THE APOCALYPSE.
1. The word _Apocalypse_ (Greek _Apokalupsis_) signifies _Revelation_,
the title given to the book in our English version as well from its
opening word as from its contents. Of all the writings of the New
Testament that are classed by Eusebius among the disputed books
(_Antilegomena_, chap. 5. 6), the apostolic authorship of this is
sustained by the greatest amount of _external_ evidence; so much so that
Eusebius acknowledges it as doubtful whether it should be classed among
the _acknowledged_ or the _disputed_ books.
It was known to Papias, to Melito bishop of Sardis, and to
Theophilus of Antioch; is quoted as a part of Scripture by the
churches of Vienne and Lyons in the last quarter of the second
century; and is expressly ascribed to the apostle John by Justin
Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, the
Muratorian canon, Hippolytus, Origen, Jerome, etc. The
testimonies may be seen in Davidson's Introduction to the New
Test., in Alford, and in the other works already frequently
referred to. Eusebius, after giving a list of the _acknowledged_
books, adds: "After these should be placed, if it be thought
proper, the Revelation of John, concerning which we shall give
the opinions at the proper time." Then, at the end of a list of
the _disputed_ and _rejected_ books he adds: "And moreover, as I
said, the Revelation of John, if it be thought proper, which
some, as I said, reject, but others reckon among the
acknowledged books" (Hist. Eccl., 3. 25); and again, after
mentioning with approbation the account of those who said that
there were at Ephesus two who bore the name of John (John the
_apostle_, and the so-called _presbyter_ John), he adds: "For it
is probable that the second, if any one be not willing to allow
that it was the first, saw the Revelation current under the name
of John" (Hist. Eccl., 3. 39). Those who denied the apostolic
authorship of the book generally referred it to this latter,
John the presbyter. So Dionysius of Alexandria and others. But
for this they adduced no historic proof. Their arguments were
drawn wholly from considerations relating to its internal
character, especially in the case of some, its supposed
millenarian views. Upon any fair principle of judging, we must
concede that the apostolic authorship of this book is sustained
by a mass of ancient testimony not rebutted by any contrary
testimony which rests on a historic basis.
2. In modern, as in ancient times, the main arguments against the
apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse have been drawn from its
_internal_ character, especially as contrasted with that of the fourth
gospel and the first epistle of John. On this ground the assaults upon
the book have been many and strong, and they have been met with vigorous
resistance. To review the arguments on both sides would exceed our
limits. Many of them, moreover, presuppose a knowledge of the original
languages of both the Old and the New Testament. We can only indicate
some considerations of a general nature.
(1.) No valid argument against the apostolic authorship of this
book can be drawn from the fact that the writer specifies his
name in the introduction and elsewhere. Chaps. 1:1, 4, 9; 21:2;
22:8. It may surprise us that the man who studiously avoids
mentioning his name in the fourth gospel, and who describes
himself in his second and third epistles as "the elder," should
here directly introduce his name at the beginning and in the
progress of the book. But for this difference he may have had a
good reason, whether we can discover it or not. The direct
command, addressed to him personally, that he should write down
his visions and send them to the seven churches of Asia would
seem to imply the propriety, if not the necessity, of his
connecting his own name with the record of them. He addressed
the churches immediately and authoritatively in the name of the
risen and glorified Saviour. What more natural and proper than
that he should inform them directly who he was that had received
this heavenly message.
(2.) The _doctrinal_ views of the Apocalypse afford no argument
against its apostolic authorship. The writer, it is true, moves
to a great extent in a new and peculiar sphere of truth; but
there is nothing in it contradictory to the teachings of John's
gospel and epistles. On the contrary, the great central truths
that relate to Christ's person and office are in perfect harmony
with those teachings.
(3.) The _spirit_ of the Apocalypse is not contradictory to that
of the gospel and epistles. A writer in Alexander's Kitto says:
"Quiet contemplation has full scope in the evangelist; mildness
and love find utterance in affectionate discourse. But the
spirit of the apocalyptist is stern and revengeful, with cutting
reproofs, calls to repentance, commands and threatenings." The
answer to all this is that, just as the human body has bones and
muscles as well as fluids and soft tissues, so the mediatorial
government of Christ has a stern as well as a mild side; and
that the very nature of the visions contained in the apocalypse
gives prominence to this side.
(4.) The main objections are based on _diversity of style and
diction_. Notwithstanding all the true points of resemblance in
this respect that have been adduced by various writers, the
difference between the Apocalypse, on the one hand, and the
gospel and epistles of John, on the other, is very striking. But
here we must take into account, first of all, the great
difference in the _subject-matter_, which naturally brings a
corresponding difference of language. Next, the difference in
the _mode of divine communication_. The gospel and epistles were
written under that constant tranquil illumination of the Holy
Spirit which all the apostles enjoyed. The subject-matter of the
Apocalypse was given in direct vision--much of it, moreover,
through the medium of oral address. To one who believes in the
reality of the revelations here recorded it is vain that an
opponent urge the difference in style between the first epistle
of John and the epistles to the seven churches of Asia; since
these latter are expressed in the very words of Christ.
Inseparably connected with the peculiar mode of revelation in
the Apocalypse are the peculiar _mental state and circumstances_
in which the apostle wrote. He composed the gospel and epistles
in the calmness of tranquil contemplation and reminiscences of
the past. The visions of the Apocalypse he received "in the
Spirit" (chap. 1:10; 4:2); that is, in a state of ecstacy; and,
according to the plain language of the book, he _wrote them down
at the time_, beginning, as we must suppose, with the second
chapter, the introductory chapter and some closing remarks
having been added afterwards. The direction: "What thou seest
write in a book" (chap. 1:11, 19), does not indeed imply that he
should write upon the spot; but that he did so is plainly
indicated elsewhere: "When the seven thunders had uttered their
voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven
saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders
uttered, and write them not" (chap. 10:4). In entire harmony
with this is another passage: "And I heard a voice from heaven
saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the
Lord from henceforth," etc. (chap. 14:13); that is, "Write down
now these words of comfort." The apostle, therefore, wrote down
his visions one after another immediately after they were
received. When he wrote he was not in a state of
unconsciousness, but of mental and spiritual exaltation above
his ordinary condition. To affirm that he could not have
received this series of visions without being deprived of the
capacity to record them at the time, would be to limit the modes
of divine revelation by our ignorance. If we cannot understand
how the apostle could hear "in the Spirit" the voices of the
seven thunders, and immediately prepare to write down their
utterances, we ought, at least, reverently to receive the fact
as stated by him. To expect from one writing in such
circumstances careful attention to the rules of Greek syntax and
the idioms of the Greek language would be absurd. Undoubtedly
Plato in a like situation would have written pure Attic Greek,
because that would have been to him the most natural mode of
writing. But the Galilean fisherman, a Jew by birth and
education, fell back upon the Hebrew idioms with which he was so
familiar. Finally we must remember that, after the analogy of
the Old Testament prophecies, this prophetic book is expressed
in _poetic diction_. It is full of images borrowed from the old
Hebrew prophets, often spiritualized and applied in a higher
sense. Looking to the imagery alone, one may well call this book
a _grand anthology_ of the old Hebrew poets. But the poetic
diction of one and the same writer may differ widely from his
prose style, as we see in the case of Moses, Isaiah, and
Jeremiah.
If the above considerations do not wholly remove the difficulty
under consideration they greatly relieve it. The apostolic
authorship of the fourth gospel and the first epistle of John is
sustained by a mass of evidence that cannot be set aside. That
the same John also wrote the visions of the Apocalypse is
attested, as we have seen, by the almost unanimous voice of
antiquity. Far greater difficulties are involved in the denial
of the ancient tradition of the church than in the admission of
it.
3. The _date_ of the Apocalypse has been a matter of much discussion,
the great question being whether it was written before or after the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. The external testimony strongly
preponderates on the side of a late date; for the great body of this
tradition represents the banishment of the apostle to the isle of Patmos
as having taken place under Domitian who succeeded Titus, and reigned
from A.D. 81 to 96. This supposition also agrees with the fact that the
recipients of our Lord's seven messages (chaps. 2, 3) are the seven
churches of Proconsular Asia, among whom, according to the unanimous
testimony of the primitive church, the apostle spent the latter years of
his life. The hypothesis of an earlier date is but feebly supported by
external testimony. It rests mainly on the alleged reference of the
writer to the overthrow of Jerusalem as an event yet future, and as
being the main subject of the prophesies contained in the book. But this
reference has never been clearly established, and is contradicted by the
general analogy of prophecy, by the contents of the book, and by its
manifest relation to the prophecies of Daniel. A few only of the briefer
prophetic books, as those of Jonah and Nahum, confine themselves to one
particular event lying in the near future. All the more extended among
them, and many of the shorter, look forward undeniably to the distant
future. The book of Daniel can be interpreted only as containing a great
scheme of prophecy stretching forward into the distant future, and with
this the revelation of John has the closest connection. The _place_
where the revelation was received was the isle of Patmos, one of the
group called Sporades in the Ægean sea off the southwestern corner of
Asia Minor, where the apostle represents himself to have been "for the
word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ" (chap. 1:9): that
is, in accordance with ancient tradition, banished to that isle on
account of the gospel.
4. For the _interpretation_ of this book many and very discordant plans
have been proposed. Setting aside at the outset all those schemes which
do not find in the Apocalypse a view of the conflicts of Christ's people
to the end of time and their final victory over their enemies, there
remain two general principles of interpretation. The first may be called
the _generic_ principle. Those who adopt it inquire only after the
general import of the symbols employed, without attempting any
particular application of them to the history of the church in
connection with that of the world. Thus, the white horse of the first
seal (chap. 6:2) denotes in general the conquests of Christ through his
gospel; the red horse of the second seal (chap 6:4), war and carnage, as
accompanying the progress of the truth; and so on throughout the other
symbols of the book. But when we come to the most important part of the
prophecies, those concerning the two beasts (chap. 13), and that
concerning the woman riding on the scarlet-colored beast (chap. 17),
this principle utterly fails. It cannot be that so many specific and
very peculiar marks mean only persecuting powers in general. They point
with wonderful clearness and precision to that grand combination of the
civil with the ecclesiastical power of which papal Rome has ever been
the chief representative.
We come, then, for the true key to the Apocalypse, to the other
principle, which may be called the _historic_. This seeks in the history
of the church and of the world for the great events foretold in this
book. It is no valid objection to this principle, that in the attempt to
apply it interpreters find great, and in many cases insuperable
difficulties. The mystery of God is not yet finished. It may be that the
mighty events of the future can alone throw a clear light on the entire
plan of the book. Meanwhile we must wait in reverential expectation,
having in the plain fulfilment of that part of its prophecies which
describes the rise and character of the combined ecclesiastical and
political power which, under the name of Christianity, persecutes the
true servants of Christ, a certain pledge that all the rest will be
accomplished in due season. Expositors are agreed that the predictions
of the book do not run on in chronological order from beginning to end.
Most find in chaps. 6:1-11:18 (with an episode, chaps. 10:1-11:13) one
series relating more to the outward history of the world in its
relations to God's people; while in chap. 12 the writer returns to the
primitive days of Christianity, and gives a more interior and spiritual
view of the conflicts of God's people along the track of ages and their
final triumph, adding at the close various supplementary views of the
same mighty struggle and victory.
5. On the _symbolic import of the numbers_ in the Apocalypse a few words
may be added.
_Seven_ is the well known symbol of completeness, and this is the most
prominent number in the book. Thus we have the seven churches of Asia
represented by the seven golden candlesticks, and their seven angels
represented by seven stars (chap. 1:4, 12, 16, 20); the seven lamps of
fire burning before the throne which are the seven spirits of God (chap.
4:5); the seven seals (chap. 5:1); the seven trumpets (chap. 8:2); the
seven thunders (chap. 10:4); the seven last plagues (chap. 15:1); to
which may be added the seven ascriptions of praise--power, riches,
wisdom, strength, honor, glory, blessing (chap. 5:12), blessing, glory,
wisdom, thanksgiving, honor, power, might (chap. 7:12). Lastly, we have
the seven heads of the persecuting beast in all its various forms.
Chaps. 12:3; 13:1; 17:3. So far as the number seven has its fulfilment
in the history of the world, we are at liberty to suppose that this is
accomplished, in part at least, by the manner in which the wisdom of God
has been pleased to group together the events of prophecy--a grouping
which is always appropriate, but might have been different had the plan
of representation so required. The final judgments which precede the
millennium, for example, which in chaps. 15 and 16 are set forth under
the figure of seven vials full of the wrath of God, might have been, by
another mode of distribution, represented under the number two. Many
think they are thus represented in chap. 14:14-20. Another prophetic
number, occurring in Daniel and the Apocalypse, always as a designation
of time, is the _half of seven_. Thus we have "a time, and times, and
half a time," that is, three years and a half (chap. 12:14); or in
months, "forty and two months" (chaps. 11:2; 13:5); or in days, "a
thousand two hundred and threescore days" (chaps. 11:3; 12:6). Compare
Daniel 7:25. Again, answering to these three years and a half, we have
the three days and a half during which the two witnesses lie dead. Chap.
11:9, 11. The number _six_, moreover, from its peculiar relation to
seven, represents the preparation for the consummation of God's plans.
Hence the sixth seal (chap. 6:12-17), the sixth trumpet (chap. 9:14-21),
and the sixth vial (chap. 16:12-16) are each preëminent in the series to
which they belong. They usher in the awful judgments of Heaven which
destroy the wicked. Here, perhaps, we have the key to the symbolic
import of the number of the beast, 666. While it represents, according
to the principles of Greek numeration, the number of a man, it seems to
indicate that upon him fall all the judgments of the sixth seal, the
sixth trumpet, and the sixth vial.
_Four_ is the natural symbol for universality. Thus we have the four
living creatures round about the throne (chap. 4:6), perhaps as symbols
of the agencies by which God administers his universal providential
government (chaps. 6:1, 3, 5, 7; 15:7); the four angels standing on the
four corners of the earth and holding the four winds (chap. 7:1); and
the four angels bound in the river Euphrates (chap. 9:14). So also in
the fourfold enumeration, "kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation,"
or its equivalent. Chaps. 5:9; 10:11; 11:9; 14:6; 17:15. _A third and a
fourth part_, on the contrary, represent what is partial. Chaps. 6:8;
8:12; 9:18.
_Twelve_ is the well-known signature of God's people. Compare the twelve
tribes of the Old Testament and the twelve apostles of the New; the
woman with a crown of twelve stars (chap. 12:1); the twelve gates,
twelve angels, twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem, the twelve times
twelve cubits of its wall, and its tree of life that yields twelve
harvests a year (chaps. 21:12, 14; 22:2). We have also the same number
combined with a thousand, the general symbol for a great number. From
each of the twelve tribes of Israel are sealed twelve thousand (chap.
7:4-8), making for the symbolical number of the redeemed twelve times
twelve thousand (chap. 14:1, 3); and the walls of the New Jerusalem are
in every direction twelve thousand furlongs (chap. 21:16).
_Ten_ is possibly only a symbol of diversity, as in the case of the ten
horns of the beast (chaps. 12:3; 13:1; 17:3); though some take a literal
view of it.
6. Dark as are many parts of the Apocalypse and difficult of
interpretation, the book as a whole is radiant with the promise to God's
people of a final and complete victory in their conflict with the
kingdom of Satan. Though long delayed, as we mortals reckon time, it
shall come at last with a splendor above the brightness of the sun, and
the earth be lighted from pole to pole with its glory. "Amen. Even so,
come, Lord Jesus"!
APPENDIX TO PART III.
WRITINGS OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS, WITH SOME NOTICES OF THE APOCRYPHAL
NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS.
1. A wide distinction should be made between the _writings of the
apostolic fathers_ which are acknowledged to be genuine, or the
genuineness of which may be maintained on more or less probable grounds,
and the large mass of spurious works afterwards palmed upon the
Christian world as the productions of apostles or their contemporaries.
The latter constitute properly the _New Testament Apocrypha_, though the
term is sometimes applied in a loose way to both classes of writings.
The writings of the apostolic fathers, though possessing no divine
authority, are valuable as showing the state of the Christian churches
at the time when they were composed in respect to both doctrine and
discipline, as well as the various errors and divisions by which they
were troubled. Their testimonies to the genuineness of the New Testament
have been already considered. Chap. 2, No. 10. Some of the apocryphal
works also, worthless as they are for instruction in the doctrines and
duties of Christianity, throw much light on the religious spirit,
tendencies, and heretical sects of the times to which they belong.
Others of these writings are unutterably absurd and puerile, worthy of
notice only as showing the type of the puerilities current in the age of
their composition.
I. WRITINGS OF CLEMENT.
2. Appended to the Alexandrine manuscript (Chap. 26, No. 5) is an
_epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians_, followed by part of a
so-called second epistle to the same church. The first of these epistles
is acknowledged to be genuine. It was known to the ancient fathers as
the work of Clement of Rome, and highly commended by them. Their
quotations from it agree with the contents of the epistle as we now have
it, nor does it exhibit any marks of a later age; for the author's
reference to the well-known fable of the phoenix as a type of the
resurrection (chap. 25), constitutes no real difficulty. It may prove
that he was credulous, but not that he belonged to a later than the
apostolic age. The ancients represent this Clement to have been
identical with _Clement bishop of Rome_. Whether he was also identical
with the Clement named by the apostle Paul (Phil. 4:3), is a question
that we may well leave undecided. The epistle was written shortly after
some persecution (chap. 1), which Grabe, Hefele, and others suppose to
have been that under Nero; Lardner, Cotelerius, and others, that under
Domitian. Upon the former supposition it was written about A.D. 68--a
supposition apparently favored by the way in which he refers to the
temple and service at Jerusalem as still in existence (chaps. 40, 41);
upon the latter, about A.D. 96 or 97.
3. The _occasion_ of the epistle, which Clement writes in the name of
the church at Rome, is easily gathered from its contents. As in the days
of Paul, so now, the Corinthian church was troubled by a "wicked and
unholy sedition," fomented by "a few rash and self-willed men," who had
proceeded so far as to thrust out of their ministry some worthy men.
Chap. 44. It would seem, also, from chaps. 24-27 that there were among
them those who denied the doctrine of the resurrection. To restore in
the Corinthian church the spirit of love and unity is the grand scope of
the epistle. The author commends them for their orderly and holy
deportment before their present quarrel arose, traces it to its true
source in the pride gendered by the honor and enlargement granted them
by God, and urges them to lay aside their contentions by every motive
that the gospel offers--the mischiefs that strife occasions, the rules
of their religion, the example of the Saviour and holy men of all ages,
the relation of believers to God, his high value of the spirit of love
and unity, the reward of obedience and punishment of disobedience, etc.
Comparing the church to an army, he insists earnestly on the necessity
of different ranks and orders, and the spirit of obedience. Comparing it
again to the human body, he shows that all the particular members, each
in his place, should conspire together for the preservation of the
whole.
Clement's style has not the merit of compactness and conciseness. He is,
on the contrary, diffuse and repetitious. But a thoroughly evangelical
spirit pervades the present epistle, and it is, moreover, characterized
by a noble fervor and simplicity. "It evinces the calm dignity and the
practical executive wisdom of the Roman church in her original apostolic
simplicity, without the slightest infusion of hierarchical arrogance."
Schaff, Hist. Christ. Church, vol. 1, p. 460. In its internal character,
as in the time of its composition, it approaches the canonical writings
of the New Testament more nearly than any other remains of antiquity.
4. The _second_ epistle ascribed to Clement is not mentioned by any of
the fathers before Eusebius, who speaks of it doubtingiy: "But it should
be known that there is said to be also a certain second epistle of
Clement. But it is clear to us that this is not equally known with the
first, for we know that the ancients have not made use of it." Hist.
Eccles. 3. 38. It is generally acknowledged to be spurious, and is,
perhaps, as Hefele suggests, one of the homilies falsely ascribed to
Clement. With this supposition its contents well agree; for it does not
seem to have, like the first, a definite end to accomplish. It opens
with a general exhortation that the Corinthians should think worthily of
Christ in view of the great work which he has wrought in their behalf,
and urges upon them a steadfast confession of him before men, not by
empty words, but by a life of holy obedience. It sets before them the
incompatibility of the service of God and mammon, and dwells with
especial earnestness on the high rewards of eternity in comparison with
the pleasures and pains of the present life; as if the writer had in
mind those who were exposed to the double peril of substituting an empty
profession for the living spirit of obedience, and of apostatizing from
Christ through fear of persecution and martyrdom.
5. Besides the above, there is a mass of writings current in ancient
days under the name of Clement which are acknowledged by all to be
spurious. Among these are: The _Recognitions of Clement_; The
_Clementines_, or, according to the Greek title, _Clement's Epitome of
Peter's Discourses in Travel_; _Clement's Epitome concerning the Acts
and Discourses of Peter in Travel_--three forms of substantially the
same work. It will be sufficient to give a brief notice of the
Recognitions. The author, apparently a Jew by birth and a philosopher of
the Alexandrine school, has embraced a form of Christianity mixed up
with the dogmas of his philosophy. For the purpose of attacking and
overthrowing the false religious notions of his age, he invents an
ingenious historic plot. Clement, a Roman citizen, who, as appears in
the sequel, has been separated in early life from his father, mother,
and two brothers, whom he supposes to be dead, is introduced as sending
to James, who presides over the church at Jerusalem, with an
accompanying letter, an account of his early education; his acquaintance
with the apostle Peter, who chooses him to be his companion in travel;
Peter's conversations with himself and the rest of the company; his
public addresses and acts; especially his famous encounters with Simon
Magus, whom he overthrows and puts to public shame. In the course of
their journeying they visit a certain island, where they meet with a
poor woman begging alms, who is found, upon the relation of her history,
to be the mother of Clement. Upon farther inquiry it appears that two of
Peter's company, Nicetus and Aquila, are her sons and the brothers of
Clement. Finally, Peter encounters on the sea-shore, whither he had gone
to perform for the newly discovered mother and sons the rite of baptism,
an old man who is found to be the long lost husband and father. From
these _recognitions_ the work receives its title. But this historic plot
is only the occasion of introducing the writer's theological and
philosophical opinions, with especial reference to the prevailing errors
of his day. Any page of the work is sufficient to show that Peter and
Clement had nothing to do with its composition. It cannot be placed
earlier than the close of the second or the beginning of the third
century. Prefixed to these Clementine writings, and having reference to
them, are two spurious epistles, one from Peter to James, president of
the church at Jerusalem, with the proceedings of James consequent upon
the reception of it, and one from Clement to James. These it is not
necessary to notice.
The so-called _Constitutions of Clement_ in eight books, embracing, as
their name indicates, a system of rules pertaining to church order and
discipline, were certainly not the work of Clement. It is not certain
that they had their origin as a whole in the same age; but the judgment
of learned men is that no part of them is older than the second half of
the third century. The eighty-five so-called _Apostolic Canons_ have
prefixed to them the spurious title: "Ecclesiastical Rules of the Holy
Apostles promulgated by Clement High Priest (Pontifex) of the Church of
Rome." The origin of these canons is uncertain. They first appear as a
collection with the above title in the latter part of the fifth century.
How much older some of them may be cannot be determined with certainty.
II. THE EPISTLES OF IGNATIUS.
6. _Ignatius_ was bishop of the church at Antioch, and suffered
martyrdom at Rome by exposure to wild beasts A.D. 107, or according to
some accounts, A.D. 116. Of the _fifteen_ epistles ascribed to him, it
is agreed among biblical scholars that _eight_ are spurious and of later
origin. The remaining seven are generally regarded as genuine, but the
text of these, as of all the rest, is in a very unsatisfactory
condition. There are two Greek recensions, a longer and a shorter, the
latter containing approximately the true text, though not without the
suspicion of interpolations. There is a Syriac version containing but
three of Ignatius' epistles, and these in a much reduced form (which
some are inclined to regard as the only genuine epistles); also an
Armenian version containing thirteen epistles. See further Schaff, Hist.
Chris. Church, vol. 1, pp. 469-471. As the question now stands, we may
with good reason receive as genuine the seven mentioned by Eusebius
(Hist. Eccl. 3. 36) and Jerome (De Viris illust. 16). They were all
written on his last journey to Rome; four from Smyrna, where Polycarp
was the bishop, to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, and Romans;
three after his departure from Smyrna, to the churches of Philadelphia
and Smyrna, and to Polycarp bishop of Smyrna. The native vigor and
energy of Ignatius, as also the depth and sincerity of his piety, shine
forth conspicuously in these letters; but they differ from the epistle
of Clement in the manifestation of an intense ecclesiastical spirit, by
which, indeed, they are marked as belonging to a later era of the
church. If we except the epistle to the Romans, they all abound in
exhortations to render implicit obedience to their spiritual rulers as
to Christ himself. To these precepts he adds exhortations to maintain
unity, and to avoid false doctrines, specifying particularly Judaizing
teachers and such as deny our Lord's proper humanity.
We cannot read his letter to the Romans, among whom he expected shortly
to lay down his life for Christ's sake, without deep interest. But it is
marred by the manifestation of an undue desire to obtain the crown of
martyrdom, which leads him to protest against any interposition of the
Roman brethren in his behalf. "I beseech you," says he, "show no
unseasonable good-will towards me. Suffer me to be the food of wild
beasts, by means of which I may attain to God. I am the wheat of God,
and am ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I may be found the pure
bread of God." Chap. 4. His letter to Polycarp, a fellow bishop, abounds
in precepts for the right discharge of his duties. It is interesting as
showing Ignatius' idea, on the one side, of the office with its high
responsibilities, and, on the other, of the duties which the churches
owe to those who are set over them in the Lord.
7. There are some spurious epistles ascribed to Ignatius which it is
sufficient simply to name. These are: A letter to one Maria a proselyte
of Cilicia in answer to her request that certain young men might be sent
to her people as their spiritual guides; epistles to the church of
Tarsus, of Antioch, and of Philippi--theological dissertations mostly
made up of texts of Scripture; a letter to Hero a deacon, containing
precepts for the right discharge of his office, and abounding, like
those just named, in quotations from Scripture: two pretended letters of
Ignatius to the apostle John; one to the Virgin Mary, with her reply.
Finally, there are some fragments of Ignatius' writings preserved to us
in the quotations of the ancients, which it is not necessary to notice.
III. THE EPISTLE OF POLYCARP.
8. _Polycarp_ was a disciple of the apostle John, and presided over the
church in Smyrna. He suffered martyrdom about the year 166. Of his
writings only one short epistle remains, addressed by him to the
Philippians soon after the martyrdom of Ignatius, who passed through
Smyrna on his way to Rome. This we gather from the letter itself; for in
this he assumes that Ignatius has already suffered (chap. 9), and yet he
has not heard the particulars concerning his fate and that of his
companions. Chap. 14. This brief epistle is marked by a fervor and
simplicity worthy of an apostolic man. The writer commends the
Philippians for the love manifested by them towards the suffering
servants of Christ, exhorts them to steadfastness, reminds them of
Paul's precepts in his epistle to them, and proceeds to unfold and
inculcate the duties belonging to the officers and several classes of
members in the church. The immediate occasion of the letter seems to
have been his transmission to the Philippians, in compliance with their
request, of Ignatius' epistle to himself, with such others of his
epistles as had come into his hands. Chap. 13. The preservation of the
present epistle is probably due to this its connection with the epistles
of Ignatius forwarded by him to the Philippians.
IV. THE WRITINGS OF BARNABAS AND HERMAS.
9. The writings current under the names of _Barnabas_ and _Hermas_ have
by no means the outward testimony in their favor by which the preceding
epistles of Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp are supported; nor the
inward evidence arising from the consideration of their contents. We
will consider them briefly in the order abovenamed.
10. Until recently the first part of the _Epistle of Barnabas_ existed
only in a Latin version. But in 1859 Tischendorf discovered at Mount
Sinai the Sinai Codex (Chap. 26, No. 5), which contains the entire
epistle in the original Greek. That the writer was the Barnabas
mentioned in the New Testament as the companion of Paul in preaching the
gospel, cannot be maintained on any firm basis of evidence. As to the
date of its composition learned men differ. Hefele places it between the
years 107 and 120. Apostolic Fathers, Prolegomena, p. 15.
The writer was apparently a Hellenistic Jew of the Alexandrine school,
and he wrote for the purpose of convincing his brethren, mainly from the
Old Testament, that Jesus is the Messiah, and that in him the rites of
the Mosaic law are done away. His quotations from the Old Testament are
numerous, and his method of interpretation is allegorical and sometimes
very fanciful, as in the following passage, for the right understanding
of which the reader should know that the two Greek letters [Greek: IÊ],
which stand first in the name [Greek: IÊSOUS], JESUS, and represent that
name by abbreviation, signify as numerals, the first _ten_, the second,
_eight_; also that the Greek letter [Greek: T] (the sign of the cross)
denotes as a numeral, _three hundred_. "The Scripture says," argues
Barnabas, "that Abraham circumcised of his house _three hundred and
eighteen men_. What was the knowledge communicated to him [in this
fact]? Learn first the meaning of the _eighteen_, then of the _three
hundred_. Now the numeral letters [Greek: I], _ten_, [Greek: Ê],
_eight_, make _eighteen_. Here you have _Jesus_ (Greek [Greek: IÊSOUN],
of which the abbreviation is [Greek: IÊ]). And because the cross, which
lies in the letter [Greek: T], was that which should bring grace, he
says also _three hundred_." Chap. 9. The Rabbinic system of
interpretation in which the writer was educated furnishes an
_explanation_, indeed, of this and other like puerilities, but no
_vindication_ of them.
11. The _Shepherd of Hermas_, as the work current under the name of
Hermas is called, consists of three books--his Visions, his Commands,
and his Similitudes. The four visions are received through the ministry
of an aged woman, who is the church of Christ. The twelve commands and
ten similitudes are received from one who appears to him "in the habit
of a shepherd, clothed with a white cloak, having his bag upon his back,
and his staff in his hand," whence the title The _Shepherd_ of Hermas.
All these are intended to unfold the truths of Christianity with its
doctrines and duties. The writer has a most luxuriant imagination. In
reading his books, particularly the first and the third, one sometimes
finds himself bewildered in a thicket of images and similitudes, some of
them grotesque and not altogether congruous. Yet the work throws much
light on the religious ideas and tendencies of its age.
The ancients speak doubtingly of the authority of this work. Origen,
whom Eusebius and Jerome follow, ascribes it to the Hermas mentioned in
the epistle to the Romans (chap. 16:14); though it does not appear that
he had any other ground for this than the identity of the name. The
Muratorian canon names as its author Hermas the brother of Pius bishop
of Rome. According to this, which is the more probable view, the date of
its composition would be about the middle of the second century.
V. THE APOSTLES' CREED.
12. We put this among the remains of the apostolic fathers, not because
there is any doubt as to its containing the substance of the doctrines
taught by the apostles, but because, as is generally admitted, it did
not receive its present form at their hand. "Though not traceable in its
present shape before the third century, and found in the second in
different longer or shorter forms, it is in substance altogether
apostolic, and exhibits an incomparable summary of the leading facts in
the revelation of the triune God from the creation of the world to the
resurrection of the body; and that in a form intelligible to all, and
admirably suited for public worship and catechetical use." Schaff, Hist.
Chris. Church, pp. 121, 122.
VI. APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS AND ACTS.
13. These are very numerous. Under the head of Apocryphal Gospels.
Tischendorf has published twenty-two works; under that of Apocryphal
Acts of the Apostles, thirteen. To the student of church history they
are not without value; for they illustrate the origin of many ancient
traditions and some ritual observances. But if we look to their
intrinsic character, they may be described as a mass of worthless
legends abounding in absurd and puerile stories. The contrast between
the miracles which they relate and the true miracles recorded in the
canonical gospels and Acts is immense, and such as makes the darkness of
these spurious writings more visible. The miracles of the canonical
books have always a worthy occasion, and are connected with the
Saviour's work of redemption. But the pretended miracles of the
apocryphal writings are, as a general rule, wrought on trivial
occasions, with either no end in view but the display of supernatural
power, or with a positively unlawful end, whence it not unfrequently
happens that their impiety rivals their absurdity. Many samples of both
these characters could be given, but the general reader may well remain
ignorant of them.
PRINCIPLES OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION.
* * * * *