Why has it hitherto been less easy to understand the Apocalypse? Because it is an allegory written as we know at a time when the events, which it figuratively describes, had no existence except in the mind of God. If anyone were to sit down and write it now, in the manner described above; if the Apocalypse had not been written in the first century, and was composed now by some writer of great talent and vivid fancy, familiar with the language of ancient prophecy, and gifted with that historical imagination which enables a man to look back upon the past as one great, varied, but consistent picture: if it were thus published in these days professedly as an allegorical drama of the warfare of Christ with Satan and the world, all readers would not only admire the sublimity of its imagery, but would also acknowledge its close agreement with history, and its exact, consistent, and exhaustive description of all its salient and more important features. There would still be diversities of opinion as to the author's intention in many of the minor details of his description; but all would understand his general meaning. A composition, too, so exceedingly artistic and elaborate, would still require from its readers long and patient study to unravel all the mysterious sayings; for a figurative description must always be somewhat difficult, even when it refers to the events of the well-known past or present. Moreover St. John's visions could not possibly have been understood much earlier than the present time, for the great drama of history had not been sufficiently unfolded until quite lately. We can scarcely yet understand or appreciate the amazing change in the state of Christendom, in the relation between the world and Christianity, which commenced at the beginning of the present century. Even now, therefore, many visions must be somewhat indistinct, because they manifestly peint to judgments and eventa which have not yet taken place. The general meaning, however, the main scope of this prophecy, is so evident, that even the early Christians, andi the faithful in all ages, have understood it enough to an ent the purpose for which it was writtens to support this faith and the patience of the saints in all their trials and dimondties, and to be the witness to the truth of Him who gank H to His Church. We need such a witness in these days. Me pad wujeknatural evidence of the supernatural origin of una poligion; and we have it in this marvelona, & militum mod kludunate allegorical description of the alveory of Roman Cinderendom, written, even as our biserent curule adult, in the first century of our era, and it que us Gold Lot possiuly Lave predicted by Ery umat facury, but who protease to have seen that vinci is describes when under the influence of the Spirit of God. As we have already observed, Kuenen and his school would undoubtedy denoune it as an imposture and an afterprophecy, if there wen tue east shadow of doubt as to the age in which it was published. Ei so deals with Ezekiel, Jeremial and Lanie.. when he is obliged to see that their figurative descriptions of the future were verified by history. Tie at once sets then down as after-prophets and piously fraudulen. imposters. bu. when we compare the prophecies of Dani avour the transactions of the agre of Antiochuswhic: non tuer exactes have caused him to be accused of water-prophesying-with the visions of St. John, we see at Once Lut un alegor: © the apocalypse is far closer to history thai anything Wale Lane wrote about Antiochus; BARS IN VIC Ci de platies eVluences which we can, well pave, üht the Omussen Spire is the real author of the Vision, antzouga diev were seen all written down by one. Why has it hitherto been less easy to understand the Apocalypse? Because it is an allegory written as we know at a time when the events, which it figuratively describes, had no existence except in the mind of God. If anyone were to sit down and write it now, in the manner described above; if the Apocalypse had not been written in the first century, and was composed now by some writer of great talent and vivid fancy, familiar with the language of ancient prophecy, and gifted with that historical imagination which enables a man to look back upon the past as one great, varied, but consistent picture: if it were thus published in these days professedly as an allegorical drama of the warfare of Christ with Satan and the world, all readers would not only admire the sublimity of its imagery, but would also acknowledge its close agreement with history, and its exact, consistent, and exhaustive description of all its salient and more important features. There would still be diversities of opinion as to the author's intention in many of the minor details of his description; but all would understand his general meaning. A composition, too, so exceedingly artistic and elaborate, would still require from its readers long and patient study to unravel all the mysterious sayings; for a figurative description must always be somewhat difficult, even when it refers to the events of the well-known past or present. Moreover St. John's visions could not possibly have been understood much earlier than the present time, for the great drama of history had not been sufficiently unfolded until quite lately. We can scarcely yet understand or appreciate the amazing change in the state of Christendom, in the relation between the world and Christianity, which commenced at the beginning of the present century. Even now, therefore, many visions must be somewhat indistinct, because they manifestly point to judgments and events which have not yet taken place. The general meaning, however, the main scope of the prophecy, is so evident, that even the early Christians, and the faithful in all ages, have understood it enough to answer the purpose for which it was written: to support the faith and the patience of the saints in all their trials and difficulties, and to be the witness to the truth of Him who gave to His Church. it We need such a witness in these days; we need supernatural evidence of the supernatural origin of our religion; and we have it in this marvellously sublime and elaborate allegorical description of the history of Roman Christendom, written, even as our bitterest enemies admit, in the first century of our era, and by one who could not possibly have predicted it by any human faculty, but who professes to have seen that which he describes when under the influence of the Spirit of God. As we have already observed, Kuenen and his school would undoubtedly denounce it as an imposture and an afterprophecy, if there were the least shadow of doubt as to the age in which it was published. He so deals with Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Daniel, when he is obliged to see that their figurative descriptions of the future were verified by history. He at once sets them down as after-prophets and piously fraudulent impostors. But when we compare the prophecies of Daniel about the transactions of the age of Antiochuswhich from their exactness have caused him to be accused of after-prophesying-with the visions of St. John, we see at once that the allegory of the Apocalypse is far closer to history than anything which Daniel wrote about Antiochus; and so, is one of the plainest evidences which we can well have, that the Omniscient Spirit is the real author of the visions, although they were seen and written down by one, who describes himself as John, an exile in Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.' ' THE ANTICHRIST. HARMONY OF THE APOCALYPSE WITH THE PROPHECIES OF ST. PAUL. SINCE the time of the Apostles it has been the universal belief of the Church in all ages, that the revelation of Antichrist will immediately precede the Second Advent of Christ. The reader will observe that the interpretation of the Apocalypse suggested in this volume is in perfect accordance with that belief. But it may be well to point out its consistency. The origin of the name is evident enough. Just as the disciples of Christ were early named Christians, so it would seem that the great predicted opponent of Christ, called by St. Paul the Man of Sin,' the Son of Perdition,' 'the Lawless One,' came to be named Antichrist, at some time between the publication of St. Paul's Second Epistle to the Thessalonians and the writing of the Epistles of St. John; for that Apostle uses the name as one familiarly known to Christians. 'Ye have heard,' he writes, that Antichrist shall come.' 2 3 The time of the Second Advent was not revealed either to the apostles or even to the angels of heaven. It was not revealed while Christ was on earth. Of that day and hour knoweth no one, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.' It was not revealed to St. Paul or to any Christian in his day. Of the times and seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.' 4 There are notices of time in the Apocalypse, but they are so 1 3 6 21 John ii. 18. 4 1 Thess. v. 1, 2. |