Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

REMARKS ON THE USES OF PROPHECY.

You have sometimes favourably received a paper which I had ad. dressed to you; and I hope that you will not be displeased with my present observations. They relate to your review of the publications on Prophecy by Mr. Fry and Mr.Cooper. In perusing Mr. Cooper's important work, and the various reviews of it, the following were my reflections.

1. That ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is PROFITABLE—though not every part equally for the same end, yet that each part is so far profitable, that, if it be neglected, the man of God is not thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Tim. iii. 16.)

2. That the typical and prophetical parts of Scripture have their special use, respectively. This, indeed, is a point which particularly deserves attention at this present time. We live in an age in which the current of popular opinion runs counter to the study of Scripture altogether, and very commonly to all study. The reason is, that study has in former ages been often abused; but this is a weak reason against the use of it. Judgment is shewn, not in running from one extreme into the opposite, but in finding and maintaining the happy mean and line of rectitude between both extremes. To the present day, Babylon has mystery written upon her forehead; but the modern opponents of Babylon too often in effect proclaim, that where mystery begins religion ends.

The mean between these conflicting doctrines seems to be, that so much of Scripture as is necessary to be understood by all, without exception, who possess reason, is made so plain that he that runneth may read. For St. Paul, having warned the Romans of the consequences of substituting other Saviours, or their own merits, for the ascension and descension of the

one only Mediator, adds, " The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart; that is, the

word of faith which we preach." (Rom. x.) But because the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ, which is the substance of the Gospel message, is addressed to every creature, and level to the capacity of all who properly possess the human faculties, does it therefore follow that the whole counsel of God is not to be unfolded, or that there is no mystery in the right worship of God, of which the church is the pillar and ground; and, by falling from which mystery, the mystery of lawlessness is characterized and known? (Acts xx. 20, 21, 27.) Or does it follow that these first principles of the oracles of God are the whole counsel of God; or that believers are not required, according to their callings, abilities, and opportunities, to "meditate upon these things," and " give time to reading and study." (Heb. v. 12 to vi. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 13, &c.; Rev. i. 3; ii. 18-29.) Nevertheless, such an irrational inference is commonly made from the texts relating to justification by faith; and the consequence is, that the church, which is the ground and pillar of the mys tery of right worship, is reviled for considering it necessary to preach the whole counsel of God, and all Scripture; and the Scriptures themselves are not studied sufficiently to enable men to apprehend the fidelity of the church to Scripture. With many, indeed, human reason is sufficient, as they assume, to select what it regards of importance in Scripture; with others, the Spirit is regarded as setting aside the necessity of study; and it is too seldom, in practice, considered, that as study without prayer is atheism, so prayer without study is presumption.. (Dr. Watts's Improvement of the Mind, ch. i. § 16.)

Whether, then, the present age be not chargeable with this conceit, ascribed to the latter times by St. Jude, in his application of the ele venth of Daniel (ver. 16, 18), is a matter for serious reflection.

This, however, is certain, that whosoever does not admit that all Scripture is profitable, and, in particular, that the typical and propheti cal parts are profitable, will slight the excellent intention of Mr. Cooper in calling the public attention to this Scripture which he has brought forward.

But, 2. Of those who do believe all Scripture to be both inspired and profitable, there are very many who regard the study of types and prophecies as profitable only to some future age, and intended to be sealed up till that time; as the contradictions of interpreters, each to every other, as they say, clearly proves.

These prejudices will probably much diminish the utility of Mr. Cooper's work, if it be founded in truth; and, probably, will so prepossess the world that few will examine it with attention sufficient to decide upon its merits. But, besides attention, something else is wanted. A man's judgment of the truth or falsity of any proposition depends upon his possessing a criterion of truth in respect to the subject-matter of the proposition. But the propositions of Mr. Cooper, to use a comparison, relate both to a picture, and to the reality intended by the picture. Suppose, then, a picture of Napoleon to be set up for public inspection, and a traveller to be asked whether the picture so well represents the real man that he can pronounce it to be intended for him. Such a traveller, if he had not seen Buonaparte, would properly answer, I never saw the man. But are we not too apt to suppose that we are sufficiently well acquainted with the historical reality, and consequently disposed to reject Mr. Cooper's prophetical picture, pro

nounced to be intended for Napoleon, viz. Dan. xi. 36-45?

May I, then, suggest to the reader the propriety of comparing some such work as Mr. Nares's Continuation of the Abridgement of Universal History, with Dan. xi. 21-40? Should he find, then, somewhat more resemblance than he suspected, and yet not find the picture altogether exact, or the times not exactly correspond to his times; or, should he decide, that, because the prophecy certainly does depicture the Jewish apostasy, which occasioned the destruction of Jerusalem, as you have properly observed, should he therefore at once decide that Napoleon is not intended? Would it not be much more proper to admit that in some respects there seems to be a strong resemblance; but that the decision requires an answer from Mr. Cooper to these objections, before the public mind can be satisfied? And if the objector had leisure, would it not be desirable to look a little closer and longer at the picture itself? The picture, I must confess, does in part so exactly correspond to Napoleon, that I fully believe and admit that Mr. Cooper has established his main point, viz. that Napoleon is intended somewhere in the eleventh of Daniel. But the awkwardness of terminating the eleventh chapter of Daniel with Napoleon's Egyptian expedition and defeat near Megiddo

In

so beautifully described by Mr. Heber in his poem entitled Palestine, and so according with prophecy-would decide me to reject Mr. Cooper's arrangement, and to endeavour to find another. looking, then, more closely at the prophetical picture, I observe that the English version has probably led Mr. Cooper into a mistake. For if Daniel xi. 40, &c. were properly translated, it would run thus: "And at the time of the end shall the king of the South push at him, and the king of the North shall bristle horri

bly against him [compare ch. viii. 5, 6] with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships, and shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over, and enter into the land of glory," &c. What Mr. Cooper, therefore, applies to Napoleon, is properly applicable to the king of the North, as applied to Gog by Ezekiel. And though I think it not improbable that there may be a secondary intention in the prophecy, to introduce a king of the South and a king of the North, besides the wilful king; nevertheless in the first, the obvious, the first-received construction of the 40th verse, it has been understood of two persons only, and those engaging, not with a third, but with one another. And of those two persons, the one has been naturally supposed to be Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of the North, in consistency with the whole chapter.

But besides this circumstance, there is another in Mr. Cooper's scheme quite as awkward. I mean, his commencing his application to Napoleon in the thirty-sixth verse. It is true, that Mr. Wintle translates on by A king; but he has no right to do so. But Mr. Cooper goes farther, and, retaining the definite article, the, which refers to the king above mentioned, and demonstrates the identity of the wilful king with that king who leagued, in ver. 31, in taking away the daily sacrifice, he introduces a new king, and cuts off the prophetical picture at top, as much as he had stretched it at the bottom.

In respect to the calculations of the times, I cannot but regret that Mr. Cooper has assumed that the computation of the termination of the 1260 years, which he has adopted from others, is satisfactorily established by them. For instance, when they interpret the passage, Rev. xi. 13, εv εKELY Tη wpа in that very hour," to signify a century after that very hour, of the

ascent of the witnesses, I appeal to every person, who has no hypothesis to serve, whether such an interpretation be not an unfounded gloss. "That very hour" bears proportion to the "three days and a half," its immediate antecedent, and is the last hour of Ottoman prevalence over the Papal powers, (Rev. ix. 15, x. 7, Gr. xv. 1—4). And I cannot but add, that the more I read modern works on the prophecies, with so much the more pleasure and admiration I return to Bishop Newton, and feel that the full and final accomplishment of this prophecy is still future, and that the ultimate intention of the calculations will not be understood till the Resurrection of Daniel, at the end of the said predicted days. Boldness in explaining and applying prophetical dates, is as much to be opposed as the despising of prophecies, of which perhaps it is the main cause. were more easy to invalidate, I do not say to subvert, Mr. Cooper's epoch of the commencement of the thirty years, to which he especially adverts, than to supply a better one. One thing, however, should by all means be done, that is, the translation should be corrected, and y and rendered by different words; and the context should be examined, very closely, to find where and how often occurs in the eleventh chapter.

It

In relation to the admission of successive applications of this prediction, I could wish Bishop Horne's preface to the Psalms, and Bishop Hurd's Lectures, to be well perused, together with Bishop Newton's answer to Collins. Facts are stubborn things; and because you most properly assert, and can easily demonstrate, that our Lord applies the eleventh and twelfth chapters of Daniel to the age of the destruction of Jerusalem, further proof that this prophecy cannot be applied to Buonaparte, without supposal of repeated fulfilments, is unnecessary. But,

further, it is impossible to read Rev. x. xi. and xii. comparing at the same time those chapters with Dan. x. xi. xii. without seeing another application of them, after the destruction of Jerusalem. Prophecies, then, may be fulfilled by steps and degrees, repeatedly, and variously also.

The subject before us, and the author, are worthy of the utmost attention; nor has any one disproved that Napoleon is intended in Dan. xi. Hence one great step is gained; and if I could suggest the smallest hint, which might enable Mr. Cooper to follow up his scheme, and to awaken the sleepy church of Laodicea, (Vitringa on the Apocalypse), I should feel myself truly privileged. Much however, remains to be disentangled in the application to Napoleon, and particularly in respect to the calculation of the times. Perhaps the numbers are to be computed literally, as well as spiritually literally with respect to the individual Napoleon, as beginning to work from the commencement of the French Revolution in 1792; and, accordingly, each of the periods mentioned in the twelfth chapter relate to separate and successive events, with, it may be, an interval between them. Such a thought struck me in perusing the allusions to these three computations in the eleventh chapter. At the same time, it may yet be proved that Mr. Cooper's scheme and mode of computation may apply to Napoleon, considered spiritually, as a continuation of the "man of sin,” as the king here described is unquestionably called. The dangerous error, indeed, of most modern interpreters, is to divert some of the prophecies applicable to the Papacy, to revolutionary France. It is true that these two may be distinguished so, as that all the prophecies applying to either may be applied to both distinctly, as I have suggested above; but still, revolutionary France is not the less the

Latin Antichrist in continuation of the man of sin, from the day of the fall of the ancient Western empire. But while it is the same Latin Antichrist, it is by no means inconsistent to behold it burning Babylon with fire; nay, it is predicted that her own kings should execute judgment upon her. There is much to this purpose, and worthy of the utmost attention, in Dr. Wells's Notes on the Revelation. "It is peculiar in some sense" (observed Mr. Fleming, in 1700) "to the fourth vial, that the sun, upon which it is poured out, should yet be made the executor of it upon others, at the same time that it is tormented by it itself. So that, whosoever is denoted by the sun here, as I suppose the house of Bourbon principally is, is made use of, as the devil is, both to torment others, and to be tormented himself in so doing. And if the king of France therefore be denoted by this principally, I fear he is yet to be made use of, in the hand of God, as Nebuchadnezzar was of old against the Jews, namely, as a further severe scourge to the Protestant churches every where. And besides this characteristic mark, which seems to forebode his further exaltation, and our humiliation, there is yet a third thing, which I cannot but think upon with dread and trembling of heart-" (Fleming's Discourses, 1701, p. lxxii.) Mr. Fleming so far agrees with Mr. Cooper, as to consider the 1260 years, in one of his calculations, to terminate with the humiliation of the French monarchy, not before the year 1794; but he very wisely considers the Papacy as having risen by steps and degrees; from each of which, as in the Babylonish captivity, there are 1260 years, terminating with corresponding steps of declension in the Papacy. Upon the whole, he agrees most nearly with Bishop Newton; and we are indebted to him for directing us to the prophetical description of the fourth vial, the epoch of BLASPHEMY. And

I could most sincerely wish that every man would read his work; and, unless he can prove that he is mistaken, that he would learn the great practical lesson from prophecy, relating to these present times; which is, that Popery is a furnace, but French liberty a fire. That the fourth vial referred to the French Revolution, was made out by Mr. Fleming, as well as the year when it should take place, and the main circumstances of it, and the character of the revolutionists and revolutionized, more than ninety years before the event. And it is from the original work, the existence of which some have questioned, that the foregoing extract was made; as is also this which follows. "But as to the expiration of this vial, I do fear it will not be until the year 1794. The reason of which conjecture is, that I find the Pope gat a new foundation of exaltation when Justinian, upon his conquest of Italy, left it in a great measure to the Pope's management; being willing to eclipse his own authority, to advance that of this haughty prelate. Now this being in the year 552, this, by the addition of the 1260 years, reaches down to the year 1811, which, acording to prophetical account, is the year 1794."

Mr. Fleming's reason for this mode of computation is, that in Rev. xii. 6, 14, "three times (or years) and a half" are identified with 1260 days-i.e. with three years and a half, each year comprehending 360 days. And I am not aware that any solid proof of the contrary can be given. The prophetical computation is therefore by years of 360 days, though it may be so appointed that the prophecy may be fulfilled according to both computations: for here, if the years are computed prophetically, the French revolution is pointed out; and if the 1260 years be taken as solar years, where would the prevalence of the French revolution more obviously terminate than in 1811?

From what has been stated, it may perhaps appear, that Mr. C. has good reason for his general position, but that the entire vision needs to be examined with the utmost attention, before any satisfactory explanation and application of it can be effected. At present, we are all skimming the surface, and assuming many things which ought to be proved; and our calculations here are made without induction of all texts which might assist, and ought to be harmonized with each other. The translation is neither close, nor adequate to the various import of the original. The light which the entire vision might cast upon itself, has never been separately collected; the light which the other visions of the author might afford, never yet duly sought; the other Scriptures connected with it, and requiring to be harmonized with it, have been never all duly collated, and made the most of for illuminating the passage. But until this be done, before any application be made of it, fumum ex fulgore ciemus. Even the interpretation of single symbols is almost always guess-work; and yet where is the symbol that the Bible does not somewhere explain?

Perhaps this last question requires illustration, and I will illustrate it thus. Let the question, for instance, be, Who is meant by Gabriel, the visible representative of the Eternal Logos, who commanded the angel to instruct Daniel in the meaning of the visions; the 8 whom Daniel heard giving the injunction to the 2 (chap. viii. 15, 16)? The answer is, He is the angel of the Lord Jesus Christ; as is proved by comparing chap. viii. 15, 16, and x. with Matt. i. 20; Luke i. 26, Matt. xxviii., Rev. i. 10-18, x., with Dan xii. 5-7. And why is he said, in Rev. i. 15, to have a voice like many waters? The answer is, that on the day of Pentecost the Lord spake in the languages of many nations; proved by Rev. xvii. 15,

« AnteriorContinuar »