belonging to the seven vessels of plagues a like order may be observed; the later visions being here, and in the other series, more fearful in their character, and more fully described. This characteristic of the several series of visions may suggest that the scenes should be regarded poetically and not chronologically, and that we should seek in the symbols for a general and moral, and not for a particular and merely historical, signification.

4. Certain numbers are often used indefinitely as general or mystical numbers. Besides the seven churches, the seven seals, the seven trumpets, and the seven vessels of plagues, already noticed, there are many other instances in which this number occurs. Mention is made of the seven Spirits of God, of the seven horns and seven eyes of the Lamb, of seven thunders, of the seven thousands destroyed by an earthquake, of the seven heads and seven diadems of the dragon, of the seven heads of the beast, of the seven kings and the seven hills of Babylon. The half of seven is employed several times; three days and a half, and three years and a half,-or its equivalents, forty and two months, and twelve hundred and sixty days. The numbers ten, four, and twelve, occur frequently. The persecution predicted in one of the epistles is for ten days, the dragon has ten horns, the beast has ten horns and ten crowns. Four cherubim support the throne of the Most High, four angels hold the winds till the people of God are sealed, and four also are restrained at the river Euphrates. Twelve times twelve thousands are sealed, twelve stars shine in the crown on the woman's head, the new Jerusalem has twelve gates, twelve courses of precious stones in its walls, and its length is twelve thousand stadia. In most of these instances it is evident that the numbers are not used as ordinary numbers, and the principle of interpretation which is certainly required in most cases should, on the ground of consistency, be applied to all. But though all the numbers mentioned are used indefinitely, they are not employed indiscriminately. Associations, which arose in various ways, would render the use of different numbers more appropriate for different occasions, though, all might bear a general import. These are all occasionally used as general designations in other parts of the sacred Scriptures.

The supposition that some of the numbers mentioned in this book are to be taken definitely is liable to many objections. In the first place, it renders the numerical usage of the writer inconsistent, without any evident reason. Secondly, it is alien from the whole character of the work, which is general and poetical, rather than particular and chronological. Thirdly, it is apparently adverse to the declaration made by our Lord to his apostles, that it was not for them to know the times and the seasons which the Father had fixed by his own authority. Fourthly, it receives little,

if any, support from other portions of the word of God. The prophetical references to exact periods of time in the Old Testament are few; while there is nothing in the New resembling the chronological and historical information which has been attributed to this book. Fifthly, the advantage to be gained by such knowledge is not apparent. Hitherto it has not enabled any to anticipate the history of a single nation; and if it be supposed that the chief province of prophecy is to aid in the review of the past, it would only repeat the lessons concerning the foreknowledge of God, which all previous prophecies had furnished. And, lastly, no application of the numbers of the Apocalypse as definite numbers to the facts of history appears to us to be practicable. The last writer who has made the attempt proclaims the utter failure of all who have preceded him, and we cannot regard his chronology of the Apocalypse as at all satisfactory.

Some who have taken the days and months of the Apocalypse for definite periods of time have sought, but we think without success, for the accomplishment of all these predictions in the events of Jewish or Roman history, during the few years that elapsed between the writing of the book and the destruction of Jerusalem. Others have referred them altogether to the distant future. But most of the interpretations which suppose that these times are definitely described, assume that each day of the prophecy stands for a year in history, and then they seek to show, in the history of the south and west parts of Europe, the fulfilment of what is here foretold. To us this assumption appears to be destitute of any adequate foundation. We believe that it is maintained chiefly on the ground that, when the predictions are thus explained, it is thought their accomplishment may be traced in the pages of history. But the curious coincidences which many writers have pointed out appear to us much too partial to prove their hypotheses. The many different interpretations which plausibly supported in the same way, but which are mutually destructive, show that the argument itself is unsound. The times mentioned have been referred to various series of events, and various epochs have been fixed for the commencement of each, and still by a little ingenuity every author succeeds in showing some coincidence between history and his view of prophecy. since all these coincidences, excepting one, must be wholly worthless as arguments, and be merely accidental, we cannot see how much argumentative value can be assigned to the one which alone is imagined to be right.

are

But

The other arguments in support of this mode of interpreting the periods of prophecy seem to us equally unsatisfactory. The seventy weeks of Daniel may appear to the reader of our version an analogous case, but the phrase in the original is merely seventy

sevens.* The use of such an expression for four hundred and ninety years is plainly no proof that a day is put for a year. The unbelief of the Israelites, during the forty days in which their messengers surveyed the promised land, was the cause of their wandering forty years in the wilderness.† There was this correspondence between the time of their sin, and that of their punishment. But this can be no evidence that the term day stands for the period year, nor that a typical day represents a real year. Of the former usage no instance is adduced from Scripture: of the latter only one; and this being alone, and in many respects peculiar, is quite insufficient to justify the conclusion which has been deduced from it. The prophet Ezekiel was directed to perform some symbolical action, the days of which would denote the years of the affliction of his people. The term day is here used only for a day. It was obviously a real day of the type which corresponded to a real year of the events thus indicated. The scale of the typical personal action was necessarily much smaller than that of the predicted national affliction, and the proportion of the one to the other is expressly declared. If it were said that an inch in a picture corresponded to a fathom of the building it represented, it would be most illogical to infer that, in statements concerning other buildings, an inch meant a fathom. Equally unreasonable would be the inference, because in the account of a type one of its days is declared to correspond to a year in that which is typified, that therefore, in the language of prophecy, a day means a year. If it be said that in applying this principle to the visions of the Apocalypse, the term day in the book stands for a real day in the symbol, and that it is this real day which represents a year in history, we reply that this seems to us purely conjectural. It is nowhere stated in the book, and there is nothing in the nature of the symbols to require this diminished scale of proportion. In all the prophecies of the Bible, which are sufficiently understood to admit of their introduction as evidence, the descriptions of time are to be taken for the exact numbers stated, or they are to be understood indefinitely. A day stands for a day, a month for a month, a year for a year: or else the numbers specified stand for long or for short periods generally.

We are surprised to find that Professor Stuart, while rejecting the definite interpretation of other numbers, is of opinion that the three years and a half during which the two witnesses prophesy in sackcloth, and the three days and a half in which they lie unburied, are to be understood literally; and also that the seven hills of Babylon are the seven hills of Rome, and the seven kings seven

*Daniel ix. 24.

VOL. II.

Numbers xiv. 34.
N

Ezekiel iv. 4

Roman emperors. Such an interpretation appears to us peculiarly inconsistent with the general character which he elsewhere attributes to the symbols. If the new Jerusalem, the bride, be no particular city, we cannot see why Babylon, the harlot, should be thus regarded.

IV. The principles of interpretation.

Of these we shall mention only a few, which depend on the view we have given of the character of the work.

1. It should be read as a poem.

If all the observations made in reference to the poetic form of the book have not been satisfactory to the reader, yet we think enough has been stated to show that it has more of the character of a poem than of a prose composition. This should never be forgotten in its perusal. It will naturally lead to the figurative interpretation of some passage, which otherwise might be understood literally, and will account for the number and nature of the figures. It will show, too, that the meaning of every figure is to be sought in its general character; for a particular signification is never expected in the details of poetic imagery. And it will also evince the propriety of an arrangement which is subjective rather than objective; since in poetry the relation of events one to another, in time and place, is not so much regarded, as the relation of successive scenes to the impression which is to be produced on the reader's mind.

2. It should be read as a poem of Hebrew form and character. Some acquaintance with the prophecies of the Old Testament, especially with those which are poetical, is obviously necessary to the right understanding and due appreciation of this book. It has so many resemblances to them, that certainly it should be interpreted as belonging to the same class of compositions. We shall be unable to determine the meaning of some figures if the common usage of the Jewish prophets be not regarded; and others will appear, unless thus illustrated, to be strange and unnatural. The consideration that the figures which they employed, when predicting the calamities which were to come on other nations, or the adversity and prosperity of their own people, or the glory of Messiah's kingdom, exhibit only the general nature of the events foretold, may show the impropriety of expecting in the Apocalypse any anticipation of the details of history, or any precise chronological information. If the Old Testament prophecies evidently were not designed to gratify curiosity in respect to the future, but only to reveal its character so far as it would afford moral and spiritual instruction, much more may we expect that this will be the design of New Testament prophecies.

3. It should be read as a poem the sense and spirit of which are Christian.

This is evident from the introductory and conclusory statements. It is a revelation from Jesus Christ, and therefore we conclude that it must agree with the character of that religion of which he is the author and the principal subject. Now Christianity is distinguished from Judaism by its universality. When communicated to men it was necessarily presented in a form which was in some degree modified to suit the special condition of those who were first addressed. But in the discourses of our Lord, and in the epistles of his apostles, the universal character of the new religion ever rises prominently above the peculiarities which belong to any class, country, or age. Man is referred to under the general aspects of humanity: the truths exhibited, the duties inculcated, and the promises presented, are such as relate to the whole human race. The doctrines of Christianity, its precepts, and its promises, are for the world; and we infer, therefore, that its prophecies also are for the world. That the Jews should be especially referred to, till the end of that dispensation for one people which was preparatory to a dispensation for mankind, might be anticipated. And such predictions we find in the New Testament. But that any other nations should be selected for special notice, and that the page of Christian prophecy should exhibit the history of the Roman empire, of Goths, Visigoths, Vandals, and Huns, of Saracens, and Turks, and of recent events in England, France, Italy, and Germany,-this we think rather improbable. It is so unlike the other parts of that revelation, which is designed equally for the inhabitants of every quarter of the globe, and for all the successive generations of mankind.*

Christianity is also distinguished by the little regard paid to external affairs. We should therefore not expect that in its predictions much importance would be attached to the civil history of any nation, or to that ecclesiastical history which is almost equally external and secular. Surely the enemies with which the church of Christ has to contend are not invading armies; nor is it by the patronage of princes that its prosperity is secured. If all other Christian instruction is designed to fix attention on what is moral rather than on what is physical, on what is unseen and not on what is seen, is it not improbable that its prophecies should have another character, and be occupied chiefly with the external history of a small portion of our race? We can scarcely conceive of anything less consistent with the spiritual character of Chris

* We think on this ground alone the interpretation should be rejected, which represents one of the three frogs as a symbol of the Dissenters and the other supporters of the Reform Bill. Mr. Elliott thinks the emblem appropriate, as indicating their French origin, and their noisy and noxious habits. The other two he supposes to refer to the Jesuits and the Puseyites.