Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents

The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 2

 - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    IV. Daubuz Holds Firmly to Historical School Interpretation

    CHARLES DAUBUZ (1673-1717), exiled Huguenot, was born in Guienne, France, his father being a Protestant pastor. Upon the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685), the family left France, but his father died upon reaching England. Finally they settled in Yorkshire, England. He was educated at Christ Church, Oxford, and in Queens College, Cambridge. After receiving his B.A. and M.A., he became librarian of the college. He was tall, swarthy, and possessed of a powerful voice. In 1696 he accepted the mastership of a grammar school in Sheffield. However, he soon received orders in the Anglican Church, and was made vicar of Brotherton, in Yorkshire, where he wrote his Perpetual Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, which was published by his widow.PFF2 655.1

    One of its features is a Symbolical Dictionary, in which the general significance of the prophetic symbols, especially those of the Apocalypse, is laid down. There, under “Babylon,” Rome is signified, because the power of Babylon passed successively to Persia, Macedonia, and then Rome, first pagan and then papal. 35Charles Daubuz, A Perpetual Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (1730 ed.), pp. 24, 25.PFF2 655.2

    1. PLACES SARACENIC WOE FROM 612-762

    Believing that the seven churches are the church universal till the end of time, Daubuz explains the trumpets largely as Mede and Jurieu explain them, the fifth and sixth being the Saracens and Turks. Holding to the year-day principle, he places the five months, or 150 years, of the fifth trumpet, from Mohammed’s opening of his mission to the Saracen caliph’s removal to Baghdad, 612-762. Daubuz is not clear on the sixth trumpet. But the seventh is the signal for the resurrection of the just, after which is to come the time of the millennium. 36Elliott, op. cit., vol. 4, pp. 514-516.PFF2 655.3

    2. TWO BEASTS ARE CIVIL AND ECCLESIASTICAL ROME

    The beasts of Revelation 13 Daubuz expounds as representing Rome, first civil and then ecclesiastical. 37Daubuz, op. cit., chap. 13 (1720 ed.), p. 576 (1730 ed., pp. 412 ff.). The seven heads are successive forms of government, and the ten horns are the original divisions, with their modern counterparts, which are: Italy and Germany, France, Spain, England with Ireland, Scot land, Hungary, Poland with Lithuania, Denmark with Sweden and Norway, Portugal, and Greece. 38Ibid. (1720 ed.), pp. 556, 557. Note is also taken of other lists as given by Whiston and Allix.PFF2 656.1

    3. EBERHARD’S TABULATION NOTED; 1260 YEARS (476-1736)

    The early Latin tabulation of Eberhard, bishop of Salzburg at the Diet of Ratisbone, in 1240, is quoted. 39Ibid. The forty-two months are placed as from A.D. 476 to 1736. 40Elliott, op. cit., vol. 4, p. 517. The seven vials are made to spread over the centuries, the sixth drying up the Turkish power.PFF2 656.2

    4. TWO-HORNED BEAST AND BABYLON DECLARED PAPAL

    The two-horned beast is taken to represent the whole body of the corrupted clergy, as the former beast was that of the laity. 41Daubuz, op. cit. (1720 ed.), p. 576 (1730 ed., pp. 502, 503). The Babylonish woman of Revelation 17 is the Papacy.PFF2 656.3

    5. RESURRECTION LITERAL AND MILLENNIUM FUTURE

    Daubuz’ clear position on the future millennium and the literal resurrection, with the New Jerusalem being the habitation of the church-a touch of Whitbyanism is best cited by the following extract:PFF2 656.4

    “They who will right or wrong explain this Life or Resurrection, to signify the Resurrection of the Church in general, will find it hard to shew, why those, who are said to be dead still, and to live again during this first Resurrection, must not be said to be dead, and not to live again, in the same sense as they are so said in v. 12. to be dead, who are there to stand, that is to be raised again to stand before God, in order to be tried and judged.... But if this second Resurrection be of the Bodies, why must not the other? Are not both expressed in the like Terms. If this consequence be denied, then I challenge any Man to prove, that there is ever to be any bodily Resurrection of the Dead. For at this bold rate we may easily evade the force of all the Texts in Holy Writ, which mention the Resurrection of the Dead, and thus fall into that folly of those, who in the times of the Apostles, did, as some still do. 42Ibid. (1720 ed.), p. 933.PFF2 656.5

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents