Horae Apocalypticae, Vol. 1 (Third Edition) (1847)

Download: PDF — Horae Apocalypticae, Vol. 1 (Third Edition) (1847)

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web at http://books.google.com/

THIS BOOK BELONGED TO

BOB DELAISSÉ

AND WAS GIVEN TO THE LIBRARY

BY HIS FAMILY

DEPARTMENT OF

THE HISTORY OF ART

OXFORD

THIS BOOK BELONGED TO

BOB DELAISSÉ

AND WAS GIVEN TO THE LIBRARY

BY HIS FAMILY

J. A.

HORÆ APOCALYPTIC Æ.

HORAE APOCALYPTICE;

OR,

A COMMENTARY ON THE APOCALYPSE,

CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL;

INCLUDING ALSO AN EXAMINATION OF THE CHIEF PROPHECIES OF DANIEL.

ILLUSTRATED BY AN APOCALYPTIC CHART, AND ENGRAVINGS FROM MEDALS AND OTHER EXTANT MONUMENTS OF ANTIQUITY.

BY THE REV. E. B. ELLIOTT, A. M. LATE VICAR OF TUXFORD, AND FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.

THIRD EDITION, REVISED, CORRECTED, AND IMPROVED;

WITH AN APPENDIX,

CONTAINING, BESIDES OTHER MATTER,

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF APOCALYPTIC INTERPRETATION,

AND INDICES.

VOL. I.

SEELEY, BURNSIDE, AND SEELEY; FLEET STREET, LONDON. MDCCCXLVII.

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things that are written therein : for the time is at hand." Apoc. i. 3.

"The word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn." 2 Peter i. 19.

Leonard Seeley, Thames Ditton, Surrey.

ORIGINAL PREFACE.

In presenting this Work to the Public, the Author may be expected to give some account of the circumstances under which he was led to undertake it, of the plan pursued in it, and of any important peculiarities that he may suppose to attach to it, as compared with other previously published Commentaries on the Apocalypse.

At the time when his thoughts were first seriously directed to the study of Prophecy, now some ten or eleven years since, the Rev. S. R. Maitland's publications had begun to make an evident impression on prophetic investigators, as well as on other students of biblical and ecclesiastical literature; and had caused considerable doubt in the minds of many as to the correctness of the Protestant anti-Romish views of the Apocalypse, and the prophetic year-day theory, generally received in England since the Reformation; indeed, doubt whether the Apocalypse had as yet received any fulfilment in the past history of the Church and Christendom. The circumstance of a Periodical on prophetic subjects, called The Investigator, having been started about this time by a near neighbour and intimate and valued friend, the Rev. J. W. Brooks, then of Retford, now of Nottingham, and of his wishing the Author to contribute Papers to it, rendered it necessary that he should acquaint himself with the controversy, and form some decision of judgment as to the correctness or incorrectness of Mr. Maitland's theory.

And the result of his inquiries was of a twofold character. On the one hand the untenableness of many statements and opinions of Apocalyptic Interpreters of the Protestant School, such as Mr. M. had exposed, appeared palpable. On the other hand the general truth of their view of the Apocalyptic prophecies concerning Babylon and the seven-headed Beast, as having fulfilment in Papal Rome and the Popedom, appeared to him equally indubitable; and consequently that any theory of the prophecy which repudiated all idea of such fulfilment could not be true. His conviction to this effect was confirmed by consideration of the obvious and very striking chronological intimation given to St. John at the outset of the visions, (Apoc. iv. 1,) "Come up, and I will shew thee what must happen after these things;" i.e. after the state of things previously depicted as then existing, in the Epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia. It seemed to him that it would have been an almost direct violation of this intimation, had the presigurations thereupon given represented no events of earlier occurrence than such as were to happen in a distant futurity of at least 1800 years after St. John; indeed none earlier than the very eve of Christ's Second Advent.

Under this impression he could not but feel persuaded that there must have taken place in reality, although apparently up to that time undiscovered, some more exact fulfilment, in accordance with the year-day principle, of those several Apocalyptic prophecies, against the Protestant interpretations of which, previously offered, exception had justly been made: more especially of those of the Seals, of the Vision of the rainbow-crowned Angel of Apoc. x, of the Witnesses' Death and Resurrection, of the seventh Head of the seven-headed Beast, of the Beast's Image, and in fine of the structure of the Apocalypse itself. It so happened that he had soon after occasion to direct his careful attention to one of these prophecies, viz. that of the Witnesses' Death and Resurrection, which both by reason of its own details, and from its intimate and necessary connexion alike with the prefigurations that precede and that follow it, appeared almost more than any other to involve in its solution the true principles of Apocalyptic interpretation; and that he found in history what seemed to be precisely the explanation that had been wanted:—an explanation which was thereupon published by him in the Investigator, and which has been since substantially adopted by Mr. Birks and Mr. Bickersteth.

By this discovery, as he supposed it, and another that followed, of what appeared to him the true meaning of the Image of the Beast, he was confirmed in his belief and hope, that through careful investigation the right solution of other more obscure points might be discovered also. But it was evident that for such investigation prolonged and careful researches were necessary; researches such as he had neither time nor facilities for in a village retirement, and amidst the avocations of a parochial ministry.

Soon after this, however, he was providentially called, in consequence of the dangerous illness of one most nearly allied to him in domestic life, to quit his Living in Nottinghamshire for a warmer climate. Thus the leisure and opportunity for research that he had needed were brought unexpectedly within his reach: and the strongly-urged request of his excellent friend Mr. Bickersteth, concurred with the previous inclination of his own mind, in deciding him to apply himself seriously to the work.

The difficulty of the Seals met him at the outset. For the most careful reconsideration of the subject only confirmed him in his conviction of the utter untenableness of the several solutions of them offered by the best-known Protestant Expositors: alike that by Mr. Faber on one theory of Apocalyptic structure, that by Messrs. Woodhouse, Cuninghame, and Bickersteth on another, and (in so far as regarded the three earlier Seals) that by Mede and Bishop Newton also, on yet another. Thus he felt himself positively compelled, on this introductory part of the prophecy, to seek a truer solution.

And in commencing his researches after it, there were two preliminary presumptions on which he judged that he might safely proceed. The one presumption was that, supposing the fortunes of the Roman World and Christendom, from St. John's time down to the consummation, to have been the subjects of Apocalyptic figuration, the æras successively chosen by the Divine Spirit for delineation must have been the most important and eventful in the history of Christendom:—the other, that the emblems introduced into and constituting each prefigurative picture, must have been emblems in every case suitable to the æra and subject, and in considerable measure characteristic and distinctive. Were the problem proposed to any student or artist of competent attainments to depict a nation's history in a series of pictures, what should we think of him were he to select other than its most important æras for delineation? What if, in the delineations themselves, he were to introduce emblems or costumes inappropriate to the æra; or so to generalize in them that the pictures might equally well refer to twenty other æras and subjects, as to those intended? And if, with reference to any superior human artist, such a handling of the subject would be deemed discreditable, insomuch as à priori scarce to be believed of him,—how much rather should the idea be rejected as incredible, of the Divine Spirit having so handled the subjects of the Apocalyptic prophecy!—Proceeding on these principles and persuasions, light soon began to dawn on the Author's mind, as he prosecuted his researches into the pictures of the earlier Apocalyptic Seals: and, as he still went on somewhat laboriously, to complete what was wanting to a more perfect understanding on the subject, the twilight seemed to him to brighten into day.

Thus far the investigation had been almost purely literary in its character. And it was the Author's original intention to have confined himself to these and other such-like more literary subjects of investigation; omitting others that might be rather of a theological nature: especially if involving controverted questions; those only excepted which concern the grand differences between Protestantism and Popery.

On this plan the Work would have been a series of Essays, in illustration of such of the obscurer parts of the Apocalypse as the Author, by critical historical or antiquarian research, might deem that he had been enabled to unravel; and in extent one within the limits of a single Volume. But, as he proceeded, he found that the several parts of the sacred Book were so intimately connected together, that however successfully he might have explained certain detached passages of importance, he would almost certainly fail of working any thorough conviction of the truth of his explanations, in the minds of his more accurate and cautious readers; because of the conclusions thereon involving conclusions also on other closely connected passages, the correctness of which, prior to proof, they might by no means be prepared to admit. Moreover, as he seemed to himself to have perceived in some of those self-same more directly theological parts of the prophecy a meaning quite different from any that had before been supposed to attach to them,—and this in matters of no slight importance,—it became a serious question with him whether he would be justified in shrinking back, through fear of controversy, from declaring what he believed, on apparently clear evidence, to be the revealed truth of God. Nor was this, the voice of conscience, one which he dared resist.

Thus the Work became not only materially different from what he had first intended, and very much extended beyond the limits originally proposed, but one also to which, from the circumstance of its involving theological as well as literary questions, he could not but feel that a vastly increased amount of responsibility attached. And certainly he may say that he carried this sense of responsibility into the execution of the

Work.

He has spared neither time nor trouble in seeking out the true meaning of each part of the prophecy; and carefully watched lest any wrong prejudice or pre-possession should warp his judgment concerning it. It has been his habit always in the first instance to consider the simple grammatical meaning of the prophetic passage, comparing scripture with scripture; then to consult the most authentic histories of the period supposed to be alluded to, (often those of original authority,) and, where necessary, such works also as might furnish antiquarian illustration. This done, and his own independent judgment formed thereon, his next step generally has been to refer to the most approved and elaborate Commentators on the subject, more especially those of different views from his own; and to weigh their arguments, ere coming to any final conclusion. One thing, he may confidently say with Pascal, has in the execution of this Work been above all things his object;—that is, the discovery of THE TRUTH.

Deeply conscious of the worthlessness of any unsubstantiated dictum or opinion of his own, he has deemed it essential, in order to the Reader's satisfaction, to submit the evidence with somewhat more than usual fulness, on which in each case that opinion may have been grounded. Hence the Notes, which in large part contain it, have swelled at times to an extent for the most part undesirable. But the Apocalyptic subject is one altogether peculiar;—being at once so important, so difficult, and so controverted. Consequently he has no fear of this being made a matter of complaint by any of the more judicious and intelligent of his readers; but the contrary.—And there is yet another point in which he has thought it right to enlarge, beyond what may by some persons be deemed the proper limits of prophetic exposition; viz. in the political and historic sketches which he has here and there introduced: sketches drawn up however as briefly as might consist with their proper distinctness and comprehensiveness; and introduced only in order to fill up the historical lacunae, which in certain cases might seem to exist between consecutive Apocalyptic figurations; and so, conjointly with them, to make up altogether a general connected view of the history of European Christendom, alike political and ecclesiastical.

No doubt, in the case of a reader thoroughly conversant with history, this may have been superfluous. But a conversancy like this can scarcely be expected in the majority of readers. And of those who possess it not, it is but few, he is persuaded, that would have either time or inclination to turn to historians or other writers, simply named in Notes of reference, for the requisite information or authority. In which case they would necessarily be at a disadvantage in judging of the whole subject. For, as the Spirit of Omniscience made choice of each particular era of history for presfiguration, and planned the fittest mode of figuring them severally, while contemplating in its comprehensive glance the then whole future as one great present,—so they alone can be expected at all adequately to appreciate the justness of this its selection of eras, or the excellence of its prophetic pictures, who may in a general way have become tolerably well informed on the main history.

The Engravings given from ancient medals of the age supposed in each case to be prefigured, or other monuments of similar antiquity, will, the Author doubts not, be universally approved as alike interesting and illustrative. It is indeed a kind of evidence unimpeachable, supposing the medals authentic; and as hard to be forgotten as it is convincing. An Apocalyptic Chart too has been appended, which will bring the whole scheme of his Exposition under review at a glance. And he ventures to hope that the plan of Apocalyptic structure thus exhibited to the eye, will, from its obvious simplicity and completeness, as well as from its perfect agreement with St. John's primary description of the Scroll that it develops, as "written

within and without," presumptively commend itself for true to the mind of the Reader:—the rather if compared with other Apocalyptic schemes of structure, that have been similarly drawn out on a Chart; as for example Mede's or Mr. Cuninghame's.

With regard to the various mundane systems that have from time to time been imagined, the simplicity of the Copernican, as compared with the complexity of others, has been justly deemed of itself a presumptive argument of no small force in its favour. The same rule of judgment may apply, the Author thinks, in the present instance. Simplicity and completeness are ever characteristics of the works of God.

It will have appeared from the account just given, that the Work is, in the fullest sense of the word, original. More especially this characteristic attaches to the solutions here proposed of the three first Seals,—of the sealing and palm-bearing Visions,—of the vision of the rainbow-crowned Angel described in Apoc. x, xi, with its included notification on the death and resurrection of the two Witnesses;—also to those of the Beast's seventh Head,—of the Image of the Beast,\*—and finally of the Apocalyptic structure itself, and of St. John's representative part as acted out on the scene of vision. Besides which in other parts, where old solutions may have been in the main adopted, there is scarce a chapter where some new evidence has not been added, or some modification made in the explanation:—an assertion the correctness of which they will be best able to appreciate, who are best acquainted with other Commentaries.—In stating this, however, the Author must not be supposed to undervalue his obligations to the labours of those expositors who have preceded him:—not even where he may have deemed their views more or less erroneous. The Culloden, which stranded at Aboukir, contributed perhaps its full share to the victory of the Nile. Where an expositor has fairly and fully developed his theory, it will, even when manifestly unsuitable, serve at least as a buoy to warn those that follow of the rocks and shallows.

Moreover the collateral information, and hints for thought, furnished by laborious and independent expositors, must needs often prove, though perhaps indirectly, more or less valuable. To the Rev. S. R. Maitland, for example, the Author feels himself on these grounds specially indebted; though most widely differing from both him and his whole school of interpretation in the conclusions come to. Indeed he feels indebted to him more than to any other living writer on prophecy. For, but for Mr. Maitland's acute inquiries into, and exposure of, many too generally received errors, and his thereby almost forcing the sincere inquirer after the truth of prophecy to think for himself, the necessity of new investigations would have been by no means so impressed on the Author's mind, and the present Apocalyptic Commentary probably never have been written.

On the whole, the Author sends this Work into the world under the conviction, not merely of its truth in all main points, but also (however otherwise imperfect its execution) of the evidence of that truth being conclusive and clear. And he trusts that it will approve itself as such to his more intelligent and candid readers; at least if unpreoccupied by any very decided views, previously formed, as to the prophecy which is its great subject. His appeal is to common sense and sound learning; with both which it is his deep conviction that the truth of God's word will ever be found accordant. From them he invites a rigid though not uncandid scrutiny.—And if his Work successfully stand such scrutiny, then let him be permitted also to express his judgment that its importance can scarcely be overrated. For not only will it furnish new and striking evidence to the world of the truth of Scripture prophecy, and consequently of the Divine inspiration of Scripture,—a point in itself of no little moment; but moreover, by unfolding the history of the Church Visible and of Christendom, from St. John's time to the present, as prefigured to the Evangelist in Patmos, it will exhibit that history to the reader as it were with God's own continuous comment on it, his moral lessons intermixed, his philosophy of the history.

And thus, connected with past history as the present needs must be, there will be few of the stirring topics of religious controversy of the present day, but must here have the Divine judgment pronounced respecting them.—Besides which there will also be the advantage of whatever new light the Book, by its correcter exposition of the past, may possibly throw on the mysteries of the coming future. And surely it needs little argument to prove that, in order to any rational conjecturing as to the intent of unfulfilled prophecy, a previous correct understanding of that which has been already fulfilled must be an important help; if not an almost indispensable preliminary.

In conclusion, the Author has only to express his hope and prayer that He will thus bless it, without whom nothing is strong, nothing is holy. And should this his hope be fulfilled,—should the Work prove in any measure to the sceptical a convincing evidence of the Divine inspiration of Holy Scripture,—to the unsettled or misled a safeguard against the many dangerous errors of the day,—and to our Nation, our Church, and Christ's Church Universal, a seasonable word of instruction, warning, and direction, with reference to the past, the present, or the future,—then indeed will the labour of the many "Apocalyptic Hours," which have been devoted to it be abundantly requited. And to God be all the glory!

Cheltenham, January, 1844.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

In sending this second Edition of his Work into the world, the Author wishes first to express his thankfulness for the very favorable reception so far given it: the original Edition having been all sold off in eight months; and warm opinions exprest in its favor both publicly and privately, in Reviews, and personally, or by letter. The value of this testimony has been enhanced to the Author's mind, as coming from persons of different professions, and different Protestant ecclesiastical communities: alike from prelates and other dignitaries and ministers of his own Church, whose approbation might well be to him a legitimate source of gratification; from residents in our Universities, and able and learned members of the legal profession; from some of the most eminent ministers both of the Scotch Established and of the Scotch Free Church; and from some too of Dissenting bodies from our own Establishment. The voice of kindliness and approbation has been repeated from other countries; from Switzerland and France on the European Continent, from the United States of North America, from our Colony at the Cape, and from India. From that last-mentioned distant country the Author has been favored with the approving voice, not only of other valued friends in the Bengal and Madras Presidencies, but of him especially who, in God's Providence, has been spared to preside for above thirteen years over the branch of our Anglican Reformed Church there planted, to its great advancement and

blessing; for the re-establishment of whose health, shattered in the noblest of services, many prayers, he doubts not, have ascended from his readers to the throne on high.

And this has been, above all, gratifying to him, that the impression on the minds of by far the larger number of those who have thus approved his Work, is to the effect that, as an Exposition of the Apocalyptic Prophecy, it is substantially true, and has the evidence of truth stamped upon it. It had occurred to the Author to have here presented the reader with two or three such testimonies, (for he knew that he would have been permitted to do so,) from persons eminent in the literary as well as ecclesiastical world; whose judgment could not but have carried weight with every intelligent and candid mind. But on reconsideration he has concluded not to do this. It seems due to those whom he had in view, that they should have full time to see, hear, and weigh whatever may be brought against the interpretation here given, before their opinions in favor of its substantial truth are published to the world. Moreover, though the authority of such names as are referred to could not but tend to the Book's present acceptance, yet in the long run this result must arise, and indeed ought to arise, not from the authority of approving names and opinions, however highly estimable, but from its own intrinsic weight of evidence and argument.

And the Author has distinctly to acknowledge, that this impression of truth has been by no means made on all, even of the friends that have felt warmly interested in his Work. Nor indeed have there been wanting those, as the reader may probably know, who have pronounced a directly unfavourable opinion on this head against it. In every such case it has been his object to ascertain, if possible, the grounds of the incredulity as to its expository correctness and truth. And, while sensible that certain imperfections in his original development of the evidence cannot but have tended to help forward such a feeling, (imperfections which he will have again to allude to before concluding this Preface,) yet in no small number of cases he seems to have traced it to a cause of which the operation was not unforeseen by him at the time of the first publication of the Horæ; viz.

the previous possession of the objectors' minds (perhaps long and inveterate possession) by other quite different and contrary Apocalyptic theories. It was observed by him in his original Preface, that he trusted the Work "would approve itself as true to his more intelligent and candid readers; at least if unpreoccupied by any very decided views previously formed as to the intent of the prophecy." For, not merely with reference to Authors committed before the world by repeated publications on the subject, (the strongest case of all in point,) but in a measure with reference also to decided disciples of long standing attached to any opposite Apocalyptic school, whether that of the Præterists, that of the Futurists, or that of earlier Protestant interpreters, differing from the Author on important details, it seemed scarcely to be expected that they would give an unprejudiced and fair consideration to the propounded evidence of a new, and more or less counter theory. And this without any impeachment of their candour. For when the mind has long entertained and dwelt on certain views of a subject as true, albeit incorrect views, it insensibly habituates itself more and more to overlook and forget the flaws and weaknesses of the supposed sustaining evidence; and at length so to mistake its own creations for realities, as to be, for a time at least, almost incapable of receiving, or fairly considering, that which would destroy the illusion.—So even when the difference is only prophetic. Much more must this prejudice be likely to operate, where a difference of religious views is added to that on prophecy: for it cannot be questioned that religious truth of the most important kind is necessarily and deeply involved in the exposition of the Apocalypse.—Now, that prejudices such as these must have operated, one or both, the Author thinks he may conclude, where his exposition has been at once set aside as altogether erroneous, withoutanycontroverting or even encountering of his proffered evidence and reasonings, but simply the assertion of some counter-system as the true one.

So, for example, in the case of an otherwise very friendly Reviewer, of the Futurist school, in the Christian Examiner. So in the case of a less friendly writer in the Eclectic Review, of the school of the Praterists. The latter especially sets aside at once the whole exposition of the Horæ as based on principles fundamentally false; simply because not those of his own chosen school.

The fact, however, of such opinions having been entertained and asserted, has led the Author carefully to reconsider the nature of the evidence on which a reasonable man, believing in the inspiration of the Bible, may safely conclude on the truth of any alleged historical fulfilment of this sacred prophecy. And the more he has considered the question, the stronger and deeper has become his conviction that the evidence must be sought, and must consist, in the fitting of historic fact with the prophetic figurations. There can surely be no plainer or safer guide on this point than the precedent of other prophecies, such as are admitted on all hands to have already received their accomplishment. On what ground then is it, I ask, that we assert the very Messiah of Old Testament prophecy to have trod this our earth some 1800 years ago in the person of him that was called Jesus of Nazareth? What, but that, on a comparison of the recorded facts of his history with the details of prophecy, we find them most marvellously, and in a hundred particulars, to tally one with the other:—particulars involving place, time, circumstances; and having reference alike to the Messiah's predicted character, life, death, resurrection, ascension. It is not that there remain no difficulties unsolved, no points on which difference of opinion exists, in the Messianic prophecies. Even as regards Isaiah's famous prophecy, respecting the Messiah's birth of a Virgin, it is well known to Biblical students that its context still presents certain difficulties and obscurities: and so, again, as regards the prophecy of the seventy weeks, "until Messiah the Prince," in Daniel.

But in all the mass of the particulars the coincidence of fact and prediction, fairly made out, is overwhelming: and consequently the conclusion undoubted. It is on the same kind of evidence (to add another example or two) that we pronounce Christ's prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem to have been fulfilled: the same on which we declare Daniel's four metals in the symbolic image, and also his four Beasts, seen in vision, to have been realized in the four great successive empires of the world, the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman — Precisely similar is my proffered proof in the Horæ. And sure I am that no dogmatic dictum by any Critic, of whatever prophetic school, authoritatively pronouncing it "a total failure," and "based on principles fundamentally erroneous," simply because different from those of his own Apocalyptic theory, will avail much or long to influence any sensible and candid inquirer against it. The conclusion on its truth or error, as an exposition of the Apocalypse, must and will be drawn from an examination of the asserted correspondence of fact and prophecy. And if they prove to fit, so as I believe they will, like the loops and taches in the hangings of the Tabernacle, (for precision and definiteness, let it be observed, not generalizing vagueness, such as in most counter-systems, will every where be found to characterize the solutions in the Horæ, every where consequently presenting angular points for comparison and testing,) and this not in respect of one, two, or three particulars, but of a continuous series of particulars, from St. John's time down to the time now present,—I say if such a fitting be proved, then the common sense of intelligent and candid men will ultimately, indeed speedily, settle down into the conviction, that such fittings of prediction and fact can no more be ascribed to chance, than could the fittings in the Jewish Tabernacle; and that the Exposition which unfolds them must be true.

There is however one Critic, and so far as the Author knows, but one, (except indeed a really kindly reviewer in the Congregational Magazine of last March, contesting, though quite vainly it is believed, the Domitianic date of the Apocalypse argued from in the Horæ,1) who has partially encountered the evidence here offered; and, as the result, professed to prove the Work, as an Apocalyptic Exposition, a failure. I allude of course to the Pamphlet entitled "Remarks on the Horæ Apocalypticæ," by the Rev. T. K. Arnold. It was to the Author a real source of satisfaction that one so able as Mr. Arnold, and one so well known too as a scholar and controversialist, should have undertaken the task of examining and refuting the Horæ. For, persuaded as he himself was of its truth, he could not but anticipate that failure would be found to characterize the attack, rather than the work attacked; and thus that the "Remarks" would prove a means of confirming, rather than of overthrowing it. And such indeed, if he may trust not his own judgment only, but that of many literary friends well competent to judge in the matter, has been the result. The reader of course will not be expected, nor ought to receive, this ex parte opinion. The Author is anxious rather that he should read and compare for himself the Pamphlets of attack and reply: also a further criticism by Mr. Arnold in the British Magazine for last March, and a Reply in the Number for the present month of April. It will be seen, I believe, that there is not a point in the attack on which Mr. Arnold has not been met directly and successfully. Meanwhile, in order that there may be better understood the present position of the controversy, he subjoins in a Note his requisition to Mr. Arnold to bring the question between them,3 on the truth or untruth of the Exposition in the Horæ, to a decisive issue before the literary world.

And as the writer in the Eclectic Review has so strongly pronounced against its truth, he begs distinctly to apply the requisition to him also.

The Author has now to state the principal differences and improvements that will be found in the present Edition, as compared with the former.

The chief Additions will be found in the Appendix at the end of the fourth Volume. First, there is there given a Sketch of the History of Apocalyptic Interpretation, occupying some 180 pages, and tracing its subject from the earliest times down to the present era. The Author had himself long felt the want of some such Treatise, and doubts not it will be deemed both interesting and useful by his readers: useful not otherwise only, but above all as enabling them more satisfactorily to judge as to Apocalyptic truth, from having distinctly under view all the main systems of Apocalyptic interpretation,—After which follows a Critical Examination into each of the two chief anti-Protestant systems of Apocalyptic Interpretation, that of the Præterists, and that of the Futurists: as well as afterwards also into the Church-Scheme of the Apocalyptic Seals, given by certain earlier Protestant Expositors, and into the Prophetic theory of the late Dr. Arnold. Of those notices the third alone was given fully in my first Edition; the second partially; the other two, not at all. The singular dogmatism however, and assurance of this Præterist school, its general reception by German critics and Romish theologians, its zealous adoption and propagation by Professor Moses Stuart and others in America, and its evidently increasing favor with not a few theological students, and writers on Biblical criticism, in our own country, (Professor Lee's respected name included among them,) all concurred to show that it was a system that could no longer be overlooked, by any thoroughly impartial inquirer into prophetic truth. The Author trusts that the result of his critical examination into it will be to show that there is absolutely no locus standi for the Præterist system, any more than for that of the Futurists: and in the belief that general opinion will soon so pronounce, he cannot but feel thankful that Professor Stuart should, by his late ela-

borate Apocalyptic Commentary, have so forced the scheme into notice; to the effect only of its final and decisive rejection both in England and elsewhere.

Lastly follow Indices, which have been much called for. Such are the chief Addenda to this new Edition: though it is to be understood that, in the progress of a very careful revision, many other lesser but by no means unimportant additions have been made here and there; wherever the evidence seemed drawn out imperfectly, or additional illustration useful to the argument. Indeed they have added to the Work much above 100 pages. On the other hand, in some few parts condensation and retrenchment seemed practicable with advantage. And by this, and the transfer occasionally of part of an overcrowded Chapter to the Appendix, and a better and more frequent division into Chapters and Sections, relief has been given to parts that before must have read heavily. So that, on the whole, the Author ventures to hope that his Work will be found not only more clear, more strong in evidence, and more interesting, but even perhaps effectively in the perusal shorter, in spite of its being longer. Alterations of historic explanation there will be found none, except on points of detail. The chief are two. One is that he now assigns a larger meaning (so as classical antiquity, he finds, requires that he should) to the symbol of the sword-giving in the second Seal, than he gave it before; applying it to designate the military profession generally, as causes of the civil war and blood-shedding, (so as he also finds history requires,) instead of the Prætorian Prefects alone and in particular. The other is that he now carries out fully into his explanations of the vision of the Souls under the Altar in the 5th Seal, and of that of the Angel and his oath in Apoc. x, (so as he had not done before,) the important hermeneutic principle of regarding St. John as a symbolic man on the scene: the representative at each epoch prefigured of the true apostolical ministerial succession of that epoch; i.e.

of the successors of the apostles not lineally alone, but in doctrine and spirit.

In conclusion the Author must beg permission to add a few words on the religious bearing of his Work. He could not but be sensible, when first launching it into the world, as well of its exceeding importance in this point of view, supposing it to be really based on truth, as of the probability of its being questioned and objected to on that very account, by such as on the controverted points of religious doctrine, here involved, took other and contrary views to his own. So especially with regard to his view of the Popedom and Papal Rome as the very antitypes of the Apocalyptic Beast and Babylon; and that of the spiritual body of true believers, included within the Church visible, as distinctively the object of the chief and highest Church promises. Accordingly Mr. Arnold has vehemently reprobated the former view; and others, the Author knows, have similarly shrunk from the latter. In either case, however, he has the comfort to know not only that the objectors have failed of disproving the asserted clear accordance of these his views alike with the Apocalypse, and whole tenor of the Bible; but moreover that they are distinctly and precisely agreeable to the doctrines of the beloved Church to which he belongs. In England, as well as in Switzerland and Germany, the Reformation, as Bishop Warburton most truly states, was begun and carried on upon the principle of the Pope and Church of Rome being the Antichrist of Scripture prophecy.1 And as to the chief Church of the promises, (in other words the Church of the saved, the Church the Bride,) our Anglican Liturgy defines its constituency (distinctively from the visible Churches that include them) as "the members incorporate in the mystical body of Christ, the blessed company of all faithful people:2 most scripturally and beautifully describing their character and history, from its beginning to its end, in the xviith Article of its own authoritative and admirable code of doctrine.—Nor even as regards his premillennial view, which many otherwise warmly interested in the Work have objected to, but of the truth of which the Author, after very careful reconsideration, is more and more persuaded, (though of course its evidence cannot equal that of the fulfilled and past, as it cannot be tried by the same testing,) is there any material difference between himself and the admirable men who, in God's providence, defined and founded the Reformed Protestant Church of England.

For though opposed, and most justly opposed, to certain wild millennarian doctrines then propounded by German Anabaptists and others, they did yet most distinctly hold, and set forth, the doctrine of Christ's pre-jubilean advent: meaning by pre-jubilean an advent antecedent to, and introductory of, this our earth's jubilean restoration to happiness; a restoration the theme of all the prophets, and subject surely of every heart's aspiration.—Indeed, so far as the Author is aware, the whole theology of the ensuing Exposition, though everywhere most strictly and simply drawn from the Apocalypse itself, it yet all through singularly in concord with that of the Anglican Church; taking the Church's Articles, Liturgy, and Homilies as the expression of its doctrines: (the two latter of course in all doubtful points explained by the former:) and of which, may he be permitted to add, the truest as well as sweetest exponent, (at least of all authors subsequent to the era of the Reformation,) seems to him to be the admirable Archbishop Leighton.

And surely what has past since the first publication of the Horæ has only served to show in clearer light the need of such a guide, amidst surrounding darkness, as this record of God's own philosophy of the past history of Christendom, this divine Apocalypse. Would there have been on the part of some (men highly thought and highly spoken of in our Church) that secession to Papal Rome, after first vainly attempting, by a non-natural sense given to its Articles, to make our Church symbolize with Rome, had there been the understanding which this Book teaches, that the Papal system is in very truth that of the Antichrist of Babylon? Would there have been such sad and grievous errors under the name of Church principles, had the Apocalyptic doctrine been studied and understood, as to what that Church is to which attach the everlasting promises? Or, again, such lowering and earthly notions respecting Christ's Kingdom? A Kingdom of which alike the Apocalypse assures us, and indeed the voice of our own Church re-echoing it, that it is then and then only to be really manifested, when "the number of the elect is complete:" its present state being but that mixt and most imperfect one which is connected with the incipient and preparatory gathering of its members, from out of the professing Churches, as well as from among Jews, heathens, and heretics, "throughout this naughty world."

May it please God to bless this Second Edition of the Horae to its readers, in so far as it is accordant with his divine mind and will: that the Holy Book which it seeks to interpret may thus prove to them, what it was doubtless intended to be, "as a light shining in a dark place; until the day dawn:"a beacon light to warn from deadly error; a guiding light to truth and Heaven!

Torquay, April, 1846.

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.

The present Edition is for the most part a reprint of the Second. It has however been cursorily revised throughout; and received many small emendations, with a view to the improvement of the style or argument. More especially this has been found necessary in the two last Sections of the Appendix to the Fourth Volume, containing the Author's critical examination of the prophetic systems of the Futurists and of Dr. Arnold; which, from the unavoidable pressure of other engagements at the time, were both drawn up and printed somewhat hurriedly and negligently.

As regards the interpretation, the reader will find but one alteration of any consequence; viz. in that of one of the component parts of the symbol of the third Seal. As the point is one not only interesting to himself, but very confirmatory, he believes, of the truth of his general explanation of the Seals, it may be permitted him to state that it has reference to the measure and the price of wheat enunciated in the voice from the midst of the living creatures. It was his primary strong impression that this price designated the actual average price at the time to which he referred the vision; that is, the reign of the Emperor Alexander Severus.

But while on all other points the symbol precisely suited this epoch, the price seemed much too high: and he found himself obliged in consequence to fall back on the supposition of a certain larger chenix being meant than the one best known in classic history, and of the price being that current at the time when the Apocalyptic visions were revealed to St. John, not the time to which the particular Seal referred; a supposition admissible, he deemed, though not altogether satisfactory. In the course however of recent researches on another subject, his attention was directed to an important element in the question which he had quite overlooked before; viz. the adulteration of the Roman silver coinage, which began and went on increasing through the third century. And he had the gratification to find that, at the then well-defined depreciated value of the denarius, the price announced in the Apocalyptic figuration of the third Seal was nothing more or less, according to the best data that remain on which to form a judgment, than about the average price at the time of the era spoken of, the reign of Alexander Severus.

It may be right to state further, that having had suggested to him the necessity of attention to the authenticity of his illustrative Roman medals, and the want of accuracy and trust-worthiness in some of the writers on medals that he had himself in part depended on, he has gladly availed himself of better opportunities for informing himself on this interesting branch of the medallic science, than he happened to enjoy during the time of his preparation of the two former Editions of the Horæ. The result has been the rectification of some inaccuracies that he had fallen into; all comparatively unimportant, however, with the exception of one affecting the medal of Maximian: on which, and a point of historic fact connected with it, there is appended a full discussion in the Third Volume. Besides which there has resulted the addition of a disquisition, placed at the end of the present Volume, on the medallic illus-

tration of another historic point of primary importance in the Author's Scheme of Apocalyptic interpretation : and also a general historic sketch, that will be found, he hopes, both useful and interesting, of matters of chief importance respecting the Roman coinage; with special reference, in detail, to the Roman coins engraved in this Work.

With regard to the controversial Pamphlets, or Letters, that have appeared since the publication of the Second Edition, on the subject of the Horæ, (the Author alludes more particularly to Mr. Arnold's later Letters on the Seals in the British Magazine, and Dr. Candlish's, in relation to the symbols of St. John's measuring of the Apocalyptic temple and the ascent of the Witnesses,) he has seen no reason, from any thing contained in them, to alter the views previously expressed by him on the several topics that they controvert. And he ventures to hope that in his replies to these writers, it will appear that their arguments have been fully and fairly met: and that it is thus from no undue attachment to his own original opinions that he adheres to them; but from their having, to say the least, an evidence of truth sufficient to justify his belief. As regards however another point prominent in Dr. Candlish's Pamphlet, viz. the tone of some of his remarks on the Scotch Free Church and certain of its writers, the Author feels himself to have given some reason for complaint; and gladly takes this opportunity of acknowledging it; as he has indeed already done more fully in his Pamphlet of Reply. In the present Edition these remarks have been all carefully revised and altered. And though his judgment still remains substantially the same on the points alluded to, yet he trusts it is now so exprest that the members of the Free Church, for many of whom he entertains the highest esteem, may find in his remarks no just ground of offence.

In conclusion the Author has to express his thankfulness for the unusually rapid sale of the Second Edition; sold off as the whole was within a month from its publication, and with the demand for it still continuing. He trusts that he may regard this as a proof, not only that the important subject which it is its object to unfold, has taken hold in some measure of the public mind, but also that the impression prevails to no inconsiderable extent of the evidence offered by him in its development being on main points satisfactory and convincing. And the favorable testimonies to its usefulness, which he still continues to receive from time to time, induce him the rather to hope that it has not been without the Divine blessing.

Lausanne, March, 1847.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TO VOL. I.

PRELIMINARY ESSAY.

CHAP. PAGE

I. GENUINENESS OF THE APOCALYPSE . . . 1

II. DATE OF THE APOCALYPSE . . . 35

INTRODUCTION.

I. ST. JOHN IN PATMOS . . . . 55

II. VISION OF "THE THINGS THAT ARE" . 72

III. THE HEAVENLY COMPANY . . 82

IV. THE APOCALYPTIC SCENERY . . 96

V. PRINCIPLES AND PLAN OF THE EXPOSITION . 110

PART I.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ON THE FOUR FIRST SEALS. 117

I. FIRST SEAL . 125

II. SECOND SEAL 140

III. THIRD SEAL 147

IV. FOURTH SEAL . . . . . 170

V. FIFTH SEAL . . . . . 180

VI. SIXTH SEAL . . . . . 210

VII. SEALING AND PALMBEARING VISIONS, PREFACE 226

§ 1. INTIMATIONS OF APOSTACY BEGUN 228

§ 2. ANTIDOTE TO THE APOSTACY IN THE REVELA-

TION OF THE DOCTRINES OF ELECTING GRACE 262 PART II.

I. THE SILENCE IN HEAVEN . . . . .

PRELIMINARY ESSAY

ON THE GENUINESS AND THE DATE

OF THE APOCALYPSE OF ST. JOHN.

When a Book of any interest or importance is set before us, there are two questions on which we may reasonably wish and expect information, preliminary to its perusal; the 1st, Who is the writer? the 2nd, When written? More especially this is the feeling, if the Work be one that claims to be of Divine inspiration; so as in the case of the Apocalypse. I purpose, therefore, in the present preliminary Essay, to answer these two questions concerning it. The first is one that has obviously a most important bearing on the inspiration of the Book; the second, as will be shown, on its right interpretation.

CHAP. I.—THE WRITER OF THE APOCALYPSE.

Now on this point a ready and satisfactory answer seems at once to meet the eye in the very text of the prophetic Book itself. For the writer more than once enunciates his own name in it, "John." 1 And the authority which it implies to have attached to him, alike from the asserted circumstance of his being Christ's chosen medium for receiving the revelation, and communicating it to the angels or presiding bishops of the seven Asiatic Churches,—from that of his pronouncing a blessing on those several presiding bishops, 1 —and yet again from its speaking of the prophets as but his brethren, 2 —is such as could scarcely belong to any one named John of less than apostolic dignity: insomuch that the very genuineness of the Book seems involved in the fact of its writer being John the apostle.

Nor will the corroborative evidence that it offers fail to strike the investigator,—an evidence acknowledged even by the superficial and the prejudiced,—in the holiness and super-human sublimity of the composition. 3 —Should further evidence have been deemed desirable, the well-known accordant testimony of Irenæus will have been ready at hand to the inquirer; a testimony express and often repeated, as will presently appear, to the effect that the author of the Apocalypse was indeed that beloved disciple, the Apostle and Evangelist St. John. 4 And considering Irenaeus' own very early era, relation to St. John, and character,—that he was an Asiatic Greek, born nearly about the time of St. John's death, 1 that he was a disciple of Polycarp, which latter was a disciple of St. John, 2 and that he was moreover one of the most learned, as well as most holy and devoted of the Christian bishops of that age,—his testimony will justly have been considered not only as of high authority, but as almost in itself decisive on the point in question: indeed as altogether sufficient and decisive, except in the case of some strong countervailing evidence.

The fact is, however, that countervailing evidence of this nature has been asserted to exist. The genuineness of the Apocalypse has been questioned by ancient writers of eminence in the Christian Church, as early at least as the third century: more especially I may name Dionysius of Alexandria. And it has been questioned too by modern biblical critics of high reputation for learning and candour; among whom Michaelis stands pre-eminent. This renders it necessary that the point in question should be more carefully looked into; and the evidence,

B2 as well against as for, examined in detail.

At least it must be done by him who would wish thoroughly to satisfy himself on the grounds of our belief in the genuineness and divine inspiration of the Apocalypse of St. John.—I purpose therefore drawing out the evidence somewhat fully; and shall first, and with a view to the fairer conducting of the inquiry, set before the reader the strength and substance of the objections of these two, the most notable of ancient and modern objectors.

With regard then to Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria about the middle of the third century, 1 the earliest impugner (at least the earliest of any note) 2 of the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, this is most observable, that he did not impugn its ascription to the Apostle John on historical grounds. He did not allege the testimony of any more ancient writer against it. He did not thus argue (I borrow the language of Michaelis 3 ) ; "It is not preserved in the archives of the seven Asiatic Churches : the oldest persons in those cities have no knowledge of its having been sent thither : no one ever saw it during the life of St. John : it was introduced in such and such a year, and contradicted as soon as it appeared." It was simply on critical grounds, and internal evidence, that he rested his objection : reasoning from certain marked differences of sentiment and diction between the Apostle John's Gospel and Epistles on the one hand, and the Apocalypse of John on the other. Now the circumstance of an objector so learned as Dionysius having thus failed to appeal to historical evidence, and of certain previous, but evidently rash and intemperate objectors to whom he alludes, having equally failed to do so, 1 (nor, let me add, is the case different with the next eminent questioner of the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, I mean Eusebius 2 ) constitutes, as Michaelis allows, a considerable, 3 —I should say an exceedingly strong argument, in proof of the point disputed.

For had such evidence existed at the time, I cannot but believe that he would have alleged it. As to his main critical argument, 4 just before stated, he who has marked the difference of style in the case of other sacred writers, when simply writing history, and when rapt by the Spirit into the enunciation of prophecy, (I might exemplify this in the cases of Moses, Isaiah, and St. Peter,') will easily perceive the danger of deciding a question of identity of authorship simply on such grounds, and without the corroboration of external evidence:—not to add that there are observable certain remarkable points of similarity 2 (as well as of dissimilarity) between the writings thus brought into

In the Apocalypse (xix. 13) Christ is called, "The Word of God."

In the Apocalypse Christ is called "The Lamb," (v. 6, 12, vii. 17, xiv. 1, &c. &c.) apviav.

In the Apocalypse Christ is called "He that is true," "He that is faithful and true." (iii. 7, xix. 11).

In John's Gospel (i. 1) Christ is styled "The Word," and in his first Epistle (i. 1) "The Word of Life:" * and there only in the Bible.

In John's Gospel Christ is called "The Lamb of God," (i. 29, 36), b apos rov Θev. (To which I may add the application of the type of the paschal lamb to him, John xix. 36; "A bone of it shall not be broken.") The only other passages in the New Testament where Christ is called the Lamb, are Acts viii. 32, 1 Peter i. 19.

In St. John's Gospel and Epistle, Christ is called "He that is true," "Full of truth," "The truth;" i. 14, xiv. 6, 1 John v. 20.

In John's Gospel (xix. 37) the same prophecy of Zechariah is referred comparison ; indeed such as to make Michaelis suggest in explanation the idea of the Apocalyptic phraseology being in these points a forged imitation 1 of that of St. John's Gospel.

Again the Evangelist's Apocalyptic Hebraisms may be accounted for on the at least suppo-

sable hypothesis, in the absence of authentic contradicting testimony, of his late domiciliation in Greek Asia, and publication of the Apocalypse first, of the Epistles and Gospel afterwards. Nor let me here omit to observe that Dionysius himself, though incredulous as to the Apostle John being the author of the Apocalypse, had yet the conviction,—in part derived from the holy character of the book itself, in part from its general recep-

Michaelis (p. 535), in quoting the above, observes justly that Mr. Twells

John xix. 37; Opere et us de aguer-

tuer and,

Apoc.1.7; Οφεται αυτον πας οφθαλ-

mos, και οὐτives αυτον εξεκεντησαν.

has not given this example of parallelism all the force he might : because in the Apocalypse the quotation from Zechariah is made not according to the text of the Septuagint ; * but with a certain different reading, the very same that occurs in the Gospel citation.

As an example of similar construction and phrase, also urged by Mr. Twells, I may select the expression "to keep the words," or "word," τηνεw λογους, or λογον, occurring in Apoc. iii. 8, 10, xxii. 7, 9; but which occurs no where else in the New Testament, except in St. John's Gospel, viii. 51, 52, 55, xiv. 23, 24, xv. 20, xvii. 6, and his Epistle, 1 John ii. 5.—Michaelis (ibid.) adds that the similar but antithetical phrases ποειν αληθειαν and ποειν φενδος are used, the one 1 Ep. John i. 6, the other Apoc. xxii. 15.—Let me add that in Apoc. xviii. 24 the true reading, according to Griesbach and Scholz, is alματα in the plural (ev αυτρ alματα προφητρων ευρεθη); which somewhat remarkable use of the word, though not very infrequent in the Septuagint, is found, I believe, no where else in the New Testament except in St. John's Gospel, i. 13, Ol ονκ εξ alματων, &c.

…