Page images
PDF
EPUB

..

ter; at present I shall confine myself to that of the trumpets. The four firfl of these he will not allow to relate to the overthrow of the Western empire, on the ground that the subject of the Apocalypfe is the fates and fortunes of the Chriftian Church.* But are not those fates and fortunes moft clofely connected with the overthrow of the Western empire ? According to the usual interpretation of the four first trumpets and the tyranny of the two beafts during the period of the 1260 years, every thing appears in strict chronological order, and the one fucceffion of events arifes naturally out of the other. St. Paul teaches us, that, when he that letted or the Western empire should be taken away, then should the man of fin be revealed. Now what is the particular portion of the Apocalypfe which we are now confidering except an enlarged repetition of St. Paul's prediction? He that letted is taken away; and the man of fin forthwith rears his head :-the Western empire is taken away by the operation of the four first trumpets; and the great apoftacy of 1260 days, the reign of the falfe prophet and his temporal supporter, shortly commences. The one is preparatory to the other: the four trumpets are merely the prelude to what may be termed the grand subject of the Apocalypfe, wonderful tyranny exercised within the Church itself by the upholders of the Apostacy, and a contemporary Apostacy in the eastern world scarcely less wonde ful than that in the western. St. Paul and St. John are perfectly in unifon: they alike connect the downfall of the empire with the fates of the Church. Thus, even independent of the Archdeacon's chronological arrangement which shall prefently be discussed, I fee not why the old interpretation of the four trumpets, or at least the great outlines of that interpretation, ought to be rejected.

a

The Archdeacon however brings an argument against such an interpretation of the four trumpets from the homogeneity of all the feven trumpets. He infists most justly, that what the nature of one is the nature of them all must be: and observes that Mede, in order to make them homogeneal, interprets the fifth and the fixth trumpets as relating to the attacks made upon the empire by the Saracens and Turks, as he had already referred the four first to the attacks previously made upon the empire by the Gothic tribes. But he adds, that the seventh trumpet announces "most clearly the victory obtained by Christ and his Church, not over the Roman empire, but over the powers of hell, and of Antichrift, and a corrupt world; over the dragon, the beast, the false prophet, and in procefs of time (for the feventh trumpet continues to the end) over death and hell. If then, under the seventh trumpet, the warfare of the Chriftian Church be so clearly represented (and in this all writers are agreed), what are we to think of the fix? How must they be interpreted, so as to appear homogeneal? Are they to be accounted, with Mede and his followers, the fuccessive shocks, by which the Roman empire fell under the Goths and Vandals? Homogeneity forbids. They muft therefore be supposed to contain the warfare of the Christian Church. And this warfare may be fuccefsful under the seventh and last trumpet, when it had been unfuccefsful before, yet the homogeneity be confiftently preferved. For the question is not concerning the fuccefs, but concern

[blocks in formation]

ing the warfare. And the trumpets may be deemed homogeneal, if they all represent the fame warfare (viz. of the powers of hell, and of the Antichristian world, against the Church of Chrift), whatever may be the event."* That the object of the feventh trumpet is to introduce the victory obtained by Chrift and his Church, and to usher in the happy period of the Millennium, few will be disposed to deny: but the question is, how is this defirable object accomplished? The Archdeacon himfelf allows, by the triumph of the Church over those instruments of hell, Antichrist, the beast, and the false prophet. Now, whether I be right or wrong in my own notions of Antichrist, what is this but a triumph over the Roman empire and the apoftate communion inseparably connected with it? Accordingly we find, that the seventh trumpet, after conducting us through six of its vials all of which are poured out upon God's enemies, magnificently introduces under the feventh vial the judgment of the great harlot, the downfall of Babylon, and the complete deftruction of the beaft along with the false prophet and his confederated kings; in other words, the overthrow of the papal Roman empire both fecular and temporal. How then is the homogeneity of the trumpets violated by Mede's expofition? Under the four first, the western empire falls; under the two next, the eastern empire follows the fate of its more ancient half; under the last, the revived beast or papal empire is utterly broken, and prepares a way by its overthrow for the millennian reign of the Meffiah. In short, as matters appear to me, if we argue backwards from the feventh trumpet, homogeneity, instead of forbidding, requires us to refer all the fix first trumpets to different attacks upon the Roman empire, the final ruin of which is ushered in by the feventh.

2. But my objection to the Archdeacon's arrangement of the Apocalypfe, on which a great part of his subsequent interpretations neceffarily depends, is infinitely stronger than to his very limited system of applying the prophecies. It appears to me to be so extremely arbitrary, and to introduce so much confufion into the three feptenaries of the feals, the trumpets, and the vials, that, if it be adopted, I see not what certainty we can ever have, that a clue to the right interpretation of the Apocalypfe is

attainable.

The Archdeacon supposes, that the fix first feals give a general sketch of the contents of the whole book, and that they extend from the time of our Saviour's afcenfion even to the great day of the Lord's vengeance, a defcription of which day is exhibited under the fixth feal.t Having thus arrived at the confummation of all things, how are we to dispose of the feventh feal? The Archdeacon conceives, that the fame hiftory of the Church begins anew under it; that the connection, which had hitherto united the feals, is broken; that the seventh feal stands apart, containing all the feven trumpets; and that the renewed history, comprehended under this feventh feal, begins "from the earliest times of Chriftianity, or to speak more properly, from the period when our Lord left the world in perfon, and committed the Church to the guidance of his apostles. From this time the first seal takes its commencement; from this also, the first trumpet.' ‡ Hence it is manifeft, fince the feventh feat

P. 222.

† P. 135, 174, 196.

+ P. 197, 200.

brings us back, for the purpose of introducing the seven trumpets, to the very fame period at which the first feal was opened, that the opening of the seventh feal synchronizes, in the judgment of the Archdeacon, with the opening of the first feal, and that the feventh feal fingly comprehends exactly the same space of time as all the fix first feals conjointly.

The feventh feal then introduces and contains within itself all the Seven trumpets, the first fix of which conftitute the Archdeacon's second series of prophetic history, as the first fix feals had constituted his first series: and these two ferieses are in a great measure, though not altogether, commenfurate; for, though they both alike begin from the afcenfion of our Lord, the fix feals carry us to the day of judgment, whereas the fix trumpets only carry us to the end of the 1260 years.*

The third feries is of course that of the vials, which the Archdeacon arranges under the seventh trumpet, as he had previously arranged the feven trumpets under the seventh feal. But where is the place of the Seventh trumpet, and confequently of the first vial? The Archdeacon does not bring back the feventh trumpet and the first vial to the afcenfion of our Lord, as he had previoufly brought back the feventh feal and the first trumpet, but only to the beginning of the times of the beaft or the 1260 years; through the whole of which he supposes the seventh trumpet and its component vials to extend. He conceives however, that the fixth trumpet introduces Mahommedism in the year 606, and reaches to the downfall of Mahommedism at the close of the 1260 years. Confequently the beginning of the seventh trumpet exactly synchronizes with the beginning of the fixth trumpet; but the seventh extends beyond the fixth, and reaches, like the fixth feal and the seventh feal, to the final confummation of all things.t

In brief, the chronological arrangement of the Archdeacon's three serieses is as follows. The first is that of the fix feals; and it reaches from the afcenfion of our Lord to the day of judgment. The second is that of the fix trumpets, introduced by and comprehended under the seventh feal: and it reaches from the afcenfion of our Lord to the termination of the 1260 years. The third is that of the feven vials, introduced by and comprehended under the feventh trumpet; and it reaches from the commencement of the times of the beaft or the 1260 years to the day of judgment.

Now it is impoffible not to fee, that the whole of this arrangement is purely arbitrary, and confequently that the various interpretations built upon it must in a great measure be arbitrary likewife. The Apocalypfe must either be one continued prophecy, like each of those delivered by Daniel; in which cafe (with the single exception, as all commentators are agreed, of the episode contained in the little book) we must admit it, unless we be willing to give up all certainty of interpretation, to be strictly chronological: or it must be a book containing feveral perfectly diftinct and detached prophecies, like the whole book of Daniel, each of which, for any thing that appears to the contrary, may either exactly synchronize or not exactly synchronize with its fellows. If the former opinion be just, the Archdeacon's scheme immediately falls to the ground; for then all the feven trumpets must necessarily be pofterior in

* P. 273, 274,

† P. 308, 399, 400, 401, 252-273,274, 359, 360.

point of time to the opening of all the seven feals, and in a fimilar manner all the feven vials to the founding of all the seven trumpets. If the latter opinion be just, then the question is, how are we to divide the apocalypfe into diftinct prophecies? The only system, that to my own mind at least feems at all plausible, would be to suppose that each of the three feptenaries of the feals, the trumpets, and the vials, forms a diftinct prophecy. If we divide the Apocalypse at all, we must attend to the Apostle's own arrangement; and homogeneity plainly forbids us to separate the feals from the feals, the trumpets from the trumpets, or the vials from the vials. So again: as homogeneity requires us to attend to the Apostle's own arrangement in cafe of a division, it equally requires us to suppose that these three diflinct prophecies exactly coincide with each other in point of chronology: otherwise, what commentator shall pretend, without any clue to guide him, to determine the commencement of each ? But the feals, as all agree, commence either from the afcenfion of our Lord, or at least from some era in the Apoftle's own lifetime: therefore, if we divide the Apocalypfe, homogeneity requires us to conclude that the trumpets and the vials commence likewife from the same

era.

Accordingly I have somewhere met with a commentator, whose work I have not at present by me, and whose name I cannot recollect, that proceeds upon this very principle. He divides the Apocalypfe into the three prophecies of the feals, the trumpets, and the vials; and supposes, that all these prophecies run exactly parallel with each other, extending alike from the age of St. John to the end of the world. To this scheme, when examined in detail, the Archdeacon, as well as myself, will probably fee infurmountable objections. Sir Ifaac Newton adopts a somewhat different plan. He arranges all the seven trumpets under the feventh feal, and supposes them chronologically to succeed the fix first feals; thus making the feals and the trumpets one continued prophecy: but, when he arrives at the vials, he conceives them to be only the trumpets repeated; thus making the vials a detached prophecy synchronizing with the trumpets * Nothing can be more manifest in this plan than its arbitrary violation of homogeneity. What warrant can we have for afferting, that the feals and the trumpets form jointly a continued prophecy, but that the vials form a distinct separate prophecy synchronizing with that part of the former prophecy which is comprehended under the trumpets? But, if Sir Ifaac violate homogeneity in his arrangement of the Apocalypfe, much more furely does the Archdeacon: for he not only feparates the feventh feal and the seventh trumpet from their respective predeceffors, but divides the Apocalypfe into three diftinct prophecies, not one of which exactly synchronizes with another.

A violation of homogeneity however is not the only objection to the Archdeacon's arrangement. It seems to me to involve in itself more than one obvious contradiction. For what reason is the feventh feal styled the feventh? The most natural answer is, because it fucceeds the fix first feals. Now, according to the Archdeacon's arrangement, it does not fucceed them for the opening of it exactly synchronizes with the opening of the first, and therefore of course precedes the opening of the ree maining five, although the contents of the feventh feal itself are chronologically commenfurate with the contents of all the other fix. But, if the opening of the seventh feal synchronize with the opening of the first and therefore precede the opening of the remaining five, with what propriety can it be styled the feventh feal ? The fame remark applies to his arrangement of the trumpets. The first founding of the seventh trumpet, which introduces the feven vials, exactly synchronizes the first founding of the fixth; although, in point of duration, the seventh trumpet extends beyond the fixth. Such, according to the Archdeacon, being the cafe, why should one be termed the seventh rather than the other. The three last trumpets are moreover styled the three woes. How then can the feventh trumpet be the third woe, if it in a great measure synchronize with the second we? I am aware, that the Archdeacon does not confider the feventh trumpet as being itself the third woe, but only as introducing, at some period or other of its founding, that third woe.* Such a fuppofition however is forbidden by homogeneity; for, fince the fifth and the fixth trumpets manifestly introduce at their very earliest blast the first and fecond woes, we feem bound to conclude that the seventh trumpet should fimilarly introduce at its earliest blast the third woe. In this cafe then the fernd and the third woes exactly commence together: whence we are compelled to inquire, both why they should be styled second and third, and what event or series of events is intended by the one and what by the other? Nor is even this the only difficulty. The seventh trumpet is represented as beginning to found after the expiration of the fecond woe, and as introducing quickly the third woe. It is likewife represented as beginning to found after the death and revival of the witnesses; which must take place either (as Mede thinks) at the end of the 1260 years, or (as I am rather inclined to believe) toward the end of them. The Archdeacon himself thinks it most probable, that these events are yet to come. Now, in either of these cafes, how can the seventh trumpet fucceed the death and revival of the witnesses, if it begin to found at the very commencement of the 1260 years; that is to say at the very commencement of their prophefying?

* Observ, on the Apoc. p. 254, 293, 295,

Hitherto I have argued on the supposition, that it is allowable to divide the Apocalypse into distinct predictions; and have only attempted to shew, that it is next to impossible to fix upon any unobjectionable method of dividing it. I shall now proceed to maintain, that the system of dividing it refts upon no folid foundation. If we carefully read the Apocalypfe itself, we shall find no indications of any fuch divifion as that which forms the very basis of the Archdeacon's scheme of interpretation. Sir John only specifies a single division of his fubject, the greater book and the little book. This divifion therefore must be allowed; and accordingly has been allowed by perhaps every commentator. But the very circumstance of fuch a division being specified leads us almost necessarily to conclude, that no other division was intended by the Apostle: for, if it had been intend. ed, why was it not fimilarly specified? The Archdeacon draws an analogical argument from the diftinct prophecies of Daniel, in favour of the system of dividing the Apocalypse. After treating of his first series, that of the first fix feals which he supposes to extend from the afcenfion of

* P. 409, note.

† P. 302, 303,

« PreviousContinue »