by some and doubted by others, especially among the Greeks, it was still received by far the larger part of the church. And from the tenor of the foregoing narrative, it will be seen at once that the hesitation which in a few instances arose with regard to its authenticity originated in polemical motives, and ought not therefore to impair in the least the historical evidence afforded by its general reception among the Christians previously to the year 200.” I From the above it will be perceived that the weight of the historical testimony preponderates greatly in favor of the apostolical origin of the Apocalypse. It seems quite impossible to account for the testimonies quoted from the above-named Christian fathers, without supposing that it is a divine book, and that it was written by the apostle John. In giving the result of the historical testimony, Prof. Stuart says, “If we include in this what the book says of the author, as has been done above, we find a series of testimony and tradition, occasionally called in question, or opposed by few indeed, and but for a little time, until we come down to the latter part of the fourth century. Of the second century, Papias, Justin Martyr, Melito of Sardis, Apollonius, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Tertullian, Irenaeus, are leading witnesses. In the third, Methodius, Hippolytus, the Epistle of the Romish Clergy to Cyprian in 250, Victorinus Petavionensis, Commodianus, Cyprian, Origen, Nepos, all testify in its favor. In the fourth century, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Epherm Syrus, Athanasius, Didymus of Alexandria, Macarius, the Donatists, the Third Council at Carthage, Prudentius, Hilary, Ambrose, Philastrius, Ruffin, Jerome, Lactantius, Julius Firmicus Maternus, and Augustine, (if we may reckon him here,) all unite in their views in favor of the Apocalypse. Some of the eastern 1 Universalist Expositor, vol. iii., pp. 211—214. INTRODUCTION. We shall consider, in this place, the following questions: First, Is the Apocalypse a Divine Book? and, By whom was it written ? IS THE APOCALYPSE A DIVINE BOOK? AND BY WHOM WAS IT WRITTEN ? I. The book claims to be of divine origin. It is said to be “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he [i. e., Jesus Christ] sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.”—Rev. i. 1, 4. This is the pretension of the book itself. John, the author, styles himself the “brother” of the churches, – their “companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus.”—See verse 9. This description certainly will apply, with much propriety, to John the apostle. The author of the book further states, that he was banished to “the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.”— Verse 9. Was it not true that the apostle John was banished to that island on account of his devotion to the Christian religion ? We shall see, as we proceed. There are but two other instances in the book in which the author mentions his name, viz., xxi. 2, and xxii. 8. In the former he was treating of the descent of the New Jerusalem, or the coming of the kingdom of God with power; and it is a well-known fact, that John the apostle lived until that time, although he had become a very old man. Jesus, when on earth, had pointed him out as the apostle who should live until his coming in his kingdom should take place. — John xxi. 23. It was appropriate, then, for the apostle, if he were the author of the book, to name himself in this connection. II. We will, in the first place, give an abstract of the testimony of antiquity to the fact that the Apocalypse was written by the apostle John. It is supposed, by some, that it was referred to by writers in the apostolic age. The shepherd of Hermas (A. D. 100) is thought to have imitated in some instances the style and sentiments of the Apocalypse; from which the conclusion may be drawn, not only that the book was then in existence, but also that it was in good credit. For what other reason could have tempted to an imitation ?' Polycarp, who was o part contemporary with the apostle John, and was constituted bishop of Smyrna (as it is supposed) by him, is thought to have received the Apocalypse as the work of the apostle. Irenaeus, a devoted disciple of Polycarp, is well known to have been a fer. vent believer in the Apocalypse as the work of the apostle; and from the devotion with which he leaned to the opinions of Poly. carp, it is believed that the latter venerable father also received it as a divine book. Prof. Stuart says: —“As Polycarp was the personal friend and attendant of John, so was Irenaeus off Polycarp. Now Irenaeus everywhere, and on all occasions, tes. tifies his full belief in the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse.' Could he have done so, if Polycarp had not believed the o And must not Polycarp have certainly known what was the y fact, in regard to the authorship of the Apocalypse 3" “Is it probable,” says Prof. Stuart again, “that Irenaeus would venture on such a point to differ from Polycarp 2 Is it probable he did not know the opinion of Polycarp in respect to the authorship of the Apocalypse ?”" But it is also said that “Polycarp has cited the Apocalypse once in the only epistle of his that has come down to our times; and that the pious and sublime prayer which this holy man uttered at the awful moment when the flames were about to be kindled around him begins with the identical words of the elders in Rev. xi. 17.” But we pass to testimony of a more undoubted character. And here, as we find an abstract well made to our hand, we avail ourself of the following extract from an article in the “Universalist Expositor,” for May, 1833. It was from the pen of the learned editor of that work. “From the language of Justin Martyr, about A. D. 160, it appears that the Revelation was then received as St. John's. He says, “A man from among us, by the name of John, one of the apostles of Christ, has prophesied, in the Revelation made to him, that the believers in Christ shall live a thousand years in Jerusalem; and after that, shall be the general or eternal resurrection and universal judgment.” Melito, bishop of Sardis, one of the seven churches addressed in the Revelation, flourished about A. D. 174. All his works are now lost; but the historian Eusebius informs us, that among those extant in his time, there was one entitled, “Of the Revelation of St. John :” a fact which sufficiently discovers the estimation in which the book was then held. In the Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienna, written about A. D. 177, it is plainly referred to as authentic Scripture : “Both the magistrates,’ say they, “and the people were vexed at the very heart, that the Scripture might be fulfilled which saith, He that is unjust, let him be unjust still ; and he 1 Stuart on the Apocalypse, p. 302. |