ページの画像
PDF
ePub

it be shewn that, to all appearance at least, no other era whatsoever can answer to the tests furnished by the prophet. Mr. Mede supposes, that the 1260 years ought to be dated from the year 455 or 456, when the power of Rome was completely broken by the Vandals, though the name of Emperor was yet continued. Independent however of this opinion's having been confuted by the event, the erroneousness of it might easily have been detected even when it was first advanced. The year 456 was neither marked by the rise of any power which answers to the description of the desolating transgression connected with the he-goat's little horn, nor by any formal giving up of the saints into the hand of the papal horn: nor yet, when it is checked by the larger period according to any one of its three readings; will it bring us to an era from which the vision of the ram and the he-goat can be reasonably dated. Bishop Newton seems to hesitate between the year 727, when the Pope and the Romans finally broke their connexion with the Eastern Emperor; the year 755, when the Pope obtained the Exarchate of Ravenna; the year 774, when he acquired, by the assistance of Charlemagne, the greatest part of the kingdom of Lombardy; and the year 787, when the worship of images was fully established, and the supremacy of the Pope acknowledged by the second council of Nice: of these different dates however he is inclined to prefer the first. Now, upon examination, not one of them will be found to answer to the tests furnished by the prophet. In none of these years, except the last, were the saints given into the hand of the papal horn; and, as for the acknowledgment made by the council of Nice, it was only a repetition of the grant already made by the sixth head of the beast; in none of them did any abomination of desolation connected with the little horn of the he-goat arise: and none of them will bear to be checked by the larger number according to any one of its three readings. There is yet another date fixed upon by Mr. Mann, which prima facie was more probable than any of the preceding

ones. About the year 533 or 534, the Emperor Justinian declared the Pope to be the head of all the churches: whence it seemed not unlikely, that the 1260 years ought to be dated from that era. This opinion, however, like that of Mr. Mede, has both been confuted by the event, and might have been confuted before the event. Mr. Mann's assertion I do not contradict, but I doubt whether he has not greatly mistaken the nature of Justinian's grant. Phocas declared the Pope to be at once head of all the churches, which is a title of dignity, and sole universal bishop, which is a title of authority: whereas Justinian conferred upon him only the first of these titles, styling at the very same time the patriarch of Constantinople head of all other churches. A comparison is accordingly drawn very judiciously by Brightman, between the grant of Justinian and the grant of Phocas; in which he states, that the former only gave the Pope precedence over all other Bishops, and did not, like the latter, exclusively, constitute him Universal Bishop. Upon examining the passage in the Novella to which he refers, I find him perfectly accurate. The Emperor is simply laying down the precedency of the different patriarchs and prelates throughout his dominions. Of these, the patriarchs come first; next, the archbishops; and last, the bishops; and, of the patriarchs, the first place is assigned to Rome; and the second, to Constantinople. Thus it appears, that the supposed grant of universal episcopacy dwindles into a mere question of empty precedency. Indeed had Gregory himself borne the title of Universal Bishop, or had it been generally borne by his predecessors, he could not, in common decency, have censured his Byzantine brother as the precursor of Antichrist for assuming it. In addition to this reason, the prophetic tests afford the same insurmountable objection to the date proposed by Mr. Mann, as they have already afforded to those proposed by Mr. Mede and Bishop Newton. No desolating transgression connected with the little horn of the he-goat arose in the

years 533 and 534; nor will either of those years bear to be checked by any of the numbers which the different readings assign to the larger period. It is somewhat remarkable, that, although Bishop Newton acknowledges that "the religion of Mohammed will prevail in the East for as long a period of time as the tyranny of the little horn in the West," and although he is struck with the wonderful coincidence of "Mohammed's having first contrived his imposture in the year 606, the very same year wherein the tyrant Phocas made a grant of the supremacy to the Pope;" yet he is unwilling to date the 1260 years from that era, merely because the Pope did not attain to the height of his temporal dominion till the eighth century. The saints however were given into his hand, not surely by the grant of the Exarchate and the kingdom of Lombardy, which in itself conveys not an atom of Catholic spiritual power in the church, but by constituting him supreme in ecclesiastical matters, by making him a Bishop of all other Bishops: and the prophet expressly informs us, that the 1260 years are to be dated from the era when the saints were thus given into his hand.

"The result of the whole is, that, since the year 606 is the only era which perfectly answers to the prophetic tests, there is at least a very high degree of probability that it is the true date of the commencement of the 1260 days. In this year, the saints were given into the hand of the papal horn: in this year the Mohammedan transgression of desolation, which shortly after its rise became by the conquest of Syria a horn of the he-goat, was set up: and a computation deduced from this year, brings us precisely to the very year in which Alexander invaded Asia, one of the most proper dates that could have been assigned even a priori to the vision of the ram and the he-goat.Positive certainty indeed in such matters is the high privilege of God alone: yet a triple coincidence is not, I think, to be slighted. According to what is called the doctrine of chances, the improbability of an

accidental triple coincidence bears a much higher ratio to the improbability of only an accidental double coincidence, than the number three does to the number two."

Thus much from Mr. Faber, with a regard unto the date of the 1260 years of the reign of Antichrist, or the beast. I think his arguments for this date of the year 606, to be quite satisfactory and conclusive. He has a three-fold cord to support him, which is not easily broken. But I confess it most surprising to me, that Mr. Faber should express the opinion which he has, with a regard unto the final destruction of Antichrist. He certainly lets the beast live from thirty to seventy-five years longer than the Revelator does. This I consider unwarrantable, even in this great commentator.

The text declares, that there was given power unto the beast to continue 42 months, or twelve hundred and sixty years. But if it is the case that he is to be destroyed after the expiration of 1260 years, and thirty years are to be consumed in doing it, how does this agree with the limited time of his existence? A beast is alive until it is dead, beyond all dispute, and I have therefore a poor opinion of this construction of things, which suffers this carnivorous animal to exist some 30 or 70 years longer than Almighty power is wont to let him. Again, the scriptures limit the time of the church's seclusion to the same length of time; and his oppression and afflicted state is continually exhibited by Mr. Faber, and all other able commentators, to continue 1260 years. Yet how does this idea of thirty or rather 75 years of the most terrible judgments and calamitous times that have ever been realized by the world after her 1260 years oppression, comport with the scripture account of her distressed state? There can be no consistency in saying, that the woman will be out of the wilderness until Antichrist falls, or until the beast is taken. At least, that is what looks to me reasonable. If, therefore, it be the case, as I think Mr. Faber has clearly shewn,

that the beast had completely arisen by the year 606, and in every sense of the word had then become a beast, I wish to know how and why it is, that by the year 1866, he will not cease to exist as such? Such a conclusion, I believe, cannot consistently be avoided, if we confine ourselves to the sacred text, that he was to continue but 42 months, and that a creature lives until he dies, or continues until he is gone. If it be urged that he was to continue so long in his full power, such a position would be with less foundation still, and facts have proved it so; for it is evident, that he has been falling or losing ground for about two hundred years; ever since the days of Luther. It remains, therefore, that he shall continue but twelve hundred and sixty years; and as it was the case that he gradually arose and was many years attaining his summit; so also I conclude, that he has for many years been sinking and depreciating, which is too evident to deny. But I apprehend there can be but 1260 years from the time the beast began to arise, unto the time he began to fall; and the same length of time will pass between his completely appearing in that character, and his final destruction. What strengthens me in the opinion that the time of taking the beast and the false prophet, is nearer at hand than this lapping on of 75 years after the year of 1866, is that am quite well confirmed that the harvest of the earth spoken of in Revelations, was completed, as I have before noted, in the French revolution, and those subsequent wars, terminating, perhaps, with the final defeat of Bonaparte, at the battle of Waterloo. Mr. Faber thinks that the French revolution was the harvest, which he considered even past when he wrote, in 1806. How then could he consistently place the vintage so far off? Both the symbol of the vintage soon following the harvest in the order of nature, and the rapid succession in which the seven vials might be reasonably expected to be poured out, as they are all undoubtedly included in the last woe-trumpet, forbid, in my opinion, such an.

« 前へ次へ »