gest at length, nor attempt the vindication of my views by appeal to all the minute particulars which the book of Revelations exhibits, and which might serve to confirm them. This must be reserved for another, work of a more copious nature than the present, and where a more ample discussion than the present would naturally find an appropriate place. I must, however, beg the reader's earnest attention to the following suggestions, and entreat him at least to examine and well consider them, before he decides against the views that may be proffered in the sequel.

66

(1) It lies upon the face of the Apocalypse, from beginning to end, that it was written in the midst of a bitter and bloody persecution of the church. The writer himself is in exile, on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus," Rev. 1:9; and the persons whom he addresses are exposed, or speedily to be exposed, to all the hardships, perils, and temptations, which result from persecution. Of course his object is to guard, to guide, to fortify, and to console Christians in such circumstances; and never did a writer cleave more fully to his purpose, or execute it more effectually. The glorious rewards of those who persevere; the speedy and condign punishment of persecutors; the ultimate and certain triumph of the church over all her enemies; the universal spread of Christianity over the earth; and the eternal happiness of all the faithful in the kingdom of God above; are unfolded on the pages of the Apocalypse, and stand there deeply engraven in characters of light. He who runneth, may read.

It follows now, from the plain and evident intention and object of the writer, that the book before us must consist of matter appropriate to its design. If we deny or overlook this, we must of course involve the writer in the charge of having failed to execute his purpose, or of having executed it in a feeble or unsatisfactory manner.

Should we suppose, then, as many have done, that the Apocalypse is a kind of Syllabus of civil history, or of civil and ecclesiastical history, disclosing the leading events that are to take place down to the end of time among nations and kingdoms, nothing can be more plain, than that we should assign to it an object totally foreign to what was appropriate to the time and circumstances of both writer and reader. I am aware that the very first verse of the Revelation proclaims the design of the book to be, "to show to the servants of Christ the things that must come to pass." But what things? The context and sequel of the book must answer this question. The Apocalypse is no dissertation de Omni Scibili. It has an appropriate and limited object; and this is, to show the servants of God the certain triumph of the cause in which they were engaged, and to hold out the glorious reward consequent upon being faithful unto death.

That I am correct in this position, I think no one will seriously call in question who reads the book through, with his mind unembarrassed by any preconceived scheme of interpretation. And if I am correct, how is it possible to suppose, that the civil history of states and kingdoms, or of the various heresies which were to arise out of the church many centuries after the writer and all his readers were dead, are not only detailed in the book before us, but, that the greater part of the book is occupied by this detail? Yet on such a supposition many a commentator upon the Revelation has built his system.

But I have not yet done with the declaration at the commencement of the book, that the object of the Revelation is" to show the servants of Christ what must come to pass." Many, I am aware, have stopped short with this single consideration, and endeavored to justify their syllabus of civil and ecclesiastical history thereby. But there

is another most important circumstance attending this declaration, which needs to be noted. This is,

(2) That the things to come to pass are those, which are

SHORTLY TO COME TO PASS.

I cannot stop here to examine how often the repeated declarations of this book to this purpose have been overlooked, or the force of them evaded by ingenious conjecture. Most expositors have indeed made too little of these direct and positive declarations; but a few, such as Wetstein, Herder, and some others, have made too much. There is a medium; nor is it difficult, as I apprehend the matter, to discover what it is. The great body of the work appears to me, beyond any well-grounded doubt, to have reference to events speedily to take place, or at least speedily to commence taking place; for the second catastrophe is a prolonged one, as may be seen in Rev. XVI.-XIX. A very small portion of the work, e. g. chap. xx. XXI., has respect most plainly to the distant future. This is what the nature of the case would seem to require, and this too is what the nature of the expressions under consideration admits. More or less than this would not be compatible with both of these.

We must now turn our special attention, for a few moments, to the further development of the declarations in question. In Rev. 1:1 the writer says, that God gave to Christ the Revelation, " in order to show his servants what should take place év tázs, speedily, quickly." In 1: 3, the author solemnly declares, that what is written in this book is of speedy accomplishment: 'O xaigos éyy's, the time is near, i. e. the time when what is revealed will be accomplished. Thus much in the prologue to the book. The epilogue repeats three several times the equivalent declaration: Behold I come quickly! 22:7, 12, 20. The coming of Christ is the main subject of the book; so that the

declaration here is, that what the book contains will speedily be accomplished.

That such must be the meaning, is evident by appeal to similar declarations in Rev. 2: 16. 3: 11, and 11: 14. No one can doubt, that what is said is what is meant, in these last cases. As little reasonable doubt can there be, if philology is to be trusted, in the cases just cited from the prologue and epilogue of the book.

What tolerable meaning now can be given, and defended on exegetical grounds, to the declarations in question, if we suppose that the main portion of the book relates to events some thousand and more of years then future? And if every writer is to be permitted the liberty of explaining his own purpose, why should we refuse to John the liberty that we concede to all others?

But still, one more consideration is to be taken into view, to which I have already alluded. This is, that a very small portion of the book, (strictly considered only chap. xx., for the sequel is mere expansion of a part of this), has respect to the distant future. So plain is this distant future here brought into view, that no explanation or defence of this position is needed. Of course some modification of the expressions, coming to pass quickly and coming quickly, is necessary. But here is no difficulty. The great mass of the book respects events in reality to be completed speedily, or speedily to commence being completed. On these the writer dwells at length, and spreads them out from chap. 6: 1 to chap. 19: 21. Of the distant future he gives, even in the sequel, nothing more than a few rapid glances. In describing the new heavens and the new earth he is indeed more copious; but this is a delightful theme, and is not properly prediction, but description which is intended for the very purpose of creating emotion in the breast of his readers.

Thus considered, all harmonizes. We admit the full force of the declarations, that a speedy accomplishment of what is said, i. e. of the great portion of what is said, will take place. We interpret the words of the writer in a straight-forward manner, without resort to any subterfuges, without at all explaining away the writer's words. We extend the briefness of time for accomplishment, to every thing in the book which in its nature is susceptible of such an application. More cannot reasonably be asked; less cannot reasonably be assumed; for every writer should be left, so far as may be, to explain himself.

If

(3) It would seem to follow from the positions thus laid down, that we are at liberty, or rather that we are obliged, if possible, to seek for a fulfilment of the predictions in the main body of the Apocalypse, within a time which is not far distant from the period when the book was written. such a fulfilment can be found as coincides with the periods named in the Apocalypse, then what good reason can be offered why we should reject it? Or rather: Why are we not exegetically obliged to admit it?

That there are some designations of time in the Apocalypse, which are to be symbolically taken, i. e. which, though definitely expressed, are not meant to be urged by the reader in the literal shape, all, I suppose, will concede. For example; in Rev. 2: 10 it is said to the church at Smyrna, that "the devil would cast some of them into prison, that they might be tried and afflicted for ten days.” That a short period merely, but not a strictly definite one, is here meant, will be generally admitted. If the reader wishes to see how the scriptural writers can employ the number ten in such a kind of way, he may compare 1 Sam. 25:38. Neh. 5: 18. Jer. 42: 7. Dan. 1: 12, 14. Acts 25: 6, al.; where he may find examples to this purpose. The 10*