APPENDIX,

No. I.

WHEN the first edition of this Dissertation was published, I had not had an opportunity of perusing the recently printed work of Archdeacon Woodhouse on the Apocalypse; but it would be unpardonable, considering the plan which I have adopted, to suffer a second edition to make its appearance without noticing it. The thanks of every biblical student are due to the learned author for his very clear and convincing Dissertation on the divine Origin of the Apocalypse, and likewise for many valuable remarks and much sound criticism contained in his notes on the book. I feel myself peculiarly gratified and interested at finding several of my own positions maintained and established by a writer, with whom I have not the honour of being acquainted, and whose work I had not read at the time when my own was published. Thus, we are both agreed, that Mohammedism constitutes one half of a grand apostasy from the purity of Christianity*; that the apocalyptic

The position, that Mohammedism is a Christian apostasy, is so ably treated by the Archdeacon, that I cannot refrain from strengthening what I have already said on the subject with his quotations and arguments.

"Mohammed did not pretend to deliver any new religion, but to revive the old fone. He allowed both the Old and New Testaments, and that both Moses and "Jesus were prophets sent from God (Prideaux's Life of Mohammed, p. 18,

19.); that Jesus, son of Mary, is the word and a spirit sent from God, a re"deemer of all that believe in him (Sale's Koran, p. 19, 80, 65. Ockley's "Hist. of Saracens II.). Mohammed represents himself as the Paraclete or

Comforter sent by Jesus Christ, John xvi. 7. (Koran, p. 165.). So, in Mohammed's ascent to heaven, as invented in the Koran, while the pa

triarchs

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

but

triarchs and prophets confess their inferiority to him by intreating his prayers, in the seventh heaven he sees' Jesus, whose superiority the false "prophét 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 article of the Mohammedan creed; and among these is the

Gospel given to Issa or Jesus, which they assert to be corrupted by the Chris"tians.-If any Jew is willing to become a Mohammedan, 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 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 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 believerl. And thus he was better inclined to the Christians than to the Jews (Spanheim. Introd. ad hist. sæc. vii. p. 609.). "Mohammedism began as a christian heresy, acknowledging Christ for a pro

46

phet, a greater than Moses, born of a Virgin, the Word of God (Ricant's "Ottoman empire, p. 138.). Sale asserts the Mohammedan religion to be "not only a Christian heresy, but an improvement upon the very corrupt idolo◄ 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, Gnostics, 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, møde 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 ho resy. If the Gospel had never been 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, 10 copies

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 empire; 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

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

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, corrupted, even like the papal, to serve the purposes of a worldly and diabolical tyranny. In the Mohammedan religion are these articles, all evidently 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 Mohaminedismi one article, in which it differs from all religions

generally admitted to be Christian, the belief of Mohammed's divine mission i " and little will then be found in it, which may not be discovered in the pro «fession 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 Mohammedism, excepting belief in the pretended prophet " of Mecca.

"a

"On the whole, when we consider the origin of Mohammedism, and its "near affinity to corrupted Christianity; when we reflect also on the amaz ❝ing extent of this superstitious domination, which occupies nearly as large portion of the globe, as that possessed by Christians; comprizing vast 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, it is at least a Christian apostasy." Apocalypse translated, p. 365-370.

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

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 applicable 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 persecu "tion raged against the Church, when St. John himself was actually suffering "banishment in Patmos, for the word of God and the testimony 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 ariseth 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 present in another, as belonging to the "vision then under exhibition; for the beast was then present in exhibition "before St. John, and in the act of re-ascending to power. This will appear « more probable to those, who read forward from this passage to the end of the 8th verse, where the admiration 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."

This point is excellently discussed by the Archdeacon. "On consulting "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.

man.

"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 mysa tery, in preference to all interpretations suggested by the imagination of Now in the 9th verse of this chapter (Rev. xii.) such an interpre"tation is presented; the dragon there expressly declared to be that ans cient serpent called the devil; known by the name of Alaßoλo; in the Greek, «and of Satun in the Hebrew; who deceiveth the whole world. Here are "his names, and his acknowledged character. No words can more com "pletely express them. No Roman emperor, nor succession of emperors, "can answer to this description. The same dragon appears again in

« chap.