1

Roman beast during his second state of existence which is still FUTURE.

This argument appears to me so strong for the FUTURITY of that death, which is ascribed to the witnesses; because the prophecy represents them as being slain by the beast that ascendeth out of THE ABYSS, and the ascent of the revived beast from THE ABYSS is a yet FUTURE event: this argument, I say, appears to me so strong for the FUTURITY of the death of the witnesses, especially when the peculiar genius of the Apocalypse is considered which deals largely in these almost hidden connecting links which may easily escape the notice of a careless observer; that I can only state the difficulties and objections which lie on the other side of the question, and leave the cautious reader to determine for himself in which scale the weight of probability preponderates.

II. Now to perform such a task is the same as to produce the arguments in favour of the opposite opinion, that the death of the two witnesses is already past.

1. The first of these arguments is, that, since the seven vials are vials of woe and final destruction to the persecuting powers of the Roman Empire, and since, no hint is given that any such event as the war against the witnesses will occur under any one of them: it seems both incongruous and unwarrantable to seek for an event under some one of the vials, which is wholly irrelevant to their general tendency, and respecting which they themselves are uniformly silent. But, if the war of the witnesses be still

future,

future, it must be placed under some one or other of the vials; because there is no where else in all the grand apocalyptic periods, where it consistently can be placed. Supposing it therefore to be yet future, we restrict ourselves, by the necessary arrangement of the Apocalypse, to seek it in the series of the vials. But, to seek any indications of it in that series, is only so much lost labour. All the vials are silent respecting it; nor can we even discover any subtle connecting link, by which we may chain it to any one of them. Nothing however is in itself more improbable and unaccountable than such a total silence, if indeed the war of the witnesses be destined to occur under some one of the vials. Hence the obvious presumption is, that it does not occur under any of them. But, if it do not occur under any of them, then it must be past: for the vials are the only chronological series under which we can consistently place it, if it be yet future.

To this argument I see not what answer can be given except the following one. Under the sixth vial, and again in the battle of Armageddon under the seventh vial, we find the persecuting false prophet in full action and evidently leagued with the revived beast or the beast that ascendeth out of THE ABYSS. This appearance therefore of the false prophet in such company may lead us to imagine, that he is once more engaged in his old practice of con-. verting pretended heretics by fire and faggot: and consequently that the war of the witnesses must be placed, either under the sixth, or under the seventh, VOL. III.

K

vial.

vial. It may be added, that the battle of Armageddon is probably the final issue of that war; when, after the resurrection of the witnesses, their enemies are completely and ultimately overthrown.

But to such an answer it is not very difficult to put in an abundantly sufficient reply. The false prophet does indeed actively appear under the sixth vial : but not a hint is given, that he appears for the purpose of waging war against the witnesses. On the contrary, we have a very definite account given of the object of his appearance, however obscurely the nature of his machinations may be described. The business of the evil spirit, which proceeds from his mouth, is said to be, in conjunction with other two evil spirits, the gathering of the Latin kings to destruction at Armageddon. Thus insufficient is our warrant to place the war of the witnesses under the sixth vial. Nor do we seem to have much better authority for placing it under the seventh. The revived wild beast indeed, with the false prophet and the congregated kings, wages war against Messiah and his army; but still we have no hint given, that he prevails even for a season over the people of God after the manner described in the war of the witnesses: we are simply told, that he goes forth to the battle and is completely routed. This however is not the whole that may be said. We have not the slightest ground, so far as the tenor of the prophecy is concerned, for imagining that the battle of Armageddon is the grand and final result of the war of the witnesses. As the prophetic account of the battle is wholly

wholly silent, as to any antecedent slaughter and resurrection of the witnesses; so the prophetic account of the war is equally silent, as to any immediately succeeding overthrow of the persecuting wild beast from the abyss. The enemies of the witnesses are indeed represented as grievously terrified by their resurrection and ascension, and a tenth part of the great Roman city is said to fall shortly afterwards by the shock of an earthquake: but not the least intimation is given, that those enemies, though alarmed, are exterminated as in the battle of Armageddon. Thus, on the whole, I deem it but lost labour to seek for any hint of the war of the witnesses in the series of the seven vials. If it do occur under some one of them, we have, at all events, no light thrown upon the subject by the prophecy itself.

2. The next argument is indeed an hypothetical one yet the hypothesis, on which it rests, seems to be so wonderfully corroborated by the evolution of correspondent history and by the imperious claims of never-to-be-neglected homogeneity, that I confess it to be with myself, what the Roman application of Daniel's fourth wild beast was to Mr. Mede, almost an article of faith.

Of this hypothesis I shall give the ground in my own words and I am the more disposed to do so, because my learned friend Dr. Hales, however he may differ from me on some other points, has both quoted those words and honoured them with his entire approbation.

"The time for the beginning of the last woe,"

says the author of the Analysis of ancient Chronology, "has long been a subject of the most eager "and anxious inquiry amongst the ablest interpre"ters of the Apocalypse. Of all the interpretations "hitherto proposed, that of Mr. Faber appears to "be the most probable and the least exceptionable. "It cannot be better expressed than in his own words.

“The rise of Mohammedism and the conquests of "the Saracens form a singular epoch in history. "The rise and conquests of the Ottoman Empire form another singular epoch. After these two, "where shall we pitch upon a third epoch equally ' singular? Can any other answer be given, except "the French Revolution and its amazingly extensive consequences? Now the Saracens and Turks are "universally allowed to be the subject of the two first woes: and are they more worthy of a place in prophecy, than the daring impieties, the unheard of "miseries, and the vast change in the whole European commonwealth, which have flowed from the "French Revolution? Since we are compelled to "date a new order of things from this tremendous convulsion, is it improbable to suppose, that the "third woe-trumpet began to sound, when the reign of Antichrist, of Anarchy, and of Atheism, com"menced* ?"

(1.) But more may be advanced in favour of such an opinion than I have here advanced.

* Hales's Synopsis of the signs of the times. p. 29, 30. Dissert. on the 1260 days. chap. x. sect. 1. § V. 2.

The