realized in the future restoration of the Jews. Let us interpret the unfulfilled on the same principle, and in the same literal way as we do the fulfilled.

May we not (the author must include himself,) have perverted the scriptures; have wronged the Jews, have obscured the future glorious kingdom of Christ; have misdirected the church, and hidden from it the judgments yet to come on the ungodly, by attempting to spiritualize that which God intended not to be spiritualized, but to be literally understood?

It is allowed that there is much figurative and symbolical language in the scriptures, and especially in the prophetical writings. Some prophecies are plain and literal, and others symbolical; it should be considered, therefore, whether the prophecies be symbolical, such as are Daniel ii. and vii. and much of the book of Revelation; or simple and literal as [99] many prophecies in Isaiah. Figurative language in the symbolical prophecies is frequently "taken from the analogy between the world natural, and an empire or kingdom considered as a world politic."* The rules which Sir Isaac Newton gives, and the examples of Daubuz, on the prophetic language, are valuable; though probably no rules of interpretation yet. fixed on this point are altogether unexceptionable. Much scriptural and heavenly wisdom is requisite for fully understanding the right interpretation of the language of the varied prophecies. Dan. xii. 4, 8-10.

A difference between a symbol and a figure may be noticed. All language is full of figures which convey the meaning quite as accurately as plain expressions, and much more forcibly. A symbol is an emblematic or allegorical sign; a purposely designed picture, using things universally known to convey knowledge to our minds; and thus concealing and yet illustrating; hiding from the careless, and yet speaking more explicitly than words, which have a variable meaning, and could not be so exactly translated, to the diligent searcher of scripture. The meaning of symbols is, however, made yet clearer by literal explanations. Thus we are informed that Candlesticks mean Churches, Rev. i. 20. The woman means the great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth, (Rev. xvii. 18,) the Dragon and Old Serpent means the Devil and Satan. Rev. xx. 2.

The distinction between symbolical and literal prophecies may be distinctly seen in those of DANIEL. The first part of the prophecies, chap. ii. from 31-35, is symbolical: then comes the literal explanation, verse 36-45. The first part of ch. vii. verse 1-14, [100] is chiefly symbolical, the latter part, (verse 15-27,) is the literal explanation. The eleventh

* See Sir I. Newton on Daniel chap. ii.

chapter is literal prophecy, called the scripture of truth, (Dan. x. 2,) the truth, (Dan xi. 21,) in opposition to figure and symbol. From the latter part of this remarkable prophecy, many expect a future developement of ANTICHRIST. Mr. Faber considers that the Antichrist predicted by St. John, is the same enemy as the wilful king in Daniel, (chap. xi.) and he views the actions of Antichrist as mainly constituting the third woe, (Rev. xi.) the fulfilment of which he considers as commencing with the French Revolution. The Author cannot see that the latter part of Daniel xi. refers only to that which is supposed to be emphatically and exclusively the Antichrist. Many particulars have had a remarkable fulfilment already in the history of Antiochus, of the Saracens, and of the Turks, as developed by Brightman, in his Exposition of Daniel xi., Mede, Newton, Keith, &c.; the prophecy is not, however, yet fully accomplished, and when that which remains unfulfilled is accomplished, it doubtless will make the whole clear. The change in the description of the beast, (Rev. xvii. compared with Rev. xiii.) leads us to expect that change in the Roman empire before its destruction, which will more remarkably manifest the workings of every Antichrist previous to the final overthrow of Christ's enemies. The third woe appears to be the day of judgment. Rev. xi. 13.

The symbolical character of much of the chief book of prophecies in the New Testament, THE REVELATION, is obvious. It is full also of literal and plain expressions. The application. of expressions, originally adapted to the Jewish Dispensation [101] throughout the apostolic writings, to the use of the Christian church, composed of Jews and Gentiles, and their enlarged meaning, in this use, has been sufficiently explained and justified.* The Revelation has many Jewish ideas, characters and expressions, but they are applicable to the Gentile Christian churches, and fulfilled in their history. The term Babylon is so explained in the Book, and, by the course of events, that it cannot be applied to the literal Babylon; nor the term Jerusalem, merely to the literal Jerusalem; nor the term Jew to the literal Jew only, (Rev. ii. 9; Rom. ii. 28, 29); nor the Lamb slain, to the literal lamb sacrificed in the temple, (Rev. v. 6); nor the golden vials full of odours, (Rev. v. 8,) to the incense offered in the temple. This consideration is decisive in the Author's mind, to shew that events of the Christian church fulfil the Apocalypse, and that we need not, and ought not, because no literal fulfilment has yet taken place, to imagine that these may not have been a fulfilment of the symbols,

* See Mendham's Clavis Apostolica for many useful remarks on the New Testament application of Old Testament language.

after the manner in which Protestants generally concur, though they may not yet clearly see or fully agree in particular application. It is generally admitted that the Jews are included in the later triumphs of the church foretold in this book: but it would be here a false literalness to apply words taken from the Jewish dispensation, merely literally, or exclusively to the Jews.*

It strengthens these considerations when we remember [102] that the four beasts of Daniel, (chapter vii.) refer to the four universal kingdoms of the earth; and it is generally admitted both by Protestants and Romanists, that the fourth beast of Daniel is the same as the beast described by St. John, and that both point out the Roman empire. Cressener shews this at length in fourteen different particulars, and concludes, "it is therefore unquestionable, that the fourth beast in Daniel is the same with the beast in the Revelations." He brings extracts from the Romanists, Viega, Alcassar, Malvenda, and Ribera, as concurring in this view. The learned Romanist, Sylviera, identifies too the beast of Revelation with that of Daniel, and brings forward many Romanists and Fathers to support this interpretation.‡

Mede thus states his view: "I conceive Daniel to be a contracted Apocalypse, and the Apocalypse Daniel explicate, in that where both treat about the same subject, namely, what was revealed to Daniel concerning the fourth kingdom, but summarily and in gross, was shewed to John particularly, with the distinction and order of the several fates and circumstances which were to betide and accompany the same. And that therefore Daniel's prophecy is not terminated with the first, but reacheth to the second coming of Christ, as appears by that description of the glorious coming, and of the great judgment, (Dan. vii.) and his prophecy of the resurrection. (chap. xii.) This has been the constant tradition of the church, from the apostles' days to this last age, and was of the church of the Jews before, and at our Saviour's time. And if the apostles had ever [103] taught the church otherwise, it could never have been so fully forgotten."§

Sir Isaac Newton also says "the Apocalypse of St. John is written in the same style as the prophecies of Daniel, and has the same relation to them which they have one to another; so

* In this view the radical defect of Brown's "The Jew, the Master-Key of the Revelation," applying it mainly to the Jews, and of Mr. Burgh's "Revelation Unfulfilled," may be seen. See the Review of Mr. Burgh's book in the Dublin Christian Herald, vol. iii. p. 270.

+ See Cressener's Demonstration, p. 82-89; See also p. 8, 9. See his work on the Apocalypse, vol. ii. p. 121, &c.

§ See his Works, page 787.

that all of them together make one complete prophecy, and an interpretation thereof. The prophecy is distinguished into seven successive parts by the opening of the seven seals of the Book which Daniel was commanded to seal up, (Daniel xii. 4, 9.) and hence it is called the Apocalypse or Revelation of Jesus Christ."*

But during that fourth empire, the Jews, though there be a remnant, are, as a people, fallen, and diminished, cast away, and broken off, (Rom. xi. 11-18.) that the Gentiles might be grafted in, reconciled, enriched and saved; a people being taken out of them for the name of God, at the Saviour's return he will build again the tabernacle of David, but not till then. Acts xv. 14—16. The predictions of Daniel (chap. ii. and vii.) and of St. John, relate to the times of the Gentiles. St. John takes up that part of Daniel's predictions, which was left unaccomplished, and gives a more minute and full detail,† for the use of those who were God's servants in general, and assuring them the things would shortly come to pass. To apply, then, the prophecies of Revelation primarily, mainly, and almost exclusively to the Jews, is to carry literal interpretation too far, and to go on a fundamentally erroneous [104] principle. To consider also, as some have done, the Revelation as wholly unfulfilled, is to suppose nothing taking place of things which were said shortly to come to pass, and to leave the servants of God, for 1800 years, without the light of particular prophecy. The painful fact of many differences, or mistakes, of interpreters, will not remove an improbability which must be considered great. Let us remember, also, the explicit statements of the value of prophecy, as a light to the church; (Amos iii. 7. John xv. 15. 2 Peter i. 19.) and the large concurrence of laborious, patient, and deeply learned, and pious Protestants; and the important fact that one grand instrument of effecting the blessed Reformation, was the uniform testimony of the Reformers, adopted by the Protestant church every where, that Popery was the Man of Sin, and Papal Rome the Babylon of Revelation. But for this interpretation of prophecy, we might still have been in the darkness and infatuation of that awful perversion of the gospel.

The importance of chronological prophecy to aid us now in preparedness for the day of Christ, is great, and the general interpretation has been the chief means of strengthening and confirming, if not of exciting attention to this. An wholly unfulfilled Revelation leaves us without any guide on this most important point.

* See Newton's Observations, p. 254.

+ See Mr. Habershon's Work for the illustration of this, p. 6, 7.

A vast variety of puzzling as well as important questions may be asked; and very many difficulties presented quite overwhelming at first sight. Bishop Newton says, "folly" (I would rather say ingenuity) "may ask more questions than wisdom can answer." This is the case with every subject. Even with those prophecies that have been obviously, and in a large [105] part fulfilled, there are sentences which have not apparently been realized, and which we therefore conclude, yet wait for their fulfilment, or for farther light respecting them. Difficulties do not overturn a system of interpretation; the human intellect is strong to pull down, but weak to see God's will, and the fulfilling of his purposes, and to build up his truth. This is not stated as an objection to the pointing out of difficulties, but as a reason why, though there are real difficulties, and we cannot see the whole of the case, we should not on that account disregard and set aside a system of interpretation which in many of the most important particulars, meets the terms of the prophecy, and allows subsequent events that may complete the whole. The course of investigation may, and the course of time will, assuredly, clear up all the difficulties of God's word; and we shall know as we are known. 1 Cor. xiii. 12. Nor can we expect perfectly to comprehend any part of divine truth, till that which is perfect is come, verse 10.

It may serve very much to weaken the force of these objections, to look at similar difficulties in prophecies which our Lord and his apostles notice as fulfilling in their day, and the obscurities attaching to them. Compare for instance the references in Matthew with the Old Testament Prophecies, and see whether there be not scope for an able mind to make difficulties. Far also, is universal consent from being a necessary test of truth. Some of the Jews, enlightened by prophecy, (Luke ii. 25, 38.) cordially received Christ; but the great body of the Jewish nation rejected our divine Lord, (Acts xiii. 27.) because they shut their eyes to predictions which had [106] real difficulties, but still light enough to guide them, and which we are assured were actually fulfilled. May those, then, who are staggered at the varieties of opinion, and the difficulties in the Protestant interpretation of the Revelation, duly weigh this! The Jews still reject even the most plainly fulfilled prophecies of Christ; and even the most attached disciples of our Lord were long in understanding the prophecies that were fulfilling before their eyes. (Luke xxiv. 21.) A prophecy may be fulfilled, though professing and even real servants of Christ differ about it, and do not think that it has been accomplished. If we wait till all are agreed, before we are influenced by pro