Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

apocalyptic great city denotes, not merely the town of Rome,

[ocr errors]

"

but

"triarchs and prophets confess their inferiority to him by intreating his prayers, in the seventh heaven he sees Jesus, whose superiority the false prophet acknowledges by commending himself to his prayers (Sale's "Koran, p. 17. Prideaux's Life of Mohammed, p. 55). Faith in the divine "books is a necessary urticle of the Mohammedan creed; and among these is the "Gospel given to Issa or Jesus, which they assert to be corrupted by the Christians.If any Jew is willing to become a Mohammedun, he must first believe "in Christ and this question is asked him, Dost thou believe that Christ was "born of a virgin by the blast (i. e. inspiration) of God, and that he was the * last of the Jewish prophets? If he answers in the affirmative, he is made a Mohammedan (Reland on Moham. pref. 25, 11.). Mohammed arose to "establish a new religion, which came pretty near the Jewish, and was not entirely different from that of several sects of Christians, which got him a great many followers (Leibnitz's Letter, 1706.). The impostor Mohammed confessed that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, that he was the word of God "sent from heaven, the Spirit of God declared by the miracles of the Gospel, "the prophet of God, whose office it was to deliver the Gospel and teach the way

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

of truth, who is to come to judgment and to destroy Antichrist and convert the "Jews. Thus also he taught, that the Gospel of Christ, and the Law of Moses, "and all the prophets, are to be believed. And thus he was better inclined to the "Christians than to the Jews (Spanhem. Introd. ad hist. sæc. vii. p. 609.). "Mohammedism began as a christian heresy, acknowledging Christ for a pro"phet, a greater than Moses, born of a Virgin, the Word of God (Ricaut's "Ottoman Empire, p. 138.). Sale asserts the Mohammedan, religion to be "not only a Christian heresy, but an improvement upon the very corrupt idola"trous system of the Jews and Christians of those times (Prelim. p. 15.). Joseph "Mede affirms, that the Mohammedans are nearer to Christianity than many of the ancient heresies, the Cerinthians, Guostics, Manichees (Works "p. 645.). Whatever good is to be found in the Mohammedan religion (and some good doctrines and precepts there undeniably are in it), is in no small "measure owing to Christianity: for Mohammedism is a borrowed system, made up for the most part of Judaism and Christianity; and, if it be considered in "the most favourable view, might possibly be accounted a sort of Christian heresy. If the Gospel had never heen preached, it may be questioned whether "Mohammedism would have existed (Dr. Jortin's First Charge.). The Mus"sulmans are already a sort of heterodox Christians. They are Christians, if "Locke reasons justly, because they firmly believe the immaculate conception, "divine character, and miracles, of the Messiah: but they are heterodox in denying vehemently his character of Son, and his equality, as God, with the "Father, of whose unity and attributes they entertain and express the most awful "ideas,while they consider our doctrine as perfect blasphemy, and insist that our

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

but a corrupt communion*; that the holy city is not the literal Jerusalem, but the Christian church † ; that the first beast of the apocalypse is not the Papacy, but the Roman empiret; that the deadly wound of this beast denotes his conversion to Christianity under Constantine, and that his revival means his relapsing into idolatry §; that the little horn of Daniel's fourth beast cannot be the same as the first apocalyptic beast, in other words that it cannot be the same as the beast himself of which it is only a member (as some commentators have supposed), but that it is the same as the second apocalyptic beast or the false prophet||; that

the

"copies of the Scriptures have been corrupted both by Jews and Christians. "Sir William Jones in Asiatic Researches, Vol. I. p. 63.

[ocr errors]

"These are such testimonies as have occurred to me in no very extensive course of reading. They are derived from authors, who for the most part enjoyed favourable opportunities of examining the Mohammedan tenets ; * and they exhibit that religion as rising upon the basis of true religion, cor*rupted, even like the papal, to serve the purposes of a worldly and dias "bolical tyranny. In the Mohammedan religion are these articles, all evi•

"

dently derived from the Christian, and constituting in it a great superiority "above any thing that paganism or mere philosophy have been able to pro "duce: the belief of the existence of one all-wise, all-good, all-powerful, "God; of the immortality of the soul; of future rewards and punishments "to be distributed by Jesus; of the acceptance of prayer, of self-humiliation, "of almsgiving; of the obligation to morality in almost all its branches. "Take from Mohammedism one article, in which it differs from all religions generally admitted to be Christian, the belief of Mohammed's divine mission ; and little will then be found in it, which may not be discovered in the profession of many acknowledged Christians. Nay, perhaps it may appear, that the creeds of two bodies of Christians will supply every thing "which is to be found in Mohammedisu, excepting belief in the pretended prophet of Mecca.

"

[ocr errors]

"

"

"

"

"On the whole, when we consider the origin of Mohammedism, and its near affinity to corrupted Christianity; when we reflect also on the amaze "-ing extent of this superstitious domination, which occupies nearly as large a portion of the globe, as that possessed by Christians; comprizing va regions in ancient Greece and Asia Minor, in Syria, in Persia, in the In dies, in Tartary, in Egypt, and Africa, which were once Christian : we "shall readily admit, that, if not a Christian heresy, is is at least a Christian apostasy." Apocalypse translated, p. 365–370.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

the deadly wound and revival of the first apocalyptic beast is enigmatically described by the phrase was, and is not, and yet is*; that the time of the end denotes the expiration of the 1260 years; that the apocalyptic dragon cannot mean pagan Rome, but must typify the devil; that the period of 1260 years, or

66

at

p. 426-428. The Archdeacon argues very forcibly against those who with Mede would ascribe the fulfilment of this mysterious phrase to the age in which the vision was delivered. These words of the angel, describing "the beast, He was, and is not, and yet is, appear to me in no wise appli"cable to the tyranny seated at Rome at the time of the vision, when the "angel spake them. This was the time of the Emperor Domitian, when a "cruel persecution raged against the Church, when St. John himself was actually suffering banishment in Patmos, for the word of God and the tes"timony of Jesus. Such a time can in no wise agree with the representation "that the beast was, and is not. It is therefore probable, that the time, in' "which the beast is said to have been, and not to be, and yet to be, is the "time when he arisetli again after his wound, to exercise dominion under "the direction of the harlot. This time was not arrived when St. John saw "the vision in Patmos: but, though future in this sense, it was présent in another, as belonging to the vision then under exhibition: for the beast "was then present in exhibition before St. Jokń, and in the act of reascending to power. This will appear more probable to those, who read "forward from this passage to the end of the 8th verse, where the admi"ration of the inhabitants of the earth is spoken of as yet future; and yet "this admiration is fixed upon this same object-the beast which was, and "is not, and yet is."

p. 281.

[ocr errors]

On consulting

This point is excellently discussed by the Archdeacon. "the writings of the commentators most approved in this country, I find, "that by the dragon is generally understood the pagan and persecuting power of Imperial Rome. But, I trust, a few observations will shew the fallacy of this notion.

[ocr errors]

"Where an interpretation is expressly given in the vision, as in ch. i. 20; v. 6, 9; xvii. 7; that interpretation must be used as the key to the mys"tery, in prefereuce to all interpretations suggested by the imagination of "man. Now in the 9th verse of this chapter (Rev. xii.). such an interpre"tation is presented; the dragon is there expressly declared to be that an"cient serpent called the devil; known by the name of AtaBoxos in the Greek, "and of Satan in the Hebrew; who deceiveth the whole world. Here are "his names, and his acknowledged character. No words can more com

[ocr errors]

pletely express them. No Roman emperor, nor succession of emperors,

can

at least a period of 1260 years, ought most probably to be dated from the year 606*; and consequently that we are rapidly approaching to the catastrophe of the great apostatic dramat. In these points I have the satisfaction of finding myself

can answer to this description. The same dragon appears again in "ch. xx. 2. and (as it were to prevent mistake) he is there described in the 66 very same words. But this re-appearance of the same dragon is in a very “late period of the apocalyptic history; long after the expiration of the 1260 days or years; and even after the wild beast and false prophet, who de"rive their power from the dragon during this period, are come to their "end. And the dragon is upon the scene long after these times, and con"tinues in action even at the end of another long period, a period of a

[ocr errors]

thousand years. He there pursues his ancient artifices, deceiving the "nations, even till his final catastrophe, in ch. xx. 10, when the warfare of "the Church is finished. Can this dragon then be an emperor of Rome? " or any race, or dynasty, of emperors? Can he be any other than that an"cient and eternal enemy of the Christian Church, who in this, as in all "other scriptural accounts, is represented as the original contriver of all "the mischief which shall befall it. In this drama, he acts the same con"sistent part from beginning to end. He is introduced to early notice as "warring against the Church (ch. ii. 10, 13.)—In the succeeding conflicts "the Church is attacked by his agents; by the wild beast and false pro"phet, who derive their power from him and at length he himself is "described, as leading the nations against the camp of the saints., No"thing appears more plain than the meaning of this symbol. The only appearances, which may seem to favour the application of it to Imperial "Rome are, the seven crowned heads, and the ten horns of the dragon. "But-the seven mountains and ten horns, of the latter Roman empire are "fitly attributed to Satan, because during the period of 1260 years, and perhaps beyond it, he makes use of the Roman empire, its capital city. “ " and ten kings or kingdoms, as the instruments of his successful attack on "the Christian Church.-The dragon therefore appears to me, as he did "to Venerable Bede eleven centuries ago, to be Diabolus, potentia terreni "mundi armatus." p. 324 326.

་་

[ocr errors]

p. 360. The Archdeacon thinks, that there are more than one period of 1260 years (p. 339-344.). He by no means appears to me to prove his point.

+ Nearly all the more recent commentators on prophecy, with whose writings I am acquainted, seem to agree in the belief that we cannot be far removed from the end of the 1260 years. The very phraseology used by the Archdeacon most forcibly brought to my recollection a conversation

[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

myself supported by the authority of the Archdeacon ; but in various other matters I am unable to agree with him.

The first objections, which I have to urge, are of a general nature; afterwards I may descend to particulars.

I. My general objections are to the Archdeacon's principle of applying the apocalyptic prophecies, when carried to the length to which he carries it; and to his system of arranging the Apocalypse itself, on which a great part of his subsequent interpretations is founded.

1. He conceives the prophecies of the Apocalypse" to be "applicable principally, if not solely, to the fates and fortunes "of the Christian Church" Agreeably to this system, he interprets the six first seals, and the four first trumpets, as relating solely to ecclesiastical matters; and rejects at once both the usual chronological arrangement of them, and the almost universal supposition that the four first trumpets predict the calamities brought upon the Roman empire by the incursions of the various Gothic tribes and the final complete subversion of its western division. The principle is undoubtedly a just one if adopted with moderation; but the Archdeacon does not advance any arguments in favour of carrying it, to the length which he does, that are at all satisfactory to my own mind. The affairs of the Church, both Levitical and Christian, have been more or less connected, from very early ages, with empires and kingdoms hostile to the cause of true religion: hence, although the Church is the main end of prophecy, yet, circumstanced as it has always been, it seems nearly impossible to foretell the fates of the Church without likewise foretelling the fates of the great powers connected with it. Nevertheless, the Church

which I once had on this subject with the late Bp. Horsley. His Lordship avowed it to be his opinion, that, before the present century elapsed, the prophecies respecting the destruction of the Roman beast and the overthrow of the Antichristian faction would be no longer a sealed book. "The days "will come," says the Archdeacon," and seem at no very great distance (the present century may perhaps disclose them), when the beast and "false prophet being removed, and Babylon sunk for ever, the devil, that "ancient foe, shall be deprived of his wonted influence." p. 470.

[ocr errors]

* Pref. p. xiii, xiv.

« PreviousContinue »