” Nor is there any other Foundation,”—“For
OTHER Found ATION can no man lay than that is
laid, which is CHRIST JESUs.” And, therefore,” as
the Stone (; Atºos) which the builders rejected,”—
“ is become the Head of the Corner,” so “ whoso-
ever shall fall on this Stone (in rºw Aſtov rávroy) shall
be broken; but on whomsoever IT shall fall, it will
grind them to powder.”
It is clearly seen that the Scriptures do not furnish
us with one single instance of the word IIárpa, Rock,
being applied to PETER as the IIárpos, or foundation
stone, of Christ's Church militant; but that IIérpa
and Atºos are everywhere used to denote Christ, and
him only, both before and since his Incarnation,
therefore, if IIérpo, were meant to denote the founda-
tion stone of Christ's Church, there would conse-
quently be Two Rocks, or Stones, or Foundations; for
if THE CHURCH were built on the NAME or PERson
(rather than the FAITH) of PETER, then it would be
St. Peter's Church of Rome, and not Christ's. It
is equally clear by what subtile artifices the name of
the Servant has been put for that of the MASTER,
which is a direct forgery: for that which was only
spoken in a spiritual sense to Peter, is taken in a
literal sense by the Sovereign Pontiffs. When
Christ told Peter that his * “ kingdom was not of
this world,” but spiritual; then Peter believed
Christ, and preached the Gospel. On the other
hand, the Popes erect a Temporal Kingdom, and
* I Cor. iii. 11. * Matt, xxi, 42, 44. * John xviii. 36.
126 CHAPTER XI :
preach, saying, that Rome is the Mother Church of
all Churches in the world; but Rome is called
* “MYSTERY-BABYLoN THE GREAT, THE MoTHER
OF HARLoTs,” because seATED on “SEVEN MoUN-
TAINs: ” therefore, as the Pope claims the * Power
of the Keys,” as well as the NAME of PETER, we
know that they are the Keys of Earth and the Bot-
tomless Pit, and that he ranks with * “the Prince of
this World,” because he is Not IN SUBJECTION to
the Powers THAT BE, as was Peter; but his preten-
sions are above all earthly sovereignty. We cannot
but see the folly of allowing that IIérpo; and IIárpa are
synonymous, the results being so fatal to the spread
of Christianity, as to sap the only foundation STONE,
which is laid in Sion. Let us therefore take heed
how we allow things small in appearance to be given
up, or substituted; whether they be Words, Names,
Letters, or even Cyphers, until we know whether
they are sMALL : for the whole Power of Papal
Rome has been laid upon the Name of Peter, viz.
IIérpos, or Kºpås. May we not then, in the full assur-
ance of Revealed Truth, take up the language of
Moses, and declare to Papists, that * “ Their Rock
is not as our RocK, even our enemies themselves
being Judges?” Peter's question, with our Lord's
answer to him, will decide that Peter was not in-
tended by Jesus to be the Pope of the Christian
Church, neither the Stone or Foundation thereof.
* “Then answered Peter, and said unto him, Behold,
* Rev. xvii. 5, and 9. * Matt. xvi. 19. 3 John xii. 3 l ; xiv. 30.
4 Deut. xxxii. 31. * Matt, xix. 27, 28. Luke xxii. 28–30.
EQUALITY OF THE APOSTLES. 127
we have forsaken all, and followed THEE ; what
shall we have therefore? And Jesus said unto them,
Verily I say unto you, that YE which have followed
me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall
sit in the Throne of His Glory, YE also shall sit
upon Twelve THRoNEs, judging the Twelve TRIBES
of Israel.”
St. John confirms the same thing in these words,
* “And the wall of the City had Twelve Found A-
TIONs, and in them the NAMEs of the Twelve
APOSTLEs of the LAMB.” St. John also represents
the equality of their Commission. ” “ Then said
Jesus unto them again, Peace be unto you : (ºpiº) as
my Father hath sent me, even so send I you (Suá).
And when he had said this, he breathed on them,
and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them ; and whosoever sins ye retain, they are re-
tained.” The sitting on Thrones is spoken in refer-
ence to a glorified state, which the Apostles would
receive when they had finished their Testimony, and
entered into the Glory of their Lord: but the Popes,
wishing to be beforehand, have taken the Mitre of
High Priesthood, and the Triple Crown besides,
and sat down in the Temple of God at Rome, as the
* “ Lords over God's heritage.” Wherefore they are
Apostates according to the Canon of Inspiration,
which they profess to believe.
- * Rev. xxi. 14.
* John xx. 21–23. Matt. xviii. 18. xxviii. 16–20. Mark xvi. 15–20.
* 1 Pet. V. 3.
128 - CHAPTER XI :
IV. That the MoHAMMEDAN CHURCH, the Me-
tropolitan of which is ST. SoPHIA at Constantinople,
is the largest in its area of any ecclesiastical edifice
in Europe, or the world, it being so spacious as to
contain (as I have been credibly informed) in its
vast interior 100,000 persons at one time; whereas
the magnificent Roman (or Papal) BASILIQUE, called
St. PETER's can only contain 75,000 persons. The
Mohammedan Church (or rather Imposture) was
nearly co-eval in its Rise with the Roman Catholic;
the former commencing about July 16th, A. D. 622, and
is as much an APOSTATES from Roman ISM, (witness
the Koran,) as Rom ANISM is from CHRISTIANITY.
And because MAoMETIs is the Name of a Man,
—who was a professed Prophet, and whose Church
or Imposture exists at this hour, and whose Name
when written with the foregoing Greek Letters (al-
though I cannot admit the propriety of it being so
written, because of the total dissimilarity of the
Language from whence it is derived, viz. Arabic,)
LATIN THE LANGUAGE of THE PAPACY. 129
will produce the evact Number 666, therefore
APOSTATEs, which is not the Name of a Man, can-
not be a suitable appellative Name for identifying the
Numbered Beast. But it is well worthy of remark,
that Constantinople was once the Seat of the Im-
perial Roman Government, and professedly a Chris-
tian City, though now Apostates by reason of the
successive barbarous incursions of the Saracens,
Moors, Turks, and Arabs, who have kept possession
of it ever since, and have set up the KoRAN in lieu
of THE BIBLE. And although the Koran has never
been published in LATIN, nor is it the Living Ver-
nacular Language of that Apostacy, (as it is of
Mystic Rome at the present moment); it must
nevertheless be accounted as an inexplicable Mystery,
that whilst the LATIN has been a Dead Language
throughout the whole of Europe for several centuries,
even in Italy and Rome, the very Seat of the Latin,
or Roman, or Italian Church and Hierarchy, that
it should be, notwithstanding this indisputable fact,
the MoTHER Tongue, the Living Universal Lan-
guage of the CHURCH OF ROME, wheresoever her
tyrannical power and influence have hitherto been
extended ; and she impudently professes herself to
be the original Root of the primitive Christian
Church, the Mother Tongue of which was GREEK,
but which she has discarded by preferring the Latin
Vulgate Translation to the GREEK ORIGINAL.
Mr. Faber, in his little volume entitled ' ' Re-
* Faber's Rccapitulated Apostacy, from page 42 to 46.
K
130 CHAPTER XI :
capitulated Apostacy,” may be consulted with ad-
vantage on the Arabic Name of the Impostor
Mohammed, for one special reason which he gives—
“Scarcely two occidentals, except by previous concert,
will express a Hebrew or an Arabic word perfectly
alike in Greek or Roman Letters.” The subjoined
are the whole of his remarks on the subject.
“The name MAOMETIS’(says Mr. Faber) “may
rejoice in the rare felicity of having been adduced, at
diverse times, both by Protestant and by Popish
Expositors. Yet, even independently of the falseness
of the principle upon which they work, we may well
ask: Where is the indisputably final authority, even
for writing at all, still less, therefore, for earclusively
writing, the Arabic name of the impostor with the
precise Greek Letters which compose the word
MAOMETIX 7 *
. ‘By the Popish expositor Bishop Walmesley (who
clumsily fancies, however, that his MAOMETIX will be
some yet future personal Turkish Antichrist as-
suming or bearing the name of the Arabian Impostor')
we are told: that The word is thus written by
Euthymius and Zonaras and Cedrenus.’”
* “Walmesley proceeds upon the wild fancy, that we may expect a future
and as yet unrevealed personal Antichrist, who will wear out the saints and
lord it over God's heritage during the exactly defined term of 1260 literal or
natural days.”
* “Walmesley's General History of the Christian Church, chap. x. p. 320.
Feuardentius, so far as I know, was the first who struck out MAOMETIX or
MOAMETIX as the name of the beast. Annot. in Irenae. page 486. But,
with wise caution, he hesitates between the false prophet Mohammed and the
false prophet Luther: for he finds that, provided only we write Martin
Luther MARTIN LAUTER, we shall equally produce the desired number 666.
REMARKS ON BISHOP WALM ESLEY. 13]
‘Now, even if Walmesley were accurate in his
statement: what then? Other historians of the
later empire express the name of the prophet of
Mecca in various other forms. Why, therefore, for
the purpose of arithmetical calculation, are we bound
to take the alleged MAOMETIx of Euthymius and
Zonaras and Cedrenus, rather than the MOAMEA of
Nicetas or the MEXMETHz of Chalcocondylas, or the
MAXEMET of Joannes Cantacuzenus, or the MExeMET
of Ducas Michael, or the MoAMEe and the MAxorMETHz
of Joannes Cananus 2 °
“By reason of the essentially different principles
of alphabetic writing which severally prevail in the
East and in the West, scarcely any two occidentals,
except by previous concert, will express a Hebrew or
Arabic word perfectly alike in Greek or Roman let-
ters. Consequently, since, down to the present day,
the name of the grand impostor has been written in
almost an endless variety of forms: those, who seek
the number 666 in his name expressed in Greek
letters, ought first to demonstrate, that the particular
form MAOMETIx must, from some inherent necessity,
be critically adopted, and that all the other forms
must, from some inherent necessity likewise, be
critically rejected. In fine, any person, acquainted
with Hebrew or Arabic, will, from the very genius
of those languages, readily perceive the utter impro-
bability, that the enigmatical name, alluded to in the
Apocalypse, should be an Arabic word written and
numbered in Greek characters: because such a cir-
cumstance would make the absolute strictness of an
K 2
132 CHA PTER XI :
arithmetical calculation to depend upon the inherent
laxity of an alphabetical expression.’
‘Such would be the immediate objection to the
word MAOMETIx, even if Bishop Walmesley had been
correct in his allegation: but, where the interests of
their church either are, or are supposed to be con-
cerned, the assertions of the Romish Priesthood must
in no wise be implicitly received. Cedrenus writes
the name MOTXOTMET : Zonaras writes it MQAMEG :
and Euthymius, like Zonaras, also writes it MoAMEe,
or (as it appears in a manuscript of the Panoplia left
by Bishop Fell to the Bodleian Library) MoAMEA.
Not one of them writes it MAOMETIx, though Bishop
Walmesley assures his wondering readers that such,
with rare unanimity, is the orthography of them
all.” -
To the foregoing observations of Mr. Faber, in
answer to the Romish Bishop Walmesley, we may
add another, which is, that the TERMINATION of the
Name Macperk, as written by the said Bishop, is a
LATIN TERMINATION, and not Greek ; for if it were
the latter, it ought to be written with os or nº, as
Mackeros or Mackerns, and then the one would produce
the Number 726, and the other 664, neither of which
would correspond with the sacred Number 666, and
this circumstance alone is sufficient to eject the Name
Maoperts from further use—the ORTHoGRAPHY being
spurious. *,
Though MoHAMMED was a vile Impostor, cruel
Tyrant, an open and grand Enemy to the spread of
Christianity by the blasphemous publication of the
MOHAMMED NOT THE MAN OF SIN. 133
KoRAN, and in these particulars, (with many others,)
an ANTI-cHRIST and APOSTATE, inasmuch as he
professed himself to be IIapáºros, the Paraclete,
or Comforter, or Holy Ghost, and caused the KoRAN
to be written in proof of his Mission, yet He is Not
“ the Man of Sin” spoken of by St. Paul, nor the
Numbered Beast of St. John : for neither the loca-
lity of his Kingdom, or Throne, are answerable to
the words of . St. John in reference to its being
sEATED 1 on “Seven MoUNTAINs,” nor is the
MANNER of his * “SITTING in the TEMPLE of God,”
correspondent with a pretended THEocRACY ; nor
are his pretensions to Supremacy, Universality,
Infallibility, CEcumenical Power, commensurate
with those of the LATIN PAPAL MAN. …”
V. and VI. That? SocINIANs and UNITA-
RIANs are both of them APosTATEs from Chris-
tianity is evident, because they profess to believe
in Christ, as a good man, and a Prophet of the
highest character, and yet they deny His Atone-
ment, the belief of which, according to “the word of
God,” is absolutely necessary to every Christian
man's Salvation. To admit that a man is a good
7man, and not to believe that what he said of himself
was strictly true, is at variance with Truth, and
1 Rev. xvii. 9. - * 2 Thess. ii. 4.
* For a refutation of their heterodox principles see Dr. Wardlaw's Dis.
courses on the Socinian Controversy. Dr Magee (late Archbishop of Dublin)
on the Atonement, and Dr. Middleton, (late Bishop of Calcutta) on the Doc-
trime of the Greek Article applied to the Criticism and Illustration of the
New Testament, edited and revised by the Rev. James Scholefield, Regius
Professor of Grcck in the University of Cambridge.
134 CHAPTER XI :
common sense: yet such is the unpardonable incon-
sistency and persevering obstinacy of SocINIANS and
UNITARIANs. St. John says,” “He that comETH
FROM ABove is above all. And what he hath seen
and heard, that he testifieth, and no man receiveth
his testimony. He that hath received His TESTI-
Mony hath sET to HIS SEAL that God is true: ” but
this seal, this signet is wanting in the Socinian and
Unitarian schemes, by rejecting the Atonement,
and, therefore, THEY have “neither part nor lot in
this matter,” for to reject the major, and adopt the
minor points for which the Son of God was made
“manifest in the flesh,” is to reject Christ and his
Gospel, and to render “His TESTIMONY " of none
effect. The Jews stand convicted upon this very
ground, and their magnificent Temple and City,
which were for ages, the * “Joy of the whole Earth,”
have, for the last eighteen centuries been a “ Deso-
lation,” and they themselves * “an astonishment, a
proverb, and a by-word, among all nations,” for
their Apostacy. The destruction of Jerusalem with
its Temple and Service, and the subsequent disper-
sion of the Jews, were foretold by Christ, before
they came to pass, and were all the fatal conse-
quences of denying the Testimony of Jesus and his
Atonement; for the Jews said, when they crucified
the “Lord of Glory,” “ “His Blood be on us, and
on our Children,” and “ his blood" is still on their
children, wrath having come upon them to the
* John iii. 31, 32, 33. * Psalm xlviii. 2; Lamen. ii. 15.
* Deut. xxviii. 37. * Matt. xxvii. 25.
OBSERVATIONS ON SOCINIAN ISM. l 35
uttermost, according to the sign which Jesus showed
them.” “Then shall be great tribulation, such as was
not since the beginning of the world to this time, no,
nor ever shall be.” This is confirmed by Josephus,
the Jewish historian, an inflewible enemy to Christ
and Christianity, who says, that, 1,300,000 Jews
perished in the siege of Jerusalem. Poland,
the country of SocINUs, and the hot-bed of Soci-
nians has drunk the cup of bitterness from the hand
of the Lord, almost to the dregs, by the instrumen-
tality of the Russians, even as the Jews did by the
instrumentality of the Romans.
If it be a high affront to say of a mere man,
that he does not speak the Truth, how much more
to say of HIM, who “ spake as never man spake,”
that His word is Not TRUTH | Such an Impeach-
"ment of HIM, who is TRUTH ITSELF, if it be not
direct “Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost,” I
know not to what to compare it. To the woman of
Samaria, Jesus testified, saying”, “I that speak unto
thee am He,” viz. “MESSIAs.” To the Jews, Jesus
said, “Pour father Abraham rejoiced to see MY
DAY : and he saw it, and was glad. Verily, verily,
I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.”
“No man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that
came down from heaven, even the SoN of MAN
which is in heaven.” “I am the Son of God.”
“He that hath seen ME hath seen the FATHER.
“I and MY FATHER are ONE.” “I am the LIGHT
* Matt. xxiv. 21.
* John iv. 26: viii. 56,58; iii. 13; x. 36; xiv. 9 : viii. 12; xi. 25.
136 CHAPTER XI :
of the world.” “I am the Resurrection and the
LIFE.” And when adjured by the High Priest, in
the name of God, to say whether he were THE
CHRIST, THE SoN of God, he confessed that he was
both.” “And the High Priest answered and said unto
him, I adjure thee, by the living God, that thou
tell us whether thou be THE CHRIST, THE SoN of
GoD. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: never-
theless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son
of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and
coming in the clouds of heaven.” From the circum-
stance of the High Priest rending his clothes,
and declaring that Jesus had “spoken blasphemy,”
and from another passage of scripture we know in what
sense blasphemy was applied to Jesus,” “The Jews
answered him, saying, For a good work we stone
thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou,
being a man, makest thyself God.” As Jesus
proved his divine power and origin, by the Mi-
racles which he performed in the presence of multi-
tudes, and declared himself without reserve to be
“God manifest in the flesh,” (and this is the view
which the Jews took of the matter,) so we are bound
to believe that ALL he said was true; or mone: for
there is no medium in the case. Christ was the Son
of God or he was not the Son of God. He was
equal with his Father, or he was not. Those who
deny his Divinity are in precisely the same case as
the Jews, and the same punishment which awaited
them, awaits those who take a particle from his
* Matt. xxvi. 63, 64. 2 lbid. 64. 9 John x. 33.
OBSERVATIONS ON SOCINIAN ISM. 137
glory. That the word of God is true, we have
strong evidence from the fact that it has been trans-
lated into 157 Languages and Dialects already.
St. John writes thus,” “If we receive the witness
of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is
the Witness of God which He hath testified of his
Son. He that believeth on the Son of God, hath
the witness in himself: he that believeth not God
hath made him a Liar; because he believeth not the
Record that God gave of his Son. And this is the
Record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and
this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath
life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not
life.” . . . “And we know that the Son of God is
come, and hath given us an understanding, that we
may know HIM that is TRUE, and we are in HIM
that is TRUE, even in his SoN JESUS CHRIST.
THIS is the TRUE GOD, and ETERNAL LIFE.”
To adopt then a line of argument which would
place terms and things which are totally dissimilar
upon a co-equality is to follow the eaſample of Soci-
nians and Unitarians, for they assume to themselves
the proper Title of CHRISTIANs, which belongs onLY
to those who believe in the Atonement. But as”
“ the Disciples were called Christians first in An-
tioch,” and not ‘ Unitarian’ or ‘Socinian Chris-
tians,” so we know from the page of Holy Writ that
the terms Unitarian and Socinian are superfluous,
and only brand them with Apostacy. And because
THEY deny the Atonement, therefore “their Rock
* 1 John v. 9–12, 20, * Acts xi. 26.
138 CHAPTER XI :
is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves
being judges: ” for their speech is to the ear of a
Christian what the “speech of Ashdod” was to
the ear of Nehemiah, and as easily to be distin-
guished. And, consequently, to attempt the identift-
cation of such ‘ counter-elements,’ as these, without
Reason or Precedent, is to introduce uncertainty into
every thing, by nullifying the established laws of
Order in Language, Orthography, and the plainest
Scripture Truths.
It is still further manifest, that Apostates, which
is not the proper name of a Man, cannot, for the
same reason, be the proper or Appellative Name
of the numbered Beast whose Name is declared by
St. John to be that of a MAN, and to contain the
precise Number xàº' or 666; since Apostates is too
indefinite an appellation for the Beast, it does not
contain the Number 666, and can never be converted
into, or substituted for the Name of a Man, and,
therefore, must be rejected, as the most useless, be-
cause the most inconclusive of all pretended Names.
For example—If we were to speak of the Emperor
JULIAN who is proverbially and emphatically styled
THE APOSTATE, yet it would be necessary to use the
Name—Julian—because it is the Proper Name of
this Man ; for were we to omit his Name, no one
would of a certainty conclude that Julian the Apos-
tate was meant; but probably Antiochus Epiphanes
might be intended, or Absalom, or Ahithophel, or
Rehoboam, all of whom were in their turns Apos-
* Nehem. xiii. 24.
INVALIDITY of The word APOSTATES. 139
tates from “the Commonwealth of Israel; ” or per-
adventure Judas Iscariot, who is emphatically called
“The Son of Perdition,” and therefore Apostate,
because he betrayed Christ and perished in his
Anorarta rā, IIſrews. Not of necessity, therefore, should
The Popes of Rome be conjectured from the mere
indefinite Appellation of ApostATEs, which is appli-
cable to other Churches and other Individuals, and
which is totally inapplicable to the Name of any
Man ; for the Popes have severally and successively
their proper Names as Men, as well as the Titles
which are given them by way of Distinction and
Eminence upon their ELECTION and establishment on
the PAPAL THRONE, even as the Apostate Julian
had ; and, therefore, on this additional ground of
objection Apostates will not serve the purpose in-
tended by Mr. Faber. -
As we have already noticed several leading Apos-
tacies from Christianity, ex. gr. the Jewish, Greek,
Latin, Mohammedan, Socinian, Unitarian, together
with sundry examples of Civil and National Apos-
tates : how shall we be able to prove that the chief
burden of Apost Acy ought primarily, appellatively,
and summarily to be laid upon the Latin Church
of Rome, so as to distinguish Her by Character and
Name as she ought to be distinguished from ALL
other Apostates ? I would answer, not by means
of the word Apostates, but by adhering in the
strictest manner to the “ wisdom'' and “ under-
standing” of which St. John speaks, which is, in
the given Greek Number x&s' (or 666) to find the
140 CHAPTER XI :
NAME of a MAN written in Greek Letters, which
will produce by Greek Alphabetical Numeration or
Computation the appropriate “Mark,” appellative
“ Name,” and enigmatical “ Number 666° of the
Beast; and having thus discovered the Name of a
Man, (written in Greek characters,) then we must
apply it to the Rule laid down by St. John, which is
this,” “Here is wisdom. Let him that hath under-
standing COUNT THE NUMBER of the Beast;”
that is to say, “The NAME of the Beast, or the
NUMBER of his NAME,” which is the “NUMBER
of a MAN ; and his Number is Sir Hundred Three-
score and Sia.” And by following this Rule, after
the evample of Irenatus, the result will be manifest.
To which end we must have resort to the original
Greek Tert of the New Testament, the testimony of
the early Fathers, of ancient Greek Grammarians,
Lexicographers, and Classical Writers; and the
opinions of the most learned and pious men, as cor-
roborating the whole; whereby we shall prove, in
the clearest and most indisputable manner that the
very ancient name AATEINox, (Lateinos,) as used by
Irena us in the Second Century, is in truth the
Name of a Man, which contains the ea'act Number
666, and is applicable in every particular to the
character of the Numbered Beast as described by
St. John. Moreover, we shall find that the ancient
use of the Diphthong, or broad d or ē, in Aardvos
or Aarévos was perfectly correct in regard to ortho-
graphy, and also the truth of the conjectures
* Rev. xiii. 17, 18.
INVALIDITY of THE word APOSTATES. 14 l
of Irendºus and Tertullian (concerning the LATIN
or Roman Ecclesiastical Power made by them some
centuries before the Events came to pass) will be
evident. For, after the division of the old Empire
into Ten Kingdoms, and the subsequent Rise, Pro-
gress, and Establishment of the Papal Dominion
had brought to light the truth of a hidden Mystery,
viz. that the Papacy after its establishment was
found SEATED in the old IMPERIAL CITY of Rome;
had adopted the Pagan Casarean Title of ‘Pon-
TIFEx MAxIMUs; ” had retained its ancient LATIN
Language, with its Pagan sacrificial Rites and
ceremonies, modified to a professed Christian Stan-
dard, and finally claimed UNIVERSAL Power and
Dom INION, both SPIRITUAL and SECULAR, and
thereby Evidenced ITSELF to the whole world to
be the GREAT ANTICHRISTIAN Power, or in the
words of Scripture, “THE ANTICHRIST,” “THE MAN
of SIN,” “THE SoN of PERDITION,’ ‘THE WICKED
ONE ;’ then that which was Prophesied by St.
John and St. Paul, conjectured by Irematus and
Tertullian, was confirmed by succeeding Events to
which the whole current of Ecclesiastical History
bears ample testimony. -
It must be evident, from what has been already
advanced respecting the word (not Name) APOSTATES,
that it does not contain in the INDIVIDUAL LETTERS
of that word the true Number 666, or xís', but
rather l 160, which is 494 more than the number
mentioned by St. John ; neither is it an appropriate
word in any rendering of it; for it is as much too
142 CHAPTER XI :
general a Term whereby to express the Proper and
Appellative name of the Beast, as the word Catholic
is too universal a Term whereby to identify the
Roman Catholic, or LATIN Church; for the Term
CATHolic is an UNIVERSAL TERM, but the adjective
Roman is a PARTICULAR Term, and distinguishes it
from the Jewish, Greek, Christian, Mohammedan,
and all other real or professed Churches in the world,
and by which peculiar LATIN “ Mark or Name” we
know, to a demonstration, that the LATIN Church of
Rome is neither the Original, nor True, nor Universal
Church ; but only UNIvERSAL as it respects the
mystical use and incaplicable Retention of the LATIN
Language, which is ALL that we want for our
argument in favour of the Name Aarévos, Lateinos.
If the Roman Catholic were the true Christian
Church, (as she impudently professes herself to be,)
then, the Term Catholic, being an universal term,
would suffice to express the whole Christian Church
to the utmost limits of the globe; but the adjective
Roman (“Sacra RomanA Ecclesia,'— “Sanctum
Roman UM Imperium') being annexed, we have
at once both the Identity and self-prescribed LIMITs
of the Roman or LATIN Papal Church and King-
dom, founded upon the ruins of the ancient city and
empire of Imperial Rome, which persecuted the
Apostles and Primitive Christians under the tyran-
nical reigns of the Emperors Nero, &c. but where,
in the days of St. Paul, there was a Christian
Church of which LINUs was appointed the first
! IRENAEus, Lib. iii. cap. 3. and Eusebius, Lib, iii. Hist. Eccles, cap. 2.
T ISCREPAN CIES OF THE V U LGATE. 143
Bishop, ANACLET the second, and CLEMENT the
third. Moreover, as the GREEK (not Latin) was
the Mother Tongue of the true Catholic and Apos-
tolic Church, why has it not continued such, if
indeed some one particular Language must needs
be retained on account of Church Unity, &c. 2
The Greek, which is the original Language of the
New Testament, has been most impiously laid aside
by Papal craft and authority, and has been sup-
planted (without the least shadow of a command in
Holy Scripture for such substitution) by the LATIN
Vulgate Version or translation, of which there have
been SEVEN revised and amended Papal editions,
and between the two editions of Pope *SIXTUs the
Vth. and CLEMENT the VIIIth. there are about 2000
different Readings: and not only has the LATIN
Version been substituted for the Greek original, but
it has literally superseded the Vernacular or Vulgar
Tongue of Modern Rome and Italy, which is
ITALIAN.
Let, therefore, the Pope of Rome glory in his
LATIN-Ecclesiastical Universality, Dominion, and
Power; for by How Much HE hath the GREATER
Authority, by so Much surer argument is HE
that LATIN BEAST or MAN, whose proper and
Appellative NAME is Aarévos, and His enigmatical
Number xés, or éézkoa tos éénkovla áč, or 666.
* See James's ‘Bellum Papale,’ &c. London, 1678.
CHAPTER XII.
CONTAINING A REFUTATION OF DR. ADAM cLARKE's
HYPOTHESIS OF
H AATINH BAXIAEIA.
HAviNG now fully discussed the demerits of Mr.
Faber's favourite word Atos-arms, Apostates, as neither
contractedly nor uncontractedly containing the true
Number x&g', or 666, nor the name of any Man—
and having also established that the numerical exionpoy
Tav, or cypher sº, which has been brought forward
by Mr. Faber to represent the contraction of a and
+ (g) is spurious orthography,-and finally, that
the word Apostates itself contains no sufficiently
definite signification, —I gladly leave both the
Theory and the Theorist, and proceed to consider—
II. The Hypothesis of the learned Dr. Adam
Clarke, concerning the Number xás", which he affirms
to be—
H AATINH BAXIAIEA," THE LATIN KINGDOM.
* See Dr. Adam Clarke's Commentary on Rev. xiii. 18.
ST. JoHN AND DR. clarke contRASTED. 145
This opinion of the learned Doctor (against the
orthography of Aarévvos) will soon be seen to stand
on very slender ground, though backed by much
learning and ingenuity, and the aid of Cardinal
Bellarmine. To this end it will only be necessary
to contrast, or bring in opposition the words of the
Apostle John with those of Dr. Clarke, to see
how well they agree. St. John says, “THE
NAME of the Beast, or the Number of His
NAME.” “Here is wisdom. Let him that hath
understanding count THE NUMBER of the beast:
for it is THE NUMBER of a MAN ; and HIS NUMBER
is Sia, hundred threescore and Siar,” or “ 666.”
whereas the “wisdom" and “ understanding ”
evinced by the learned Dr. Clarke is to the following
effect, “ The Name of the Beast, or the Number
of his Name.” Here is wisdom. Let him that
hath understanding count the Number of the Beast;
for it is the NUMBER of THE LATIN KINGDOM ;
“ and his number,” (i.e. of the LATIN KINGDOM)
is “ Sir hundred Threescore and Siv.” Now then, it
must be evident to all reasonable men that the
NUMBER of A KINGDoM and “the NUMBER of A
MAN ?’ can never be construed to mean the same
thing, unless it can first be proved that MAN and
KINGDOM are synonymous terms, which is impossible,
and, therefore, whatever amount of learning, talent,
and ingenuity has been displayed by the Doctor on
this subject, it is nevertheless wholly irrelevant to the
subject proposed for our consideration by St. John,
* Rev. xiii. 17, 18.
I,
146 CHAPTER XII :
which is from the given Number x;', to find the
NAME of a MAN, written in Greek characters, an-
swerable to the Number 666; and not only must the
Name of the Man contain the precise given number,
but it must likewise portray the general and par-
ticular character of such a MAN as is described in
the xiiith Chapter of the Revelations from ver. l l to
wer. 18, inclusive. And however nearly Dr. Clarke
may have arrived in idea at the given Number from
the sentence # Aaron Bagºsia, “ The Latin Kingdom,'
yet from the simple Facts that this sentence does
not denote the Name of a MAN, and that there is
another sentence of similar and equal importance,
which contains the same number 666, viz. Ekkamata
Iraxxa, ITALIAN CHURCH ; the Doctor's hypothesis is
more fanciful than real, and must of necessity be dis-
puted, as we shall proceed to demonstrate. For if
the sentence n Azriyn Barıxeiz, THE LATIN KINGDOM
will produce the Number of the Beast, so also the
sentence Exxxºria Iraxika, ITALIAN CHURCH will pro-
duce the same number: but as neither of them con-
tains the Name of a Man, so they must both be
rejected, not on account of the Number, which is
correct, but because they are inapplicable.
- f - *
1N APPROPRIATE senteNCEs, &c. 14?
CHURCH. /
E’ = .. 5 * = .. 8
K' = . 20 A’ = .30
K' = . 20 a’ = ... 1
X’ = .30 +’ = 300
n' = .. 8 THE , = . 10
* = 200 y = .50
i’ = . 10 . LATIN n' = .. 8
IT ALIAN a' = ... 1 = ... 2
I' = . 10 KING- a' = 1
T' E 300 a’’ - 200
* = ... 1 t’ = . 10
X’ = .30 DOM. X. .30
s' = . 10 e' = 5
k' = . 20 i' = . 10
a' = . . 1 a' = ... 1
666 666
As Piscator, Brightman, and others, have given
us the sentence Ekkºnata Iroxtrº, ITALIAN chURCH,
which will produce the Number 666 in a legitimate
manner; what advantage has the learned Dr. Adam
Clarke derived by the adoption of the sentence n Aarºn
flag Xela—THE LATIN KINGDom ? for it is evident
that both, “THE LATIN KINGDom ' and “ITALIAN
CHURCH, when written in GREEK LETTERS will
severally produce the same Number 666, yet as
neither of these sentences can exhibit the Name of
Piscatoris Commentarii Novi Testamenti. Scholia in cap. xiii. Apoca-
lyps Johannis, ver. 18, p. 1549. Ed. Herbornæ Nassoviorum, 1613. Bright- .
man on Rev. xiii. 18. Amsterdam 161 l.
&
L 2
148 CHAPTER XII :
a Man, they cannot properly be said to represent the
Number of a Man, but are both spurious : because
St. John says most plainly that, “the NAME of the
Beast,” “ is the Number of a MAN : ” now the
words KINGDom,” or ‘CHURCH,” or “APOSTATES,'
are none of them the Names of Men, and as the
WoRD of God is to be our GUIDE to the interpreta-
tion of the sacred numerical enigma, and not the
learning of Dr. Clarke, or Mr. Faber simply con-
sidered, therefore, their authority must bow in sub-
mission to that SUPREME authority, as being the in-
fallible guide to, and Fountain of all revealed Truth.
And although neither “ The Latin Kingdom,’ nor
* Italian Church,” are suitable sentences to prove
the point at issue, yet I must confess that Dr. Adam
Clarke has used much greater fairness than Mr.
Faber, in his search after the Number 666, in the
sentence n Azrivn Bagweiz, inasmuch as the Doctor has
strictly confined himself to the well known numerical
wse of the 24 Greek Letters, without running wild
after an episémon to prove it equal to the contraction
of two Letters ; it is however abundantly certain that
the Doctor's argument cannot be sound, although
the said sentence may be considered in a comparative
point of view, as strengthening the long existing
arguments against Romanists or Papists, but not
7more so than the sentence Ekkanaia Iraaika, ‘ Italian
Church,’ which is more appropriate for the Papacy.
Yet after all I feel satisfied (yea, I might say positive)
that the only one proper and Appellative Name of a
MAN, which, when written in Greek Letters, can
LATINUs A MAN's NAME. 149
furnish us with the precise arithmetical ‘Number,'
appropriate Mark,' and appellative Name” of
the number Beast, is Aarévos, Lateinos, the ortho-
graphy of which is proved to be correct, and to be in
every other respect answerable to the general scope
of the Prophecies of St. John and St. Paul; being
the Proper Name of a Man, namely, LATINUs,
who was King of Latium or Italy, and the founder
of the ancient Kingdom of the Latins, called after
his Name, Latium, (and afterwards Rome,) whence
comes the Latin NAME, Race, and Language,
which was formerly spoken throughout all Europe;
and more Proof than this is not necessary in any
argument. It is absolutely indispensable that the
Name of the Man should in all particulars identify
the character of the second Beast (as the true Image
of the First,) who is an acknowledged 2 Ecclesias-
tical Superior of the very Highest Order and
Degree—the pseudo-Christian ‘Pontifex MAXI-
MUs' even the Man of the Latin, or Roman, or
Italian Church and Kingdom, who ““SITTETH "
(according to prediction) “in the Temple of God”
(at Rome) “shewing himself that HE is God; ” of
ancient Roman Idolatries, of Heathen Mythology,
impudently introduced into the Church under Chris-
tian names; that He is the God-Man of Romanists
—their Idol, their Image, their Pope, Papa, or
Father; that He is the ecclesiastical founder of
modern Hierarchical Rome with its present Papistical
! Virgil. Æneid. Lib. vii. line 45. ibid. Lib. I. line 6.
* Rev. xiii. 1 1. * 2 Thess. ii. 4.
150 § CHAPTER XII :
form of Government, a similar form to which has
never before eaisted in the known world. That He,
therefore, is “ the Man of Sin,” “The Son of
Perdition,” “ The wicked one,” spoken of by St.
Paul, The Antichrist of St. John, and the very
MAN, whose enigmatical Number is xfs', or “Sir
hundred threescore and sia.” And, therefore, not-
withstanding the number of profound Greek authors
who have been quoted by Dr. Adam Clarke with an
intent to nullify the orthography of Irendºus in his
use of the DIPHTHONG or broad et or d in the Name
Aarévvos, he has utterly failed. The learning of
Cardinal Bellarmine moreover has been added to
the List of his authorities:—‘ Bellarmine the Jesuit
(as the Doctor writes) objected against Aatévvos
being the Name intended in the prophecy from its
orthography; for, says he, it should be written
Aarºvos. That the objection of the learned Jesuit
has very great force, is evident from every Greek
writer evtant, who has used the Greek word
Latinus, in all of whom it is uniformly found with-
out the diphthong. See Hesiod, Polybius, Dio-
nysius of Halicarnassus, Strabo, Plutarch, Dio
Cassius, Photius, the Byzantine historians, &c.’
From this array of ancient classical authors, sup-
ported by Bellarmine, it would appear, at first sight,
morally impossible to advance any thing further towards
establishing the name Aarévvos ; but the question at
issue is not whether any of the before named Authors
have ever used the diphthong or broad et or d when
writing the Name Aarºvos ; but whether such
LEGITIMACY OF THE DIPHTHONG. 151
orthography was acknowledged as legitimate among
the ANCIENT GREEKS and ANCIENT Rom ANs in
NAMEs of MEN, &c. ? That it was both customary
and legitimate to use the Diphthong or broad et or
& can be proved by a number of the most in-
disputable ancient authorities. Therefore it matters
not in the least whether any such authors as those
named by Dr. Clarke have ever used the Diphthong
or not. The simple fact to be established is, whether
such orthography was considered genuine in the time
of Irenaeus ; and, if it ever was legitimate, we may
suppose it probable in his Days, because he has un-
hesitatingly used the diphthong, or broad et, or 3 in
two several NAMEs out of THREE, pertaining to the
same number “ 666, viz. Aarévvos and Tévrav, and
as IRENAEUs (the beginning of whose name is written
by Eusebius with the Diphthong et, Epºwocios,) was
one of the Christian Fathers, and wrote professedly
“Contra omnes Hareses,” it would seem a gross
inconsistency for him to select Two Names out of
Three, the orthography of which was disputable.
It will be therefore my grand object to bring forward
such ancient authorities under the head of the Diph-
thong et vel d as shall establish the com Mon Use
of the broad et or d beyond all further doubt or con-
troversy: for that which the Amcients used, and
which can be proved incontrovertibly from many
classical Authors extant, from Learicons, from
Medals, &c. cannot be set aside by modern Com-
'mentators, let their learning be ever so great. When
Dr. Clarke and others have proved that the authorities
152 CHAPTER XII :
produced in favour of the Diphthong or broad 4 or
et are not sufficient, nay even abundant, to establish
the ancient uses of the Diphthong in the name
Aarévvos, it will be time enough to give up the
Point; till then, I shall consider myself fully justified
in vindicating the Orthography of Irenatus in the
ancient classical use of the epsilon (e) with the iota
() as et or d, or the iota circumflered as ū, (which
latter is generally, if not always, equivalent to a
Diphthong,) against the various pseudo-opinions of
Dr. Adam Clarke, Mr. Faber, Cardinal Bellar-
mine, Grotius, and a host of other writers. That
Dr. Clarke should have selected Cardinal Bellar-
mine, the most subtle of all Jesuits in the world,
the very mouth piece of the Pope of Rome, with the
intent to nullify the orthography of Irenatus in the
use of the e in Aarévvos, is most astonishing, (much
more so indeed than that Professor Lee of Cambridge
should have chosen the subtle demi-papistical Arch-
bishop Laud, with a view to set aside the Number
xćs', 666, by confronting it with the spurious Num-
ber 2013', 616). Because Bellarmine had a special
self-interest to support at Rome, as Cardinal Secre-
tary of State to the Pope, in which he could
not more effectually serve His Holiness,’ and the
whole “ Church of Rome,” than by endeavouring to
set aside the orthography of Irenaeus on THIS
Point ; for this Arch-Jesuist had most assuredly
found out that if the orthography of this all-im-
portant Name Aarévos were once established BE-
Yond contRoversy, the consequences would be that
PAPAL coronATION TITLES, &c. 153
It could apply to NoNE other church in the world
than his own LATIN CHURCH and usurped HIERAR-
CHY, and that it would, according to prediction,
lead to its downfall. Bellarmine, therefore, could
not be looked upon as a disinterested Man, especially
when it is duly considered that the LATIN or Roman
Church claims to herself, universality, and will
admit of no ecclesiastical Rival or Superior; for,
what is said by Papists of the Church of St. John
Lateran at Rome, is equally said of the Pope at his
Installation and Coronation—“ Omnium in Urbe
atque in Orbe Ecclesiarum Mater atque Caput.”
Of all Churches in the City and the World—The
Mother and the Head; so upon the Papal Corona-
tion are these presumptuous Titles of Blasphemy
conferred—‘Accipe Tiaram, tribus coronis orna-
tum, et scias TE esse Patrem Principum et Regum,
Rectorem Orbis, in Terrá Vicarium Salvatoris nostri
Jesu Christi: cui Honor est, et Gloria in Saecula Sae-
culorum. Amen.” “Receive Thou the Tiara,
adorned with THREE CROWNS, and KNow THYSELF
to be FATHER of PRINCEs and of KINGs, RULER of
THE WoRLD, upon Earth Vicar of our Saviour
Jesus Christ : to whom be Honour and Glory for
ever and ever. Amen.” -
It is evident to me that Irenaºus never doubted for
one moment the integrity of the orthography of the
Name Azrévvos, because he has made use of a second
Name Tetray, TEITAN, which is liable to the same
orthographical objection respecting the Dipthong
or et, and were there no other authorities extant to
154 CHAPTER XII :
prove the use of the Dipthong & in his day, the
double use of it by a Christian Father ought to
carry more weight than any thing which Dr. Clarke,
Mr. Faber, Cardinal Bellarmine, Grotius, or other
writers of a recent date can advance to the contrary.
The Field, however, will be left to them no longer,
but it will be proved beyond all doubt that Irenaeus
was not only a much better Grammarian than they,
but also that he came so much nearer to the true
Name of the Man, as to have literally furnished us
with it. “LATEINos momen habet Seaventorum Sea-
aginta sea numerum : et valde verisimile est, quo-
niam, novissimum Regnum Hoc habet vocaBULUM.”
And the Reason why we know of a certainty that his
conjecture was true, is this, that “LATINI enim
sunt qui NUNC Regnant.” For THEY are ‘LATINs
(i. e. Papists,) who Now Reign.’
And although Dr. Clarke has declaimed so much
against the orthography of Irendeus, with regard to
his use of the diphthong in the name Aztérvos, the
Doctor has nevertheless noticed three things rela-
tive to the Number “ 666 '' which are worthy of
observation, because they tend greatly to strengthen
my own opinion.
1st. That it is the GREEK LANGUAGE from which
the Name of the Beast must be elicited, as he says,
“Having shown that it was a practice in the Apos-
tolic age, and subsequently, to count the number in
words and phrases, and even in whole verses, it will
be evident that what is intended by 666, is that the
GREEk NAME of the Beast, (for it was in the Greek
DR. CLARKE's APPRov AL of IRENAEUs. 155
Language that Jesus Christ communicated his Reve-
lation to St. John,) contains this Number.”
The 2nd point worthy of observation is, the very
high Terms in which the Doctor speaks of the Name
Agreavos and of Irendeus its Author, or setter forth.
“Many NAMEs,” says the Doctor, “ have been
proposed, from time to time, as applicable to the
Beast, and at the same time containing 666. We
will only notice on E example, that famous one of
Irenaeus, which has been approved by almost all
commentators who have given any sort of tolerable
eaposition of the Revelation. The word alluded to
is Aarévos, the LETTERS of which have the following
numerical values. A = 30. a = 1. T = 300. s = 5.
w = 10. v = 50. o = 70. s = 200 ; and if these
be added together, the sum will be found to be equi-
valent to the Number of the Beast. This word was
applied by Irenaeus, who lived in the second Century,
to the existing Roman Empire; for, says he, “ They
are LATINs who now reign.”
The 3rd particular which the Doctor notices, is the
sentence # Aaron Bagwela, ‘THE LATIN KINGDOM.’
His observations are as follow :
* No other Kingdom on Earth can be found to
contain 666. This is then the # copſa, “ the wisdom,
or demonstration.” The Doctor continues. “A
Beast is the symbol of a Kingdom ; THE Beast has
been proved, in the preceding part of this Chapter,
to be the LATIN Kingdom ; and # Aarwn Baaixia,
being shown to contain, e.vclusively, the Number
666, is the demonstralion.”
156 CHAPTER XII :
On the two former observations of the Doctor, we
are pretty well agreed; but respecting his third remark
I must be allowed to differ from him ; for if it can be
proved—that “ No other Kingdom on Earth can be
found to contain 666; ” and that “A Beast is the
symbol of Kingdom : yet the # ropſ, of St. John is
not to find “ the Symbol of a Kingdom : ” BUT “the
Number of a MAN,” which must imply his Name,
and therefore St. John tells us in the 17th verse of the
xiiith chap. that “the NAME of the Beast, or the
NUMBER of his NAME,” must be sought after and
then counted; and as I have already shown that
MAN and KINGDoM are NoT synonymous terms, and
that the sentence exºxnawa Iraxxx, “ITALIAN CHURCH,’
will produce the same number as the sentence # Azrivn
Bariñeiz ‘ THE LATIN KINGDom,’ therefore ‘The
Latin Kingdom ' and “ Italian Church' must both
of them give place to the Proper name of the Man
of Latium or Rome, viz. Aarévvos (LATINUs) of
which it may with much greater propriety be affirmed
that “ No other Name of a Man on Earth can be
found suitable to, and illustrative of the Roman
Papal Beast but Aarévvos; because it contains the
true Number 666, and is fully answerable to the
general scope of the Prophecy. And, although, Dr.
Clarke has quoted Cardinal Bellarmine, and eight
classical Authors against the orthography of Aarévvos,
namely, Hesiod, Polybius, Dionysius of Halicar-
massus, Strabo, Plutarch, Dio Cassius, Photius,
the Byzantine Historians, &c. &c. : yet I will pledge
myself to confront these with many more authorities
DR. CLARKE YIELDS To BELLARMINE. 157
of equal antiquity and celebrity for the ancient use
of the diphthong 4 or it, and what then can be said
after the production of such numerous authori-
ties? Why, they must necessarily cause a surrender
of Dr. Clarke's hypothesis, because the question to be
decided is not (as we have before remarked) whether
the epsilon () is to be found in any of the eight be-
fore mentioned Authors when writing the Name
Aarévvos , but whether it was considered sound ortho-
graphy in the time of Irenaus, who lived in the
2nd Century, and whether it was THEN legitimate to
write the Diphthong or broad 4 or it. [See the
Authorities for such uses, Chapter XV.]
It is evident, therefore, that Dr. Clarke, without
taking the trouble to investigate the merits of the
Diphthong, broad or circumflea, i, et, or d, in the
Name which may be written in any of the three
following ways, as Aztévvos, Aardvos, Aarivos, has
tacitly, and I might say ignorantly, ceded the palm
To CARDINAL BELLARMINE, and thereby LosT the
most answerable NAME EXTANT, concerning the
Number 666, agreeably to the Doctor's own obser-
vation. ‘Many NAMEs,’ says he, “ have been pro-
posed from time to time, as applicable to the beast,
and at the same time containing 666. We will only
notice that on E example, viz. that famous one of
Irenaeus, which has been approved of by almost all
commentators who have given any sort of tolerable
eaposition of the Revelation. The word alluded to
is Aarévvos,’ &c. However I doubt not that what
has been already advanced concerning the ortho-
158 CHAPTER XII.
graphy of Irendeus, in reference to the Diphthong.
in the Name Aarºwos can never be overthrown by
any Classical writers, and if this Name of Axteuvos
were FAMoUs in times past, it will be still MoRE
FAMoUs for THE TIME To come. I am free to
confess, that, although there are multitudes of men
more competent than myself to undertake this eluci-
dation, yet from the sophistry which has been dis-
played by so many learned and pious Authors, I felt
most anxious, if possible, to arrive at the CERTAINTY
both of the NAME of the MAN, and the NUMBER of
his NAME, the latter of which has been impeached
by Professor Lee and Archbishop Laud, and the
former has been misconceived by many writers.
Of one thing I can assure my Readers, that, since
the year 1829, I have used much patient investiga-
tion in my endeavours to establish the Mystic
Name; and that the Motive which prompts me to
the publication of this little work is a love of and
zeal for the elucidation and final establishment of
TRUTH, which is evidently the self-same Motive
which moved Irenaus to write on this Sacred Num-
ber x&g', or “666,” as he says, Propter timorem
erga Deum, et ZELUM VERITATIs.
As it is truly painful to see so many gigantic
Authors at a polar distance in their opinions on this
subject, it seems expedient as far as practicable, to
arrest the progress of so many glaring errors as must
spring out of such a discrepancy.
CHAPTER XIII.
REMARKs on THE SPURIOUS NUMBER xus', or 616,
WHICH IS MENTIONED BY PROFESSOR LEE.
HAvi Ng proved, as I believe, the fallacy of Dr.
Adam Clarke's hypothesis with reference to the
sentence n Aarwn Baqixeia, as also of the similar sem-
tence Ekkamatz Iraxika, I now proceed to notice,
III. The opinion of Professor Lee' of Cambridge,
which is, that the Number x2' or 666 is disputable,
for the Regius Professor of Hebrew informs us that,
“In the times of Irenaeus another Number, viz.
xus', 616, was also found, which is sufficient to
shew, that liberties had been taken with this passage:
and I cannot help adding the words of Archbishop
Laud: ‘Numeralis illa theologia—non mihi placet—
non sapit spiritum apostolicum.’” -
I believe, however, that all New Testament com-
mentators upon this Number x£g', 666, are fully
* Lee's Dissertations on Prophecy. Rev. xiii. Diss. II. Sec, III. Page 329. .
160 CHAPTER XIII :
agreed concerning its authenticity and integrity; even
Cardinal Bellarmine, the Jesuit, who objects to the
orthography of Irenaeus, in his use of the Diphthong 4,
in Azrévos does not object to the NUMBER xés', 666,
and, therefore, should it be still further objected that
not only was the orthography of Irenatus incorrect
respecting the diphthong d, but that a doubt exists
about the correctness and validity of the Number
×{s', 666, as Professor Lee has insinuated in his
“ Dissertations on Prophecy,” then it will be proper
to examine the force of such objection in order to
ascertain whether it can stand the Test of critical
investigation; and if it cannot, it must be rejected as
irrelevant and inconclusive.
In replying to the above sentiments of Professor
Lee concerning the pseudo-prophetic Number xus',
616, backed by the equivocal opinion of Archbishop
Laud, I will endeavour to shew from the genuine
words of Irenaeus, that this solitary rival of the
Number x:4', 666, was never sanctioned by that
Christian Father, but originated with some author
(most likely contemporary,) whose writings were never
considered equally orthodox with those of Irenaeus,
otherwise the Professor of Hebrew would not have
failed to have given us his Name, the precise time
when he wrote, and when this Number first made
its appearance. For although the Professor has not
hesitated to remark—that, “ In the times of Irenaeus
another number, viz. Xug', 616, was also found,
which is sufficient to shew, that LIBERTIES had been
taken with this Passage; ” yet he cannot suppose
REMARKs on THE SPURIous NUMBER x15". 161
that we are to infer from the expression, ‘The
Times of Irenatus,’ that IRENAEU's ever favoured
such an opinion; for the production of his own
three Names Tºray, Aarºvos, and Eva,0a;, as well as
his reasoning on the subject, are totally subversive of
such an idea, because each one of these Names con-
tains the precise Number 666. As to the statement
that this Number 616, Xug', is “sufficIENT to shew,
that liberties had been taken with this passage; it
can only prove that on E liberty had been taken with
it, and this is the very utmost that the Professor
can produce, or he need not have resorted to the
dubious opinion of Archbishop Laud, who merely
says, ‘Numeralis illa theologia. . . non MIHI placet;"
as people generally express themselves, when they do
not understand any particular subject—‘non mihi
placet,’ ‘it does not please me; ' and as for the
Archbishop's assertion—“mon sapit spiritum Apos-
tolicum,’ it seems to me altogether to want proof.
It is evident from the simple circumstance that the
Professor has used the term ‘ LIBERTIES,’ that HE
is not satisfied with the ORIGINALITY and authen-
ticity of the Number xus', 616, or why does the
Professor say, “liberties 2' We may infer, there-
fore, from the off hand words of Archbishop Laud,
* Numeralis illa theologia. . . . non MIHI placet. . . .
non sapit spiritum Apostolicum,’ that they no more
sanction the rejection of the Number x&g', 666,
than the authority of Cardinal Bellarmine, quoted by
Dr. Adam Clarke, (and a worse could scarcely have
been adduced,) can operate to the rejection of the
M
162 CHAPTER XIII :
e in the Name Aarévvos. And this I say because
of the Cardinal’s attachment to the LATIN or Roman
Church, and that he has been proved not to be so
good a Grammarian or Antiquarian as IRENAEUs.
Professor Lee's observations on the Number xug',
or 616, were, I presume, induced by his Theory
concerning the Completion of the whole Prophecy
of the Book of Revelation, thus given in the Title
Page to his “ Dissertations on Prophecy.’
‘The second (DISSERTATION) on the interpreta-
tion of Prophecy Generally, with an Original Ex-
position of THE Book of REvelATION ; shewing
that the whole of that remarkable Prophecy has
LoNG Ago been FULFILLED.' Now, with deference
to the Professor, I would remark, that the Roman
or LATIN PAPAL CHURCH, which is a Principal
Subject of that Prophecy is still in existence, as
also the MoHAMMEDAN CHURCH, or Imposture,
which is another subject of the same Prophecy,
that is, “ The Beast,’ and “ The false Prophet,’ and
while these Two great Antichristian Churches con-
tinue, it cannot be literally or figuratively said,
that “ BABYLoN is fallen, is fallen, that GREAT
CITY.” And the Reason why it cannot be so said
is, that the predicted Antecedent to the Event has
not yet fully come to pass, namely, * “I saw
another Angel fly in the midst of heaven, having
the everlasting Gospel to Preach unto them that
dwell on the EARTH, and to EveRY NATION, and
* Rev. xiv. 8. - * Rev. xiv. 6.
REMARKs on the spurious NUMBER x16', 163
KINDRED, and Tongue, and People.” And as
the everlasting Gospel had been in the first instance
“preached in all the world for the obedience of
Faith,” Before the Time that St. John's Revelation
was generally known, we may conclude that these
grand Events belong Not to “ the things which
ARE ; ” (or happened in St. John's time;) but to
that epoch of his Vision which relates to * “the
things which shall be HEREAfter.” Besides which
the Jews have not been nationally converted to
Christianity; neither has * “Ethiopia stretched forth
her hands unto God; ” nor is the * “EARTH filled
with the Knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as
the waters cover the sea.” And, therefore, the
whole of that remarkable prophecy cANNOT, in its
fullest eatent, have been FULFILLED. See Rom. xi.
12, 15, 23, 25, 26, &c. .
As Irenaeus himself has set forth three several
Names, viz. Evay823, Aarávos, and Tāraw, each of which
contains the precise Number x{s', 666, nothing can
be advanced from the writings of this ancient Greek
Father, in favour of the Number xus', or 616, so as
to make it worthy of the least credence ; because
Irenatus wrote professedly against all Heresies,
and was contemporary with Polycarp, who was the
Disciple of St. John. It would therefore be folly to
allow this Christian Father, after the unequivocal
declaration he has made, “Sed scientes FIRMUM
NUMERUM qui à SCRIPTURA annunciatus est, id est,
* Rev. i. 19. * Psalm lxviii. 31. * Hab. ii. 14. Isaiah xi. 9.
* IRENEUs, Lib. V. cap. xxx. p. 448, edit. Grabe.
M 2
164 CHAPTER XIII :
SExcENToRUM SExAGINTA SEx,’ &c., to be deemed
ignorant of the true Number 666. And yet Professor
Lee has ventured (upon his own ipse diarit, and that
of Archbishop Laud, and the Codea of Petavius, the
French Jesuit,) to set aside such ancient authority,
by bringing forward the spurious Number xus', or
616, and thereby has left the learned world in com-
plete ambiguity concerning the Number xás', or 666.
We have already shewn that Dr. Adam Clarke, the
Rev. George Stanley Faber, Cardinal Bellarmine,
Grotius, and others, affirm that the orthography of
Irenaeus is incorrect, and thus the NAME Aarévvos,
as well as the NUMBER x86', 666, of St. John have
Both been seemingly invalidated. Who then will
venture to become Umpire among such discordant
Theologians? Who will play the man, in raising
Irenaeus from the dust of such theological controver-
sialists? Nay, behold! Irenatus lives again / for,
“ he, being dead, yet speaketh” to us in his writings!
Yes, he shall come forth from his shrouded mantle of
obscurity to confront these learned men, and as their
senior, in point of time, in accuracy of investigation,
in fidelity of orthography, and in soundness of argu-
ment, shall settle the point at issue; that is to say,
without a figure, succeeding events have become the
literal Interpreters of the NAME of the MAN, which
has been so long veiled under an enigma; hence we
KNow that what IRENAEUs only conjecTURED in the
. Second CENTURY of the Christian AEra, is most
manifestly fulfilled in the NINETEENTH, and that no
| Heb. xi. 4.
REMARKs on THE SPURious NUMBER xts'. 165
further doubt can remain on the subject in the minds
of those who will undertake the easy task of com-
paring his conjectures with matters of Fact.
Let us therefore take good heed to the words of
Father IRENAEUs, whose ancient, learned, and pious
testimony is invaluable; for he has given to Protes-
tants the Master Key to Popery, and has thereby
constructed for the Christian world, a Bulwark of
Defence against the innovations and usurpations of
the LATIN PAPAL MAN, whose Latin titles are—
‘ Pontifex Marimus,’ ‘ Sanctissimus Pater,’ &c.
and especially to the following FIve Points the moral
certainty of which Irendºus has established beyond
refutation.
CHAPTER XIV.
FIVE REASONS DRAWN FROM IRENAEUS ESTABLISH-
ING THE MORAL CERTAINTY OF HIS ORTHOGRAPHY
IN THE NAME Aarévvos, witH FURTHER REMARKs
on the opinions of ARCHBishop LAUD AND
PROFESSOR LEE.
IRENAEUS.
I. THAT the “wisdom" and “ understanding ” of
which St. John spake concerning the solution of the
enigmatical Number xàg', 666, was, that “ The
NUMBER of a MAN,” must necessarily imply the
NAME of A MAN ; i. e., “Numerus Hominis,”
being put for “Numerus Nominis Hominis; ” and
therefore Irendºus, in explaining the words of St.
John, has, without hesitation, supplied the manifest
Ellipsis, and given us THREE several examples of
proper Names written in Greek Letters, viz. Eva,0a;,
Azteivos, and Tāray.
II. Irenatus has established the correctness of the
THE TESTIMONY OF IRENÆUS. 167
Number x£s' by his own use. of it in Greek Nu-
merals,' kozraAA%λως δvv x&v TO ONOMA ATTOT άζει τῶν
âpi$μὸν χές'; and each of those Three proper Names
which he has given, exhibits the evact Number 666.
Thus he says,* 'Ev πάσι τόις στουδαίοις κὰι αρχαίοις άντιypóροις
τοῦ APIeMom TomTom KEIMENO», &c. ** IN oMNIBUS
ANTIQUIS et PROBATISSIMIS et VETERIBUS
SCRIPTURIS NUMERÖ HÖc PosITÖ, et TESTIMo-
NIUM perhibentibus his, QUI FACIE AD FAciEM Jo-
ANNEM vIDERUNT,” (in all the Ancient and most
approved and . old Scriptures THIS NUMBER is
placed, and the Testimony attributed to them who
had sEEN John face to face,) ** et ratione docente
mos, quoniam NUMERUS NOMINIS bestiae («ατὰ τῶν
τ&ν EAAHN0N Jípov,) secundum GRÆCORUM computa-
tionem per LITERAs quæ in Eo sunt, sExcENTos
habebit, et sExAGINTA, et sEx,” &c. And further
on in the same chapter he says respecting the
Number 666,° ** Oportet itaque tales discere, et ad
vERUM recurrere NoMINIS NUMERUM : ut nom in
PSEUDO-PROPHETARUM loco deputentur. Sed sci-
ENTES FIRMUM NUMERUM qui à SCRIPTURA
(from ScRIPTURE) annunciatus est, id est, SExcEN-
ToRUM SExAGINTA Sex,” &c. ; and in page 449
of the same Chapter, he sets forth the Name Aarêvvos
as containing the Number 666,* ** Sed et LATEINos
momen habet SExcENToRUM SExAGINTA SEx mu-
merum : et valde verisimile est, quoniam NovIssI-
MUM REGNUM Hoc habet VocABULUM. LATINI
i 1 R ΕNÆ. lib. V. cap. xxix. p. 446. * Ibid. cap. xxx. p. 447.
3 Ibid. cap. xxx. p. 448, * Ibid. p. 449.
168 CHAPTER XIV :
enim sunt qui nunc Regnant,” &c. And having
summed up, in Chapter XXIX., the Iniquity and
Apostacy of the Numbered Beast, (deduced from the
opinions of the Ancients concerning the Number
xãº" or 666,) in whom would concentre ALL un-
righteousness, Irenaeus exclaims—
* “Et propter hoc in BESTIA veniente Recapitu-
latio sit universa. Iniquitatis et omnis doli, ut in EA
(scil. BESTIA) confluens et conclusa omnis virtus
Apostatica, in caminum mittatur ignis. Congruenter
autem et NoMEN EJUs habebit NUMERUM, SExcEN-
ToruM SEXAGINTA SEx, recapitulans in semetipso
omnem qua fuit antediluvium, malitiae commixti-
onem, quae facta est ex Angelica Apostasia.” And
such Testimony may suffice as PROOF in favour of
the TRUE NUMBER xàs', 666, set against the spu-
rious Number xug', 616, brought forward by Pro-
fessor Lee ; inasmuch as the latter number would
be classed by Irenatus with the ipse divit, “PSEUDo-
PROPHETARUM,” i.e. of False Prophets.
III. Irenaeus has established to a moral certainty
the ancient and legitimate uses of the Diphthong,
Broad, or Circumfleared iota as , et or ; , by his
own use of it in Two several Names pertaining to
the self-same subject, viz. AATEINOx and TEITAN, and
as he wrote “Contra omnes Haereses,” it is most
unreasonable to suppose him ignorant of the ortho-
graphy of such Names, and as to his Grammatical
correctness see Chapter XV. of this work; besides
which a circumflewed iota i is generally, if not
* I RENAE. cap. xxix. p. 446.
COMPUTATION BY GREEK LETTERS. 169
always equivalent to the diphthong d, or et, and
therefore the Rev. Geo. S. Faber, Dr. Adam Clarke,
Cardinal Bellarmine, Grotius, and others, are con-
victed of ignorance touching the ancient orthography
of the Diphthong or Circumflered Iota in the Name
Aarévos, and Irenatus is thus proved to be the best
Grammarian.
IV. Irenatus has moreover established to a moral
certainty that the Proper and Appellative Name
of “The Man of Sin,” “The Son of Perdition,”
the “MAN " whose Number is xfg', 666, is Aarévvos,
for what he wrote conjecturally in the second Cen-
tury (ante Eventum) may, with the strictest pro-
priety, be spoken in the nineteenth Century, (post
Eventum,) that, “LATINI sunt qui nunc Regnant.”
‘THEY are LATINs who Now Reign.’ See Chapters
XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. and XX. of this work.
V. Irenaus has yet further established that it is.
with the individual Greek Letters, which compose
the Name of the MAN (according to Greek Compu-
tation) that his Number x35' must be found to
agree, as he says, “Quoniam NUMERUs NoMINIS
Bestiaº secundum GRAEcoRUM compUTATIONEM per
LITTERAs quae in Eo sunt, SExcENTos habebit, et
SEXAGINTA, et Sex,” &c. and therefore, we con-
clude that the calculation is effected neither by the
means of the Three exionpa, nor any of the numerous
Greek Contractions or Ligatures of Letters, but by
LETTERs on LY, separately and individually taken,
which was the only established METHOD of calculating
the Names of Men, &c. among all Greek writers,
170 CHAPTER XIV :
and to depart from this Alphabetical Rule is alto-
gether contrary to sound Orthography. We may
here also remind our readers, that as St. John wrote
his Gospel, Epistles, and the Book of the Revelation
in the Greek Language, as the Number xàs', 666,
is written in Greek Characters, it may most plainly
be inferred that the NAME of the “ MAN,” which is
answerable to the Number xás', must likewise be
written in GREEK LETTERs.
We may conclude from the foregoing observations
why the universal Opinion concerning the integrity
of the mystical Number x&g' did not please Arch-
bishop Laud, (Numeralis illa Theologia non MIHI
placet,) which is no great marvel when we consider
that many earlier, more learned, sound, and pious
polemical writers than his Lordship (both at home
and abroad,) had found as great perplexities as he
did, in attempting to solve to their entire satisfaction
this mystical numerical Enigma of “ 666,” and
hence his Lordship's assertion concerning the Num-
ber, “non sapit spiritum apostolicum,’ indicates his
vexation at not being able to comprehend the Name
of the Man, or “the Number of his Name,” ac-
cording to his own limited views, and he therefore
cuts the matter short by a most startling and dog-
matical assertion, “non sapit spiritum Apostoli-
cum : ” putting his Archiepiscopal veto upon the
Number 666 as unsound or doubtful: however, as
the said Archbishop was more than half a Papist,
there need be no wonder at his Lordship's brevity
and manner of Decision ; but, be it remembered,
THE AUTHORITY OF GREEK MSS. 171
that Irenatus was one of the earliest and most
authentic of the Christian Fathers, and has handed
down to us the most probable Appellative Name of the
“MAN,” (Lateinos,) for the reasons which he there
assigns, and his Number by (“Sexcentorum Sexa-
ginta Sex,”) and has denounced all Pseudo-Pro-
phetic Numbers, (“ut non in Pseudo-prophetarum
loco deputentur, sed scientes firmum. Numerum qui à
SCRIPTURA annuntiatus est, id est, SExcENToRUM
SExAGINTA SEx: ”) and there can be no Reason
for the establishment of the Pseudo-prophetic Num-
ber xic' or 616, until the Apostolic NUMBER xàs',
666, be FIRST disproved, which I firmly believe can
never be effected by honest means; nor can the
Mode of eliciting the Number from the individual
Letters of the Man's Name ever be doubted, so long
as the writings of Irenaeus are eartant. Besides all
this, the best and earliest Greek Testament, M.S.S.
Codices, LECTIONES; VERSIONES, (except the single
Codex of Petavius the Jesuit, which is lodged in the
Vatican Library,) have written the Number in the
TEXT by the Three Characters x{g' according to
Irenaeus ; but more modern writers have sometimes
written this Number at full length by the three words
expressive of the said Number, viz. taxorio &nkovſz &,
and our English Version has rendered the said Number
by the words “Six hundred THREEscore AND Six.”
Moreover, Cardinal Bellarmine, although at the very
time a thorough Papist, disputing against the ortho-
graphy of Irenaus, in his use of the Diphthong, or
broad 4 or et in the name Aarévvos, has nevertheless
172 CHAPTER XIV :
allowed the Number x&g', or 666, to be the true
Reading, according to the opinion of Irenatus: thus
(after the multiplicity of examples quoted in the VIth
Chapter of this work) there will be infinite difficulty
in admitting the solitary and pseudo-apostolic cita-
tion of the Number xus' 616, brought forward by
Professor Lee, backed by the demi-papistical opinion
of Archbishop Laud. It is evident that the Hebrew
Professor felt some difficulty in producing on E
learned sanction for the use of the Number x13' 616,
and that which he has produced must be rejected, if
the Opinion of Irendºus be true, for that Christian
Father has appealed to the Holy ScripTUREs in the
most unequivocal manner for confirmation of the
Number x&g', or 666, in the following words,-
‘Oportet, itaque tales dicere, et ad VERUM recurrere
NoMINIS NUMERUM : ut non in Pseudo-prophetarum
loco deputentur. Sed scientes FIRMUM NUMERUM
qui à ScRIPTURA annunciatus est, id est, Searcen-
torum Seavaginta Sea: ; as well as to “those who
had seen the Apostle John face to face.” Qui facie
ad faciem Joannem viderunt.”
It will be evident upon a little consideration, that
by the discovery of the true NAME of the MAN,
whose NUMBER is declared to be xàs', or 666, we
shall find the DESTINIEs of the Babylonish CHURCH
OF ROME, or in other words, the LATIN CHURCH,
inasmuch as the “ 1260 DAYs” of Years, have
already eaſpired, and, consequently, She * is “OLD’’
and “ready to vanish away.”
* Rev. xii. 6, 14. 2 Heb, viii. 13.
ARCHBISHOP LAUD AND IRENAEUs comparED. 173
St. Paul has given us a criterion whereby to judge
righteous judgment, when he says, that “The
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of
God; for they are foolishness to him ; ” (non sibi
placet) “neither can he know them, because they are
spiritually discerned.” Now, though Archbishop
Laud asserts, concerning the prophetic Number
xás", “non sapit spiritum Apostolicum : ” it is
evident from the general style of Irenaeus, as well as
from what he has particularly written on the
Number x86', that his writings savour much more
of the Apostolic Spirit and wisdom, than those of
Archbishop Laud, (witness the Christian age in
which Irenaeus lived, and that he was the Disciple
of Polycarp, the latter of whom was the Disciple
of St. John,) and therefore a comparison between the
Spiritual or Theological wisdom of the Two Bishops
(Irenatus and Laud) would afford a mighty contrast,
for example, Irenaeus was confessedly One of the
earliest and most authentic of the Christian Fathers;
but can the same thing be predicated of Archbishop
Laud? we know that it cannot, but the very con-
trary / and, therefore, I think we are bound by
Christian obligation to prefer the pious and learned
Testimony of father Irenaeus, with regard to the
fidelity of the Number xfg', or 666, which he has so
clearly given us, rather than the Pseudo-prophetic or
Pseudo-apostolic Number xus', or 616. Besides, if
we believe that his Lordship had ever read Irenaeus
“Contra omnes Hapreses,” Chapters 29 and 30 of
* I Cor. ii. 14.
174 CHAPTER XIV :
the Vth Book, yet his egotism, in expressing his
opinion, is so palpable, that it scarcely needs a re-
mark; for his words are evidently meant to imply as
much as, that because a Theological Numeral did not
please him, therefore it did not emanate from the
wisdom of the Apostolic Spirit, (an Inference which,
if admitted, would be fraught with most dangerous
consequences, both to the Word of God, and the
Christian Church.) “ Numeralis illa theologia,
mon MIHI placet ... NoN SAPIT SPIRITUM APOSTO-
Licum.” But who will venture to affirm, that be-
cause this Theological Numeral did not please the
then Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, therefore, the
words of St. John and of Irenaeus respecting this
Number x:g', were not true? or that they did not
savour of the Apostolic Spirit 2 Yet such is the
necessary inference we must draw from the assertion
of the Archbishop, if we are to consider his Lord-
ship's Opinion on this Number of paramount autho-
rity. But that it is not worthy of credence has been
proved in a variety of particulars, wherefore, until
Professor Lee can furnish us with more substantial
marks of orthodoxy, than those exhibited in his “ Dis-
sertations on Prophecy,”respecting the bare assertion
of Archbishop Laud, “non Sapit spiritum Apostoli-
cum,” weare bound to reject them as Pseudo-prophetic,
and Pseudo-Apostolic and Pseudo-Archiepiscopal, ac-
cording to the veritable Opinion of Irenatus. Con-
sequently the learned Professor of Hebrew must seek
a little further for a better authority with which to
invalidate the integrity of the Number x&g' as written
IRENAEUS VINDICATED. 175
by St. John, and confirmed by Irenæus. In truth he
must retrace his steps to seek for a better Champion
of Truth than a Demi-Papist ; for however Arch-
bishop Laud may be admired as a learned polemical
writer, the unsoundness of his opinion concerning
the number 666, is at variance with the acknow-
ledged Canon qf Scripture, as well as the Testimony
Qf Papists. See ** m Kawn Aia6n«m. Novum Jesu
Christi Domini nostri Testamentum. TexTUI GRaeco
conjuncta est versio Latina Vulgata, Summorum
Pontificum, SixTI V. et CLEMENTIS VIII. autoritate
edita et recognita. Tomus III. Lutetiæ Parisiorum,
Apud Nicholaum Buon. &c. 1628,” wherein the
Number 666 is written in Greek numerals by ** y£5',”
and the Latin Vulgate by ** Searcenti Sevaginta
Sea .” -
We may partly judge of the meek and Christian
Spirit in which Irenæus sought to find the Name qf
the Man, according to his given arithmetical Number
x£s', from the following words, “ Quoniam autem
non propter inopiam nominum habentium numerum
ejus dicimus hæc, sed propter TIMOREM ERGA DEUM,
et ZELUM vERITATIS : ETAN©Ax enim NoMEN habet
NUMERUM de quo quæritur : sed nihil de eo qffirma-
mus. Sed et LATEINos NoMEN habet Sexcentorum
Sexaginta Sex mumerum : et valde verisimile est,
quoniam novissimum Regnum hoc habet vocabulum.
Latini enim sunt qui nunc regnant: sed mon in
hoc nos gloriabimur.” It is presumed, therefore,
that Irenæus was perfectly correct with regard
to the Number X£s', 666, and in the idea that
176 CHAPTER XIV :
the proper and Appellative Name of the Beast
must be the Name of some particular MAN,
and also in his most wonderful conjecture, (which
was conceived centuries before the EVENT came to
pass) concerning the Proper or Appellative Name
Aardvos, which is the Name of a Man ; the ortho-
graphy of which, in reference to the Diphthong d
or ev, is INDISPUTABLE, it being of too classical a
nature to present a doubt to the mind of any Greek
scholar. [See Chapter XV. of this work.] It is
equally presumed, therefore, that as Irenaeus was
right in his conjectures, so Cardinal Bellarmine,
Grotius, Archbishop Laud, Dr. Adam Clarke, Rev.
George S. Faber, and Professor Lee, are palpably
wrong in their several hypotheses ; and this is little
enough to say of their versatility, for it is extremely
wonderful to observe Men eminent for very high
literary acquirement, and for Talents far surpassing
my own, not only differing from each other in the
widest degree when writing on the same given sub-
ject, but also palpably erroneous with regard to the
plainest points of orthography; and this wonder is
heightened in the case of Dr. Adam Clarke, who,
(as all England attests, was most highly gifted in the
knowledge of ancient manuscripts; and the manner
of deciphering them,) having written so much in
favour of Irenaeus, has nevertheless sought the Name
of the Beast in the Sentence, n Azrivn Baa Asia, (the
Latin Kingdom) instead of, in the Name Azretvos,
which latter is the well known historical Name of
the MAN, who was the founder of LATIUM, (from
THE TRIUMPH OF IRENAEU.S. 177
whence sprang the LATIN RACE,) and which is so
generally approved by Commentators, that I shall
give the Doctor's own opinion concerning it. “Many
Names,” says the Doctor, “ have been proposed,
from time to time, as applicable to the Beast, and at
the same time containing 666. We will only notice
ONE Example, that famous one of Irenaeus, which
has been approved of by almost all Commentators,
who have given any sort of tolerable earposition of
the Revelation. The word alluded to is Aotévvos.”
&c.
Surely it may in truth be affirmed, that all Com-
mentators and writers on this Number xãº", who
have preferred their own Chimeras to the irrefutable
Opinion of IRENAEUs, have most miserably mistaken
their subject; for it is by the individual LETTERS
which compose the Name of the Man, that his
Number 666 must be found to harmonize, and thus
alone can an end be put to all strife. At length, how-
ever, the Triumph of “well done good and faithful”
IRENAEUs shall be re-echoed through the Christian
world, to the confusion of the Pope and his spurious
LATIN Church.
There can be little doubt entertained that Professor
Lee, noticing the vast variety of speculations which
had been ventured on, relative to the Number 2.Ég' or
666, and knowing that they were utterly irreconcilable
, with the words of St. John, has chosen the shortest
method of settling the business, namely, by discard-
ing the Number altogether, even as Archbishop Laud
* Rev. xiii. 18.
N
178 CHAPTER XIV.
had done before him. However, it is most easy to
place the whole matter beyond the possibility of
future doubt or disputation, as will be seen by at-
tending to the following Ancient and Classical
Authorities in favour of the Diphthong, or Broad,
or circumfleaſed iota, as et, or d, or 7 in Aarévvos,
and by showing why the Name LATEINos (which is
the point in question) has been so often rejected, and
that is, because the Orthography of the Diphthong
was not generally acknowledged or understood, al-
though IRENAEUs, Dr. Henry More, Bishop Newton,
and many others, had led the way for its establish-
ment.
CHAPTER XV.
observations ON THE DIPHTHoNG, or THE BROAD,
OR CIRCUMFLEXED IOTA IN THE NAME Aarévvos,
Aarºvos, Aari vos, THAT is,
et, or d, or .
It has been already proved that the following
Epithets, Names, and Sentences, are wholly insuf-
ficient for establishing the NAME of a MAN, namely
Atros-arms, Maoperts, 7 Aaruyn Baaiketa, Ekkamata, Itaxika, &c.
and that neither Professor Lee, nor Archbishop Laud
are justified in their rejection of the Number xfs'. We
now proceed (in maintaining the Name Aarévvos,)
to the production of those authorities (hitherto too
much wanting) for the genuine use of the Diphthong,
or Broad, or circumflewed iota, eu, º, or ü, which
will lay a foundation for the full establishment of the
Orthography of IRENAEUs, which has been so un-
ceremoniously and unjustifiably assailed by the ipse
divit of Cardinal Bellarmine, Grotius, The Rev.
George Stanley Faber, Dr. Adam Clarke, and
N 2
180 CHAPTER XV :
others, the former of whom has displayed his Jesuit-
ical cunning for the preservation of his despotic
LATIN or Papal Church, as the three latter have
evinced their Ignorance of Antiquity, both with
respect to the prevalence of the Diphthong or et, and
to the circumstance of the circumfleaved iota, º, being
generally, if not always equivalent to a Diphthong.
It will only be necessary, therefore, to produce a
sufficient number of Classical and ancient examples
for the frequent use of the Diphthong, Broad, Long,
or Circumflexed Iota, and thus silence all further
doubts or disputes respecting the Name Aarévos, in
this point of view. The simple fact that Irenaus
has used two Names, pertaining to the elucidation of
the numbered Man, viz. Aztévvos and Teſray, in each
of which the e is expressed, (and not Aati vos and
Tºray without the e as written in modern times)
might be considered a sufficiently ancient authority
for the use of the Diphthong or Long et, in the Name
in question, as he lived in times when the said Diph-
thong was in common use, both among the Greeks,
and Romans, or Latins. But as this matter has
been heedlessly questioned by Cardinal Bellarmine,
Grotius, Rev. G. S. Faber, Dr. Adam Clarke, and
others, I would beg to call the attention of my
Readers to the following notable authorities, and if
they can be overthrown, I will then give up the
point, but not till then.
* ENNIUs is, perhaps, one of the most ancient
* Ennius, Lib. vi. 26. See Dr. Henry More's Works, p. 595, and Bishop
Newton's Dissert. II. p. 299.
QUoTATIONS FROM ENNIUS AND VARRO. 181
LATIN authors who has given us the name LATEINOS
with two diphthongs in it, and not only so, but he
has set forth five examples of the broad E1, (as in
common use among the Romans,) in one single line,
* Quam prEImum cascEI PopoleI tenuere Latein.E.I.'
Also in the seventh Book of his Annals, as quoted
by Dr. Henry More, we have the two following
examples ; the same Author assuring us that in
ENNIUs there are infinite ea'amples of a similar use
of the Diphthong, and in this opinion Dr. More is
followed by Bishop Newton,
* Quorum virtutEI bellEI fortuna pepercit,
* Horundem me leibertateI parcere certum est.’
also :
* Poine1 sunt soliter sos sacrificare puellos
* Dive1s: ’
to which I shall add another,
‘ Cive1s Roman EI tune factEI sunt Campanel.
‘Nos sumu' Roman EI, qui fuvimus ante RudineI.
‘ Omneſs mortalEIS sese laudari exoptant.
‘FortEIs Roman.EI, quanquam Coelus profundus.’
* M. TERENTIUS WARRo is another very ancient
writer, who has given us so many examples of the
broad E1, that from the Ivth to the Ixth Book in-
clusive, concerning the Latin Tongue, “De Linguá
Latind,” I have counted 1060 at least, a few of
which I shall here produce :-
* Quae ideo videtur à Latin EIS, Juno Lucina dicta,'
| M. Terentii Parronis Opera in Lib. de Ling. Lat, edit. Parisis, 1585,
182 CHAPTER Xv.
&c. p. 19. * Castoris nomen Græcum et Pollucis
à GræcEis in LatinEIs litterEIS veteribus nomen,'
&c. p. 20. * Sunt etiam animalia in aqua, quæ in
terdum in terram exeunt alia GraecE18 vocabulEIs,
ut Polypus, &c. alia LatinEIs, ut Rana,' &c. p. 21.
* Nisi à GræcEIs, quòd AthenEIs in librEIs sacrorum
scriptum est,' p. 25. Lepus, quòd è SiculEIs quidam
GræcEI dicunt,' p. 26. * Sic hic quòd erat post diem
quintum Eidus, Quinquartus.' * Megalesia dicta à
GræcEIs, quòd ex libris SybillinEIs,' &c. * In Tus-
culanEIs sacrEIs est,* p. 47. * Similiter, Latinæ
feriæ dies conceptivus dictus à Latineus populeis,
quibus ex Albano monte ex sacreIs carnem petere
fuit jus cum Romaneis : à quibus LatinEIs Latinæ
dictæ,' p. 49, also Atellam EIs, ArgivEIs, LybycEIs,
LucanEIs, PuteolEIs, TuscEIs, SabinEIs, AthenEIs,
SyracusEIs, QuiritEIS : also PalentEI, GræceI, Argei,
AristarchEi, dandEI, vocandEI, appellandEI, dicendEI,
jungendEI, adminiculandEI, nominandEI, augendEI,
lavandEI, nummEI ; also hEIs, quEIs, nonEIs, illeis,
suEIs, treis, iEIs, eEIs ipsEIs, hEIc, illEIc, hEisce, hEI,
&c. I shall conclude these examples of the Diphthong
out of VARRo, with one from * ScALIGER.
* Jovis Pater, si mihEI es autor, urbi popo'loque
Rom. Quiritium, hæc sane sartéque esse, uti tu nunc
mihEI bene sponsis, beneque volueris.'
* PLAUTUS in his Comedies makes frequent use of
the broad EI.
' Josephi Scaligeri conjectanea in Lib. quint. M. Terentii Varronis. de
Linguâ Latinà, p. 85, 86. l
3 1'lauti Comædiæ. Edit. Aldus, 1522.
QUOTATIONS FROM PLAUTUs, quintil 1AN, &c. 183
‘Is advenienteis servom, et dominum frustra
habet, p. 1.
* Vox mihi ad aurEIs advolavit,” p. 6.
* Illiscae praefeci Cephalum magni DEIonel filium.’
p. 17.
“Suspicabar, atq ; insonteis miseras cruciabam.’
p. 31.
Sese alternas cum illo nocteis hanc frui, nam in
impetro,” p. 32.
* AFquas habemus partEIs.’ p. 236.
* Ne dormienters quidem sinunt quiescere, p. 237.
Volgo adse omneſs,’ p. 284.
1 QUINTILIAN, testifies that Lucilius would have us
to write puerEI, mendace1, furEI, although now
accustomed to write it pueri, mendaci, furi.
*SCAPULA, who was a good Greek Grammarian
and Lexicographer, and whose authority is received
by the Learned, has remarked that the Letter I long
was written and pronounced among the ancient
Romans, as the diphthong d, that is to say st; and
had an s enclosed, as was constantly the case in the
time of CICERo.
‘I, t, i.
‘IOTA, Iota trissyllabam ab Hebræo Iod, t prod
usurpato, respondet i Latino.
* Cacilius hanc literam vocat pumilionem, quðd
* QUINTIL. Institut. Orator. De Orthographia. Lib. i. cap. 7. Edit. Parisiis,
1543.
* ScAPULA in Append. ad Lexicon: de Veteri et Recta Graeca. Linguæ
pronuntiatione.
184 CHAPTER XV :
omnium et figura et sono tenuissima sit et minima:
et si quidem zováypauwos. PLATO indicat accommodam
esse ad exprimendas res subtiles et penetrabiles, quod
declarant, ut ait, itvat, ligba, ac similia. Itaque planè
aliter sunt proferenda nv et ov u, quam u: ne inter
legendum incidamus in lavaktopcov et woAviora, quae
orationem faciunt exilem, enervem, pipientem et
confusam. Neque enim xpsºs sonandum ut xpns 8s:
neque kadv ut kvdv, wnkpvv longum, ut pakpov parvum.'
* HUBERT GoLTzIUs in his “ Thesaurus rei Anti-
quariae' has given us 227 instances of Greek inscrip-
tions of the Medals of Roman Emperors and
Empresses, most of which are written with the
diphthong d or et, and with the ancient sigma C
instead of 2, as Agrippina, ATPIIIIIeINA ... Sabina,
CABeINA .... Plotina, IIAQTIeINA .... Antoninus,
ANTON€INoc .... Faustina, d'ArcTeINA .... Crispina.
KPICII€INA .. Niger, NeITPoc .. Septimus, CETITeIMIoc
... Albinus, AABeINoc ... Macrinus, MAKPeINoc ...
Maximinus, MAEIMeINoc ... Balbinus, BAABeINoc ...
Sabina Tranquillina, CABeINA TPANKTAAeINA ....
Marinus, MAPeINox ... Salonina, CAAoNeINA ... Sa-
turninus, CATTPNeINoC ... Carinus, KAPeINoc ...
Constantinus, KoNCTANT€INOC .... AAEEANAPeoN
MHTPOIIOA€1ToN ... AM pIIIoAeIToN ... Ariminum,
APIMeINEON. And at page 284, he remarks that et
is put for 1, as “ E1 pro I, ut EIdus pro Idus ... “ LEI-
bertas pro Libertas ... SeruEIlius pro Seruilius, et in
multis aliis.'
' Huberti Goltzii Thesaurus rei Antiquariae, edit. Antverpiae, l 644.
quotATIONS FROM GoLTzius, MoTRAYE, &c. 185
The SIEUR A. DE LA MoTRAYE, in his Voyages
to the Chersonesus and Adrianople, has exhibited
several examples of the ancient use of the broad et, in
the MEDALs of the Emperor ANToNINUs and of his
wife FAUSTINA, which are thus written, ANTONEINOC
and eEIA （ArcteinA. See Voyages D. & D. L.
Motraye—Chersonese, Tome I. Chapitre XX. pag.
425. Figure No. xxviii. Médailles 19 et 26.-Idem,
Tome II. Chapitre V. pag. 157, Figure No. VII.
Médailles 2, 3, 18, et 19.
* Joseph DE L'EscALE, or ScALIGER, whom
RAYMond calls (not without cause) the worthy Son
of the great Julius, the Eye of Europe, and the
marvel of LETTERs, tells us that the Greeks write
their Letter iota in the diphthong et, when they pro-
duce it before an N, as Avroveſvos, Xačeſvos, Azreivos, in
Irenatus. That which custom therefore has esta-
blished, not only is it no fault (says he) to write it
so ; but it would appear necessary to make it so.
St. JERoME. It is obvious from this Christian
Father that the custom of writing the diphthong or
broad et for t, was not only adopted before the N,
but also before other Letters, as when Irenaeus wrote
Tèvrov for Tirav, when the ancients wrote Meſºas
Meithras for Mºpa; Mithras, which is the Name of
the SUN among the PERSIANS: upon which also
* Voyage D'a. D. L. MoTRAYE: Chersonese et Adrianople.
* REMOND. Chap. 39. de l’Antichrist. ScALIGER, animad. ad Chron.
EUSEB. p. 106.
186 CHAPTER XV :
depends the understanding of that passage of ST.
JEROME, which mentions that Basilidès calls | GoD .
by this prodigious Name ačpačac, and he says, that,
according to the GREEK LETTERs, and the number
of courses of the year which were contained in the
Cycle of the Sun, and which the Pagans under the
same number of other Letters, call peºpa; and not
ºv0px; as we read in the common examples. For
peºpa; and 28pača, render the one and the other by
their individual Letters 365, which is the Number of
Days in the Year, as will be seen below: whereas
ºv0.92; will produce by its individual Letters the much
greater Number 750.
a' = ... 1 Pºſ = . 40
É' = ... 2 e' = .. 5
p' = 100 1' = . 10
a' = ... 1 6' = . . 9
# = . 60 p' = 100
a' = ... 1 a' = ... 1
.." = 200 .." 200
365 365
*Edward WRIGHT, Esq. in his ‘Travels through
France, Italy, and Florence, &c. in the years 1720,
1721, and 1722, has made the following “observa-
tions,’ which may throw some light on the foregoing
words of St. Jerome, in reference to 28pača, and
peºpas.
* HIERoNY. Cap. 3. Comment in AMos, c. 3.
* WRIGHT's Hist. of Florence, &c. Vol. ii. p. 415. London, 1730.
-->
AUTHORITIES FROM TALISMANS. 187
“I saw several Talismans,” (says Mr. Wright) “and
the other magical Stones called Abraa'as, with various
Inscriptions, some in GREEK Letters, but the words
CHALDEE ; at least so Signor Bianchi told us: I
pretend not to understand that Language; but of
Greek signification I am sure they were not.’ -
“The Magical Stones called Abravas are engraved
Stones, used by the AEGYPTIANs and PERSIANs to
represent the Chief Deity who made the Heavens,
which they reckon three hundred and sixty-five in
number, answerable to the Days in the Year; and
in the several Greek numeral Letters of that Name
added together, that Number is found, as will be seen
by what immediately follows.’
-
º
i
:
:
‘The same was also signified by Mithras, writing
it with an [E] before the [1], MEIePAX, as here
under:—
188 CHAPTER XV :
. 4 0
. 5
. 1 0
. . 9
1 0 O
... 1
2 0 ()
:
:
3 6 5
* Talismans are often, if not for the most part, in
metal: both these were supposed to have great
efficacy in charming away Diseases, putting to flight
evil Spirits, prolonging Life, and doing abundance
of other Feats. The Gnostics, particularly those
of the school of Basilidès, being much addicted to
Magick, did believe there was a great Virtue in this
sort of thing.’
ScALIGER says that the Ancients ordinarily write
xixia by xixia, (which signifies a thousand,) in his
remarks on a passage of St. Jerome, who, allego-
rizing on the seven thousand men who had not bowed
the knee before Baal, by which, says he, is to be
understood the Christians, adds moreover, that be-
cause we have said that the number of seven thou-
sand relates to the name of Christians we compute
in Greek words, érrakia Xàixtov; (not by x·xious) xpigliavovº,
and you will find in the two words a corresponding
number and sum, that is to say one thousand mine
* HIERoNY. Comment in Zachariah, c. viii.
SCALIGER's REFERENCE To ST. J.EROME. 189
hundred and forty-one, (not forty-sia, as we com-
monly read it). For irrakiazäxtovº, which signifies
seven thousand, and the word xpializvov; render this
number of 1941, even as we can see here, which
reference though somewhat forced and out of the
intention of the Text, nevertheless proves the legiti-
mate use of the Diphthong et, ei, instead of the I
long.
E’ = .. 5
Tr' . 80
* = 300
a' = ... 1
K' = .20 x = 600
s' = . 10 p' = 100
a' = 200 * = . 10
x' = 600 a' = 200
e' = .. 5 r' = 300
s' = . 10 * = . 10
A = .30 a' = T
* = . 10 * = .50
* = .70 o' = .70
v' = 400 W = 400
3 = 200 s' = 200
1941 1941
The SIBYLLINE ORACLES afford us an Example
of the Name of CHRIST (xpiro) being written with
the Diphthong E1, in the following manner,
190 CHAPTER XV :
IHzotz xPEixtox eBor xothp xTATPox.
Jesus CHRIST of God SAviour CRoss
in an "Acrostic which is among the Oracles attri-
buted to the Sibylls.
* EUSEBIUs, a Christian and Greek Father of the
fourth Century when writing the NAME of IRENAEUs
in Greek Letters, begins it with the Diphthong et,
EI, as Eſpywatos. *
*IRENAEUs. From the previously cited examples
for the ancient and general use of the Diphthong,
both among the Greeks and Romans, as well as
from many other ancient authors whose names might
easily be added to this catalogue, IRENAEUs is clearly
acquitted of all grammatical incorrectness concerning
the orthography of the Names Aarévos and Tévrav,
as he wrote them agreeably to the general custom
of the Age in which he lived, and therefore ‘Litera
scripta manet.’
Had the Rev. George Stanley Faber, Dr. Adam
Clarke, Cardinal Bellarmine, Grotius, and others,
only been content with the well-known classical or-
thography of the Diphthong, Broad, Long, or
Circumflewed, et, or º, for the ancient use of which,
both by the Greeks and Romans, there is such
abundant evidence, as has been already adduced,
then a different Result must have ensued, and I had
* SibyllinA ORAcula. Imprimez à Paris, l’An. 1599.
* EUSEB. Eccles. Hist. Lib. iii. cap. viii. p. 109. Edit. Cantab. 1720.
* IRENAE. Lib. V. cap. xxx. p. 449. Edit. Grabe. Oxoniae, 1702.
ORTHOGRAPHY OF IRENAEUS CONFIRMED. 191
been spared the pain and trouble of so much animad-
version on their fruitless exertions. But when I
beheld the Truth of God's Word neutralized, in
reference to the Number 2.Ég', or 666, by their pro-
duction of Words, Sentences, and Epithets, in lieu
of the Name of a MAN, and falsified by the opinion
of Professor Lee, aided by a Quotation from Arch-
bishop Laud, the orthography and testimony of
IRENAEUs impeached and rejected by the crafty-pole-
mical discussions of Cardinal Bellarmine, Grotius,
and Archbishop Laud, I could no longer refrain
from endeavouring to evonerate both St. John and
the Christian Father Irenaºus from such Papistical
indignity; and in doing so, it appeared to me to be
of the greatest importance to RETAIN and ESTABLISH
both the orthography and TESTIMONY of IRENAEUs
in reference to the DIPHTHoNG d or et, as well as
the Name Aarévvos, which is in every respect appro-
priate, inasmuch as it is the NAME of a MAN ;
contains the ‘NUMBER of HIS NAME’ which is
“666,” and is in every other point of view answer-
able to the LATIN Church of Rome, and to HER
oNLY ; for SHE on LY has locked up the Word of
God for centuries past in the LATIN LANGUAGE,
without any better Sanction than that of her LATIN
Papal MAN (called the Pope,) and his Colleagues
(the College of LATIN Cardinals) in their Inquisi-
torial Councils.
From the twofold use of the Diphthong by Irenaºus
in the Name Aarévvos and Tétraw, and the general
use of the CIRCUMFLEx AccENT over the iota, as
192 CHAPTER XV.
[*] in the Name A&ti vos which may be seen, not
only in the Greek Levicons and Latin Dictionaries,
but likewise in Greek Authors, corroborated by the
classical Authorities (both Greek and Latin), which
have now been produced in favour of the ancient use
of the DIPHTHONG et or 4, for circumflewed, it
must be allowed (if ANTIQUITY be any Sanction)
that there is a DECIDED BALANCE in favour of the
retention of the ancient Orthography of Irenaus,
notwithstanding the contrary Opinions of all his
Opponents. And here I must repeat that a cIRCUM-
FLEX AccENT is generally, if not always, EQUIVA-
LENT to a DIPHTHONG, as t, d, or ú, to wit Aarévvos,
Aardvos, Aari vos. On these legitimate grounds, .
therefore, I have ventured to differ from Mr. Faber,
Dr. Clarke, Bellarmine, Grotius, and others, on
the subject of the Number x:g', or 666; not indeed
for the sake of singularity, or the vanity of Author-
ship, but because I wish to see a better conclusion
drawn from the genuine Premises laid down by St.
John ; for to make an assertion is one thing, and to
prove a matter is another. Having therefore shown
that the ANCIENT ORTHOGRAPHY of IRENAEUs in his
use of the DIPHTHONG was perfectly legitimate in
both the Names Tévr&v and Azrévvos, I shall pro-
ceed by other arguments to prove that the latter
NAME is the only appropriate solution of the
Apostolical enigma.
CHAPTER XVI.
of THE AUTHENTICITY AND PROPRIETY of THE
NAME Aarévvos, AS APPLIED TO THE MAN, WHOSE
NUMBER Is Yés", “666.”
AATEINOX.
As the Orthography of Irenaeus, in his twofold use of
the Diphthong E1, or ei has been proved to be Clas-
sically and Grammatically correct, according to its
ancient use, both among the Greeks and Romans, so
likewise the Name Aztévvos, though only conjec-
TURED by him in the Second CENTURY, is, in the
NINETEENTH, demonstrated by the concurrent Testi-
mony of History's every page, to be the true Appel-
lative of the Numbered Beast ; for the Apostle John
has not only furnished us with the precise NUMBER
of the Beast's NAME, which is declared to be “Siw
Hundred Threescore and Siw : ” but also with the
NUMBER and LoCALITY of his KINGDom in these
* Rev. xiii. 18.
O
194 CHAPTER XVI :
words:— “Here is the Mind which hath Wisdom.
The Seven Heads are Seven MoUNTAINs, on
which the woman siTTETH.” Now the locality of
of the ‘Seven MoUNTAINs is answerable to RomE,
because that renowned City was very anciently deno-
minated in the page of History,” “ The City of the
Seven Hills,” or Mountains, which environed it,
which description cannot be said to apply signally to
the Locality of ANY OTHER CITY of Renown in the
World, and certainly Papal Rome is a most marvel-
lous Antitype of Ancient Babylon, which is cer-
tainly referred to in this xviith Chapter of the Revela-
tions, under the Title of “MYSTERY, BABYLoN THE
GREAT.” This we conclude from the description
given of this meretricious Beast by St. John, and from
the declaration of the Apostle in the same Chapter con-
cerning that “ GREAT CITY,” which can be none other
than Rome, Mystical, because the literal “BABYLoN
THE GREAT’’ was destroyed many Ages before St.
* Rev. xvii. 9. -
* “Hanc Remus et Frater; sic fortis Etruria crevit;
Scilicet et rerum facta est pulcherrima Roma,
Septemq; una sibi muro circumdedit Arces.”
Virgilii Georg. Lib. II. v. 6, 7, 8, a fine.
‘Sed, quae de Septem totum circumspicit orbem
Montibus, Imperii Roma Déum que locus.’
Ovid. Trist. Lib. I. El. V. v. 69, 70.
Argentoratium 1778.
“Dumque suis victrix septem de Montibus orbem
Prospiciet domitum Martia Roma, legar.”
Ibid. Lib. III. El. VII. v. 51, 52.
* Septem Urbs alta jugis, toti quae praesidet orbi,
Faeminias timuit territa Marte minas.”
Propertius, Lib. III, El. XI. v. 57, 58.
Lipsiae. 1777.
THE RISE OF THE MAN OF SIN. l 95
John wrote his Revelation, and because ancient
Babylon was neither seated on, nor surrounded by,
nor celebrated for its “SEven HILLs,” or Moum-
tains, but on a plain. And as long as Imperial Rome
continued to be the Mistress of the world, the
Papacy could have no political nor spiritual Power
to “Come up out of the EARTH,” that is, the
Roman or LATIN EARTH, nor to establish a Tem-
poral Kingdom there; but when the SEAT of the
Imperial Dignity was removed from Rome to Con-
STANTINoPLE, the ancient Seat of the Empire became
Vacant. Thus with the Change of Cities, and sub-
sequent overthrow of the Roman or Latin Kingdom
by Barbarians, the * * Aroazzaſz spoken of by St.
Paul, took place soon after by the increasing secular
Power of the Bishop of Rome; and then the Second,
or Ecclesiastical Roman Beast (concerning whom it
was predicted that he would” & ré gavrot kaupg, “ in his
time,” “eatercise ALL the Power of the FIRST
BEAST,”) began to “Rise up” from among the
“SEVEN MoUNTAINS ’’ or HILLs, in the vacant
Seat of old Rome, in the reign of Justinian, A. D.
533. There has the Papal Ecclesiastical PontiFEx
MAXIMUs,' or Latin Man, “the Man of Sin,”
“ the Son of Perdition,” been seated ever since in
the professed.* “Temple of God,” dedicated to St.
Peter, at Rome. Thus the remarkable Prophecies,
both of St. Paul and St. John, have had their clearest
and most literal fulfilment in those unexampled coin-
* Rev. xiii. 1 1. * 2 Thess. ii. 3.
* 2 Thess. ii. 6 compared with Rev. xiii. 12. * 2 Thess. ii. 4.
() 2
196 - CHAPTER XVI :
cidences of successive Events, which are the surest
Interpreters of Prophecy, and comprise ALL that is
requisite to demonstrate the Truth of that which was
predicted concerning the Numbered Beast. Of this
there can be no possible doubt existing in the Present
Age, that is, with respect to his Mark, Name,
Number, Identity, Locality, Babylonish Attire,
with all other characteristics of his Mysterious Rise,
Progress, Establishment, and final Destruction, as
set forth by St. John and St. Paul; add to this, that
St. John has given us the exact period of the Reign
of the Second Beast, or Antichrist, viz. “A Thou-
sand two hundred and Threescore Days,” or
“A Time, and Times, and Half a Time.” So
that the NAME, SEAT of temporal and spiritual
GOVERNMENT, and REIGN of the LATIN or
Roman or EccLESIASTICAL BEAST are ALL NUM-
BERED : that is to say, the NUMBER xàs' or 666, for
his enigmatical, proper, and Appellative NAME, which
is LATEINos. The “seveN MoUNTAINs,” for the
SEAT of his KING|Dom, which is Rome, the Antitype
of Ancient Babylon, that.” “GREAT CITY which
(Now) REIGNETH over the KINGs of the EARTH.”
And the “ 1260 DAYS ’’ of YEARS, for the allotted
Period of his Reign, which have been hitherto ful-
filled by the long duration of the Papal or Latin
Hierarchy of Rome, according to Prediction.
If LAMY the Papist, in his “ Apparatus Biblicus,’
had cause to say in the seventeenth Century, “In
* Rev. xii. 6, 14. * Rev. xvii. 18.
Rome THE soverEIGN PONTIFICAL EMPIRE. 197
Italia Roma condita, olim cAPUT totius MUNDI
NUNc RELIGIONIs.” “In Italy Rome is built, once
the HEAD of the whole World, Now of Religion : ’
how much more may we bring down the conjectural
words of IRENAEUs from the second to the Nine-
teenth Century, and say with him, ‘LATEINos NoMEN
habet sea centorum seraginta sea numerum ; et valde
verisimile est, quoniam Novissimum REGNUM hoc
habet vocabulum. LATINI enim sunt qui NUNc REG
NANT." The Name LATEINos has the Number
666: and it is very much like, since ‘the LAST
KINGDom has this Number. For they are LATINs
who Now REIGN.”
As the old Roman or Latin Pagan Empire has
been succeeded by the present Roman or LATIN
Papal Hierarchy, which latter has been acknow-
ledged by all the crowned Heads of Europe for cen-
turies past as the Sovereign Pontifical Empire, the
HEAD of which has revived and adopted the original
Language of Old Rome, viz. LATIN, and vaunteth
himself to be (in the words of Lamy the Papist) the
* HEAD of ALL Religion in the world; therefore, his
Papal Kingdom may, in the words of Irena us, be
justly styled, “Novissimum Regnum,” the last King-
dom; for the same Reason which Irenaeus advanced
in favour of the name Aarévvos by applying it to
Pagan Rome, in the 2nd Century, is most abun-
dantly true at this moment, with reference to Papal
Rome, viz. that ‘ they are LATINs who Now Reign.’
“All true Papists acknowledge the Power of the
Pope to be supreme, and the Result of his Councils
198 CHAPTER XVI :
(called acumenical) to be decisive in all things,
whether pertaining to the affairs of the See of Rome
generally, or to the deposition of Kings; and that,
the LATIN is the vernacular Language of the Holy
Roman Church throughout the world, and those who
will not acknowledge the Pope's power, are anathema.”
“The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church,
Mother and Mistress of all other Churches without
which there is no salvation :” is on E of the ARTICLES
of the Roman CREED.
It is here well worthy of remark that the Apostle
Paul in speaking of the “Man of Sin,” “The Son
of Perdition,” says that he ” “sitTETH" (Kastaal)
“ in the Temple of God; ” a Posture by which the
Pope is peculiarly known to the people of RomE, both
in St. PETER’s CHURCH, and when he is carried in
State. Also St. John in his Interpretation of the
* Seven Heads and Ten Horns,' uses the same ex-
pression as St. Paul, “Here is the Mind which hath
wisdom. The Seven Heads, are Seven Mountains on
which the Woman” sitTETH ;” (kᚺra) and, therefore,
St. John represents the Beast as saying,” Káðnual
Bagtaiga'a “I SIT A QUEEN.” And in common par-
lance the people of Rome are wont to say after the
death of their Pope, and till the election of the new
one; ‘SEDE Vacante : * * The vacant SEAT ; ' that
is, both of the Spiritual and secular power: and
when the Pope is carried in State from the Vatican
Palace to St. Peter's Church, and back again, the
* See “Bishop Moreton's Church of Rome,' London 1628.
* 2 Thess. ii. 4. 3 Rev. xvii. 9. * Rev. xviii, 7.
TESTIMONY OF THE SR. A. DE LA MOTRAYE. 199
vehicle on which HE SITs, and is borne on the
shoulders of men, is called' ‘SEDIA Gestatoria,’
* The Carried SEAT : ' and this subject will receive
further confirmation and illustration from the words
of the Sieur A. De La Motraye, who says,
* “ La premiere fois que je vis le Pape en public,
ce fut dans la Grande et Magnifique Eglise de St.
Pierre, le 28 de Juin, veille de la Fête de ce Saint. Ce
Pontife y Étoit déja quand j'y arrivai, et assis-
toit aux premieres Vépres, Assis sw un TRöNE,
avec une riche MITRE sur sa Tête, la Falda,
(espece de jupe à longue queué, qui s' attache
à la ceinture,) attachée à sa Ceinture, revètu
de la Chappe Pontificale, faite d'une belle étoffe
Rouge, dout on use aux Fétes des Martirs.
Cette chappe étoit relevée d'une riche broderie, et
attachée par une espece de crochet, ou de bouche
d’or appelléepectoral, qui étoit enrichie de pierreries,
estimečs plus de 50 Mille écus.’ ‘The first time I
saw the Pope in public was in the GREAT and
MAGNIFICENT CHURCH of St. Peter the 28th of
June, the Eve of the Fête of this Saint. This Pontiff
was already there when I arrived, and was seATED on
a THRONE, assisting at the first Vespers, with a Rich
Mitre on his Head, and the Falda (a sort of Pet-
ticoat with a long train) attached to his Girdle. He
wore the Pontifical Cope made of fine Red stuff,
which is used at the Fête of Martyrs. This Garment
was turned up with a rich embroidery, and fastened
| Edward Wright’s Travels through Italy, &c. Vol. i. p. 191. London 1730.
* Sieur A. De La Motraye, Tom. i. Chap. ii. page 21, 22. A La Haye 1696.
200 CHAPTER XVI :
by a kind of hook or buckle of Gold, called pec-
toral, which was enriched with precious stones,
estimated at more than fifty thousand crowns.”
The Sieur A. De la Motraye, in one of the
fourteen particulars which he mentions relative to the
Pontifical Procession, tells us in the tenth, of the
SEAT, and manner of the Pope being carried on the
Day of his CoRoNATION.
* X. LE SouverAIN PontiFE, avec la méme Thiare,
et les mémes habillemens qu'il avoit la veille. Iletoit
sur un Riche et Magnifique SIEGE, porté par huit
hommes en longues robbes Rouge,” &c. ‘X. The
Sovereign PontiFF, with the same TIARA, and the
same habiliments which he wore on the Eve of St.
Peter. He sat upon a RICH and MAGNIFICENT SEAT
carried by eight Men in long RED Robes,’ &c.
The same Author (Motraye) remarks that the SEAT,
and prodigious stretch of SPIRITUAL Power of the
Rom AN PontiFF was such, that it was commonly
said of Rome in his day, that it had gained by RE-
LIGION, that which it could not formerly conquer by
Arms, as we may see by the verse following. The
original words are from Prosper, Lib. de ingratis,
Cap. 2.
" * SEDES Roma PETRI, quae pastoralis honoris
Facta CAPUT mundo, quicquid non possidet Armis
RELIGI one TENET.’
* Rome the See or SEAT of Peter, which is made to
the world the HEAD of Pastoral Honour, whatever
it does not possess by ARMs, it holds by RELIGION.”
* Voyages du Sr. Motraye, Tom. I. chap. i. page 4.
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 201
The same writer informs us, that the Pontiff ranks
himself with Emperors as a Temporal Prince; but
he places himself ABove them by the Quality of a
Spiritual Prince, and this fact is practically acknow-
ledged in words and DEEDs—in worDS by Pope
** Leo THE GREAT.’ -
* Persacram D. Petri SEDEM, Caput orbis effecta,
(Roma) latius praesides religione diviná, quamvis
enim multis aucta victoriis, Jus Imperii tui, terra
marique protuleris, minus tamen est, quod tui belli-
cus labor subdidit, quam quod pax Christiana sub-
jecit.” That is, ‘By the holy See or SEAT of St.
Peter (0 Rome), thou being made the Head of the
World, commandest further by divine Religion, than
by earthly domination : for albeit, being augmented
by many victories, thou hast extended the power of
the Empire both by sea and land, yet that is less,
which the labour of war hath subdued to thee, than
that which Christian Peace hath brought under
subjection.’ -
In DEEDs, when they have literally kicked the
crown from the heads of *EMPERORs, and caused
KINGs to stand barefoot at their gates, as in the
cases of the Emperor HENRY the VIth, whose crown
Pope CELESTINE, with his foot, spurned from off
his head, to show, that it was in his power to take the
Empire from him, and to pull off his crown; and of
's Leo Magnus, Serm. I. De Natali Apostolorum. See Durham on the
Revelations, chap. xiii. page 562. Amsterdam, 1660.
* See “ The Buckler of the Faith,” by Peter du Moulin, from page 522 to
544; and ‘Bishop Jewell's Apology for the Church of England,” by Isaacson,
page 270 to 276. 1829.
202 CHA PTER XVI:
Henry the IVth of France: King John of England:
Henry the IInd, and Prince Henry the VIIIth :
so that there is a complete coincidence between the
words of St. Paul and St. John, in reference to the
locality of the “ GREAT city " and “ Temple of
God,” in which this LATIN Papal MAN sitTETH,
and to the unqualified power which he exerciseth,
being no less than “ALL the Power of the FIRST
BEAST.” Moreover, The pretended chAIR of St.
Peter, in which the Sovereign Pontiff sIts enthroned
on the HIGH ALTAR in ST. PETER’s BASILIQUE,
when he is crowned, as well as when he receives
adoration from Emperors, Kings, and their Emi-
mences the Cardinals, &c. is so well known to all
Europe as scarcely to need a remark. The French
would say of the City and SEAT of the Pope's juris.
diction or dignity, ‘ Le Saint SIEGE,” “Le SIEGE de
Rome.’ The Holy SEE or SEAT of Rome.’ And St.
John crowns the whole by saying that “THE DRAGON
gave him his Power, and his SEAT, and Great
AUTHoRITY.”
It is an astonishing Fact, and scriptural coincidence,
that the most magnificent of all the Triple Crowns,
or Papal Tiaras, is one which was made by order of
Pope JULIUS the IInd, and that Pope GREGoRy the
XIIIth, removed the simple cross which was formerly
upon the top of it, and replaced it by a most brilliant
EMERALD, supported by two gold DRAGONS, causing
his own Arms to be quartered therewith, and then
placed his own Name and Title upon it in Letters of
of Diamonds, after the following manner—
THE DRAGON TIARA . 203
GREGOR, XIII. PONT. OPT. MAX.
So that the Title of ‘ PontiFEx MAxIMUs.' * The
greatest Priest,’ was not a sufficient Title of distinc-
tion for Pope Gregory the XIII. but ‘OPTIMUs,'
“THE BEST,” must be added, and then, as if the Papal
Tiara were hitherto incomplete, two gold DRAGONS
were placed on it, to give grandeur to the Diadem.
In a word, when Pope Gregory the XIIIth had re-
moved the simple CRoss, and voluntarily placed two
gold DRAGONS upon the top of his Tiara, and at the
bottom placed his own Name and Title in Letters of
Diamonds, and quartered them with his Coat of
Arms, THEN he designated himself by the Title of
‘ PontiFEx OPTIMUs MAXIMUs,’ ‘THE GREATEST
AND BEST PRIEST.’ Is not this an Heraldic and
Hereditary, (I might say scriptural) acknowledgment
of the SEAT of the DRAGon ? of whom it is written
that “The DRAGON gave him his Power, and his
SEAT,” (viz. Rome,) “ and great Authority.” A
very large and splendid engraving of this TIARA may
be seen in the Voyages of the Sieur A. De La
Motraye, Vol. I. chap. ii. page 32. plate IV. than
which no Kingly Crown can be more magnificent, if
we may be allowed to judge from appearances. The
following is the Court account of it as set forth by the
Sieur Motraye, page 30.
‘La plus prétieuse des THIAREs fait par l'ordre de
JULES II, Genois de Nation, l'an 7me de son Ponti-
ficat, et representée à la Planche IV, dont le fond est
tout couvert de belles perles. Les cercles sont d'or
204 CHAPTER XV I :
battu : sur celui du bas sont le Nom, la Dignité, et
la Patrie de ce Pape en Lettres de Diamans, en ces
termeS :-
« IVLIVS LIGVR II. PONTIFEX
MAXIMUS ANNO SEPTIMO PONTIFICATVS.
* Les autres sont admirablement bien émaillées et
garnies de quantité de diamans, de rubis, d'emerauds,
d'hyacintes, de saphirs et de topases, et toutes en un
ordre qui plaît beaucoup. Dans l'espace qui regne au
dessus du cercle d'en bas, sont trois escarboucles
admirable pour leur grandeur et leur éclat, avec un
gros saphir très parfait, et un autre de même gran-
deur. Sur la partie opposée, il y a aussi çà et là
diverses perles d'une grosseur extraordinaire, et de
très belle eau, qui sont disposées avec une admirable
simetrie, entre de gros diamans. Toutes les plus
grosses pierreries sont d'ailleurs attachées en pende-
loques, ce qui leur donne un jeu qui augmente beaucoup
leur éclat.
* Sur le haut de cette Thiare, où étoit auparavant
une simple cRoIx, regne une EMERAUDE d'une couleur
parfaitement nette et vive, supportée par deux DRA-
GoNs d'or, que Gregoire XIII. y fit mettre avec ses
Armes et son Nom autour, en cette maniere :-
* GREGOR. XIII. PONT. OPT. MAX.
If the Gold Dragons, the Enamel, the Diamonds,
the Rubies, the Emeralds, the Hyacinths, the Sap-
PAPAL RoME THE MYSTICAL BABYLON. 205
phires, the Topazes, the Carbuncles, the Pearls,
which adorn the Papal Tiara: if ‘the Pontifical
Cope, made of fine RED or SCARLET STUFF, and worn
by the Pope on the Eve of St. Peter, (the Titular
Saint of Rome) with a rich Embroidery, and fastened
by a kind of Hook or Buckle of Gold, called Pectoral,
enriched with Precious Stones estimated at more than
Jifty thousand crowns :" if the scarlet colour of his
Cardinals, as well as of the Eight Men in long RED
or ScARLET Robes, who bear the ‘Sedia Gestatoria,’
and the Palfrey whereon the Pope rides, covered with
scarlet cloth ; be not enough to illustrate to the very
Letter, the words of the Holy Spirit—“"I saw a woman
sIT upon a scarlet coloured Beast,” and “arrayed in
purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and
precious stones,”—in vain shall we search for the
fulfilment of the words of St. John.
As therefore St. John has veiled the NAME of the
Beast under an Enigma, but given us the Number
xt, ', or 666, to discover it; so has he given us the
Interpretation of the “Seven Heads,” which are
“Seven Mountains,” (or RomE) to find the locality
or SEAT of the KINGDoM of the Beast, from whence
his NAME might be discovered, leaving it to the
“wisdom * and “understanding ” of which he speaks
to apply the Mystical Title of “ BABYLoN the
GREAT’’ to some Ecclesiastical City, the PotentATE
of which would be “* Revealed in his time” at
Rome, applicable to the whole scope of his Prophecy.
* Rev. xvii. 3, 4, * 2 Thess. ii. 6.
206 CHAPTER XVI :
And such a MAN is the Pope of Rome, for no other
Ecclesiastical PotentATE, CITY, STATE, or KING-
Dom, hath HITHERTo arisen answerable to the
Prophecy. Therefore, as the Apostle Paul wrote to
the Thessalonians, that “the Mystery of Iniquity
did already work,” so also we may fairly conclude,
that, as Eighteen Centuries have since rolled away,
the “Mystery of Iniquity” has been fully “RE-
VEALED.” And it is equally evident from Roman
History, and the words of Tertullian, that the then
eristence of the Roman Imperial Power was the
preventing cause which “LET’’ or “WITH HELD"
the Rise of the “Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdi-
tion,” “the Mystery of Iniquity,” “the Wicked
One,” at RomE, even as TERTULLIAN, who lived in
the second century, rightly conjectured concerning
the hidden Mystery of ANTICHRIST, before the ful-
filment of the Event, in these extraordinary words—
** Jam enim arcanum Iniquitatis agitatur, tantum qui
nunc Tenet, Teneat; donec de medio fiat. QUIs,
NIsI Romanus STATUs? cuius ABscEssio in DE-
CEM REGEs dispersa ANTICHRISTUM superducet. Et
TUNc REVELABITUR INIQUUs, quem Dominus Deus
interficiet Spiritu Oris Sui, et evacuabit, apparentiá
Adventus sui.’ ‘Even now indeed the Mystery of
Iniquity is working; only He who now restrains,
will restrain until he be taken out of the midst.
What is this but the Rom AN STATE 2 the division
of which among TEN KINGs will introduce ANTI-
1 Thess. ii. 7.
* Tertullian De Resurrect. Carnis. page 397. edit. Ilutet.
PAPAL Rome THE MYSTICAL BABYLON. 207
cHRIST. And THEN the Wicked One will be revealed,
whom the Lord God will slay with the Spirit of his
Mouth, and destroy by the appearance of his coming.’
How literally then has the Event followed the Predic-
tion or Conjecture ? as truly as if Tertullian had been
an Eye-witness of the Destruction of the Ancient
Roman Imperial Power, its subsequent Division
into Ten Kingdoms, and the Papacy (the Anti-
christian Power,) rising supremely above the whole.
There is nothing clearer in all History than that the
destruction of the PAGAN IMPERIAL, made way for
the gradual Rise and Establishment of the PAPAL,
PoNTIFICAL, or ANTICHRISTIAN Power, which con-
tinues at RomE to this Day. And as St. Paul
speaks of “ the Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdi-
tion,” and “Mystery of Iniquity,” as an Eccle-
siastical Character, who “ siTTETH in the Temple
of God; ” which is most clearly fulfilled in the
PERson of the Papal ‘PontiFEx MAXIMUs’ who
sITTETH in the superb BASILIQUE of St. PETER’s at
RoME ; so the Angel said unto St. John : “I will
tell thee the Mystery of the Woman, seated upon a
scarlet-coloured Beast, having seven heads and ten
horns. The Seven Heads, are Seven Mountains on
which the Woman sitteth.” And the Angel then
says, “The Woman which thou sawest Is that
GREAT CITY, which [Now] reigneth over the KINGs
of the EARTH ; ” the appellative of whose forehead
is “ MYSTERY, BABYLON the GREAT ; ” that is, the
“ GREAT CITY” before mentioned, the ‘ PURPLE'
* Rev. xvii. 18.
208 CHAPTER XVI :
and ‘ScARLET Colour of which, are as literally
Now the Royal Insignia of PAPAL ROME, as they
were in her Imperial CAESAR's time. So then THE
MYSTERY of “INIQUITY” is discovered by indisputa-
ble Facts, shadowed forth by the Holy Scriptures,
and confirmed by History ; and that which was
ANTE Eventum with Irenaeus and Tertullian, is
Post Eventum with us. By the same Rule, the
MystERY of the * “ 1260 Days,” or, “a Time,
and Times, and Half a Time,” has been proved,
by the lengthened Reign of the Papal ANTICHRISTs
in succession, Not to be LITERAL DAYS, as was
supposed ANTE Eventum, but prophetical Days, or
1260 years, as is evident, Post Eventum, and this
is precisely the view which IRENAEUs had of Pro-
phecy in general, and which he has given us in these
words,” “Omnis Prophetia, priusquam habeat effi-
caciam, AENIGMATA et AMBIGUITATES sunt homi-
nibus. Cum autem venerit Tempus, et evenerit
quod prophetatum est, tunc Prophetiae habent Liqui-
dam et certam Ewpositionem.” All Prophecy, before
it has its accomplishment, are RIDDLES and AM-
BIGUITIES unto Men : “But when the Time is come,
and that which was prophecied is come to pass, then
have the Prophecies a CLEAR and cERTAIN Exposi-
TION.’ And as the Character of ANTICHRIST could
not be exactly understood before he was revealed,
only as far as other prophecies had been known in
their fulfilment at the predicted time; so, to this
* Thess. ii. 7. * Rev. xii. 6, 14.
* IRENAE. Advers. Haeres. lib. iv. cap. XLIII. p. 342, 343. Edit. Grabe.
THE MAN OF SIN REVEALED. 209
purport Christ, in his instructions to his Disciples
on the Use of Prophecy, says, “And now I have
told you before it come to pass, that, when it is
come to pass, ye might believe.”
It is well known that until the end of the third
Century, and even later, there was no “falling
away” of the old Roman Empire, or of the primi-
tive Christian Church ; because during the existence
of the Pagan Imperial Sovereignty at Rome we
could scarcely expect the Rise, Progress, and Esta-
blishment of the Papal Power, and, accordingly, it
did not begin to Rise till after the Removal of the
Ancient Imperial Seat of Government from Rome
to Constantinople. This is doubtless what is implied
in the words of St. Paul,” “Now YE KNow what
witHHoldeth that He’’ (‘the Man of Sin,’ ‘the
Son of Perdition,’ ‘the Mystery of Iniquity,” “the
Wicked One,') “might be Revealed in His TIME; ”
for it was evidently the continuance of the Imperial
Power in the City of Rome, which “withheld’ the
Revelation of the “Man of Sin,” and, thereby,
embarassed the Judgment of Irendeus, and led him
to Conjecture rather than Determine the NAME;
because the Event, which is the fulfilment of Pro-
phecy, had not then come to pass, and because in his
Day there was no semblance of a LATIN or Roman
HIERARCH, or Sover EIGN PontiFF in the then
visible Christian Church at Rome, nor indeed till
long after his time. Nevertheless, how literal has
been the accomplishment of the extraordinary pro-
* John xiv. 29. * 2 Thess. ii. 6.
P
210 CHAPTER XVI:
phecy under consideration 1 for no sooner had the
“falling away ” of the Empire taken place, (called
by Gibbon “the Decline, and Fall”) than it was
presently followed by “a falling away” (à &rograzia)
in the Christian Church, and the City of Rome being
vacated by the Roman Emperor, made way for St.
John's second Beast, which he saw “ coming up out
of the EARTH ; and HE had two Horns like a LAMB,
and HE SPAKE as a DRAGON.” By the “EARTH "
is evidently meant the Roman EARTH, because ROME
was in St. John's time called “SEPTI-Collis,' or
‘the CITY of SEVEN-HILLs, and he says, “Here is
the Mind which hath wisdom. The Seven Heads
are Seven Mountains on which the Woman Sitteth.”
And the Beast which had “Two Horns like a LAMB”
evidently means some Ecclesiastical character; and
every one knows that the word EccLESIA (or
CHURCH) is a feminine Noun, and that a Woman
and a Lamb are Symbolical of a Christian Church
and Character: but inasmuch as the “Two Horns
like a Lamb” gave to the Beast the eaſternal sem-
blance of a LAMB ; yet because he had also the
“speech of a Dragon,” we know that he is not of
Christian but ANTICHRISTIAN Origin. Thus the
Pope of Rome, although he honoureth himself with
the humble and mock Title of ‘Servus Servorum
Dei.’ ‘ Servant of the Servants of God,' yet is he
much better known by his supreme Titles of ‘’Sanc-
tissimus Pater,’ ‘ Vicarius Salvatoris nostri Jesu
Christi in Terrá,’ ‘ Eminentissimus et Reverendissi-
* Rev. xiii. 1 1.
THE POPE THE SUccessor of THE FIRST BEAST. 21 1
mus Pater ac Dominus,’ ‘Pater Principum et Regum:
Rector Orbis,’ ‘ Pontifer Optimus Marimus,’ ‘Epis-
copus Orbis,' ‘Vice-Deo super Terram.” We know,
therefore, that inasmuch as the Pope exerciseth the
SUPREME Power in a TEMPORAL KINGDom ; and
that Christ said, “My Kingdom is not of this
world; ” and the Pope preacheth not the Gospel as
St. Peter did, (according to the Commandment of
Christ ;) but “sitTETH,” (as it is written of him)
“ in the Temple of God, shewing himself that HE Is
God,” by the divine ADoRATIon which he receiveth
and requireth from ALL who approach him; of which
the Pagan Roman Emperor CALIGULA's was but a
shadow; that we have thereby a full, “clear and certain
eaposition’ of all those marks which were predicted
concerning him and his Kingdom, for they have
literally “ come to pass”. in his Person and Office:
hence, he who runneth may now read, and say,
Behold I (in the Mysterious Character of the Pope
of Rome) “ the Man of Sin,” “The Son of Per-
dition,” “The Mystery of Iniquity,” The Wicked
One, The “Antichrist,” even the “MAN,” whose
Appellative Name is (from his universal Ecclesiastical
and Canonical use of the LATIN Language,) Aarévvos,
and HIs NUMBER x} or 666.” It is moreover
written concerning the Lamb-horned Beast, that,
“He exerciseth ALL the Power of the First” (Pagan
Imperial Roman) “Beast,” whose! “IMAGE” he
bears, and whose Successor he is in the CITY of
Rome, rather than of St. Peter the apostle of Christ,
* Rev. xiii. 14.
P 2
212 CHAPTER XVI :
who, most probably, never entered the precincts of
the Latin Capital. The Pope, I repeat, “ea:erciseth
ALL the Power of the FIRST BEAST" by his Latin
Papal Edicts, Anathemas, Bulls, from the Vatican :
Denunciation of all Emperors, Kings, and Princes
who will not render him their homage: by the Power
of the Temporal Sword: by the Eatirpation, Spolia-
tion, Confiscation of the Persons and Properties of
those whom he is pleased to denominate Heretics,
whom also he has punished with all possible Tortures
by means of ‘the Holy Inquisition ; ' by his mur-
derous Crusaders; by the Jesuits ; by the Spanish
Armada ; by the St. Bartholomew's Massacre, and
by a continued course of Espionage and Popish Plots.
Who then is so fit a Character as the Pope to receive
the combined Titles prophetically bestowed on the
‘Man of Sin,’ ‘the Son of Perdition,’ and the very
* Antichrist' to Perfection ?
As the Evidences which can be produced in favour
of retaining the NAME Aarévvos, are so many and so
great, it becomes our well-grounded alternative to
abide by them, because the proper understanding of
that Name of a MAN brands the whole LATIN Church
and Sovereign Pontifical Empire of Papal Rome;
and, therefore, to give up FIRST the Authenticity
of the NUMBER x};", or ‘666' of St. John, and
THEN the Orthography of IRENAEUs and his Testi-
mony, without a due consideration and Investigation
of the subject, opens the Flood-gates to our Enemies,
by throwing down ONE of the most stupendous Bul-
warks of defence against the influence of Popery
THE POPE ANTICHRIST. 213
which has been discovered since the Apostolic Age,
and which the good Providence of God has given us
by the Inspired Pen of St. John, and his faithful
servant Irenaeus, who has followed in the steps of the
Apostle. Thus, which way soever the CHURCH of
Rome may turn her brazen front, this LATIN
“MARK, NAME, and NUMBER, will cling to Her,
till, “like a Mill-stone, She is cast into the Sea,’ as
it is written of Her, “BABYLoN is fallen, is fallen,
that GREAT CITY: and shall be Found No MoRE
AT ALL.”
Dr. FULKE in his ANNOTATIONS on REv. xiii. 18,
has well answered the RHEIMISTS concerning the
Name of Antichrist; for the Doctor has supported
the Name Azteuvos, (as used by IRENAEUS,) in a
masterly manner, and he has shewn, that, in the
JUDGMENT of IRENAEUs, it was as proper to apply
the Name LATEINos to the Pope as to the Rom AN
EMPEROR, which may serve as a LESSON to those
Authors, who have invented FEIGNED NAMEs, which
are nothing to the Purpose of the MARK or NAME
of the MAN, but only productive of UNCERTAINTY;
which is no furtherance to the understanding of the
Number 666.
* ANTICHRIST’S NAME.”
** Rev. xiii. 18. THE NUMBER 666. It is true
that MANY NAMEs may be INVENTED, whose LETTERS
* Rev. xviii. 2, 10, 21. * FULKE 10.
214 CHAPTER XVI :
make THIS NUMBER, but the SPIRIT of GoD speaketh
not of FEIGNED NAMEs, nor biddeth men to FAINE
NAMEs that have THIS NUMBER in it, for THEREoF
can come nothing but UNCERTAINTIE. But he
willeth him to compt the Number of his Name,
which THEN the BEAST HAD : which NAME many
of the faithful BEFoRE IRENAEUs’ time JUDGED to be
Aaréevos : And IRENEUS, affirmeth that “it was
very like to be so indeed, because the most true
Kingdome hath that name. For they be Latines”
(saith he) “which now do Raigne, lib. 5.” By
which we note FIRST that HIs JUDGMENT was, that
ANTICHRIST should be No SINGULAR MAN, but an
ORDER and Succession of MEN. SEcon DLY, that
THE BEAST THEN REIGNED in the HEATHEN EM-
PERORS which AFTERw ARDS SHOULD REIGNE IN
ANTICHRIST. The Toy of LUTHER's Name is wor-
thy to be laughed at, seeing it is no hard matter to
drawe any Man's name almost to it: IF you may
CHANGE the LETTERs at your pleasure, and take
upon you to know a Man's Name better than him-
selfe. But you say it is most absurd folly to apply
the word Lateinos to the Pope. And why so I pray
you, is not HE a LATINE, as well as the Roman E
EMPERour 2 Your reason is, that neither the whole
orDER, nor any PARTICULAR Pope was so called.
For any particular Pope we strive not, but is not
the Pope HEAD of the LATINE CHURCH, as the
EMPEROUR was of the LATINE EMPIRE * There-
fore IF the EMPEROUR might be cALLED LATINOS,
(by IRENAEUs’ JUDGMENT) much more the Pope,
HIS APPELLATIVE NAME LATEINOS. 215.
who is so MUCH a LATIN, that HE will allow no.
exercise of Religion, BUT in LATINE. That HE con-
DEMNETH the GREEK CHURCH, because it will not
be subject to HIS LATINE LAw. Which hath
caused all private men to PRAY IN LATINE. Which
alloweth no TRANSLATION of the scripture as Au-
THENTICAL, BUT His LATINE, No Not the OR1-
GINALL of HEBRUE and GREEKE, which he blas-
phemeth to be coBRUPTED: and, therefore, MUST
GIVE PLACE TO HIs LATINE. Insomuch that THE
SETTER FORTH of the CoMPLUTENSE EDITION, in his
PREFACE to him, saith, “HE placed the LATINE
TExT BETween the HEBREw and the GREEK, as
CHRIST between Two thieves.” Finally, when it is
so notorious that HE is the HEAD of the LATINES,
that the ignorant people knowe no other proper
difference of His Religion, but that IT is LATINE.
That IRENAEUs applied THAT NAME to the STATE of
the HEATHEN EMPEROURs, IT was RIGHT, for THEN
the sixTH KING REIGNED ; and ANTICHRIST the
sEventh HEAD of the LATINE BEAST was Not
come, as HE is Now seen in the PAPACIE. That he
preferreth the Name TEITAN, it was because he
8AwÉ Not the FULFILLING of the PRoPHECIE in the
CoMING of ANTICHRIST, the accomplishment where-
of, he willed men to waite For, that they BE NOT
Deceived by the conjecTUREs of DIVERs NAMEs.
But Now that ANTICHRIST IS come and Disco-
VERED, we see PLAINELY that LATEINOS is HIS
NAME. Yea, we see that nºrmºn, the HEBREw NAME
of the BEAST signifying Roman E, hath the SAME
216 - CHAPTER XVI :
NUMBER: and it is NOT BY CHANGE that EccLESIA
ITALICA in the Account of the GREEKE LETTERs,
FULFILLETH the SAME NUMBER.’
It was the avowed opinion of Pope GREGORY, that
‘whosoever should style himself by the Title of
UNIVERSAL BISHoP, would be ANTICHRIST,” and
this is the self-adopted Title of the Pope of Rome,
viz. “EPIscoPUs ORBIs,’ ‘BISHOP of the World,”
and ‘ PontiFEx optiMUs MAXIMUs,’ ‘The BEST
and GREATEST HIGH PRIEST,’ &c.
Thus then have we discovered by Papal Testimony,
that,
The UNIVERSAL Bishop is ANTICHRIST ;
But the Pope of ROME is THE UNIVERSAL BISHOP :
Therefore the Pope of RomE is ANTICHRIST.
Thus have we caught this Lamb-horned Ecclesias-
tical Beast, ‘The UNIVERSAL BIshop,” with his
dragon-like speech, at Rome, where his Sovereign
Pontifical THRONE and SEAT of EMPIRE have been
fixed for “ 1260 DAYs of Years,’ commencing with
the Reign of Justinian, A. D. 533, and let him.
extricate himself from our grasp if he can ; but no ;
his NAME is Numbered, his TIME OF ContinuancE
is NUMBERED, and the PLACE OF HIs ABODE is
NUMBERED, and his Pseudo-Apostolic Reign is now
too short to deceive the Nations of the World any
longer as to who or what he is ; for the same
“ Kings” of the Pseudo-Apostolic Roman Earth,
who “ gave power” to this Sovereign Pontifical
Tyrant of Christendom, are to take it away from
him, as England, France, Germany, &c. have done
THE POPE THE LATIN CHURCH MAN. 217
already, and Spain, Portugal, and Italy, with the
Remaining Crowned Heads of Papal Europe will do:
for His Hour seems well nigh come.
We may then rest satisfied, from the consideration
of a succession of unparalleled Events which have
taken place on the platform of the old and new
Roman Earth, beginning with the Days of the
Apostles, that St. John in the xiiith Chapter of his
Revelation, (ver. 1 and 11,) has, under the character
of two Beasts, (the one Secular, the other Ecclesias-
tical and Secular,) figuratively described the two-fold
Empire of the most cruel Tyrants and Persecutors
of Christ's Spiritual Kingdom, sitting and ruling in
the same City, Rome ancient and modern; the first
Beast on the Pagan Imperial Throne: the second
on the Sovereign Pontifical Throne, the latter of
which has been well described as ‘ Imperium in
Imperio,” “An Empire within an Empire; ’ and
most commentators are agreed that the first of
these Beasts represents the Pagan Roman Empire
with its Emperors, as Nero, Domitian, &c.:
and the Second the Sovereign Ecclesiastical Em-
pire and its Popes, known and distinguished by the
Epithets of ‘The Papal States’ and ‘The States of
THE CHURCH :’ also “Sacra Romana Ecclesia,”
* The Holy Roman Church,” and “Sanctum Roma-
num Imperium,’ ‘The Holy Roman Empire:’ which
Holy Roman Church and Empire, we discover in
the very same City and Kingdom of Pagan Imperial
Rome, and continuing unto this Hour, of which
Church and Empire the Pope of Rome is the Sove-
218 . CHAPTER XVI :
reign Pontiff. And because the LATIN Language
has been approved by the Pope and his Councils as
the sacred Language of the whole Church of Rome,
and has been Canonized for her use, at the Council
of Trent, in lieu of the ITALIAN, which is the Ver-
macular Tongue of ITALY, or of the GREEK, which
is the Mother Tongue of the Primitive Church of
Christ and his Apostles ; consequently, as the Papacy
Latinizes in every thing of an Ecclesiastical nature;
viz. Mass, Prayers, Hymns, Liturgies, Canons,
Decretals, Bulls, Councils, Holy Scriptures, &c.
&c.; so is that Church, in the proper sense of the
word, a LATIN CHURCH, and by parity of Reasoning
the Pope, as the HEAD of that LATIN CHURCH, is a
LATIN Church MAN, answerably to his LATIN
Tongue. Irenaeus then was not far out of the
Track when he conjectured the Name of the Beast
to be Aarévvos. For the Reason which he assigned
for that Conjecture is, “LATINI sunt qui NUNC
regnant ; ” which statement was at that time perfectly
correct, because it is the Name of the first Pagan
Roman Beast to whom the Number belonged; but
is now appropriated to the Second Papal Roman
Beast, who is the veritable “IMAGE,” Representative,
and Successor of the first Beast ; inasmuch as it
may be said, in an Ecclesiastical sense, that “ They
are LATINs who Now Reign; ” for in the 19th
Century, the Church of Rome vaunts herself to be
the true Christian Church throughout the world,
and yet contrary to all precedent has adopted the
LATIN Vulgate to the eaclusion of the Vernacular
THE PAPISTs IMPROPRIATED LATINS. 219
Tongue of Italy, or the GREEK original. Behold,
then, the self-infatuation of the “Man of Sin,”
“ the Son of Perdition 1’’. Behold with Astonish-
ment the “Mystery of Iniquity /?” who can unravel
the Mystery of the “MAN ?” Why, his own LATIN
SPEECH, by self-adoption and infatuated appropria-
tion, “beurayeth HIM,” that HE is the MAN, even
the LATIN Bishop of Rome : He, The MAN, whose
descriptive “ MARK,” Appellative “NAME,” and
enigmatical “Number,” are all LATIN ; (to wit
LATEINos). Thus has he locked up the Holy Scrip-
TUREs in the LATIN (unknown, or unspoken) Tongue,
authorizing it to be the Living Vernacular Tongue
of his Latin, Papal, Roman Church and Kingdom.
Wherefore, we have an indisputable Right to desig-
nate him by that Proper and Appellative Name,
(Lateinos,) which he alloweth to be Ecclesiastically
and Canonically true, as his Council of Trent wit–
nesseth. Or why doth the Pope so scrupulously
adhere to the Latin dead Language, seeing that it
has not been spoken in all Europe for Centuries past?
And here I would by the way remark that the sense
in which, during the times of Ancient Rome its
Pagan Rulers were termed LATIN EMPERORs, may
fairly apply, with an improved significancy to the
Sovereign Pontiffs of the Ecclesiastical Roman
Empire; for the EMPERORs of Rome spake LATIN
as their native Language, but the Popes, centuries
after it has ceased to be spoken either in ITALY or
EUROPE, have commanded ALL PAPISTs to have the
formularies of their Church Service in none other
220 & CHAPTER XVI :
Ilanguage than LATIN, throughout the world, there-
jore, the PAPIsTs are, to all intents and purposes,
LATINs by self-appropriation, and are living wit–
messes to the Mysterious Fact. *
As the NEw TESTAMENT of our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ was originally written in GREEK, (and
not in Latin,) what Scriptural Argument of Com-
mandment can be advanced by this Mystical, Latin,
Pontificial, Roman MAN, and that of his Councils,
for the promulgation of the Holy Scriptures through-
out the world in the LATIN Language? Is it not in
truth permitted by Providence, that by this SPECIAL,
this adopted, this branded LATIN “MARK’’ of
Mystical and Ecclesiastical Distinction, this self-
appropriated LATIN Language, Christians might
be able, after the full Revelation and Establishment
of the Popedom, to trace the “Man of Sin,” the
“Son of Perdition” the “Mystery of Imiquity,” to
ROME 2 and thence propound from the Volume of
Inspiration, as compared with the clearest historical
Facts, that from the aggregate Evidence of his Mys-
tical Character, and most Mystical use of the
LATIN Tongue in the Roman CHURCH, HE might
merit the Proper and Appellative Name LATEINos,
as the Founder of a NEw KINGDom on the Ruins of
old Rome, and as reviving the old Latin Language,
and using the Papal Casarean Title of “PontiFEx
MAXIMUS” which is engraven on his MITRE and
TRIPLE CRowN, as also the introduction of various
Pagan Customs and Ceremonies into his Roman
Basilique. Plain then indeed, is the Evidence that
LATIN THE STIGMA OR MARK OF POPERY. 221
to the Roman or Latin Pontiff, whose entire Eccle-
siastical Language is LATIN, this Latin imprinted
“MARK,” “NAME, and NUMBER 666 ° belong,
because it is a Name most descriptive of his charac-
ter, Sovereign Pontificial Empire, and LATIN
Apostate (not Apostolic) Church of Rome.
If ANT1aulty be any thing, (and this Point the
Roman Catholics esteem of special importance,) if
the Holy Scriptures must of Imperative Necessity
be promulgated in some on E Particular Language,
then of course the GREEK ORIGINAL would take
precedence of the LATIN Vulgate, which latter is
only a Translation, as the Romanists well know.
Moreover, no Scriptural argument can be adduced
by the Pope and his College of Cardinals, why the
Holy Scriptures should be circulated through the
whole world in the LATIN Language, rather than the
Greek original: for neither Christ, the Evangelists,
nor any of the inspired Apostles, have left us any
such commandment in the Gospel, and the Latin
Language has not been spoken by any one Nation,
Kingdom, or People, in any City, or Town, or
Province in all Europe for centuries past, no, not
even in Italy, Latium, or Rome, the SEAT of the
Roman or Latin ‘ Pontifer Marimus.” Wherefore,
as notwithstanding the LATIN has been adopted and
canonized by the Popish Councils for the sole uses
of the Roman Church, and is the Living Universal
Language of that Church among all the Nations of
Europe at this hour; so she bears, as a Stigma
incurred by such adoption and canonization, the
222 CHAPTER XVI :
LATIN NAME branded upon her CHURCH and KING-
Dom, and it will anathematize Her to all future genera-
tions. For though she has the consummate impu-
dence and affrontery to style Herself kar’ tºoxy, and
exclusively, THE CATHoLic CHURCH, yet is she not
Catholic in any other sense than from the Catholic
use of the Latin Language throughout her Latin
Communion.
What, I would ask, becomes of the great intent
of the Pentecostal gift of Tongues—viz. That
* “EveRY MAN might hear in his own Tongue or
Language, wherein he was born, the wonderful
works of God; ” if the Holy Scriptures were in-
tended to be locked up, and evclusively circulated in
the Latin Tongue? Where, then, is the obedience
of this Latin Church of Rome and its members to
the emphatical injunction of our Lord, * “Search
the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal
life, and they are they which testify of ME 2'' How
in the breast of a Roman Catholic, can that noble
spirit, which characterized the Bereans, expand and
grow 2 Of whom we read, that they “were “more
noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they’”
“searched the Scriptures daily f'
* Acts i. 7–11. * John v. 39, S Acts xvii. 11.
CHAPTER XVII.
THE GENERAL ARGUMENT FOR THE NAME Aarévvos
AS’ DEFINITIVELY AND EXCLUSIVELY DESCRIPTIVE
}
of THE “ MAN of SIN,” FURTHER confirm ED.
St. PAUL's observations relative to speaking in an
“ unknown Tongue’’ “in the Church’” are worthy
of especial notice, inasmuch as they summarily and
beyond appeal condemn the Opinions and Decisions
of the Papal Council of Trent, and pronounce the
Doom of such an Heretical Council. “I thank my
God,” said St. Paul, “I speak with Tongues more
than ye all: yet IN THE CHURCH I had rather speak
FIVE words with my understanding, that by my
voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand
words in an UNKNowN Tongue.” What, however,
is the LATIN, but an “UNKNowN Tongue’’ in every
part of Europe, and even in Rome itself?
It is well worthy of remark that although there
are millions of individuals belonging to each of the
* 1 Cor. xiv. 18, 19.
224 CHAPTER XVII :
three following apostate Churches ; viz. the Jewish,
GREEK, and MoHAMMEDAN, and although the two
former of these Churches were prior in ANT1-
QUITY to Papal Rome, yet not one of them has,
at any period since the commencement of the Chris-
tian AEra, imperiously required the Religion they
profess to be promulgated in the LATIN Language;
nor has either the Jewish or Greek Church, though
persecuted by the Papal power, ever consented to the
‘Council of Trent,’ in reference to the adoption of
the Latin Language. Oh no ! LATIN is the peculiar
characteristic MARK of the Papal Roman Church,
and she shall have the proper Name Aarévos, as her
deservedly imprinted Stigma and Character. St. Paul
having also denounced those who spake in an “un-
known Tongue” “ in the Church,” it may thence be
inferred that the CHURCH of Rome is Not the TRUE
CHRISTIAN CHURCH to which the Apostle addressed
his Epistles; but the spurious offspring of the Roman
Apostolical Church after the “FALLING Away” of
the true Church (and old Roman Empire,) being .
Now mired up with Jewish Ceremonies, Pagan
Idolatry, Heresies, Blasphemies, as set forth in her
Latin Books of Dogmas, Missals, &c. &c. She has
also by her Latin Papal Bulls and Edicts, in
Ecclesiastical Affairs, and by the ‘forbidding to
Marry, and commanding to abstain from Meats,’
excluded herself from the common Rights and Pri-
vileges of Christianity, and * “seared her conscience
with a hot iron,” the imprinting of which can never
! 2 Thess. ii. 3. - * 1 Tim. iv. 2.
ST. PAUL AND THE Pope contRASTED. 225
be obliterated but by her Destruction, which, at its
greatest distance, must be near at hand. She must
therefore carry on her forehead, not only the Pagan
Imperial Title of ‘PontiFEx MAXIMUs,' but also
the indelible MARK of her Mystical Name, LA-
TEINos, until, like Babylon of Old, she has “filled
up the Measure of her Iniquity,” and is “cast into
the sea:” and, oh, what tribulation, anguish, and
wrath must await her for her bloody ‘INQUISITION,’
Tyranny, and matchless Persecutions, and for
having dared to Lock up the Holy Bible, the Book
of God, in an “unknown Tongue,” or dead Lan-
guage, by which procedure she has taken away the
* “Key of KNowLEDGE * from the Common People
of all the Countries of Europe. Give ear then, O
Christian, to the MIGHTY contRAST between the
great Apostle St. Paul, who was a truly Inspired
Man, and who wrote most of the Epistles of the New
Testament to GENTILE Christian Churches, whose
Labours, Dangers and Sufferings are set forth in the
Acts of the Apostles 1 and the great Papal Pseudo-
Apostolic Roman, or Latin, “Man of Sin,” who is
seated at Rome, and whose HEAD is adorned not only
with an Episcopal Mitre, but also with a TRIPLE
CRowN ; and who, instead of writing to the distant
Churches in his Communion, Epistles of * “Grace,
Mercy, and Peace, from Jesus Christ,” (whose
‘VICAR upon EARTH he professes to be,) sends out
of his Treasure House, the VATICAN PALACE, at
Rome, his thundering Bulls, and Amathemas to the
* Luke xi. 52. * 1 Tim. i. 2.
Q
226 CHAPTER XVII :
Crowned Heads of Europe, and to all subjects within
their Dominions, who will not acknowledge Him as
the Liege Sovereign Pontiff of the Latin Earth,
which extends over the Old and New World, de-
nouncing all such as Heretics, who are to be De-
posed, Ea'communicated, their property Confiscated,
and themselves burnt or tortured by Inquisitors of
the “..Holy INQUISITIon.”
It is well known that though the Greek Septuagint
Translation of the Hebrew Bible, completed in the
Reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, was never commanded
by God, or any of his servants the Prophets to be
received by the Gentile Nations as the Standard
Version of the Old Testament ; yet it was in truth
the most authentic of all Translations extant of the
Hebrew Tert, and is often quoted by Christ and his
Apostles in the Greek Testament: there was, there-
fore, as much authority for the adoption and general
use of the Greek Septuagint Translation for the
Gentiles, under the Mosaical Dispensation, as
there is for the Latin Vulgate Translation under the
Christian Dispensation, which in fact amounts to
none at all. There have been at least SEVEN different
Papal Revisions of the Latin Vulgate, and the last
is worse than the first, to say nothing of the numerous
corruptions introduced by the Papists themselves into
the TEXT to support their Dogmas, which are set
forth in two thick volumes octavo, besides mistrans-
lations, omissions, &c. Indeed it is most remarkable
that between the two editions of Pope SExTUs the
Vth. and CLEMENT the VIIIth there are about 2000
THE ApocrypHA cANoNized BY PAPISTs. 227
different Readings. [See a Work entitled ‘BELLUM
PAPALE, sive Concordia Discors SixTI QUINTI, et
CLEMENTIs Octavi circa Hieronymianam Editionem.
Auctore Thoma James Novi Collegii in Alma Aca-
demia Oxoniensi socio, et utriusque Academiae in
Artibus Magistro. Londini, 1678.] * * *
The Books called ApocrypHA, (although they
pertain to the History of the Jewish wars, &c. &c.,
and have many things excellent in them,) have never
been found in the HEBREw LANGUAGE, but only in
the GREEK, and some of them only in LATIN : they
were never received by the Jews themselves into the
CANoN of Holy WRIT ; and are acknowledged by
them to be ApocRYPHAL; yet they are now fully
admitted among the CANONICAL Books of the OLD
TESTAMENT by the LATIN apostate CHURCH of
Rome, upon no better authority than that of the
Pope and his pretended infallible Councils. In this
point then the Rom ANISTs have outstripped the Jews
in HERESY by rendering those Books CANoNICAL
under the CHRISTIAN, which were always accounted
Apocryph AL under the MosaicAL DISPENSATION.
It will be clearly seen from what has been said by
St. John in the Book of Revelations (Chap. xiii.
11th and 18th verses.) compared with historical
Evidence of the clearest nature, that the Apostle has
not led us vaguely to seek for the mystical NAME of
the MAN, whose Number is 666, either among the
Jews, GREEKs, or MoHAMMEDANS ; because, there
is not a sufficiency of Sovereign EccLESIASTICAL
IDENTITY in any one of them with reference to the
Q 2
228 - CHAPTER XVII :
proper Name of the Beast, or the Locality of his
mystical Kingdom; his character; or the extreme
power and authority with which the second or Papal
Beast, (who is the Successor of the first or Pagan
Roman Beast) is said to Rule; who, though he was
to “come up out of the EARTH," that is, from a
1ow and obscure state, was nevertheless to “eavercise
ALL THE Power of the FIRST BEAST:” that is,
Supreme Power and Dominion, accompanied with
"matchless tyranny towards all Christians, even sur-
passing his Predecessors, the Pagan Roman Em-
perors, who were unquestionably the First Beast.
(Rev. xiii. 1–11.) Therefore, till we have decidedly
found some matchless Ecclesiastical MAN, whose
universally acknowledged character is answerable to
the whole portraiture drawn of Him by St. Paul
and St. John, it will be useless to attempt to deter-
mine the Appellative Name of the Numbered Beast.
But as Ecclesiastical Rome has! “Lorded it over
God's heritage” for upwards of twelve centuries
past, in the most astounding manner in the face and
defiance of all Europe, contrary to the commands of
Christ, and the Apostolic Injunction of St. Peter,
whose veritable Successor the Pope professes to be,
though it is manifest enough, by such usurpation,
that He is the Successor of SIMon MAGUs; and the
words of Christ are made void, who said to his own
Disciples,” “My kingdom is not of this world;”
“now is my Kingdom not from hence.” The Pope
has thus set up an Earthly Kingdom at Rome, and
1 1 Peter v. 3. * John xviii. 36.
PERSECUTIONS OF POPERY. 229
instead of' feeding Christ's Sheep and Lambs,
(which was the special and last charge given to St.
Peter,) He, with his ** Dragon Mouth,” has devoured
both Sheep and Lambs by horrible Tortures of his
Infernal “INQUISITIon ;” by his Crusades against
the Waldenses and Albigenses : his bloody Massa-
cres of the Protestants in the Netherlands by the
command of the Duke of Alva, the Papal Massacres
in France, England, Germany and Ireland: his
persecution of the Huguenots: his attempted invasion
of England by the Spanish Armada ; the Gunpowder
Plot, with a thousand untold horrors too awful to
relate, and therefore it was that St. John said:* “I
saw the woman drunken with the blood of the
Saints, and with the blood of the Martyrs of
Jesus,” &c.
If Rome Pagan has slain her thousands of
Martyrs, Rome Papal has slain her tens of thou-
sands and hundreds of thousands. The Inquisition
has destroyed about three Millions. St. John
expressed no astonishment at the persecutions of the
first Roman Beast, because it was Pagan ; but
when he beheld the “scarlet coloured Beast,” who
is the Beast with two Horns, “like a Lamb; ” and
a professed Ecclesiastical Power persecuting the
Church of Christ, it is said that the Apostle “won-
dered with great admiration. And the Angel said
unto him, Wherefore didst thou Marvel? I will
tell thee the Mystery of the Woman.” “Here is
the mind which hath wisdom. The Seven Heads
* John xxi. 15–17. * Rev. xiii. 11. * Rev. xvii. 6.
230 * CHAPTER XVII : .
are seven Mountains on which the woman sitteth :”
which have been proved to denote Rome.
Although Mr. Faber and others have exerted all
their talents to establish such words as Aroorarms, &c.,
and to subvert the orthography of Irendeus in his
twofold use of the Diphthong, or broad so or 4, they
have nevertheless failed in both attempts. Thus
the Appellative Name Aarévos stands forth pre-emi-
nent to our view, for it is answerable in every way
to the “MARK,” the “NAME,” the “NUMBER,” the
CHARACTER, the LANGUAGE, the SEAT and the
EccLESIASTICAL KINGDoM of the “MAN,” who is
the Sovereign Hierarch of Rome, and (by self-
assumption) of the world. The history of all this
may be found to range within the SEE or CITY of
modern PAPAL RoME, or Mystic BABYLON, where
indeed this Sovereign Ecclesiastical Latin Pontifical
MAN, has most imperiously seated himself in the
superb Basilique, or “Temple of God” at Rome,
called after the Name of St. Peter; there shewing
himself to all the Potentates of Europe that He sits
a King confessed . . . a Divinity . . . a God . . . as
St. Paul characterizes his Earaltation, and that in a
vast variety of ways by requiring from all his sub-
jects, whether high or low, rich or poor, learned or .
wnlearned; the most servile homage and genuflexion,"
even from Emperors, Kings, Princes, Nobles, &c.
&c., as members of his Latin Church We have
only to revert to such instances as those of HENRY
the IV. of France . . . KING John of England . . .
' ' See “the Buckler of the Faith, by Peter Du Moulin; ' p. 542 to 544,
PAPAL ARROGANCE AND BLASPHEMY. 231
and the Emperor HENRY the VIth, whose Crown
Pope Celestine with his foot spurned from off his
head, to shew that it was in his power to take the
Empire from him, and to pull off his crown, &c.
Also, their Eminences, the Cardinals, and all others
under his Ecclesiastical authority, profoundly bend
and Kiss the Foot of this Papal Idolatrous Latin
“Man ; ” and then, as if the Godhead were in him,
this wicked “Pontifer Marimus’ pretends to have
absolute power to forgive sins, which, agreeably to
His assumed Infallibility and Universal Episcopal
Authority, he exercises with a high and mighty hand
by the sale of plenary Indulgences all over the world
to Individuals whom he never saw, nor is ever likely
to see. Whereas, St. Peter, the true Apostle of
Christ, would not allow his foot to be kissed, nor
his body worshipped by Cornelius, the centurion,
who when he met Peter,” “fell down at his feet,
and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying,
“Stand up; I myself also am a Man.” So the Angel
refused to be worshipped by St. John, to whom he
had just delivered the Book of the Revelation of
Jesus Christ.” “And I, John, saw these things and
heard them; and when I had heard and seen, I fell
down to worship before the feet of the Angel which
shewed me these things. Then said he unto me,
See thou do it not ; for I am thy fellow-servant, and
of thy brethren, the prophets, and of them which
keep the sayings of this Book: worship God :” from
which words we may conclude that the Pope is
| Acts x. 25, 26. * Rev. xxii. 8, 9; xix. 10.
232 CHAPTER XVII :
neither the true follower, nor evenplar, nor suc-
cessor of St. Peter or St. John, because he has
assumed to himself the Right of divine worship,
which Peter, refused from Cornelius, and the Angel
from St. John. - -
As Christ never entrusted any One of the Twelve
Apostles with more power than another as to the
forgiveness of Sins; so neither did he set apart St.
Peter, (the Pope's pretended Predecessor,) to that
special office: nor did He choose him as the Chief
of the Apostles. This may be inferred from the
following words:"—“And the Apostles who were at
JERUSALEM '' (not Rome) “hearing that SAMARIA
had received the Word of God, sent to them PETER
and JoHN.” Here then we perceive that the Apostles
collectively had power to send both Peter and John
from Jerusalem to Samaria to those converts who
“ had received the Word of God,” and from the
obedience of Peter we know that he was no Pope;
because he would in that case have sent other Apos-
tles from Jerusalem; and would have continued in
that City himself as the CHIEF Apostle. Besides,
Peter has most solemnly condemned what the Popes
have openly allowed, viz. the unbounded sale of Indul-
gences as the supposed pardon and absolution of men's
sins. For it was Simon Peter who said to Simon the
“Magician,” and dealer in sorcery and witchcraft.
* “Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast
Thought that the GIFT of GoD may be purchased
with money.” Now what is the “forgiveness of
| Acts viii. 14. * Acts viii. 20.
ST. PETER AND THE POPE contRASTED. 233
sins” but the “gift of God" through Jesus Christ?
as well as the other gift of the Holy Ghost 2 Are
they not both of them mentioned together in these
words of St. Peter f * “Then Peter and the other
Apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God
rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up
Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him
hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince
and a Saviour, for to GIVE repentance to Israel, and
forgiveness of sins. And we are his witnesses of
these things; and so also is the Holy Ghost, whom
God hath GIvEN to them that obey him.” Nu-
merous other Texts might be adduced to the same
purpose. .
Wherefore, we may rest assured that if Simon the
magician was so greatly condemned by St. Peter for
the expression alone of the THought which was in
his heart of purchasing the gift of God with
money, that the Apostle declared he had “neither
part nor lot in this Matter; ” with how much
heavier condemnation would the same Apostle have
pronounced an irrevocable Sentence on the Popes,
the pretended Vicars of Christ, for their infamy in
selling Indulgences and the pardon of men's sins
by wholesale, at a Market-price, over all the world,
whereby he maketh Merchandize of men's souls and
they are cast into Perdition ? Is not the Appellative
of the Pope, therefore, rightly signified by the
“ Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdition,” “the
Mystery of Iniquity,” “the Wicked One º’ But
| Acts v. 29–32.
234 CHAPTER XVII.
we notice that it was for the exercise of the Divine
Right in the forgiveness of sins that Christ was
stoned and afterwards put to Death by the Jews,
for they said, “How doth this Man thus speak
blasphemies : who can forgive sins but God only 2”
And if the Jews considered it Blasphemy in “the
Man Christ Jesus,” who, as the “Son of Man *
had “power on Earth to forgive sins ; ” and evi-
denced his High and Divine Commission by a public
e.vhibition of his Miracles in attestation of the
Truths which he taught, what shall we say to this
vile Papal Impostor, this Antichrist, this Man of
Sin, this Son of Perdition, this Mystery of In-
iquity P Shall we not say, without hesitation, that this
Latin Papal Roman Man speaketh BLASPHEMIEs?
Yea, verily, we fear not to charge upon the Pope
and the conclave of his Latin Cardinals confederate,
with the whole College of Jesuits, the blood of
Saints and Martyrs for Jesus' sake, whose blood
crieth from the ground for that vengeance which will
shortly be awarded to this “Man of Sin,”
“whom the Lord shall consume with the Spirit of
his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of
his coming.”
* 2 Thess. ii. 3, 8.
CHAPTER XVIII.
ROMANISM SUMMARILY CONFRONTED WITH HOLY
SCRIPTU R.E.
It was a common saying of old, “ Ubi Imperator,
ibi Roma,” “Where the Emperor is, there is Rome;’
and can we not with equal propriety say at this time,
Ubi Papa, ibi Roma P ‘Where the Pope is, there is
Rome 2 ' Yes, indeed; for nothing can be clearer
than that the Proper and Appellative Name Aztevos
most fully unfolds the whole secret of the Mystical
Enigmatical Number xàs', or 666, and brings us
into acquaintance with the “ wisdom.” and “un-
derstanding” of which St. John speaks, and of which
we have been in search. To this we have now
attained in the most satisfactory and unequivocal
manner, insomuch that it may be truly affirmed that
there is none other Name of a MAN so suitably de-
scriptive of, and Identical with, the Roman Sovereign
Pontiff, who Latinizes in every Ecclesiastical
* Rev. xiii. 18.
236 CHA PTER XVIII :
Matter. Moreover, if the adjective Roman be sub-
tracted from that of Catholic, we might be in some
little difficulty about the manner of appropriating the
Latin Name to the Roman Sovereign Pontiff, because
the term Catholic would apply to the Universal
Church of Christ upon Earth, wheresoever dispersed,
the term Catholic being a universal Term ; but by
the retention of the adjunct “Roman' (as the
Papists themselves have acted by reviving the use of
the old Latin Tongue,) we have thereby both the
identity and limit of this Roman, Latin, Italian, or
Mystic Babylonish Church. Doubtless she herself
has given us her own proper and approved Appella-
tions in these words, “Sacra Rom ANA Ecclesia,”
and “Sanctum Roman UM Imperium,’ and, there-
fore, as she has styled herself by the Titles of the
* Holy Roman Church, and the Holy Roman Em-
pire,’ (which is ‘Imperium in Imperio,) and that
the Latin vulgate is the canonized Mother Tongue
of the aforesaid Roman Church, so the Appellative
Name Aarévos, Lateinos, is engraved upon her
Battlements, and the Hebrew word nºn-n, Romiith,
which likewise contains the Number 666, confirms
the signature, which cannot be obliterated by all the
sophistry of the whole Order of Jesuits, or the
thunders of the Vatican itself.
Having fully established the orthography of Irendºus
concerning the Diphthong st or d, and shown the
strict propriety of retaining the Name Aarévvos in
preference to all Indefinite and inappropriate Titles,
Sentences, or Names of Men, I must now leave the
LATIN CANONIZED BY PAPISTS. 237
subject to the calm and impartial consideration of my
Readers, as to whether any other NAME has been
conjectured, or can be found equally appropriate to
the terms of the Prophecy. And I fear not the
Result, with reference to this “ STRONG-Hold *
against Romanism, the wisdom and understanding
of which St. John speaks, being to find the Name
of a Man, producing by the individual LETTERS of
the Name, the true Number 666: as also his de-
scriptive “MARK,” all of which harmonize in the
Name LATEINos, "and, therefore, to set aside the
Proper, descriptive, and Appellative Name Aarévvos,
as the Rev. Mr. Faber, Dr. Adam Clarke, &c., have
done, by rejecting the Orthography and Testimony
of Father Irenaeus, and as Professor Lee has done
by insinuating an uncertainty concerning the authen-
ticity both of the Number, and the verse which con-
tains the Number xàº'; and Dean Woodhouse, by
the Mode of Calculation, would be (what the Sailors
would say,) to let go the Sheet Anchor, and thereby
to incur certain Shipwreck.
What further doubt then can we have upon the
subject of the NAME in Question ? when the Papists
themselves have literally adopted the Epithet Roman,
both for their CHURCH and Empire, and have Cano-
nized the LATIN as the MoTHER Tongue of their
ITALIAN, Rom AN, or LATIN CHURCH, whereby the
Pope has established the use of the Roman and
LATIN as his self-approved MARKS of Distinction 2
Wherefore let nºnin and Aarévos divide the spoil
between them ' '
238 CHAPTER XVIII :
Let us therefore proceed summarily to suggest the
following queries:
I. Why is it that the Kingdom of modern Rome
is designated by the Papists, at this very hour,
‘Sanctum Roman UM Imperium,’ ‘The Holy Roman
Empire;’ if the Sovereign Pontifical EMPIRE be no
AT ROME 2 *
II. Why is the Church of Rome denominated by
the Papists themselves, ‘Sacra RomanA Ecclesia,”
* The Holy Roman Church ; * if that Church
be not the Roman CHURCH to all intents and
purposes 2
III. Why does the Pope of Rome, as a professed
Christian Bishop, adopt the Pagan Imperial Title
of “PontiFEx MAxIMUs,” upon his TRIPLE CRowN
or TIARA, if it be not with the intent of identifying
himself with the old Pagan HIGH PRIESTHood of
JUPITER, which office and Title were commonly held
by the Roman Emperors?
IV. Why has the Latin Vulgate Translation of
the Holy Scriptures been substituted and canonized
by the Papal Council of TRENT,’ instead of the
HEBREw and GREEK Originals; if it be not intended
by the said Papal Council, that the Church of Rome
should, after the most mature Deliberations, be con-
sidered as a LATIN CHURCH 2
V. Why is it that the Pope of Rome, as the pro-
fessed VIcAR and HEAD of Christ's Church upon
Earth, RENou Nces both his BAPTISMAL and SUR-
NAME, and assumes (upon ascending the Pontifical
Throne) some fictitious Title of Eminence, such as
ROMAN AND LATIN PAPAL SYNoNYMS. 239
LEo the Xth. SExTUs the Vth. INNocent the
XIIIth. CLEMENT the VIIIth. PIUs the VIIth. &c.
if the character of the PopeDom be not DIFFERENT
from ALL other Kingdoms upon Earth, and if it be
not in direct imitation of the LATIN Imperial Titles
on the one hand, and of the LATIN, ‘ Pontifea. Maa-
imus,' on the other ?
It follows surely, as a matter of course, that, as
the adopted Appellative Name of the Italian Sove-
reign Pontifical Empire is Roman, “Sanctum Ro-
MANUM Imperium;’ and the adopted Appellative
Name of the ITALIAN CHURCH is Roman, ‘Sacra
RomanA Ecclesia;' and that the canonized Lan-
guage of the Italian Church; her Masses, Prayers,
Hymns, Litanies, Canons, Decretals, Bulls, Coun-
cils, Edicts, Holy Scriptures, are all in LATIN ;
and the self-appropriated Title of her HIGH PRIEST
is LATIN, (viz. “PontiFEx MAxIMUs,') so the Pope
as the visible and acknowledged HEAD (by all the
monarchs of Europe) of the “Holy Roman Empire,’
and Holy Roman or Latin Church—(for Roman
and LATIN are herein used as Papal synonyms, the
former being used to denote the Kingdom of the
Pope, the latter exhibiting the Language or Speech
of his Church,) is a Roman and LATIN HEAD, and
consequently, that his Appellative imprinted NAME
must correspond with the Proper Name of his
Kingdom, and the Living Language of his Church ;
with his Pagan Latin Title affixed to his TRIPLE
Crown, as the Mysterious “MARK" of his Sove-
reignty, all of which may be comprehended in these
240 CHAPTER XVIII :
two following Appellatives, both of which contain
the sacred Number 666.
nºn and Aarévvos.
nºnym, Rom IITH, Rom ANA, and Aarévvos, LATEINos,
LATEINUs.
It is a most remarkable circumstance, which may
here be noticed that there is not a single ea'ample
to be found in the entire of the Old Testament Scrip-
tures (except in the corrupt period of the Maccabees),
relative to the Jewish Dispensation of a conjunction
of the HIGH PRIESTHooD with the KINGLY Gover N-
MENT, similar to that of the Sover EIGN PONTIFF of
RomE: for in the Primitive Ages of the CHURCH
of GoD, (under the Law,) JEHovAH himself was
the KING of ISRAEL, Moses was the deputed Law-
giver, and AARON was the High Priest. In later
times, SAUL was the King of Israel, and SAMUEL
the anointed Prophet; afterwards DAVID was the
King, and ABIATHAR the High Priest; and in the
time of CHRIST, HERod was the King, and CAIAPHAs
was the High Priest : and then, “CHRIST the END
of the LAw”...” “The Law and the Prophets were
until John ” the Baptist. So that through the
whole of the Mosaic dispensation, and the Aaronic
or Levitical High Priesthood, we read not of any
one man among the Jews who was legally anointed
to be King and High Priest at the same moment.
Moreover, Christ has not made mention of the
* Rom. x. 4. • * Luke xvi. 16.
NO SUPREMACY AMONG THE A POSTLES. 24 h
continuance of the High Priesthood under the Gospel
Dispensation, but the very contrary; which we infer
from his reproof of his Disciples, who disputed re-
specting supremacy. “And he came to Caper-
naum; and being in the house, he asked them, What
was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the
way? But they held their peace; for by the way
they had disputed among themselves, who should be
the GREATEST. And he sat down, and called the
Twelve, and saith unto THEM, IF ANY MAN desire
to be FIRST, THE SAME shall be LAST of ALL and
sERVANT of ALL.” Now we know that St. PETER
was one of the Twelve, and, from the words of
Christ it is evident, that, as the office of the High
Priesthood merged in the spiritual and eternal
Priesthood of Messias; so there is equal reason to
believe that it was totally inconsistent with the
spiritual doctrine of Christ to establish an EARTHLY
KINGDom, according to his own declaration to
PILATE, * “MY KINGDom is not of this world; ”
and his conduct was in accordance with this declara-
tion, for although he was “Born KING of the
Jews,” yet "“when Jesus perceived that they would
come and take him by force, to “make him a KING,
he departed again into a mountain himself alone: ”
nevertheless, the Pope, as the pretended WICAR of
Jesus Christ, is the literal KING of the Territories
of Rome, and the ‘ PontiFEx MAXIMUs' of the
whole world. But by what means did the Pope of
| Mark ix. 33–35. Luke ix.46; xxii. 24–26. Matt. xxiii. 11.
* John xviii. 36. * John vi. 15.
R
242 CHAPTER XVIII.
Rome become possessed of his Earthly Kingdom P
Even by the agency and instrumentality of SATAN,
“ the god of this world,” as St. John informs us—
* “And the DRAGoN gave him. HIs Power, and His
SEAT, and GREAT AUTHoRITY.” But if it be ob-
jected that this Power, Seat, and great Authority
was given to the “First (Roman) Beast,’ we prove
that it was likewise given to the ‘Second (Ecclesi-
astical Roman) Beast,’ of whom it is written, that
* “He ea'erciseth ALL THE Power of the FIRST
Beast ; ” for * “HIs coming is after the working of
SATAN, with ALL Power,” &c.; and it is an histo-
nical Fact that the SEAT of the second Beast is the
same as that of the FIRST, viz. RomE, and it is
specially said of the Second or Lamb-horned Beast
of the EARTH, that * “he SPAKE as a DRAGon; ” all
of which corresponds with the imperious character
of the Sovereign Roman Pontiff, as has been de-
monstrated in a variety of particulars throughout
this work, in reference to his dragon-like persecu-
tions of the Saints. And what can establish the
character of the Pope as ANTICHRIST so strongly
as his real Assumption of the TRIPLE CRowN
with the EPIscoPAL MITRE 2 in doing which he
has manifested to all the Earth, that the origin of
his Kingdom is "“ of the EARTH EARTHLY,” (as St.
John predicted concerning it, "“And I beheld
another Beast coming up out of the EARTH,”) and
not Christian: moreover, his impudent Transition
* Rev. xiii. 2. * Rev. xiii. 12. 3 2 Thess. ii. 9.
* Rev. xiii. 11. * John iii. 31. 6 Rev. xiii. 1 1.
THE Pope's Assumption of Divi NE TITLES. 243
from the lowest Christian Title of ‘Servus Servo-
rum Dei–Servant of the Servants of God,” to those
of the highest grade, as, first, ‘Vicarius Salvatoris
nostri Jesus Christi in Terra; ' then, the Pagan
Title of ‘PontiFEx OPTIMUs MAxIMUs; then,
Universal Bishop, or Bishop of the World, ‘Epis-
CoPUs ORBIs; ’ and “ Eminentissimus et Reveren-
dissimus Pater ac Dominus; ' then a Deputy-God
upon EARTH, as PAUL the Vth. styled himself,
‘VICE-DEo super TERRAM ; ' then, “Father of
Princes and Kings, RULER of THE WoRLD ' (that
is, the ‘Holy Roman Empire,') Pater Principum
et Regum, RECTOR ORBIs ; and not satisfied with
all these Titles of superlative distinction, he must
have an Attribute peculiar to God; Most Holy
Father; “Sanctissime Pater:” all which arrogance
manifests that He is the “MAN of Sin,” the “Son
of Perdition”, who “ sitteth in the Temple of God,
shewing himself that HE is God,” “even Him,
whose coming is after the working of Satan, with
all Power, and signs and lying wonders;” and who
is so infatuated with his IDOLATRY that he “forget-
teth what manner of MAN he is ;” but HE is verily a
LATIN, as appears by his adopted LATIN Language,
as HE is also a Roman by Election. Yea, so great
a veneration hath this compound Roman and LATIN
MAN for the Holy Scriptures, that, (by the edict
of his Council of Trent, &c.) he has locked them up
in the Latin Tongue of old Pagan Rome, and
deposited them, together with the “Power of the
Keys' of St. Peter, in the Ark of the Roman and
R 2
244 CHA PTER XVIII :
Latin Covenant, between himself and his Latin Car-
dinals. What an uncommon respect, this MAN, this
PoNTIFEx MAxIMUs, has for the Memory of LATINUs
the ancient Founder of LATIUM and the LATIN
KINGDom ; so much so, that he has made choice of
that particular Country for his PopeDom, and the
Language for his CHURCH. And there can be no
better proof of his reverence for ANTIQUITY, than
his predilection of the LATIN Vulgate, ABove the
HEBREw and GREEK Originals, or, the vernacular
tongue of ITALY, which is ITALIAN.
There is another most remarkable fact illustrative
of the conduct and character of the Roman or LATIN
Pontifea. Marimus, and that is, that the Popes at
their election and coronation, not only assume to
themselves particular TITLEs of distinction, such as
have been referred to already ; or such as are cus-
tomary, as Leo Xth. INNocent XIIIth. but that
they relinquish entirely their own Proper Names,
both BAPTISMAL and surn AME : so that nothing of
their Baptismal or Family Names remains to them:
for example, a Cardinal whose Name before time was
called Hippolitus Aldobrandinus is created Pope by
the fictitious title of CLEMENT the VIIIth. So that
to be created a Pope, his Baptismal and Surname
must Both be renounced. This is a pretty example
of the Baptismal Covenant, in the pretended HEAD
of the CHRISTIAN CHURCH,-the MAN who calls
himself the Vicar of Jesus Christ upon Earth, and
the veritable Successor of St. Peter. It is well
known that all the Emperors, Kings and Princes
RENUNCIATION of BAPTISMAL NAME. 245
who have been, or are Members of the Latin Church
of Rome have universally retained their Baptismal
Names; but the Popes, who have ea'alted themselves
Above the Imperial Dignity, must be different from
all Mankind in this Particular 2 Did the Jewish
High Priests, under the Law, change their own
Proper Names from AARON to CLEMENT Ist. ;
from ABIATH AR to INNocent IInd., or from CA1A-
PHAs to Leo the IIIrd, or did the Apostle PETER
originate this ANoNYMoUs Custom for the Popes of
RomE 2 Alas ! how can we account for such Magic,
such Mystery, such Sophistry, such Jesuitry, such
Art, such Deception in the pretended VICAR of Jesus
CHRIST 2 What Apostolic precept, what Scriptural
erample can be shown, why the CHIEF APOSTLE of
CHRIST should become a NAMELEss, an ANoNYMoUs
MAN ? Surely there is hardly any thing which the
Pope says or does, but it is entirely contrary to all
Scripture precedent, and connected with the deepest
MYSTERY, which indeed is an Appellative that is
allotted to, and well bestowed by St. Paul and St.
John on this Mystic Character, viz.: “The MYSTERY
of INIQUITY ;” “MYSTERY BABYLoN,” &c.; “Mys-
TERY of the Wom AN.” Wherefore, to style Hippo-
litus Aldobrandinus by the Title of CLEMENT the
VIIIth., is all the same as if he had been created
Pope by the highly significant Title of Hocus-Pocus
the VIIIth. ; but of course the Pope, (and his Infal-
lible Counsellors,) cannot ERR in such a trivial matter
as that of renouncing his Baptismal Name !
To prevent all possible palliations which might
246 CHAPTER XVIII :
be grounded by Papists on the substitution of the
Name of Simon for that of Peter, and of Saul for
that of Paul, as a scriptural sanction for the Popes
doing the same thing, it may be observed, upon the
clearest Testimony of Holy Inspiration that the
Names of SIMON and SAUL were not relinquished,
EsPEcIALLY that of SIMON, (the Pope's pretended
Predecessor,) and that neither Peter nor Paul ever
assumed feigned Names or Titles, which are only
befitting Impostors. St. PETER thus commences
his Second Epistle. “SIMON PETER, a Servant,
and an Apostle of Jesus Christ,” and it is certain
that PETER had reached the climaa of his Apostleship
when he wrote this Epistle, for he alludes to his
expectation of Death in a short time, in these words:
* “ Knowing that shortly I must put off this my
tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath
shewed me. Moreover, I will endeavour that ye may
be able after my decease to have these things always
in remembrance :” And St. Paul was called to the
work of the Ministry under the Name of SAUL, by
the immediate Agency of the Holy Spirit, and was
“filled with the Holy Ghost,” when he wrought
the Miracle of blindness on Elymas, the Sorcerer,
as we thus read. * “The Holy Ghost said, separate
me Barnabas and SAUL for the work whereunto I
have called them.” “So they, being sent forth by the
Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia,” &c. Then
SAUL, (who also is called PAUL,) filled with the
Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him, (viz. Elymas,)
* 2 Peter i. 1. * Ibid. xiv. 15. * Acts xiii. 2–4, 9–11.
ASSUMPTION OF FICTITIOUS NAMES. 247
“And said, O full of all subtility and all mischief,
thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteous-
ness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways
of the Lord ž And now, behold, the hand of the
Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not
seeing the sun for a season.” As the Holy Spirit
has attested these things concerning PETER and PAUL
so the Popes have not imitated the Apostles but
Osporco, (the interpretation of which Name is,
Pigmouth) who, on account of his low origin, changed
his name to Sergius. It is well worthy of observa-
tion, that, although the Popes make so much ado
about the NAME of PETER, and that almost every
Pope assumes some new Title, not ONE of them
has ever assumed the NAME of SIMON or PETER,
as may be seen in the Chronological Table of the
Succession of Popes set forth by PETAvius the
Jesuit : although the Names of Paul and John are
not unfrequent.
However, the Proper and Appellative Name
Aargavos is virtually written upon the Papal King-
dom, which will very shortly be taken from this LATIN
and Roma N Usurper and Autocrat, because the
“Thousand Two Hundred and Threescore Days” of
Years have expired, and because the Ten Kings or
Kingdoms of the LATIN or Roman EARTH, who,
for the Time allotted by God, had “one MIND,” and
gave their power and strength unto this Beast, are to
take it away as soon as “the words of God shall be
* Petawii Rat. Temp. Tom. Il, p. 129, usque 152. Edit. Parisiis. 1703.
248 CHAPTER XVIII :
fulfilled,” as we read. "“The Ten HoRNs which
thou sawest are TEN KINGS, which have received No
KINGDom As YET ; but RECEIVE Power as Kings
one Hour with the Beast. THESE have ONE MIND,
and shall Give THEIR Power and STRENGTH unto
the BEAST’’ . . . * “And the TEN HoRNs which thou
sawest upon the Beast, THESE shall HATE the whore,
and shall make Her desolate and naked, and shall
eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For GoD hath
put in their hearts To FULFIL HIs will, and to
AGREE, and GIVE THEIR KINGDom unto the BEAST,
UNTIL the words of GoD shall be FULFILLED.”
Furthermore, If God spared not the NATURAL BRAN-
cHEs of his ancient Church, the Jews 1 nor the
MAGNIFICENT TEMPLE of JERUSALEM ; (which was
called “The Joy of the whole Earth,” which was the
Seat of the Holy Prophets of God, and of the
Inspired Apostles of Jesus Christ : was the very
Temple to which Christ came, and where he wrought
many of his mighty works, and preached the Gospel,
the CITY and TEMPLE over which he wept ; and
where he suffered Death upon the Cross ;) much less
will he spare thee, O Rome, or have respect to thy
MAGNIFICENT BASILIQUE ; or thy Roman, thy
Latin, thy Babylonish Pontiff.
. We further notice that as there is no parallel in
Holy Writ between the High Priesthood of Aaron
and that of the Papal Roman, “Pontifer Maarimus,”
with regard to the conjunction of the Monarchy
with the High Priesthood; so neither is there any
* Rev. xvii. 12, 13. * Ibid l 6.
ANTISCRIPTURAL IMPOSITIONS. 249
parallel between retaining the Proper Names of the
Jewish High Priests, and renouncing the Papal
Proper Names for fictitious Titles of ANoNYMous
signification. And here perhaps, I may without any
improper digression remark that there is no parallel
in the conduct and decretals of the Papacy with
reference to the Institution of Marriage; for among
the Jews, the HIGH PRIEST was always permitted to
marry. St. PETER, the Pope's boasted predecessor,
was a married man, for, as we read in the Gospels,"
“Jesus entered into the House of Peter’s wife’s .
mother, who lay sick of a fever.” St. Peter, there-
fore, was evidently no Pope. Moreover, St. Paul
tells us that ” “marriage is honorable in ALL,” &c.
And again : “that, * “If a man desire the office of a
Bishop, he desireth a good work. A Bishop, there-
fore, must be blameless, the HUSBAND of one wife.”
Of Deacons he observes, * “Let the Deacons be the
HUSBANDs of one wife,” and had St. Peter ‘for-
bidden Marriage’ to the Disciples, and commanded
believers in Christ to abstain from Meats, he would
have “Departed from the Faith,” for * “THE
SPIRIT speAKETH ExPRESSLY, that in the latter
Times some shall depart from the Faith, giving
heed to seducing spirits and Doctrines of Devils:
speaking lies in hypocrisy ; having their conscience
seared with a hot Iron : Forbidding to MARRY, and
commanding to abstain from MEATs, which God
hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them
1 Matt. viii. 14, Mark i. 30. Luke iv. 38. * Heb. xiii. 4.
3 l Tim. iii. 2. * Ibid. 12. * 1 Tim. iv. 1–3.
250 CHAPTER XVIII :
which believe and know the Truth.” And did not
our Lord himself with an Emphasis, that appears to
be almost prophetic of the LATIN heresy, declare
“MEATs defile not the Body ?” Nor can any thing
be clearer than that “ the Spirit speaks eaſpressly,”
by the instrumentality of St. Paul, that “ some
should depart from the Faith,” and that the Evi-
dence of such Departure from the Faith would be
signalized by “ Forbidding to MARRY, and com-
manding to abstain from MEATs : ” for which Two
Interdicts the LATIN CHURCH of Rome is notorious
in the Page of Ecclesiastical History, and, therefore,
we conclude, that, as there is Apostolic Authority
for “ Bishops * and “ Deacons” to Marry; and
that all Believers in Christ who know the Truth are
permitted to Eat MEATs at their own option: “for
every creature of God is good, and nothing to be
refused, if it be received with thanksgiving ; for it is
sanctified by the word of God and Prayer: ” so also
it is manifest that the Latin Church of Rome is
denounced by St. Paul, in the eaſpress words of the
Holy Spirit, as being “seared with a hot iron ’’ for
Her “departure from the Faith,” in the latter
Times" of which departure she is proved guilty by
such a Prohibition. As, then, we have the express
authority of Christ and his Apostles for MARRIAGE
in ALL, and the unrestricted use of MEATs, so have
we the Holy Spirit's eagress conDEMNATION of
Those who forbid the same: such are the Pope and
his Councils. How can the Church of Rome clear
| 1 Tim. iv. 3—5.
ARROGANT TITLES OF THE POPES. 251
Herself from this charge of Apostacy 7 Who will
have the impudence and inconsistency to contradict
the Fact? Perhaps a MAN who has publicly and
officially renounced his own Baptismal and Family
Name to take a Hocus-pocus Title (such as Leo X.
GREGORY XVI.) for no better Reason than to become
the Pope of Rome, may have such effrontery; for HE
who has forbidden Marriage to the whole Body of
his Clergy, and commanded Believers in Christ to
abstain from Meats on every Friday and Saturday
throughout the year, (besides Lent and numerous
other Fast-days,) contrary to the ExPRESS words
of the Holy SPIRIT, would, in the words of St.
Paul, “speak Lies in Hypocrisy; ” by endeavouring
to establish a belief, that HE has the most unlimited
and independent Power to act so without the Sanc-
tion of the Holy Scriptures, or any Apostolical
Voucher or Precedent. It is particularly mentioned
by St. Paul that this species of Departure from the
Christian Faith, (i. e. Forbidding to Marry, and com-
manding to abstain from Meats,) would be associated
with “speaking lies in hypocrisy” and “ lying
wonders” which have been verified to the Letter;
for when the Pope calls himself the ‘Vicar of Jesus
Christ upon Earth,’ and “Servant of the Servants of
God,' we know that it is Hypocrisy, and that He is
a Liar; because his TRIPLE CRowN sheweth that
He pretends to be King of all Earthly Kings, and
the Lord of all Earthly Lords, and his followers
call him Our Lord God the Pope; and because his
general speech is that of the DRAGON, as the Holy
252 ..CHAPTER XVIII :
9
Spirit declares, “He spake as a Dragon,” even
though he wears the “ two Horns like a Lamb,” the
external semblance of an Ecclesiastical Dignitary.
Furthermore, because the Pope calls the most
horrible, devilish, and bloody INQUISITIon by the
Title of the “Holy INQUIsITIon,” we know from
the Holy Scriptures that it is nothing but a “ Lying
Wonder,” such as no MAN, who is not himself, the
“Son of Perdition,” would either venture to utter
or believe, and, therefore, when the Pope is called
“His Holiness,” and “Most Holy Father,” and
his Church “The Holy Roman Church,” and the
States of his Church, “The Holy Roman Empire,”
and when the common Titles which the most furious
Popes have assumed are those of PIUS, CLEMENT,
INNocent, &c. we fearlessly declare that it is no-
thing else than “speaking Lies in Hypocrisy; ” for
the Lives of the Popes in general, as set forth by
PLATINI, Bower, and others, are too well known
to suffer us to suppose that Popery is any thing less
than the “MystERY of INIQUITY.” We prove
likewise from Holy Scripture that the Papal “Pon-
TIFEx MAXIMUs,’ cannot be the Vicar of Jesus Christ,
because he hath an EARTHLY KINGDom, and Christ
said most explicitly to his Disciples, “ My kingdom
is not of this world.”
Such a Temporal and Spiritual Kingdom as the
Popedom, such an Imperium in Imperio, is in open
hostility to the public Peace and Happiness of
1 Rev. xiii. 1 1.
ROME IDENTIFIED WITH BABYLON. 253
Europe; even as King Louis the XII. (surnamed,
Le Père du Peuple,) had formerly evinced to Pope
Julius II. who, when he was thundered at by this
Pope, overthrew Him and his Adherents in a Battle
at Ravenna; and at Pisa assembled a Council
against the Pope, causing cerTAIN CRowNs of GoLD
to be stamped with this superscription, “PERDAM
NoMEN BABYLoNIs,” “I will DESTROY THE NAME
of BABYLoN : ” thereby testifying to the whole
world his firm belief, that, Rome Papal is the
* Mystic BABYLoN of the Revelations. Here then
is King Louis XIIth, one of the 3 “TEN HoRNs”
or KINGs of the Papal Roman Earth, purposing to
destroy the Name of Babylon; first, by a defeat of
the Pope and his Adherents in Battle; then, by call-
ing a Council of the Nation to witness his Royal
intentions against the Pope and Popery : and, then,
finishing the whole matter by causing the impress
of his intentions to be put on the Gold Coin of the
Realm ; and Buonaparte was evidently possessed
with the same belief, when he compelled Pope Pius
VI. to sign the Renunciation of His TEMPORAL
Power, which he did, beginning with these words:
* “In sequito degli ordini superiori si denuncia a
tutte le persone dello stato Ecclesiastico di qualunque
grado, e condizione, &c.
“G. Della Porta, Tresoriere Generale.”
1 See Peter Du Moulin's Buckler of the Faith. Second Edition, p. 543.
* Rev. xvii. 5. 3 Ibid. 12.
* See Duppa's Journal. Sec. iv. p. 35, 36. London, 1799.
254 CHAPTER XVIII :
“Yielding to the orders of our Superiors, we
denounce all Persons of the EccLESIASTICAL STATE,
of whatever RANK or ConDITION, &c. &c.
“G. Della Porta, Treasurer General.”
And when this Deed of Renunciation and Denun-
ciation was signed, it was said that the Pope under-
signed these words, “Noi cediamo l'autorità nostra
agl'ordini superiori. Pio Sesto.” We cede our
Authority to force.—Pius the Sirth.”
Buonaparte then expelled Pius Seatus from Rome,
and sent him to Tuscany, Sienna, and Florence, and
ransacked the Vatican, with every other Palace,
and Church in Rome, &c.; and, on another occa-
sion the Emperor brought Pope Pius the VII. a
state Prisoner to Fontainbleau, and asked him how
he reconciled his TEMPORAL KINGDoM with the
words of Christ, “Mon Regne n'est pas de ce
Monde,” “My kingdom is not of this world.” But
there is only one Answer to this inquiry, which may
be summed up in the words of Christ to his Servant
St. Peter, whose Successors the Popes pretend to
be, in reference to the Ecclesiastical Office and
Dignity.
* “All they that take the Sword shall perish with
the Sword: ”
But the Popes of Rome “take the Sword; ”
Therefore the Popes of Rome “shall perish with
the Sword.”
Richard Duppa's Journal of the most remarkable
1 John xviii. 36.
* Matt. xxvi. 52. John xviii. 10, 11. compared with Rev. xiii. 10.
PRocession of RELics AT Rome, 1798. 255
occurrences that took place in Rome, upon the sub-
version of the Ecclesiastical Government, in 1798,
(second edition) will throw much light on this sub-
ject. The more than absurd infatuation of Pope Pius
VI. is ridiculous in the extreme; for to prevent the
downfal of his Earthly Kingdom, he issued an Edict
for a Procession of the most sacred Relics, which
were carried in a solemn manner through the streets
of Rome. Mr. Duppa writes as follows—' ‘As the
interposition of miracles in the Catholic world has
always been a very powerful agent to promote the
interest of the Church, so upon this occasion, they
were not wanting to oppose the impending danger
that so imminently threatened the destruction of her
Temporal Power.’
* The Pictures of the Virgin Mary had opened
their eyes in different Parts of the Town, which,
by favourable exposition, was supposed to be a mani-
festation of her peculiar grace and favour to the
Roman People. This miracle, however futile or false
it may seem to men of reflection, had so powerful
an influence over the minds of the multitude, as to
produce an enthusiasm little short of madness. The
constant processions, night and day, illuminations,
Ave-Marias, and Litanies, were attended with so
much clamour and tumult, that it was thought prudent
for the Missionaries to recommend to the people to
abate their fervour, as the Government became fearful
lest it might pass the limits of restraint, and riot
succeed to the vehemence of devotion.’
* Duppa's Journal, sect. ii. p. 13–16,
. 256 CHAPTER XVIII :
* It was now, however, when no Embassy from
foreign Courts brought hope of assistance, and THE
STATE felt the near approach of its inevitable fall,
that, as A LAST REsource, His Holiness issued an
Edict for a solemn Procession to be made of THREE
of the most sacred Relics of the Christian Church.
The first was a Portrait of Jesus Christ, called il
Santo Volto, supposed to have been painted by super-
matural agency. This picture was never shown to
the people, or carried in procession, but at times of
the greatest national calamity and distress. In the
year 1709, it was exhibited, to avert the consequences
of a dreadful earthquake; since which, till now, it
had never been exposed to the public. The seeond
was a celebrated Portrait of the Virgin Mary, of
Santa Maria in Portico. And the third was the
chains with which St. Peter was fettered when in
Prison, and from which the angel freed him when he
was set at liberty.'
As the “1260 Days" of years were fulfilled about
the year 1793, so the Dark Ages of Papal Superstition
were ended, and, therefore, the exhibition of Pictures
and the chains of St. Peter, with an intent to
avert the Judgments of God against the Roman
Church were of no avail, the Hour being then come
to expose to public odium and execration, the wicked-
ness of confiding in such “superstitious vanities,”
such “refuges of lies,” such “Satanic devices,” on
the part of the Pretended Vicar of Jesus, whose
Edict was more characteristic of the High Priest of
Jupiter, than the Head of the Church. “Let no
THE POPE EX OFFICIO ANTICHRIST. 257
man deceive you by any means” that the Pope is,
ev officio, “Antichrist,” the “Man of Sin,” the
“Son of Perdition,” not only to “be revealed in his
Time,” but likewise “destroyed,” whom St. Paul
tells us, “The Lord shall consume with the spirit
of his Mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness
of his coming : ” and, that, as the word of God is
true concerning the Time of the second Beast's con-
tinuance, (i. e. 1260 years,) so Napoleon Bonaparte
finished, in the Reign and Person of Pope Pius VI.
what King Louis the XII. had begun, by obliging
the Pope to sign the Renunciation of his Temporal
Power, and leave Rome and its Treasures forthwith :
and although a shadow of the Papal Sovereignty still
exists, it is only a shadow, and those who look for
any other Name than LATEINos for a solution of the
Mystical Number x&g', or 666, will be as much dis-
appointed as Pope Pius the VIth, his Cardinals,
and the deluded People of Rome were, when they
found that the sacred Pictures and the Prison chains
of St. Peter were of none effect to save his Holiness
or his kingdom from that long predicted vengeance
against the Kingdom of Antichrist, of which the Pope
is the Supreme Head ; even 2 the “MAN,” who “ had
two horns like a Lamb, and HE SPAKE As A DRAGON.”
As the Rise of the Papal Power may be dated from
the "Edict of the Emperor Justinian, in favour of
Pope John, A. D. 533, so we may date the commence-
* 2 Thess. ii. 8. * Rev. xiii. 11, 18.
* See the Edict of Justinian, quoted by Cuninghame on the Apocalypse,
p. 202, &c. Second edit, 1817.
S
258 CHA PTER XVIII:
ment of the 1260 Days of Years from that time, which
would consequently end with A. D. 1793; and it is a
fatal coincidence, that in the Reign of Pope Pius
Seatus, A. D. 1798, the Papal Ecclesiastical Govern-
ment was completely overthrown, and this Pope com-
pelled to sign the Resignation of his Temporal Power,
and go into banishment. Here then is History illus-
trating and confirming the fact that the 1260 Days
of Years foretold by St. John, had fully ended, A. D.
1798, and what is still more remarkable, that the
Papists themselves had an existing persuasion, be-
fore the event happened, that the Roman Ecclesias-
tical State would be destroyed in the Reign of a
SExTUs, as may be inferred from their own voluntary
Satire on this Title, which was assumed by Car-
dinal Braschi, at the time of his election to the Pope-
dom, and as set forth in a Note in the Journal of
Mr. Duppa. "“The Romans (says Mr. Duppa) have
a credulous prejudice amongst them, that THE STATE
must ever be ruined when governed by a SExTUs ; and
when Cardinal Braschi was elevated to the Pontifical
Honours by the Title of Pius the SixTH, the day after
his election, this elegant and severe satire was to be
read on the corners of the streets, and in every public
Piazza in Rome—
‘Tarquinius Sextus, Sextus Nero, Sextus et Iste;
‘In Seactis semper perdita Roma fuit.”
The power which the Emperor Justinian gave
to Pope John, A. D. 533, Napoleon Bonaparte took
* Duppa's Journal, sect. i. p. 1.
BON APARTE DESTROYS TIIE POPEDOM. 259
away from Pope SExTUs, A. D. 1798, agreeable to the
Prophecy of St. John, “God hath put in their
hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their
Kingdom unto the Beast, UNTIL the words of God
shall be FULFILLED.” The “ 1260 Days” of Pro-
phetical years having expired A. D. 1793, we conclude
that the “words of God are fulfilled,” and this fact
is confirmed by the Pope being compelled to put his
Pontifical Roman Signature to his Downfall,—‘ Pio
SESTO,’ to which we may add the x&gayaz of his
Kingdom, which is, LATEINos.
* Rev. xvii. 17.
S 2
CHAPTER XIX.
THE SUBJECT RECAPITULATED, WITH A BRIEF NOTICE
OF THE WARIOUS LATIN TITLES ASSU M ED BY THE
PA PACY.
HAVING already shown that LATINUs (in Greek
Aarévvos) is the NAME of a MAN, and that the ancient
Orthography of IRENAEUs in his two-fold use of the
Diphthong or Broad 4 or et, was esteemed perfectly
classical in his time; also that the said Proper
Name contains the true “ Number of a Man,”
which is x86', 666; and having also reminded my
readers that the universal and canonized Language
of the Church of Rome (in lieu of the Italian, or
Greek,) is LATIN, which constitutes the Pope a
LATIN HEAD ; that the Pope who is the HEAD of
the CHURCH of Rome is both the SoverEIGN of
Rome and “PontiFEx MAXIMUs,” wearing the
TRIPLE TIARA or CRowN as the Emblem of the
former, and the EPIscoPAL MITRE of the latter;
THE Two-Fold sover EIGNTY OF THE POPE. 261
and, that, by exercise of this two-fold Sovereignty,
the Pope is a Roman Sovereign and Latin High
Priest : that the SEAT of the Papal Latin Empire
is Rome, which was the ancient Capital of the
Roman Emperors, (whose Language was Latin,) and
to whose CITY and KINGDom the Popes have gra-
dually succeeded by craft and usurpation after the
breaking up of the old Roman Empire, and the
change of the Seat of Government from Rome to
Constantinople; that the Pope (in the character of
the “Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdition,”)
“sitTETH in the Temple of God,” and is worshipped
by all the People of Rome as a God, according to
the prophecy of St. Paul to the Thessalonians,"
“Let no man deceive you by any means; for that
Day shall not come, Except there come a FALLING
Away FIRST, and that MAN of Sin be Revealed, the
SoN of Perdition; who opposeth and ea'alteth him-
self above all that is called God, or that is wor-
shipped; so that He as God sitteth in the Temple
of God, shewing himself that He is GoD ; ” that
the Pope has not only adopted the LATIN Language
for the use of the Church of Rome; but has taken
to Himself, as an appendage to his TIARA, (in Letters
of Diamonds,) the Pagan Casarean Latin Title
of “ Pontifer Optimus Marimus,” as the Pagan
Roman Emperors did, who sacrificed to JUPITER,
whose High Priests they were: that the Papal
Jatin Church of Rome claims to be the Mother and
Mistress of all Churches in the world: this is
| 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.
262 CHAPTER XIX.
obvious from the ‘Roman Catechism' and ‘Trent
Confession of Faith,’ in these words, “ Ecclesia
Romana, quae omnium Ecclesiarum, Mater est et
Magistra,” &c. that the Church of Rome “forbids
Marriage” to her Priesthood, and “Meats” to
her Laity, thereby fulfilling the ea press words of
the Holy Spirit concerning Apostacy, 1 Tim. iv.
1, 3, and also ‘speaks in an UNKNowN Tongue in
the Church, viz. LATIN, which latter Heresy, if it
stood alone, proves her “falling away” or “de-
parture from the Faith : that there is none other
City in the world, seated on Seven MoUNTAINs
or HILLs of classical or historical celebrity, but
Rome; or, over which Rome does not claim Eccle-
siastical ascendancy; and, therefore, the Pope is
clearly seen to be the Mystical Babylonish MAN, or
Ecclesiastical Abomination, which St. John saw in
Vision as the great corrupter of Christ's Church,
seated upon the “Seven Mountains " which indicate
the locality of Rome; for, as the Euphratean Ba-
bylon was destroyed before the Christian AEra ; so
there can be no doubt that Rome is intended by the
figure,” “MYSTERY, BABYLoN THE GREAT,” “that
GREAT CITY, which reigneth over the KINGs of THE
EARTH.” This opinion is pointedly confirmed to us
by the words of * King Louis the XIIth, when he
had overthrown Pope JULIUS the IInd, and caused
certain CRowNs of GoLD to be stamped with this
* Bp. Jewell's Apology, p. 33. Edit. Isaacson.
* Rev. xvii. 5 and 18.
* See “The Buckler of the Faith,” by Peter Du Moulin, p. 543.
RoME THE SEVEN-HILLED CITY. 263
superscription, “PERDAM NoMEN BABYLONIs.”
‘I will DESTRoy the NAME of BABYLoN.”
How sound, therefore, and conclusive are the
remarks of Dr. Henry More on this point! No
one, indeed, who will give a moment's attention to
the subject, can fail of perceiving their force and
pertinency. The Doctor remarks,” “The Woman
which thou sawest is that Great City which [Now
Reigneth] over the Kings of the Earth.” For it is
in the PRESENT Tense, and spoken in St. John's
time, when there was no seven-hilled City that
reigned over the Kings of the Earth but old Rome.
And, therefore, of NECESSITY it is she.” To which
remarks I would add the parallel opinion of Irendeus
for his production of the conjectured Name LA-
TEINos, wherein he calls the Latin, or Roman Em-
pire, “ Novissimum REGNUM,” “ the Last King-
dom; ” and then gives his Reason, “LATINI enim
sunt qui NUNc REGNANT : ” “ For they are LATINs
who Now REIGN.” And, by the revival of the
Latin Language by the Papacy, in the City of
Rome, and throughout the States of the Church
of Rome, we know that the Sovereign Pontifical
Empire is, (as far as it regards the LATIN,) “ Novis-
simum Regnum,” “ The Last Kingdom ; " and that
Rome, therefore, is “ MYSTERY, BABYLoN the
GREAT ; ” “ that GREAT’’ (Ecclesiastical, Seven-
Hilled,) “CITY, which [Now] reigneth over the
Kings of the Papal Roman Earth.”
* Dr. H. More's Works. Fol. p. 593, London, 1708.
264 *
CHAPTER XIX .
Dr. More further remarks, “But why do I go
about so industriously to prove that which our very
Adversaries do not deny, as Ribera and Cornelius &
Lapide, who both acknowledge Old Rome here
meant, and Alcazar also and Bellarmirte upon par-
ticular evincement from this verse ? The words of
Bellarmine are, “Neque enim alia Civitas est quae
Johannis tempore Imperium habuerit super Reges
terra quâm Roma, et notissimum est supra septem
Montes Romam a dificatem esse.” Which two things
joined together are a Demonstration that Rome in
Italy here is meant, and no other City.” May we
not say then, that the CITY of Rome (“Mystery,
Babylon the Great") is all but named by St. John?
and that he could not have come nearer to the Name
than by saying it is Rome; it is the Latin, or Roman
Pontifical City: that “Great” Ecclesiastical “City”
which Reigneth over the Kings and Kingdoms of
the old Roman Earth, out of which she arose, and
into which She succeeded by craft during the vil-
lanous Reign of the Usurper and Regicide Emperor”
Phocas the IInd.
Thus have we discovered by the aid of the Holy
Scriptures, the conjectures of Irenatus, Tertullian,
and others, subsequent History, and undeniable
facts, that the Latin Mark, Latin Name, Latin
Number, Latin Language, Latin Church, and
Kingdom of Rome, are fully descriptive of this
| Dr. H. More's Works, p. 593.
See the Confirmative Edict of Phocas, quoted by Cuninghame on
the Apocalypse, p. 207.
©
sº
THE ABODE OF THE MAN OF SIN. 265
Mystical, Idolatrous, Papal Latin MAN, the proper
Appellative of whom is LATEINos: that the Number
of his Name is 666; the time of his Reigning “ 1260
Days" of Years; the situation of his “Great
City” upon the “Seven Mountains ; ” all of which
concentre in the Roman and Latin Name and City
of Rome. To doubt, therefore, any longer upon this
subject seems plainly inexcusable, for vain would be
the attempt to discover any other Proper and Appel-
lative Name of a MAN, which can be Thus applied
in almost every possible manner to the PAPAL
CHURCH, CITY, KINGDOM, LANGUAGE, TITLEs, &c.
&c. &c. wherefore Pope RY is fully characteristic of
the “MAN,” who is the “Man of Sin,” the “Son
of Perdition,” the “ Mystery of Iniquity,” the
“Wicked One,” whose Mystical “ MARK,” or
“NAME,” we are exhorted by St. John to seek after,
by the means of “wisdom * and “understanding,”
and then to “count the “ Number” of his NAME.
The “wisdom" then to which we presume we have
arrived, is, that by the union of the Papal Mitre
with the Triple Crown or Tiara, we have come to
the “understanding ” that “the Beast,” who (ac-
cording to the very words of St. John) “ had two
Horns like a LAMB,” represents the ecclesiastical
character and dignity of the Pope, whereof the epis-
copal Mitre is the emblem ; and as it is by him said
of the second Beast that “ HE everciseth ALL the
Power of the FIRST BEAST, and SPAKE as a
DRAGON,” we understand the Dragon-like speech to
represent the TEMPORAL Power of the Pope, (to
266 CHAPTER XIX :
wit, the Triple Crown, which is the Emblem of
Triple Sovereignty,) which latter has never been ea-
ceeded by the most Tyrannical Pagan Emperors of
ancient Rome. Wherefore as Rome PAGAN was the
first Beast, so is Rome PAPAL the second Beast,
which St. John saw “coming up out of the EARTH :”
and, consequently, as Aarévvos is the Name of a
Man, according to Irendºus, Virgil, &c. and con-
tains the true Number 666, by the individual Greek
Letters of the Name, and is in every possible sense
applicable to the Mystical Papal Kingdom, so is it
the proper Appellative of the Pope of Rome, whose
Kingdom, Reign, City, and Name are all Numbered,
and whose indelible “ MARK ?? is LATIN.
As we have traced the Pope to head quarters, we
may presume with tolerable confidence that HE is
the “MAN "whose Appellative or Descriptive Name
we intended to elicit from the enigmatical Number
xás", or 666, and it may throw some additional light
on the subject of the mystic Name, to mention a
few of the Sovereign Titles and Epithets which the
Pope assumes to himself, or which are bestowed upon
him by his Conclave of Cardinals, at the time of his
Installation, Coronation, &c. which are all of a
LATIN complexion, and characterise his dupler power,
fulfilling those words of St. John, "“He is the
eighth, and is of the seven,” i. e. ‘ Imperium in Im-
perio,” namely, “Sanctum Romanum Imperium,’ and
‘Sacra Romana Ecclesia.”
* Rev. xvii. 11.
TITLES oF THE PoPEs. 267
I.
The Sovereign Title
Of
The Temporal Kingdom.
of
Papal Rome.
* SANCTUM RoMANUM IMPERIUM.'
Sovereign Titles
given to the Popes, (in lieu of their Baptismal
and Surmames) at the time of their Electiom and
Coronation ; such as—
JULIUS LIGUR. II. VICTOR IV.
GREGORIUS VII. FELIX V.
SEXTUS V. PIUS VII.
CLEMENS VIII. INNOCENS XIII.
PAULUS V. LEo X.
LUcIUs II. ALEXANDER III.
Sovereign Pontifical Titles
assumed by the Popes; the first of which is Pagam,
the others Blasphemous.
' * PoNTIFEX OPTIMUs MAxiMUs.'
* * VICE-DEo sUPER TERRAM.'
3 * PATER PRINCIPUM et REGUM : RECTOR ORBIs.
1 The Title of Gregory XIII. ° Title of Paul V.
3 Coronation Title giwen to Pope Innocent XIII.
268 CHAPTER XIX :
II.
The Ecclesiastical Title
Of -
The Metropolitam Church
and
Spiritual Hierarchy
Of
Papal Rome.
* SAcRA ROMANA EccLESIA.'
* EccLESIA RoMANA, quæ oMNIUM EccLESIARUM,
MATER est et MAGISTRA.
Ecclesiastical Titles
Of
Supremacy, Universality, Blasphemy, and of mock
humility, used by and concerning the Popes.
* EMINENTIssIMUs et REvERENDISSIMUS PATER ac
DoMINUS.'
* EPIscoPUS ORBIS.'
* VicARIUS SALvAToRIS NosTRI JESU CHRISTI IN
TERRA.'
* SANCTIssIMUS PATER.'
* SERvUs SERvoRUM DEI.'
As all the foregoing LATIN Titles, with very many
others, are assumed by or bestowed upon the Popes
qf Rome, may we not thence say they savour much
more of their Latin pagam predecessors the Romam
THE MAGNIFICENT TIARA of JULIUS II. 269
Emperors, whose seat and kingdom they occupy,
than of St. PETER the Apostle of Christ 2 For,
I would ask, What humble, poor and despised MAN,
like St. PETER, would think of assuming to himself
such monstrous and blasphemous Titles, whereby to
glorify his Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and of
taking a TIARA, or Triple Crown, or Royal Diadem,
in addition, more magnificent perhaps than any of
those which were worn by the Emperors and Kings
of the Roman Earth, up to the time of Louis the
XIIth. [See a splendid engraving of the Papal
Tiara of Julius II. with the description of it, as set
forth in the Voyages of the Sr. A. De La Motraye,
Tom. I. chap. ii. p. 30 and 32.] And then to make
yet one more allusion to that most unscriptural prac-
tice of inculcating Religion in an “unknown tongue.”
Is not LATIN the Mother Tongue of the Papal Church
of Rome at this very hour, although it is a Dead
Language in all Europe and the World, yea, even in
all ITALY and at Rome itself? The Papal “Masses,
Prayers, Hymns, Litanies, Canons, Decretals, Bulls,
&c. are expressed in LATIN. The Papal Councils speak
in Latin. Women themselves pray in Latin. The
Holy Scripture is not read in any other Language
under Popery, than Latin. The Council of Trent
has commanded the Vulgar Latin to be the only
authentic Version. The Roman Doctors prefer it
to the Hebrew and Greek. Teat itself, which was
written by the Prophets and Apostles ; and there-
* More's Mystery of Iniquity, Part II. Booki, chap. 15. sect, 8. London,
1706.
270 CHAPTER XIX :
fore it is conclusive that as the Papists Latinize in
every thing, so the Proper and Appellative Name
LATEINos is in every way applicable to Popery. The
Pope therefore is the “MAN ?” who carries the Mark
or Name of the Beast, or the Number of his Name,
having the descriptive Mark of both Beasts, that
is, Sovereign and Pontifical; inasmuch as he is a
Latin by Language, a Roman by Election : Earer-
cises all the Power of the First Beast, and is the
Image made to the first Beast; for upon the Creation
of the Pope, these words are said: ‘Quem Creant,
Adorant,’ ‘whom they create, they adore.’ And if
the Speech of poor Peter bewrayed him that he was
a Galilean, although he endeavoured to conceal it ;
how much rather does the openly professed LATIN
Tongue of the Pope bewray HIM that HE is the
Mystical Roman or LATIN MAN of the Secular and
Pontifical Empire of modern Rome. Look to it,
therefore, O Papist, if, peradventure, thou canst
recover thy Pope from the deadly wound which the
faithful Martyr Irenaus hath inflicted on thy LATIN
HEAD, wherewith he hath (by a Bow drawn at a
Venture) smitten thy CHURCH and KINGDoM ; thy
MITRE and TRIPLE CROWN; thy Latin Roman MAN.
Prepare then, O Papist, thy Latin Coffin (for the
doom of Popery is come, the “1260 Days” of Years
having eaſpired,) and embalm the Effigy of thy
Majestic LATIN IDol, and let thy Asbestos be of
true Latin Teature, that the Fire of Vesuvius scorch
not his LATIN Holiness, for “the smoke of his Tor-
ment ascendeth up for ever and ever.”
THE BRAND, MARK, LATEINOS. 27 l
O LATIN PAPA, the Church of Christ will mourn
thy evit: but only as the Jews of old did that of
Herod the Great, after they had escaped from the
* Circus or Hippodrome at Jericho, in which that
Monster had caused them to be imprisoned, com-
manding that they should be destroyed immediately
after his Death ; and because of those whom THOU
hast shut up in thy INFERNAL INQUISITION, hast
tortured, burned, and massacred to the number of
three Millions, and others whom thou hast anathema-
tized and turned out of thy LATIN Roman CHURCH ;
(the great Antichristian “SYNAGoGUE of SATAN ;”
because of these, and all other, thy horrible Monstro-
sities, and “ lying wonders ; ” KNow that “thy
latter end shall be worse than the beginning !”
As the Pope of Rome has chosen to be styled :
‘The Vicar of our Saviour Jesus Christ upon
Earth,’ and yet as he renounces his Baptismal and
Family NAMEs, and substitutes the vulgar LATIN,
for the vernacular Tongue of Rome and Italy,
which is ITALIAN ; so it is evident that HE is an
ANoNYMoUs MAN ; wherefore, it is only consistent
with the word of God that he should be branded
with the characteristic Mark of “the Man of Sin,”
“the Son of Perdition,” “the Mystery of Ini-
quity,” “the Wicked one,” “the Antichrist,” for
these, and such like terms, may be fairly associated
with his most wonderful descriptive, proper, enigma-
tical and Appellative Name Aarévos. Let him,
therefore, be allowed in requital of his most Myste-
* Joseph. Antiqui, Lib, xvii, chap. vi.
272 CHAPTER XIX .
rious Tyranny, the full enjoyment of his Mock and
Blasphemous Titles which he has assumed, (“and
I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast,
full of NAMEs of BLASPHEMY,”) that he may appear
as Monstrous as he is described by St. Paul and St.
John, and that his Proper and Appellative Name
may be written in Hebrew, GREEK, and LATIN
characters
(nºn. AATeiNox. LATEINUs.)
upon the Pontifical LABARUM, or Mystical Rom AN
STANDARD, and placed in the VATICAN PALACE at
Rome, as a STANDARD MEMORIAL of the indubitable
NAME of the “MAN,” whose NUMBER is x&g', 666:
that all EUROPE may exclaim in mock derision :
“ ECCE HOMO ! !”
Ecce 1 * “ NoMEN Bestiaº, aut Numerum NoMINIs
ejus. Numerus enim HOMINIS est, et NUMERUs
EJ US SExceNTA SExAGINTA SEx.” And we may
add the words of Irendºus to those of St. John, and
say, “LATEINos NoMEN habet Sevcentorum Seva-
ginta Sea. Numerum ; et Valde Verisimile est,
quoniam novissimum Regnum hoc habet vocabulum.
LATINI enim sunt qui NUNC REGNANT: i.e. in the
Person and Character of the Pope of Rome, the
Appellative of whose Ecclesiastical Kingdom is
nºnym Roman ; (“Sacra Rom ANA Ecclesia ; ”)
but the NAME of the MAN, (whose “NUMBER is
Sia. Hundred Threescore and Siv ") is A&révvos,
LATEINUS.
AATEINOX.
* Revelations xvii. 3. * Revelations xiii. 17, 18.
273
AATEINOX.
A
-
3
=
:
=
M
=
With a little attention we may soon discover by the
pompous and most unewampled manner which this
LATIN ... “Pontifer Optimus Marimus" ascends the
Papal Throne; by the nature of his Papal Proclama-
tion; with the subsequent secular and Ecclesiastical
Titles and Fictitious Name which he so Innocently
and modestly assumes, that HE is the “MAN,” whose
“MARK,” “NAME,” and “NUMBER” are referred to
by St. John ; and thus we are well assured, that the
Event is the sure Interpreter of the Prophecy. It
will only be necessary, therefore, to give an Historical
Account of the Election, Proclamation, and Coro-
nation of Pope INNocent XIII, who succeeded
CLEMENT XI, (as recorded by Edward Wright,
Esq., who was an eye-witness of the Ceremonies,) as
conclusive on this subject.
CHAPTER XX.
AN HISTORICAL Account of THE ELECTION, PRo-
CLAMATION, AND CoRoNATION OF Pope INNo-
CENT XIII. (As REcoRDED BY EDwARD WRIGHT,
Esq.) ILLUSTRATING THE GENIUs of Pope RY.
“ ROME.”
* “We made the more haste,” says Mr. Wright,
from Naples to Rome in expectation of seeing the
Ceremonies of the Holy Week; but the principal
were omitted, by reason of the Death of the Pope
(CLEMENT XI.) which had happened a little before.”
** Clement XI. died the 19th of March, 1721,
N. S. after a Reign of twenty years, and about three
Months. He was esteemed a Man of learning, and
affable Behaviour, and gave patient Audience to the
meanest: However, his Subjects thought he had
reigned long enough. The Rom ANs please them-
selves with the Jubilee of a new Promotion ; the
Court Favours are then to run in a new channel, and
every Man is in hopes of some Benefit by the change.”
* Wright's Travels in Italy, &c. vol. i. p. 189, London, 1730. ” Ibid. 190.
ELECTION OF POPE INNOCENT XIII. 275
“The conclave for the Election of the new Pope
sate about five weeks, which is reckoned but a short
time. It was shut up the 30th of March, and the new
Pope was proclaimed the 8th of May by Cardinal
Panfilio, who came to the Loggia della Beneditione,
over the noble Portico which is at the entrance into
St. Peter's Church ; there with a Thundering Voice
he spake as follows: ”
“Annuncio vobis Gaudium magnum ; PAPAM
habemus ; EMIN ENTISSIMUM et Rev ERENDIssi MUM
PATREM ac Dom INUM Mich. Angelum, Titulo S. S.
Quirici et Julitae SACRE Rom ANAE Ecclesiæ Pres-
byterum, Cardinalem de Comitibus, qui NoMEN sibi
Assumpsit INNocentiuM XIII.”
“I bring you Tidings of great Joy; we have a
Pope; the Most Reverend Father and Lord Michael
Angelo, Priest of the Holy Roman Church, Car-
dinal de Conti, with the Title 1 of S. Quiricus and
Julita ; who has taken upon him the Name of
INNOCENT XIII.”
“This sort of Annunciation to the People seems
to have a plain Allusion to that of the Angel to the
Shepherds, upon the Birth of our Saviour; “Behold,
I bring you tidings of great Joy.” When he had
done speaking, he dropt a Paper, which contained
the same words, down among the People.”
Now to whom, I would ask, did Cardinal Panfilio
announce these—“tidings of Great Joy?” Was it
not to the People of Rome 2 Yes, truly 1 And what
* “Each Cardinal has a Church, of which he is said to be Titolare; and
so this of the Saints Quiricus and Julita gave Title to Cardinal Conti.”
T 2
276 CHAPTER XX .
was the nature of his Annunciation to them? Why,
that “we” (Romanists or Papists) “ have a Pope 1"
And pray what Order of being is he 2 Why an
“Innocent ’’ ‘‘ PontiFex opTIMUs MAXIMUs,”
“Priest of the Holy Roman Church,” whose Lan-
guage is LATIN, and he a LATIN MAN, who, although
his original Name was Michael Angelo, must, upon
his Assumption of the Papal Dignity, renounce both
his Baptismal and Family Names, and be announced
to the world by the assumed, or fictitious Name of
INNocent XIII. And pray why does the Pope
assume this fictitious Title of INNocBNT 2 Because
a Roman Sovereign Pontiff, whose Name was
OspoRco, (that the obscurity of his Family might
not be known) changed his Name to SERGIO, as the
Florentine History informs us in the following words.
| “After a few other Bishops,” (says Macchiavel,”)
“OSPORco a Rom ANE, aspired to the Papacy; who,
for the homeliness of his Name, caused himself to
be called SERGIo: which was the beginning why the
Names of the Popes were changed at their Elec-
tions : " and this elective custom, which originated
in Pride, has been continued by all succeeding Sove-
reign Roman Pontiffs. And why does this practice
continue 2 Because of Antiquity, and that we might
be sure that the Pope is elected kar’ story—“The
Most Reverend Father and Lord ” “ Innocent
XIII.” “Priest of the Holy Roman CHURCH.”
Well, tell me what is the meaning of the “Roman
1 See the Florentine History by Nicholo Macchiavelli, translated from the
Italian into English by Thomas Bedingfield, Fsq., 1595.
ADoRATION of Pope INNocent XIII. 277
CHURCH 2" Why, the CHURCH of Rome to be
sure. O Rom AN MAN ; O LATIN MAN ; O PAPAL
MAN ; “out of thine own Mouth will I judge thee :”
Thou acknowledgest thyself that thy CHURCH is the
‘Rom AN CHURCH,” (“sacra Rom ANA Ecclesia”)
and because it us the Rom AN, therefore it is also
the LATIN Church ; for LATIN is Roman, and
RoMAN is Latin, and LATIN is the canonized living
wniversal Language of the Roman Church. But as
to the Church of Christ, or of St. Peter the Apostle;
KNow, O Pope, that “Thou hast neither PART nor
Lot in this Matter;" for although thou hast endea-
voured to associate the humble Title of “, Servus
Servorum Dei,” with the Pagan Blasphemous
Title of ‘Pontifea. Optimus Marimus,' yet canst
thou not hide thy cloven Foot, nor thy “Dragon
Mouth.”
But we proceed with Mr. Edward Wright's obser-
vations concerning the Adoration paid to the ‘Pon-
tifea. Optimus Marimus.’
“In the Afternoon of the same Day his new Holi-
ness went to St. Peter's Church to receive the THIRD
ADoRATION of the Cardinals [the two first had been
made in the Chapel of Sixtus IV. within the PALAce
of the VATICAN) and to give his first Benediction
to the People. His Holiness sate on the Great
Altar; then the Cardinal Dean (Tanara) beginning
to chant the Te Deum, was followed by the Musicians
of the Chapel. At the ADoRATION, the Cardinals
kiss the Pope's foot, then his Hand, and then his
Cheek : the last they call being received ad Osculum
278 CH APTER XX.
et Amplevum [to the Kiss and the Embrace;] for
His Holiness at the same time Embraces them. As
soon as the Adoration was over, and the Prayers
usual on the occasion, all was concluded with the
Benediction.”
It is well remarked by “Dr. Conyers Middleton'
in a small work entitled “A Letter from Rome,” that
“Of all the Sovereign Pontiffs of Pagan Rome,
it is very remarkable that CALIGULA was the first,
who ever offered his Foot to be kissed by any, who
approached him ; which raised a general indignation
through the City, to see themselves reduced to suffer
so great an Indignity. Those who endeavoured to
excuse it, said; that it was not done out of Insolence,
but vanity; and for the sake of shewing his golden
slipper, set with jewels. Seneca declaims upon it,
in his usual manner, as the last affront to Liberty;
and the introduction of a Persian Slavery into the
manners of Rome." Yet this servile act, unworthy
either to be imposed or complied with by man, is
now the standing ceremonial of Christian Rome,
and a necessary condition of access to the Reigning
Popes; though derived from no better origin, than
the frantic pride of a brutal Pagan Tyrant.”
From the foregoing verbatim account of Mr.
Edward Wright concerning the Adoration of the
Pope, which is corroborated by the testimony of
Dr. Conyers Middleton, we deduce a most important
* Absoluto et gratias agenti porrexit osculandum sinistrum pedem-qui
excusant, negant id insolentiae causã factum : aiunt socculum auratum,
imo aureum, margaritis distinctum ostendere eum voluisse—natus in hoc,
ut mores Civitatis Persica servitute mutaret, &c.” Senec. de Benef. i. 2. 12.
INNOCENT XIII. AND CALIGULA CoMPARED. 279.
Historical Fact; for therein we not only discover
an Evact Parallel between Popery and Paganism ;
but also between the words of St. Paul and the
conduct of the Popes. The Apostle Paul says, that,
the “Man of Sin,” the “Son of Perdition,” oppo-
seth and evalteth himself above all that is called
God, or that is worshipped; so that HE as God,
sITTETH in the TEMPLE of God, shewing himself
that HE Is God.” And Mr. Wright says concern-
ing the Pope that “His Holiness sat on the GREAT
ALTAR in St. PETER’s CHURCH ‘’—and—“At the
ADoRATION the Cardinals kiss the Pope's foot, then
his Hand, and then his Cheek,” &c. whereby we
perceive that this Papal “Pontifer Optimus Mawi-
mus” is worshipped and adored by his Cardinals, and
Courtiers in a more servile manner in St. Peter's
Church, (“THE TEMPLE of God’”) at Rome, than
the brutal Pagan Tyrant and Emperor CALIGULA
was upon his Imperial Throne. Wherefore, the
Pope is proved to be incomparably the “Man of
Sin,” and the “Son of Perdition,” by the agree-
ment of the Event with St. Paul's prediction. Now,
is there any ea'ample on Record of St. Peter's kissing
the foot; then the Hand; and then the Cheek of
CHRIST, before he spoke to his Master; who had a
right (if any one had) to expect this sort of homage
from his poor Disciple # Or, is there any ea ample
of any one of the Apostles kissing the Foot, then
the Hand, and lastly the Cheek of St. Peter, before
they addressed him as their Sovereign Pontiff’ſ We
* 2 Thessalonians ii. 3, 4.
280 CHAPTER XX :
know that the Apostle introduced no such abominable
and Idolatrous Custom into the “Temple of God.”
For in the case of Peter, and Cornelius the Centu-
rion, we read, that, “as Peter was coming in,
Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet and
worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying,
Stand up: I myself also am a Man.” There is no
mention of St. Peter's foot being kissed on this
occasion, neither do we read that St. Peter was ever
SEATED (as the Pope now is) on the “Great Altar”
“in the Temple of God,” either at Rome, or JERU-
SALEM, or elsewhere: but the Apostle in raising up
Cornelius, plainly and honestly assured him that he
was only a Man, and not a God to be worshipped.
Whatever abundance of Infallibility, Universality,
Antiquity, Mystery, or Blasphemous Titles, the
Latin Papal Hierarch may heap upon himself 'as
Badges of peculiar Distinction, they must, one and
all, be brought to the Standard of Divine Truth,
and there we have the declaration of Jehovah himself
concerning CHRIST's Mission to the GENTILEs,” “I
AM THE LoRD : that is MY NAME: and MY GLORY
will I not give to ANother,” (viz. the Pope,)
“ neither my praise to graven Images: ” to wit, the
Image of St. Peter, which is made out of an old
Statue of Jupiter, and placed in the Roman Basi-
lique, (dedicated to the Apostle,) the toe of which,
although of Metal, is nearly worn out by the re-
peated kissings of countless Pilgrims, and all Orders
of Papistical Devotees.
* Acts x. 25, 26. * Isaiah xlii. 8,
Idol ATRY OF Pope INNocent XIII. &c. 281
We perceive, then, by every view of the Question;
by a Comparison of the Holy Scriptures with the
Page of History, that the Latin Papistical “ Pon-
tifer Optimus Marimus” has required more homage,
more Adoration, more genufletion for Himself, than
God, or Christ, or St. Peter, or any of the Inspired
Apostles : or even than the Pagan Romans would
countenance in the Person of the tyrannical Emperor
CALIGULA. The Pope, therefore, as the “ Dua,
Gregis’’ of Papists, is surely “ANTICHRIST,” in
requiring and receiving divine Honours on the one
hand, and Titles which are wholly at variance with
Christianity on the other.
We have most clearly tracked this Latin Pontifical
“Man,” or “Lamb-horned’ Beast of the “EARTH,”
to his Latin Ecclesiastical Seat and Sovereign
Throne “in the Temple of God” at Rome. And
now let this “MAN,” whose Proper and Appellative
Name is LATEINos, and “ his Number 666,” be
assured of a “fearful looking-for of judgment and
fiery indignation, which shall devour the Adver-
saries; ” for his allotted Reign of “1260 Days”
of Years has come to a close. Witness how much
was accomplished at the Time of the REForMATION:
and how much has been effected by the Instrumen-
tality of France since the years 1792 and 1830; for
confirmation of the former, see ‘ a Brief Account
of the Subversion of the Papal Government, by
Richard Duppa. Second Edit. 1798.’ And of the
latter, witness the erasure of the VIth Article of the
| Heb. x. 27.
282 CHAPTER XX.
French Charter, whereby the Popish Church of
Rome ceased to be the National Church of France,
and the Abdication of the Crown of France by the
Popish Priest-ridden Monarch CHARLEs the Xth,
(August 2nd, 1830,) at RAMBouilleT, the MANSION
of a FRENCH PROTESTANT, who had fled to England,
and taken up his Abode in Kent," at the time of the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes by Louis the
XIVth. So that Charles the Xth, the Duke of Bor-
deaua, Monsieur, the King's Brother, the Duchess
of Berry, the Duchess of Angoulême, and all the
old Branch of the Bourbons, ceded their Right
and Title to the Popish KINGDom of FRANCE in the
House of a FRENCH PROTESTANT Refugee, which
was applied for by the living Hereditary Descendant
of the House of Rambouillet, after the Restoration
of Louis the XVIII. but he was refused his patri-
mony by Charles X. According to the Laws of
France, the Crown was considered an Hereditary
Right, and irreversible, and, therefore, England
waged war with Buonaparte and Restored the Bour-
bon Line; and by the same Hereditary Law the
House and Property of Rambouillet ought to have
been Restored to their Rightful Owner.
But to return from our digression. Mr. Edward
Wright thus continues his description of the Papal
Coronation.
* “On the 18th of the same month [May] was
the CoRoNATION ; before that ceremony a Pontifical
* See Christian Guardian for October 1831.
* Wright's 'Travels. Vol. i. p. 191.
coRONATION AND MASS OF INNOCENT XIII. 283
Mass was celebrated by the Pope himself in the
Church of St. Peter; His Holiness sucks the Sacra-
mental Wine through a Tube; ALL OTHER PRIESTs
and Bishops drink it out of the Chalice.”
As there is no foundation in Holy Writ for the
Idolatrous custom of kissing the Foot, the Hand,
and the Cheek of the Pope, so neither is there for
His Holiness (or rather His Wickedness, for so he
is called by St. Paul, “the Wicked One,”) to suck
the Sacramental Wine through a Tube, because the
Primitive Institution of the Lord's Supper, as set
forth by St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St.
Paul, enjoins not upon Christians any such ridiculous
practice; for the word “DRINK’’ (and not suck)
was the expression used both by Christ and his
Inspired Apostles ; and, therefore, let the Reader
only be at the trouble to consult with attention that
most admirable and unanswerable work of “ Peter
du Moulin, on the ANATOMY of the MAss,” wherein
he sets forth no less than XXXIV. DIFFERENCEs as
existing between the Papal Mass, and the Aposto-
lical manner of celebrating the Lord's Supper, and
he will no longer wonder why the English of old
time used to convert the words, “ Hoc est Corpus
Meum ; ” “This is my body: ” into “Hocus-
pocus.”
But I must now proceed with the Account given
us by Mr. Wright of the Ceremony of the Pope's
Coronation after the celebration of the Pontifical
* ANATOMIE de la Messe. Par Pierre Du Moulin. Chap. II. Cinquiesme
Edition. A Charenton. 1647.
284 CHA PTER XX.
Mass, wherein we have an additional narrative of
Papal Elevation and Adoration. Mr. Wright thus
describes the scene:
* “As the Pope was carried from the Chapel of
St. Gregory (where were performed some Functions
preparatory to the Mass) ea'alted in his Chair [the
Sedia Gestatoria] with the Baldachino, or Canopy, -
over his head, and the Flabelli for driving away the
Flies on each side, one of the Masters of the Cere-
monies went before him with some Flair tied at the
end of a long Cane, and one of the Clerks of the
Chapel with a lighted Torch set fire to it; the
Master of the Ceremonies at the same time pro-
nouncing aloud these words, “ SANCTISSIME PATER,
sic transit Gloria Mundi ; ” Most Holy FATHER,
thus passeth away the Glory of the World. This
ceremony was repeated twice more.” -
Thus we notice that the Pope is not only carried
in State, and receives divine Adoration from their
Eminences the Cardinals, and sucks the Sacramental
Wine through a Tube differently from all other
Priests and Bishops of the Latin Church ; but
permits the Master of the Ceremonies to proclaim
aloud (in the hearing of assembled Multitudes)
“SANCTIssi ME PATER,” “Most Holy FATHER.’
Thus the Pope tacitly allows himself to be proclaimed
by an Attribute peculiar to the Deity, viz. “Most
Holy,” and, therefore, is the Pope guilty of down-
right Blasphemy.
To whom belongeth the lofty attribute of “Most
| Wright's Travels. Vol. i., p. 191.
BLASPHEMOUS PROCLA MATION OF INNocent XIII.285
Holy,” but to the Lord GoD 2 But the Pope also
assumeth the lofty attribute of “Most Holy " to
himself: therefore the Pope assumeth an Equality
with the Lord GoD.
And, consequently, in the person and Ecclesiastical
character of the Pope of Rome is fulfilled this pro-
phecy of St. Paul, “That HE” (viz. “The Man
of Sin,” “ the Son of Perdition,” “the Mystery of
Iniquity,” “the Wicked One,”) “as God” (in the
character of God “Most Holy ”) “sitTETH in the
Temple of God, showing himself that He is God ; ”
which the Pope abundantly manifests by the Divine
adoration which he commonly receives in St. Peter's
Church and at the Vatican Palace, as well as in the
public streets of Rome, from their Eminences the
Cardinals, from the Emperors, Kings, Princes, and
Nobles of the whole Roman earth, and from all
persons whatsoever, when they approach near to
‘ His (Sovereign Pontifical) Holiness,” or ‘Most
Holy Father.’ This fact is confirmed by the as-
sumption of the Divine Attribute “Most Holy,”
as well as the Divine Title of “RULER of THE
WoRLD,” with many other titles which he most im-
piously assumes, as if they belonged to him by
divine right : whereas, those bestowed on him by St.
Paul and St. John are of a different nature, to wit,
“The Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdition,” “the
Mystery of Iniquity,” “the Wicked One,” “Anti-
christ,” “the Beast,” “the Mother of Harlots and
Abominations of the Earth,” Dragon Mouth : with
1 2 Thess. ii. 4.
286 CHAPTER XX .
a number of other epithets indicative of his utter
vileness.
But to continue the History of the Papal Corona-
tion, as related by Mr. Wright, when the Pope re-
ceives the pallium, or pall, from the first Deacon.
* “The Pope was carried to the great altar; there,
after confession for the Mass, and some usual prayers,
he received the pall from the first Deacon, with these
words, Accipe PALLIUM, sc. Plenitudinem Pontifici-
alis Qficii, ad honorem Omnipotentis DE1, et glorio-
sissimae VIRGINIS MARIAE éjus Matris, et Beatorum
Apostolorum PETRI et PAUL1, et Sanctae Roman Æ
Ecclesia. Receive thou the PALL, namely, the
PLENITUDE of the PontiFIcAL OFFICE, to the honour
of Almighty God, of the most Glorious Virgin Mary
his Mother, and of the blessed Apostles PETER and
PAUL, and of the Holy Roman Church.”
The receiving of the pall, which is the cloak or
mantle of state, may well be termed by Papists the
PLENITUDE of the Pontifical OFFICE, since it not
only embraces the highest earthly titles, but likewise
heavenly, such as “Sanctissimus Pater,’ ‘ Rector
Orbis,’ ‘ Vice-Deo,” “ Divina Majestatis,’ &c. &c.
It also includes Divine Adoration, and the appro-
priating of (what is not in the province of an earthly
being to bestow) a divine attribute to the Virgin
Mary, by calling her “ Gloriossissima’ (the most
Glorious), although the superlative degree is never
used concerning her in the New Testament ; and by
further calling Mary, “the Mother of Almighty God,”
* Wright's Travels, vol. i. p. 192.
THE POPE SUPERSEDES CHRIST. 287
(“ad honorem omnipotentis Dei, et Gloriossissimae
Virginis Maria, ejus Matris’) which are Titles of Blas-
phemy when applied to a mortal being, such as Mary
was ; for Jesus thus addressed his Mother in Cana of
Galilee, before he had performed his first miracle of
changing water into wine, “Wom AN, what have I
to do with THEE 2'' and when upon the cross, Jesus
said to his Mother, * “Wom AN, behold thy Son 1"
Besides which, the NAME of CHRIST is not men-
tioned in this ‘plenitude of the Pontifical office to the
honour of Almighty God: ' wherefore, by the
omission of the NAME of CHRIST, the ‘ Pontifical
office’ virtually supersedes that of CHRIST, and the
Pope becomes, de facto, ANTICHRIST in office. How
‘the plenitude of the Pontifical office’ can be said to
be ‘to the honour of Almighty God,” when the
NAME of CHRIST is not mentioned in THAT office, I
cannot comprehend, unless it is to be understood that
the Pope, as the visible and supreme head of the
Holy Roman Church is to be honoured as Almighty
God; and certainly no higher degree of adoration
can possibly be bestowed on any created being, than
that which the Popes require and receive, from
the Emperors, Kings, Princes, Cardinals, &c. of
the Latin Roman Church, and some of their courtiers
have even said in their presence—
** Divinae Majestatis tuae conspectus.”
‘The countenance of thy Divine Majesty.’
* John ii. 4. * John xix. 25, 26.
* Orat. Puccii. in Sess. 9. Concil. Lateram. sub Leo X. ap. Sur. ipso
limine.
288 -CHA PTER XX .
! ‘Omnem tibi uni in Coelo et in Terrā traditam a
Domino Potestatem.’
“All Power is delivered by the Lord to thee alone,
both in heaven and upon earth.”
* “Tu denique Alter Deus in Terris.’
‘Another God upon Earth.”
* “Nec Deus es, nec Homo ; quasi Neuter Es inter
utrumque."
‘ O Pope, thou art not God nor man; thy part
‘Is neither : but betwiat them both thou art.”
In corroboration of the above sentences I shall
adduce one which I copied with my own hand (during
my residence in Paris, in 1830), from a beautifully
enamelled tablet of great antiquity, representing a
Trinity of Persons. From the exquisite manner in
which the whole of it was finished, as well as the
abbreviated style in which the Latin words were
written upon it, I suppose that it must have been
executed when Popery was in its zenith. The three
characters which composed this Trinity were, 1st. the
Holy Ghost, in the likeness of a dove, with a radiated
glory around it. 2dly. Our Lord Jesus Christ in
the likeness of a Man, with a radiated glory around
his head: this figure is placed on the right side of
the Dove. And 3dly. the Pope, dressed in full
canonicals, with the Triple Tiara on his head, and
the Keys of St. Peter in his hand: this figure is
placed on the left side of the Dove. And then the
* Orat. Puccii. in Sess. 9. Concil. Lateram. &c.
* Orat. Marcell. in 4 Sess. Concil. Lateram. Sub Jul. II. Ap. sur.
* Clement. Prooem. in Gloss. prop. fin.
THE DEIFICATION OF THE POPE. 289
following words, explanatory of the subject, were
placed above and below the hieroglyphic:—
* Sancta Trinitas, UNUS DEUs: an Te invocemus;
an Te adoremus ; Te laudamus : Te glorificamus ; O
beata Trinitas, subnomen DEI UNIUs.”
* Holy Trinity, ONE God : whether we invoke
Thee; whether we adore Thee ; we praise Thee ; we
glorify Thee; O blessed Trinity, under the name of
the ONE God.”
Thus the Pope became “ as God,” in the mind of
the person who designed and executed this antique,
representing the Papal Trinity. A Jesuit might say,
that ‘ an enemy hath done this,' but the unbounded
power which the Popes have assumed and evercised
in times past, “over the kings of the earth,” (that
is, the Ten Horns), as well as the beautiful manner
in which it is finished, would amply justify the in-
tegrity of this hieroglyphic, without a comment or
gloss upon the subject; for the “Ten Horns” or
“ Kings” of the Apocalyptic Roman Earth had then
* “ONE MIND, and gave their Power, and STRENGTH,
and KINGDoM unto the Beast.” If the Epithets and
Attributes assumed by, or bestowed upon the Popes
do not justify the belief that the claims of the
Papacy are those of Infallibility and GoDLIKE, we
shall fail to establish the belief of any fact. But, she
does lay claim to them, as her Latin Language wit-
nesseth, in terms which cannot be applied to a Being
which is not more than mortal. Give ear then to the
voice of the Second Roman Beast of the LAT IN
* Rev. xvii. 13, 17.
U
290 CHAPTER XX :
Earth, for 1 “ He had two Horns like a Lamb, and
He spake As A DRAGON | | | * * Alter Deus in
Terris,' ‘Vice-Deo super Terram,’ ‘Divinae Ma-
jestatis tuæ conspectus,’ ‘ Nec Deus es, mec Homo :
quasi Neuter es inter utrumque,’ ‘Omnem Tibi Uni
in Caelo et in Terrá traditam a Domino Potestatem,”
“Sanctissimus Pater,’ ‘Pater Principum et Regum:
Rector Orbis,’ ‘ Pontifea. Optimus Marimus,’
* Eminentissimus et Reverendissimus Pater ac Do-
minus,’ ‘Episcopus Orbis,’ ‘ Vicarius Salvatoris
nostri Jesu Christi in Terrá,’ &c. &c. In Italy the
Pope is commonly called “Our Lord God the Pope,’
which is in agreement with a Greek Epithet bestowed
on him by commentators, eso; eu er yang, ‘ I am
God upon earth,’ which latter contains the ea'act Num-
ber 2.És', 666. And that the Pope is worshipped ‘as
God,” the kissing of his foot is confirmation enough
to establish his PRETENDED DIVINITY. What greater
adoration can be given or required by the Deity from
mortal men than that which is paid to the Pope of
Rome, when sitting on the high altar in St. Peter's
Church, or the Vatican Palace? Can there be any
reasonable doubt as to whom the Apostle St. Paul
alluded, when he warned the Thessalonians of the
coming of ANTICHRIST in these words, 2 “Let no
man deceive you by any means ; for THAT DAY shall
Not come, Except there come a FALLING Away
FIRST, and that Man of Sin be revealed, the Son of
Perdition, who opposeth and ea'alteth himself above
all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that
* Rev. xiii. 11. - * 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.
THE CHURCH of Rome, MYSTIC BABY LON. 291
He as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing
himself that He is GoD 2 ” May we not say in the
words of Job concerning Leviathan, “ Upon EARTH
there is not His LIKE: he beholdeth all high things :
he is a KING over all the children of pride.” Yet
frightful indeed as is such language of blasphemy to-
lerated by the Pope, what shall we say to the following
command addressed by the Abbé Edgworth to Louis
XVI. on the scaffold 2
** Son of St. Louis, ascend to heaven l’
If the Power of an Abbé be such that he can com-
mand the departing soul of a KING to ‘ascend to
Heaven,’ what must be the Power of the Pope?
Reasoning according to the ratio of degrees between
an Abbé and the Pope, the power of the latter must
be “as God,” and according to prediction, the Pope
“sheweth himself that he is God,” and, therefore,
we need not question further whether it is “ He that
should come 2 * For he is revealed in his time, in
the [Now] Church of Rome, which is “ the Syna-
gogue of Satan,” and Mystic Babylon, and the
Mystical Name LATEINos is put upon him, his
Church, and his Kingdom; and let him try the experi-
ment of Miracles, to do away with this branded
“Mark’ if he be able: but, as the Word of God is
infallibly true, so he must surrender up his ecclesias-
tical Kingdom, and go to his “appointed place,” the
reward of his Apostacy, even as Judas did.
But I must now continue with Mr. Wright's de-
scription of the Papal Coronation ceremony.
* Job xli. 33, 34. * See M. Hue and Clery's Journal, p. 35.
U 2
292 CHAPTER XX .
' ' His Holiness (says Mr. Wright) then going up
to the altar, kissed it, and blessed the incense in the
censer, and incensed the altar, and one of the Car-
dinal-Deacons incensed him. He then went and
seated himself in his Pontifical Chair, or Throne,
which was placed about a dozen yards from the altar,
looking towards it, and received the Cardinals again
All’Adoratione, or Obedienza, as they more particu-
larly call this. The Cardinals kissed his foot and
hand, and were all admitted All Amplesso, as before:
the Prelates kissed his foot and knee; the Peniten-
tiaries of St. Peter his foot only. Then after some
hymns and suffrages, His Holiness celebrated the
Mass. When that was done, he took the gloves and
ring, and twenty-six Julios (about sixpence a-piece),
in a rich purse, offered him by Cardinal Annibale
Albani, in the name of the Chapter, Pro bene can-
tatá Missá [for having chanted the Mass well], which
he gave to one of the Cardinal-Deacons. After this,
he was carried in the same state to the Loggia della
Beneditione, where he sat in his Pontifical Chair, in
full view of the vast crowd of spectators, with which
the great Piazza below was filled, where all the pomp
of Rome was united, in the rich coaches of the No-
bility. After some hymns and prayers, one of the
Cardinal-Deacons took the MITRE off his head, and
another put on the TRIREGNo, or TRIPLE CRowN,
with these words (as I was informed afterwards, for
he did not thunder it out, as Cardinal Pamfilio did the
| Wright’s Travels, vol. i. p. 192, 193.
PAPAL CORONATION CONTINUED. 293
Proclamation), ‘Accipe TIARAM, TRIBUS CoRoNIs
or NATAM, et scias TE esse PATREM PRINCIPUM et
REGUM, RECTOREM ORBIs, in Terrá Vicarium Sal-
vatoris nostri, Jesu Christi ; cui Honor est, et
Gloria in Saºcula Seculorum. Amen.” “Receive
thou the Tiara, adorned with THREE CRowNs, and
know THYSELF to be the Father of Princes and of
Kings, RULER of the WoRLD, upon EARTH Vicar of
our Saviour Jesus Christ; to whom be Honour and
Glory for ever and ever. Amen.’
* For two or three nights upon this occasion, the
City of Rome was perfectly on fire with illuminations
of all sorts; the Nobility and all the people striving
who should testify most zeal and joy on this accession,
for the new created Pope was a man very agreeable
to the people of Rome, as being a Roman born,
brother to the Duke of Poli, of a most ancient Family,
out of which they reckon twelve Popes to have been,
since the Family-Name was Conti, and four more
while it was Anicia, the ancient name of it, from which
they say it was changed to Conti, from the great
number of Counts that were then of it, above a
thousand years ago."
Here then we have the Nobility and all the people
of Rome striving who should testify the most zeal and
joy on the Accession of the new Pope, by illumina-
tions of all sorts for two or three nights; and from
the circumstance of one of the Cardinal-Deacons
taking off the MITRE, and then another Cardinal-
* ‘Accipe Tiaram,’ &c. For confirmation of these words consult Voyages
du Sr. A. De La Motraye en Europe, &c. Tom. i. p. 10. chap. 16.
294 CHA PTER XX :
Deacon placing the TIARA or TRIPLE CRowN on the
Head of the Pope, accompanied by a distinct Pro-
clamation (Accipe TIARAM, TRIBUS CoRoNIS or NA-
TAM, &c.), we know for a certainty that the Roman
or Latin ‘ Pontifea. Optimus Mavimus’ is both an
Ecclesiastical and Temporal Sovereign, and that the
Pope has succeeded to the Temporal Kingdom of
Rome, and has thus imitated the Idolatrous Custom
of the Pagan Roman Emperors who were anciently
styled by the Title of ‘Pontifea. Marimus.” Where-
fore we have a complete Narrative and Developement
of the ELECTION, PRoclamATION, ANNUNCIATION,
ADORATION, CoRoNATION, EXALTATION, and EN-
THRONEMENT of this compound Mysterious Latin
Papal Man, with the Place and Manner of his sitting
in state, viz. “ in the Temple of God” at Rome,
“shewing himself that he ” (in his ecclesiastical cha-
racter and capacity) “is God.” If, (in addition to
the customary homage of genuflexion,) kissing the
foot, the knee, the hand, and face of a Pope is not
Idol ATRY, we shall labour in vain to establish the
fact: but we have established it by the opinion of a
Pagan, even Seneca, who reproved the Pagan Em-
peror CALIGULA most sharply for permitting the
Pagan Senators and Courtiers of Old Rome to bow
down to, or kiss the Emperor's elegant slipper studded
with jewels. But the Papists have an easier way of
solution, by dividing the Tenth Commandment (given
on Mount Sinai to Moses) into two Parts, and
omitting the Second, which relates to the worshipping
and bowing down to IMAGEs and Relics, knowing
IDOLATRY OF PAPISTS. 295
that Peter refused to be worshipped by Cornelius,
and the Angel by St. John, and that the Second
Commandment subverts their Idolatrous Practices.
In the year 1830, I was in Paris, in the Easter
Week, and in the Church of St. Roch, I saw a
wooden crucifia exhibited on Good Friday, at the
Altar, and several Priests in succession came and
bowed down to it, kissing the head, body, and feet of
the full-length figure of Christ which was upon it.
The Consecrated wafeR in the Papal MAss is
bowed down to and worshipped, the people supposing
that the Real Presence of Christ is there; whereas,
it is nothing but the Pope, and the emanations of his
Supremacy and Infallibility, in and over the Latin
Church, whose Members act in concert with their
Latin Head, doing as Papa and his Councils com-
mand. But how a wafer, which is made of flour
and water, can be transubstantiated into the literal
Body of Christ, is an affair too mysterious to be ex-
plained or believed, as the Papists must know; for
this Mystical-Wafer Deity is locked up in a Pir, and
this God is not known to be such by the people, until
a little trumpery bell rings at the High Altar, to
announce it to the Congregation, at which time they
all fall down and worship this God of paste. As,
therefore, it is said of the Pope when he is elected,
‘quem creant, adorant ; ' ' whom they create, they
adore;’ so it may equally be said of the consecrated
Host (or Wafer) which they preserve in a Pir,
‘quem creant, adorant ; ' ' whom they create, they
adore.’ So that Papists first create a Paste God,
296 CHAPTER XX :
then they bow down to him and worship him, and
afterwards devour him in the MAss, or Roman Sa-
crament. This is certain, that if one consecrated
wafer becomes the literal Body of Christ, as Papists
affirm (“Hoc est Corpus meum,’ ‘this is my body'),
so, by the same rule (Transubstantiation), all conse-
crated wafers must become the literal Bodies of
Christ; and, therefore, according to the Number of
Papists who partake of the Roman Catholic MAss,
so is the Number of Christs which are devoured
(flesh and blood) on every Sabbath Day throughout
the year, besides Fast Days, which must be innu-
merable, for Papists have as many as seven different
MASSEs in one day, and oftentimes without one com-
municant. Who cannot see that this is Hocus Pocus
work. If the wafer is meant to represent the literal
Sacrifice of Christ's body, (and Papists pointedly call
their Sacrament, the ‘Sacrifice of the Mass,”) then
it is Bloodless, for the Priests deny the Cup to the
Laity, by drinking it themselves, which renders the
sacrifice of none effect to the Laity. A French
Roman Catholic, when soliciting his wife or his friend
to partake of the ordinance of the Mass, would say,
* Woulez-vous manger le bon Dieu aujourd'hui 2
‘Will you eat the good God to-day ?’ This is no
burlesque, but truth. I recollect a conversation
which I had in Paris with a French Roman Catholic
Priest, of good sense and urbanity of manner, on the
subject of Transubstantiation, which was somewhat
to the following effect: I asked him whether he
thought that Christ (whilst he sat at supper with his
The folly of TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 297
twelve Disciples, which event happened before Christ
had suffered death upon the cross,) took up his own
literal Body in his hands, and then brake his own
literal Body into twelve pieces, and then gave to
each of the twelve Disciples a portion of his own
literal Body? Because Christ said, "“Take eat;
this is my Body.” Or, did he think that Christ gave
his twelve Disciples his literal blood to drink, whilst
it was yet flowing in his veins 2 For he had not,
when he uttered these words, shed his blood upon
the cross for man's Redemption. The Priest shook
his head, as if the Question was profane. But
Christ's blood could have been of no avail before he
had offered himself in sacrifice to his Father :
for 2 “ Without the shedding of Blood there is no
Remission” of sins. The Abbé confessed it was a
great Mystery, and I agreed with him that it was
so in the literal, or carnal sense in which he under-
stood it; but that I viewed the subject in a spiritual
sense; for it was the former which staggered the
Faith of the Jews, insomuch that “many of his dis-
ciples went back, and walked no more with him,”
as may be seen in the VIth Chapter of St. John's
Gospel; but Christ explained to them his meaning
of the terms “ Flesh” and “ Blood * in the 63rd
verse of the same chapter, by saying, “It is the
Spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing ;
the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit,
and they are life.” And the IXth and Xth Chapters
of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews have for ever
! Matt. xxvi. 26. * Heb. ix. 22.
298 CHAPTER XX :
set aside all future sacrifices of Christ's Body; as
the following words of the Holy Spirit testify.
* “Christ being come an High Priest of good things
to come, by a greater and more perfect Tabernacle,
not made with hands, that is to say, not of this
building; neither by the blood of Goats and Calves,
but by his own blood he entered in once into the
holy place, having obtained eternal Redemption for
us.” “Christ is not entered into the holy places
made with hands, which are the figures of the true;
but into Heaven itself, now to appear in the presence
of God for us; nor yet that He should offer Himself
often, as the High Priest entereth into the holy
place every year with blood of others; for then must
He often have suffered since the foundation of the
world: but now once in the end of the world hath
he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Him-
self. And as it is appointed unto men once to die,
but after this the judgment: so Christ was once
offered to bear the sins of many.” Again:—“We
are sanctified through the offering of the Body of
Jesus Christ once for all.” “This Man, after He
had offered One Sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down
on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting
till his enemies be made his footstool. For by One
Offering he hath perfected for ever, them that are
sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness
to us.” So true and convincing are these words
that even a Roman Catholic Child in Ireland, when
reading them, affirmed, that the Protestants had
* Heb. ix. 11, 12; 24–28; x. 10—15.
THE CHURCH of Rome, ANTI-CHRISTIAN. 299
placed these two Chapters in the Bible on purpose
to do away with the MAss. But whosoever will
Read the Bible attentively and with a child-like
simplicity (understanding the Tenets of Popery) will
confess that such a system is Anti-christian, Satanic
and Idolatrous, and that the Bible and Papists
cannot both be true, for either the one or the other
must be false. But it has been shown already which
of them is false, and LATEINos shall be our Day-
Star, for the Night of Popish Darkness is passed
and “the True Light now shineth,” and will shine,
“more and more unto the Perfect Day.” And
though the Political Horizon of the British Empire
seems to be lowering a little in consequence of the
criminal introduction of the dark children of the
Roman Church into our Protestant Constitution,
yet, be it remembered that, the indelible stigma
LATEINos is not only written upon her Roman
Babylonish Latin Papal Man, but upon every indi-
vidual Papist; and those who cannot see the Mark,
Name, and Number of the Beast, must be totally
ignorant of the Bible, which the Papists have
locked up in the Latin Language to prevent the
discovery. IRELAND can never be godly and quietly
governed, so long as the principles of the Church of
Rome predominate, for they are wholly at variance
with christian Peace, and national safety, (as the
fiendish Jesuits and Popcs have ever proved to all
Europe during the “1260 Days” of Years,) and this
is a sure sign that the Church of Rome is Anti-chris-
tian. Let Protestants of England regard these true
300 CHAPTER XX :
words of God's Holy Spirit concerning the Roman
Papal Beast. “And the third Angel followed
them, saying, with a loud voice, IF ANY MAN worship
the Beast and His Image, and receive his Mark
in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink
of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out
without mixture into the Cup of his indignation ;
and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone
in the presence of the holy Angels, and in the
presence of the Lamb : and the smoke of their tor-
ment ascendeth up for ever and ever; and they have
no rest day or night, who worship the Beast and
His Image, and whosoever receiveth the MARK of
His NAME ;” which has been proved to be LATEINos.
May we not then with the utmost propriety apply
to Romanists the highly-significant words in St.
Paul's Epistle to the Romans, where the Apostle
reasons against PAGAN Roman IDolatry. * “Pro-
fessing themselves to be wise,” [viz. Papists of
Rome, “they became fools, and changed the Glory
of the uncorruptible God into an IMAGE” [the
Pope] “made like to corruptible Man: ” [the Pope:]
“who changed the TRUTH of GoD into a LIE, and
worshipped” [the Pope] “and served the Creature”
[the Pope] “MoRE than the CREATOR, who is blessed
for ever. Amen.”
St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans tells the
Gentile Christian CHURCH of RomE (if a CHURCH
of Rome there was, in his day, which he does not
affirm, as when he writes his Epistles to the Corin-
* Rev. xiv. 9–11. * Romans i. 22, 23, 25.
ST. PAUL's WARNING To Rome. 301
thians, Galatians, &c. but merely addresses himself
to believers in Christ dwelling in the City of Rome,
after this manner. “To all that be in Rome,
beloved of God, called to be Saints, &c., and after-
wards adds these words:—” “I am ready to preach
the Gospel to you that are at Rome also,”) of the
exceeding great Advantages and privileges of the
Jews above the Gentiles —” “ISRAELITES ; to
whom pertaineth the Adoption, and the Glory, and
the Covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the
Service of God, and the Promises ; whose are the
Fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ
came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”
But he adds, that the former had nationally forfeited all
these ancient privileges by reason of their “UNBELIEF.”
* “Because of UNBELIEF THEY were BRokEN off.”
However, St. Paul reminds the Gentile Christians
of Rome, that, because of these ancient Promises of
God made to the Israelites, the JEws were the or 1-
GINAL and TRUE “OLIVE TREE * from which
“CHRIST came * or descended, as Jesus testified
5 “Salvation is of the Jews; ” but that “some of
the Branches " were “broken off" in order to the
Ingrafting of the Gentiles, (* “I speak to you
Gentiles,” viz. of Rome, “inasmuch as I am the
Apostle of the Gentiles,”) whom he designates “a
wild Olive Tree,” and he then war.Ns the GENTILE
Church of Rome, that 7 “If God spared not the
Natural Branches, take heed lest He also spare not
* Rom. i. 7. * Ibid 15. * Rom. ix. 4, 5. * Rom. xi. 20.
* John iv. 22. * Rom. xi. 13. 7 Ibid 21.
302 CHAPTER XX :
THEE.” For although God had manifested his seve-
rity to the utmost upon the TEMPLE, CITY and
NATION of the Jews for their “ UNBELIEF ;” never-
theless the Apostle tells the Gentile Christian Church
(consisting of “a Congregation of faithful men”)
at Rome, that IT only stooD BY FAITH. “THou"
[Gentile Church of RomE] “STANDEST BY FAITH,”
and that a departure from that Faith would bring
upon IT a sentence of severity similar to that which
was executed upon the CHURCH of JERUSALEM ; that
is, IT should be “CUT OFF.” “Towards THEE,
(Gentile Church of Rome,) GooDNess, if THOU
continue IN HIs GooDNESS : oth ERwise THOU
ALso shALT BE CUT OFF.” That the Papal
Church of Rome has “departed from the Faith”
has been proved in a variety of particulars, as com-
pared with the word of God; therefore, she no
longer “STANDS BY FAITH, not having “continued
in GoD's GooDNESS,” and consequently “SHALL BE
CUT OFF.”
In conclusion : that the Reader may not for an
instant suppose that I have been speaking in my own
spirit, I will place before him the CONDITIONS on
which the GENTILE CHURCH of Rome would have
continued upon the original Stock of the TRUE
Olive-TREE, according to the words of St. Paul in
his EPISTLE to the ROMANS.
* “I speak to you Gentiles” [viz. at Rome] “inas-
much as I am THE APOSTLE of the GENTILEs.
If some of the Branches be broken off, and THOU,”
* Romans xi. 23. * Ibid 13, 17–22.
ST. PAUL's REASONING with Rome. 303
[Gentile Church of Rome, “being a wild Olive
Tree, wert graffed in among them,” [the Jews] “and
with them partakest of the Root and Fatness of the
OLIVE-TREE ; BoAst NoT * [Gentile Church of
RoME] “ against the Branches. But if THOU boast,
[Gentile Church of Rome, THou bearest not the
Root, but the Root THEE. Thou wilt say then,”
[Gentile Church of Rome, “The Branches were
broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well ;
because of UNBELIEF they were broken off, and
THOU” [Gentile Church of Rome] STANDEST
BY FAITH. Be not HIGH-MINDED ; but fear : for
if God spared not the NATURAL BRANCHES, [the
Jews, “TAKE HEED lest he also SPARE NOT THEE.
Behold therefore ” [O Gentile Church of Rome]
“the goodness and severity of God: on them which
fell,” [the Jews,) “severITY; but towards THEE,”
[Gentile Church of Rome, “GooDNess, IF THOU
CONTINUE" [these are the CONDITIONS] “IN
His GooDNEss: OTHERwise THOU ALso " [Gentile
Church of Rome] “sh ALT BE CUT OFF.”
Clear thyself then, if thou be able, thou Papal
Latin Vatican Monster, from the application of
these Prophetic words of St. Paul, to the Pseudo-
Apostolic Church of Rome, which are FULFILLED
in thy long continued UNBELIEF and Apostacy, viz.
1260 years. Thou hast given GOD the lie till the
Heart sickens at THY BLASPHEMY, and I tell thee
in His MIGHTY NAME, (for “He is KING of Kings
and Lord of Lords,”) that thou art not his Vicar,
but the ARch-ANTICHRIST, even the “MAN” whose
304 CHAPTER XX :
Appellative “NAME * or “MARK" is Lateinos,
and thy enigmatical Number x{s', or 666. Thou
knowest (or I will tell thee) that THou hast Not
“continued IN GoD's GooDNESS,” but hast signally
* “departed from the Faith in the LATTER TIMEs,”
by forbidding MARRIAGE and commanding to abstain
from MEATs, and instead of Preaching the Faith of
Christ crucified, as Paul did at Rome, thou “siTTEST
in the Temple of God,” there to be “worshipped.”
Thou hast indeed “boasted thyself against the
Natural Branches,” as thy thundering Bulls from
the Vatican have testified again and again to all
Europe. And thinkest thou, O Pope, that thy
MYSTICAL Roman CHURCH shall not be “CUT
OFF 2° Yea, as certainly as it was predicted con-
cerning Jerusalem and her Temple, before the Event
had come to pass, that * “there shall not be left one
STONE upon another that shall not be thrown down ; ”
so likewise the prediction concerning * “MYSTERY,
BABYLON THE GREAT,” “THAT GREAT CITY,”
Rome or BABYLoN, is, that she shall be “THROWN
DOWN,” and shall “BE FOUND NO MORE AT
ALL.” As the Prediction of the former has had its
literal fulfilment, so must the latter.
“Take heed,” therefore, O Latin Pope of Rome,
for God did not spare the Natural Branches, neither
will he spare THEE : for thy Latin, Roman, Papal
CHURCH and KINGDom ; thy Roman City, with the
period of thy Ecclesiastical Reign, are NUMBERED ;
* 1 Tim. iv. 1–3. * Matt. xxiv. 1, 2. Mark xiii. 1, 2.
* Compare Rev. xvii. 5, 18, with Rev. xviii. 21.
THE PUNISHMENT OF THE MAN OF SIN. 305
and the words which the Prophet Daniel addressed
to Belshazzar, the proud King of Euphratean Ba-
bylon, may be equally applied to Thee, the Proud
Sovereign Pontiff of “MYSTERY, BABYLoN THE
GREAT ; ” that is to say, “MENE ; TEKEL; ”
which, according to the Interpretation of Daniel, is
this, “ MENE ; God hath numbered thy Kingdom,”
[at “ 1260 Days” of Years, “ and finished it,”
[in the reign of Pope “Pius Sixtus,” A. D. 1798.]
TEKEL ; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art
found wanting; ” as thy NAME LATEINOS shall
evidence to all generations.
Moreover; in another passage of his Inspired
Writings, St. Paul speaks of the Punishment of
the “ Man of Sin,” “the Son of Perdition,” “the
Mystery of Iniquity,” (proved to be the Pope of
Rome,) after this manner, “That WIcked ONE,
whom the Lord shall consume with the Spirit of his
Mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his
coming.” And St. John tells us of the dire punish-
ment and Annihilation of the Beast, whose Eccle-
siastical City is upon the “ SEVEN MoUNTAINs of
Rome, in the avenging of God's people persecuted
by the Blasphemous Latin Papal Tyrannical Baby-
lonish Roman Church and “MAN,” whose Appella-
tive is LATEINos and his Number “ 666.” And as
St. Paul designates this Ecclesiastical Hierarch by'
the Title of the “Son of PERDITION,” so St. John
says, * “THE BEAST" (whose Number is 666)
“Goeth into PERDItion : ” and * “ Her Plagues
| Dan. W. 25. * Rev. xvii. 8. * Ibid. xviii. 8.
X
306 - ... CHAPTER XX.
shall come in one Day, Death, and Mourning, and
Famine ; and SHE shall be UTTERLY BURNED with
FIRE : for strong is the LORD GoD who judgeth
HER..” “And a Mighty Angel took up a Stone like
a great Millstone, and cast it into the Sea, saying,
THUS with ViblENCE shall that GREAT CITY BA-
BYLoN be THRow N Down, and shall be Found No
MoRE AT ALL.” Wherefore, the Holy Spirit, speak-
ing by the Mouth of St. John, saith, * “CoME out
of HER, MY PEOPLE, THAT YE BE NOT PARTAKERS
of HER SINs, and THAT YE RECEIVE Not of HER
PLAGUES.” -
* “Blessed,” then “ is he that Readeth, and they
that hear the Words of this Prophecy, and keep
those things which are written therein : for THE
TIME IS AT HAND.” -
* Rev. xviii. 21. * Ibid. 4. . 3 Ibid. i. 3.
THE END.
I.-TABLE OF NUMERALS.
A TABLE exhibiting the numerical value of each of the 24
LETTERS of the Greek Alphabet, with the addition of the 3 Nume-
rical Cyphers denominated eriorſpºov Tav, Korra, and Xaviri, distin-
guished by a small mark placed above or below them, as [f] and
which points out their individual Arithmetical value according to the
Mode of Calculation adopted by the Ancient Greeks. N. B. The
Cyphers, or Episemons are only introduced to supply a deficiency in
the Greek Alphabet, viz. to make up units, tens, and hundreds, &c.
If the mark be above the Letter or Episèmon, then the said Letter
belongs to the Class of Units, Tens, and Hundreds : if below, to the
Class of Thousands, &c. -
1. UNITS.
A. & equals 1
B. / F • e o e 2
T. y’ *= e Q e > 3
A. 8' = ... 4
- E. s’ = e Q 5
extankov Fav } = 6
V. G. g'
Z. g’ F • e o e 7
H. ºn' F e s e e 8
63. 6/ - e s e e 9
I. THOUSANDS.
A. & equals ... 1,000
B. 8 = . . . . . . 2,000
T. y = . . . . . . 3,000
A. : - . . . . . . 4,000
E. : F • . . . . . 5,000
eruankov Tav
V s : }=0,000
Z. & = . . . . . . 7,000
H. n = . . . . . . 8,000
©. 9 = © e o e º e 9,000
. . . . 50,000
II. TENS.
I. : " equals ... 10
K. R.' = . . 20
A. X’ == Q º 30
M. p.’ = . . . . 40
N. v' = . . . . 50
E. :’ = • 60
O. o' = . 70
II. ºr' = . . . . 80
K07ſ ºf Cz T.S./- 90
II. TENS of THOUSANDS.
I. : equals ... 10,000
K. AC - e s e e 20,000
A. A = . . . . 30,000
M. p = . . . . 40,000
N. v
0
f
º
smºs-
*
º
wº-
- e o e e 60,000
. . . . 70,000
. . . . 80,000
conna T. S. # 90,000
III. HUNDREDS.
P. p’ equals 100
X. a' - © Q 200 º
T. r" = ... 300
T. v' = . . 400
q>. p' = . . 500
X. x' = . . 600
*P. J/ F • e 700
Q. wº = .. 800
aayr. 2' = 900
P.
2.
T.
T.
$.
X.
\r.
Q.
III. HUND REDs of ThousAND8.
p equals...100,000
OT = e o e e 200,000
7 F • * ~ * 300,000
w = . . . . 400,000
‘p - e s e e 500,000
26 - e e s e 600,000
il, F e o e e 700,000
(*) = • , a e 800,000
O'Cºy'ſſ; ? - e. e. 900,000
II.-SCALE OF COMBINATIONS.
A TABLE of the CoMBINATION of NUMBERs, as set forth in the
Eton, Westminster, Port Royal, and other Greek Grammars, to
which I beg to refer my readers for an explanation.
a' G' y 3' s' g' & n' 0'
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
"| 12' 18' ty 13' te' 1;7 ig' wn' 16
10| 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
k'l koz' k8' ky' kö’ ke' kº-' kg." km/ k0'
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
x(|x2' >8' Xy' Aö’ Xe' Xº- Ag' An' ſ A6'
30| 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
a'az' eff' Py’ tº ke' es' eg º' º'
40|41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
v' vo.’ w8' vy' vö’ ve' vº-' vg" wn' v9'
50|51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
£' fa’ #8 º’ & ‘e’ &- $g' ºn’ {0'
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69
o'loo." og' oy' oë' oe' os- oš' on' o6'
70|71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79
ºr' tra’ ºrg/ try Trô' re' ºrg- ºrg/ ºrm' w8'
80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89
#|}<' h;3 º' º' We' ºs- ºg' ºn 9
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
100. 200. 300. 400. 500. 600. 700. 800. 900. 1000.
/ Æ / / / / / / M /
p aſ T U (p X t!, (w) 2) CL -
From the above Table, the Reader will perceive how the 24 Letters
are employed in unison with the 3 Greek Cyphers, called enria nuov Tav,
Kowna, and Xaviri, to denote Numbers, and that not one of the numerous
stenographical ContRActions or Ligatures of the Letters of the Greek
Alphabet appears throughout the whole Scale, (See the Table of Contrac-
tions in Greek Grammars,) and therefore, it is clearly ungrammatical
to use any of the Three Greek Cyphers, or Episemons, viz. S. h. and 2,
as the numerical representatives of any one or two Letters of the Greek
Alphabet, in writing the NAME of a MAN, or even in a word of any sort,
for to give place to such an idea would be to allow that the Letters and
Episémons arc one and the same thing, which thcy are not.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
GRADUATE LIBRARY
DATE DUE
OR
MUTILATE CARD

milliºl
135
G
sº ~~~
#!!!NJRTNºſſº Zºº Pºr. .*.*.* *
E; Nùù |||ſº!!! ſ &n: tº N NJ;
(º)
º;
§§
THE º
ºn FFIE 1.3% * ſº
LIRRARY
- - ſ--- -:)
"["II I. ( * l 1."I" ( ) 1."
T I I 1. "R". A 1 » "...º N | * 1& 1...s Y."
"l" i. 1& I.N. N. .\ss( ) ( " . .V. "I" . ( ) N