Page images
PDF
EPUB

simple statement of a fact, and not a new series of figures. But we will not enter further into this part of the subject. We have done enough to justify our original statement, that the Antipapal system of interpretation is built merely upon conjecture, and that the conjectures on which it is built are in the utmost degree harsh, gratuitous, and self-destructive. To rely on such methods in the interpretation of any ancient book would be rash and uncritical; to apply them to the word of the God of truth is presumptuous and irreverent.

And yet, it may be said, this system of interpretation has taken such entire hold of the mind of Protestant Europe, that it is hopeless to assail it. It may be true that it is false and unjustifiable, but it has got possession both of the pulpit and the press, wherever the Anglo-Saxon nation is predominant. To question it will be as vain as the attempt which the Times attributes, whether truly or not, to Dr. Cullen, to get rid of the Newtonian philosophy. You might as well think of putting Bright and Cobden into the Militia, or persuade Sir Robert Inglis to abandon Church-rates. What can the Christian Remembrancer do to withstand the torrent, if it steps forth

'To dare the Rajah's power in Scæva s sight?'

We should have felt this to be true a few years ago; but time has not only shown that inveterate, are not always incurable errors, but it has recently brought great accessions to the cause of true interpretation in various quarters. We say less of Ewald and Züllig; for though great advantage may be derived from their labours, they are yet so tainted by Rationalism that they must always be used with caution, and can never be relied upon for support. But the work of Moses Stuart the American is that of a patient, learned, and cautious critic, which cannot fail to have influence on thoughtful men. He takes the Antipagan line of interpretation, in which Grotius and Hammond formerly led the way, and it is impossible to compare him with any of the Antipapal interpreters without perceiving how manifestly he has the advantage. And now the same system is reinforced by the valuable work of Hengstenberg, a leading name for learning and orthodoxy among German Protestants, whose authority is surely a sufficient guarantee that the Apocalypse may be interpreted truly by those who are not Romanizers. We are glad to see that the same general line is taken by Mr. W. H. Scott, respecting whose work, however, we are unable to speak more particularly, as it has only just reached us.

It is not our office, of course, to attempt any interpretation ourselves, or to explain in detail that which is attempted by the Antipagan interpreters. But we must notice those general

grounds of antecedent probability by which their system is recommended. First, it is surely alleged with great truth that S. John, suffering himself from pagan persecution, and living when its awful storms were just beginning to break upon the Church, must be expected to say something respecting the immediate danger. How could those whom he addressed, and who saw all around them the breakers which threatened to submerge them, doubt that his prophecy referred to their present circumstances? Had it been otherwise, he must have explained himself more fully on the point, if he had wished (which is the very purpose of speech) to be intelligible. But, on the contrary, he declares in express words, and it is likewise declared to him by the angel, that the time is at hand.' (Rev. i. 3; xxii. 10.) This agrees with the notion that an Antipagan prophecy is intended; but, on the supposition that the events detailed were not to commence for many centuries, it is wholly inconceivable. These statements of the Apostle produced so much effect upon Hammond, that they induced him, he tells us, in defiance of the popular prejudice, to adopt that Antipagan system of interpretation which alone is consistent with them.

[ocr errors]

Again, it must be remembered that the Apocalypse is a continuation of Daniel's prophecy, and that the emblems which are familiar to us in the one reappear in the other. It would be natural then to expect, that as the external fortune of the Church, and its opposition to the powers of this world, is the subject of the former prophecy, so it would be of the latter. The internal state of the Church of God, the piety and obedience of its members, the purity of doctrine which prevails in its different parts, these no doubt are the most important circumstances in its history. But ancient prophecy is concerned with its outward form and public appearance with its sufferings from those rival empires of this world, with which it was long contemporary, and over which it was finally to prevail. When the same emblems, therefore, reappear in the Apocalypse-the worldly power, under its accustomed emblem of the fourth great empire-how obviously does it harmonize with the analogy of Holy Scripture, that we should find a prophetic account of that great struggle, which ended in the establishment of the Christian faith as the acknowledged law of the civilised world! These general considerations would go far to confirm the general view of the Antipagan interpreters, that the first period of the prophetic interpretation, described in Rev. iv.-xix., exhibits the persecutions of the Church from the Roman form of paganism, and the consequent triumph of the cross.

The consistency of this view with the general outline of the Book of Revelation, is rendered manifest by the rapid progress

of those events which are described during these sixteen chapters. There is no interval or pause, save for half an hour. (viii. 1.) But so soon as these events are completed, there occurs a cessation of a thousand years. Now, does not the general outline of history since the Christian era accord exactly with such a picture? Have we not first that stormy period, when the winds were contending on the great deep of the Roman empire, while out of it were arising the forms of modern law and Christian civilization? This period over, we come to that which may be called the great intellectual armistice of the middle ages, during which the different nations which had come upon the scene remained in possession, while the Christian Church continued to be the dominant object in the world. The first of these periods, then, we consider to be described in those chapters of the Revelation (iv.-xix.) which predict the victory of Christianity over paganism. The second is that thousand years during which Satan is bound, during which the kingdoms of the world, i.e. make profession of Christianity, and not of heathenism. That this is not necessarily a Romish theory we shall show by quoting Mr. Scott's statement of it: The Millennial period following the fall of Rome corresponds to those ten centuries of the reign of the Church known as the Middle Ages; . . . . . . the latter' (or Church empire) 'definitely began in the year 516, ' and ended with the year 1516; its overthrow was in fact the immediate result of the Reformation of 1517; the imperial power ' of the Church was taken away at the Reformation in punish⚫ment for the sins of the Church during the thousand years; her 'position from the year 1517 to the present day is analogous to the captivity of Israel in Babylon during the seventy years." -Scott, Advertisement.

We do not commit ourselves to Mr. Scott's dates, but quote him only as showing that the Antipagan interpretation may be maintained by those who are not Romanists. But because this view of things may surprise some of our readers, we shall add a passage from Hengstenberg.'

It is not a mere accident that the sects have always had a 'love for Chiliasm, whereas the Church, on the contrary, has 'been ever opposed to it. To be a practical denial of the affir"mation, "I believe in one holy Catholic Church," is of the very essence of the sects. Those whose tendency is to limit that 'which is good and Christian, and the working of God's Spirit, 'to the narrow sphere of their own sect (as, for instance, the

1 Professor Hengstenberg's work has been translated, we are glad to find, into English; but we have not seen the translation, and can say nothing, therefore, respecting the merits of its execution.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Irvingite programme says distinctly, "Without is Babel, here is "Zion"); those who can only receive that which is divine in a single form, and are incapable of recognising it in the strange 'shapes, and under the strange disguises, under which it has 'often appeared,-such persons must be disposed to carry for'ward the 1,000 years into the future, because they describe a 'real state of advance-a time when the Church was at peace, 'as compared with that which went before it-when Satan's 'power was broken, and the power of Christ predominant. Another ground of the same appearance is the following. Chiliasm, even in its most refined forms, rests on a confusion of things which are incompatible, that is, of conditions which 'pertain to the present and to the future state. Bengel, for example, sees the untenableness of the ordinary Chiliastic view, according to which the just are to rise again with their bodies, 'to be partakers of the reign of a thousand years upon earth. The 'effect of this is to detach the resurrection from the regeneration ' of the earth, with which it is most intimately connected; and 'to represent those who have risen again, and are glorified, as besieged by perishable mortals at the end of the thousand years. Bengel thus assumes that those who have risen again are to be 'translated into heaven, and from thence to reign with Christ over the earth. But even he destroys the connexion between 'the resurrection and the regeneration of the earth; and trans'fers to heaven that which the text, taken in its natural sense, 'assigns to the earth. Then Bengel maintains, on the one side, 'that sin is to continue during the thousand years, as indeed how 'could he do otherwise, since how could the great falling away 'at the end of it be accounted for, unless its infection had con'tinued through its whole period?" Among the children of the 'kingdom," he says, "there will be children of iniquity upto the 'end of the world; the contest with sin in the flesh will not yet 'be done away, or death swallowed up in victory. There will 'be new temptations and trials, harmonizing with the rich measure of the gifts of grace, instead of the assaults and exter'nal persecutions of Satan." On the other side, Bengel denies all continuance of Satan's operations during this period, and thereby involves himself in an entirely unscriptural view of the ' relation between Satan and sin. For as sin came into the 'world through Satan, so is he ever busy with it; he takes away 'the seed from the hearts of those who hear, lest they should 'believe and be saved. (Luke viii. 12.) His work is not only ' in the children of disobedience, but even the faithful are tempted 'by him. (Luke xxii. 31.) They need continually to pray, that 'God may deliver them from the evil one, who would lead them 'into temptation: it is not Judas only who is exposed to his

[ocr errors]

E

assaults, but S. Peter also, whom nothing but his Master's prayers defend from them. Now, the unsoundness of the sects 'is ever exposing them to such confusions of doctrine; the sound 'judgment of the Church has ever revolted from them.'-Hengstenberg, 2nd Band, 1st Abtheilung, p. 371.

We have quoted this passage as illustrative of the necessary contradictions which are engendered, if the binding of Satan be supposed to refer to the cessation of his individual temptations, and not to the breaking down of that authority which he once possessed in the high places of the world. We have here a ready answer to the question, whether Christ's coming is premillennial, which is likely to be little interesting to our readers, but which we see from the work of the Rev. David Brown, is exciting great attention in other quarters. For if the thousand years are not a state of trial and probation, whence come the hosts which Gog and Magog muster at its close? If they are, whence come temptations save from the tempter? How much more natural is it, therefore, to suppose the binding of Satan to be the deprivation of that place, which he exercised in those four empires of the heathen world, which were succeeded by the kingdom of Christ? So that the Revelation describes first the victory of the cross, and then that state of public affairs, during which Christianity has been the acknowledged religion of Christendom.

This general view of the order of the Apocalypse, which has commended itself to those students of Scripture, whose works are just beginning to tell upon the public, can only be got rid of by certain expedients, by which the harmony of the Revelation may be destroyed. Such is the monstrous year-day theory, which, without a shadow of reason, or a vestige of authority, would attempt to convert three years and a half into a long period. This is not an individual explanation, but a canon of interpretation, and therefore there could be no pretence for adopting it, unless it had been communicated by the Apostles themselves. Those who introduced it therefore, on sheer conjecture, in later times, had no more authority than Mahomet or Montanus, when they affirmed that they themselves were intended by the predicted Paraclete. For there is not a shadow of such a notion in early times. On this subject we may refer to Dr. Wordsworth, whose arguments respecting the numbers which occur in the Revelation, are perhaps the best part of his book. But we must observe, that, in overthrowing the yearday theory, Dr. Wordsworth is overthrowing that which is essential to his own system. For without this, how is it possible to maintain that such a long interval separated S. John from the events which he predicted? The year-day theory is a contrivance for accounting for this, by spinning out three years and

« PreviousContinue »