on this account the understanding is justly defined, both by Archbishop Leighton, and by Immanuel Kant, the faculty that judges by, or according to, sense.  However, practical or intellectual, it is one and the same understanding, and the definition, the medial faculty, expresses its true character in both directions alike.  I am urgent on this point, because on the right conception of the same, namely, that understanding and sense (to which the sensibility supplies the material of outness, ’materiam objectivam’,) constitute the natural mind of man, depends the comprehension of St. Paul’s whole theological system.  And this natural mind, which is named the mind of the flesh, [Greek:  phronaema sarkos], as likewise [Greek:  psychikae synesis], the intellectual power of the living or animal soul, St. Paul everywhere contradistinguishes from the spirit, that is, the power resulting from the union and co-inherence of the will and the reason;—­and this spirit both the Christian and elder Jewish Church named, ‘sophia’, or wisdom.

Ben-Ezra.  Part I. c. v. p. 67.

Eusebius and St. Epiphanius name Cerinthusas the inventor of many corruptions.  That heresiarch being given up to the belly and the palate, placed therein the happiness of man.  And so taught his disciples, that after the Resurrection, * * *.  And what appeared most important, each would be master of an entire seraglio, like a Sultan, &c.

I find very great difficulty in crediting these black charges on Cerinthus, and know not how to reconcile them with the fact that the Apocalypse itself was by many attributed to Cerinthus.  But Mr. Hunt is not more famous for blacking than some of the Fathers.

Ib. pp. 73, 4.

Against whom a very eloquent man, Dionysius Alexandrinus, a Father of the Church, wrote an elegant work, to ridicule the Millennarian fable, the golden and gemmed Jerusalem on the earth, the renewal of the Temple, the blood of victims.  If the book of St. Dionysius had contained nothing but the derision and confutation of all we have just read, it is certain that he doth in no way concern himself with the harmless Millennarians, but with the Jews and Judaizers.  It is to be clearly seen that Dionysius had nothing in his eye, but the ridiculous excesses of Nepos, and his peculiar tenets upon circumcision, &c.

Lacunza, I suspect, was ignorant of Greek:  and seems not to have known that the object of Dionysius was to demonstrate that the Apocalypse was neither authentic nor a canonical book.

Ib. p. 85.

The ruin of Antichrist, with all that is comprehended under that name, being entirely consummated, and the King of kings remaining master of the field, St. John immediately continues in the 20th chapter, which thus commenceth:  ’And I saw an angel come down from heaven, &c.  And I saw thrones, &c.  And when a thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison.’