be apparent on comparing them with one another. Jesus, having in ve. 16, by the words "I Jesus," emphatically avouched himself to be the testifier of 'the things' contained in the book (and which concern the Church of all time), in ve. 18 returns from his digression; and, in order to connect closely with his first declaration that, which he is about to make as a safeguard against corrupting the testimony, he takes up again the thread of his discourse by repeating the word I testify, which he had used as the emphatic word of the sentence in ve. 16. It was because the testimony proceeded from him, and concerned the Church of all time, that such a protective statement as that which follows, was rendered proper and necessary. Besides, in the case of a book numerically and stichoically arranged in the way that this is, a special reason would exist for such a conservative declaration; inasmuch as the smallest addition or omission might suffice to throw out the whole arrangement. These reasons will better and more naturally account for the insertion of the warning, which the word before us introduces, than the hypothesis of Stuart (which, by the bye, has nothing to rest upon), that there was a special proneness 'to tamper with such books in the region, where the Apocalypse was published.' And it must be admitted, that a declaration, so solemnly appended as a parting word, needs to be accounted for; since, as Stuart says, 'there is something not perfectly natural in the severity of the interdict before us.' Precedents, however, for such a caution may be found in De. 4; 2: 12; 32: Pr. 30; 5, 6.-Hengstenberg asserts, that no one, who has discerned the spirit of this book, will for a moment doubt, that such additions and omissions as belong to the proper kernel of the book, and to which a clew may be found by comparing C. 2; 10, 20: Is. 5; 19: 2 Pe. 3; 4: 2 Ti. 2; 17, are here referred to.' For my part I must submit to be reckoned by him among the number of those, who have not discerned the spirit of the book; for I can see no grounds for entertaining such an opinion.To every one who heareth. In C. 1; 3 two terms, hear and read, are used. In this place the preference is given to the former, in consequence of the hearers being necessarily far more numerous than the readers, owing to the paucity of manuscript copies, and the comparatively small number of persons, that could read. Of course, no contrast between hearers and readers is intended; but we are to understand the latter, as being included in the former. In the use of the term hear, we may see another indication of immediate reference to the time then current.

1606. The words of the prophecy of this roll. This phrase and the similar one (the words of the roll of this prophecy) in 1611, the these things in 1607, and this roll in 1609 and 1615, may be supposed, at first sight, to have all the same meaning. But a closer inspection

will show, that there are indications to the contrary. Thus, the arrangement of the words in the two first is not identical. In the genuine text of the third the pronoun, which expresses these things, is not (as might have been expected) put in the gender, that would have made it refer to the words in the preceding clause, but in that, which refers it to the things spoken of in ve. 16. Again, the roll cannot be precisely identical with the prophecy contained in it. What, then, do the several terms and phrases mean? 1. The roll is that, which John sent to the seven churches in obedience to the command given to him in C. 1; 11, and which contained the epistle (1; 4, cp. 22; 21), in which the revelation-proper was sent. In short, it was the Apocalyptic roll. And strange it is, in so self-evident a case, that the interdict before us should be commonly cited as referring to the whole Bible, as though it were the book intended, or could possibly have been at a time, when the Scriptures contained in it were not collected into a volume. 2. The prophecy is, properly, the inspired matter contained in the roll. Hence the roll and the prophecy are not strictly identical; though they are so closely connected, that, when strict accuracy was not required, the terms might be used interchangeably. 3. The words of the prophecy of this roll (22; 7, 10, 18) may be taken to be equivalent to the words of this prophetic roll. So that this phrase, the roll (1; 11: 22; 18, 19), the prophecy (19; 10), the words of this roll (22; 9), and the words of this prophecy (1; 3), may be considered to be in the main identical in meaning, all virtually denoting the Apocalypse. The two remaining phrases, while they may have the same general meaning, seem to have a specialty of signification assigned to them. 4. These things (cp. ve. 16) appears to have specially in view the things about to happen, after those now occurring,' of C. 1; 19 and 4; 1. 5. Again, the phrase in ve. 19, corresponding to the one before us, may be thought to have had the arrangement of its terms varied expressly for the purpose of signifying, that it is the roll of the prophecy,' that is to say, the predictive portion of the Apocalyptic roll, that is specially meant. If so, this phrase will be substantially identical with that last noticed. The chief result I will hereafter exhibit in a collation of the two parts of this interdict. At present, I will only further call attention to the additional instance of parallelism between the Introduction and the Conclusion, which appears in the distribution between them of the four examples of the clause before us.

1607-8. God shall add... God shall take away. Jesus alone could be justified in speaking thus.

1609. The plagues, sc. 'those, in which the wrath of God attains its end' in the due punishment of the offending party.-Codex B, seven cursives, and some versions have 'the seven plagues.'

XXII; 19. 1610-13. And if any one .. his part, &c. Far from having "part in the first resurrection," his portion shall be with the liars (this being a species of lie), who have their part in the lake of fire.' "God shall appoint him a portion with the unbelievers." "This shall be the portion of his cup.'-From the wood of life. This reading is better accredited than that of the R. T.; and the circumstance of the wood and the city having been mentioned together just before (ve. 14) gives additional probability to it. As "the plagues," by which the great city Babylon was desolated and destroyed were doubtless had in view in ve. 18, so the blessings, which are to be found in, and which form the crowning glory of the holy city, new Jerusalem, are implied in the wood of life.

1614. And from the holy city. The wood of life and the holy city were blessings promised (2; 7: 3; 12) to the conquerors of the beast in the seven churches (i.e., in the Catholic Church of John's time primarily). And they are finally exhibited in Cs. 21-22, as being the consummating privileges and blessings of earth. Whence it may be inferred, that the things signified in Cs. 2-3 and in Cs. 21-22; 6 are substantially the same, the Church of Christ on earth being represented in both places, only under different aspects, and at different stages and epochs.

1615. The things written in this roll. In consequence of the unauthorized insertion of the copulative in the R. T., the things here spoken of are made in the A. V. to be distinct from, and additional to the roll and the city; whereas these are in point of fact the things spoken of. The view to be taken is this. To the plagues' (ve. 18) would have corresponded naturally in ve. 19' the blessings written;' but, instead of the indefinite term 'blessings,' a symbolical specification of them has been substituted, And the reason for this seems to be obvious. The term 'plagues' would in itself be sufficient to indicate, that such plagues as the seven last plagues, by which the great city Babylon was to be destroyed, were intended. But in order to bring out the parallelism of reference to the holy city, new Jerusalem, something more definite than the term 'blessings' was required.

The threat contained in the two verses last considered has been deemed to be 'severe,' and disproportioned to the offence. But this can appear to be the case, only when a too literalizing principle of interpretation is adopted. The principle followed throughout the book ought, in a degree proportioned to the character of the passage as a whole, to be adhered to here. This will require, that we take the terms used in the same wide and quasi figurative sense here as in similar places, and that we look rather at the gist of the passage as a whole, than interpret it in its several details. The passage itself, by

the alliterative form into which it is thrown, indicates, that this is the right view to take of it. Construing it on this principle, we shall merely gather the following, as being its general purport in literal terms:-God will assign a due measure of punishment to any one, who in any way wilfully corrupts this book.

Vv. 18-19 contain the last words of the Mediator Jesus; and it must be superfluous to point out how appropriate they are, as a termination (excepting John's final prayer) of the Conclusion.

DIV. 7. JOHN'S FINAL COMMUNICATION AND PRAYER.

XXII; 20. 1616-18. He who testifieth these things saith; 'Yea, I am coming speedily: Amen.' Come, Lord Jesus!

1616. He who testifieth. The change to the third person indicates a change in the person, from whom this verse proceeds; and I think there can be little doubt, that John (by inspiration) adds one more word of his own, in order, by a fourth repetition in this Conclusion of the Lord's own assurance of his speedy coming, to inspire those, who were suffering for the truth's sake, with hope and consolation. He who testifieth is, of course, Christ. And what he testifieth is the REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST," but with so especial a view to the things, which must shortly come to pass," that these may be, and occasionally are put for the whole (1; 1). Whence we see, what we must understand by the these things; and, that we must not refer the expression to the sayings just uttered.

1617. Yea, I am coming speedily: Amen.' That I have done right in not following commentators in connecting the Amen with the clause that follows it, and in attaching it to this, may, I think, be satisfactorily shown. 1. Yea: Amen is the most emphatic Hebrew expression for affirming, that a thing is unalterably fixed, and will inevitably happen. See 2 Co. 1; 17-20; 'When I was thus minded, did I use lightness, that with me there should be the yea yea, and the nay nay? . . . For the Son of God . . . was not made yea and nay, but hath been made yea in him. For all the promises of God have in him the yea [which seals their truth], and in him the amen' [which seals their unchangeableness]; that is, they have the highest possible attestation given to them; and they may, therefore, in the fullest manner be relied upon. See also Mt. 5; 37, where the command is given, that a Christian man must not go beyond a double yea or nay. Now, as the intention here manifestly is to give the strongest possible attestation to the declaration made, the connexion which I have indicated must be adopted. 2. This is confirmed by C. 1; 7, which contains a declaration, to which the one under consideration is doubtless intended to form a parallel; and in which, moreover, the two terms appear together:-" Lo, he cometh,

6

&c. Yea: Amen." Thus we have at the end of the general Introduction, and at the end of the Conclusion, statements precisely parallel (the one presenting the Lord's coming in the aspect, in which it will be regarded by his enemies, and the other in that, in which it will be viewed by his saints); and both are avouched by the two immutable words, after which it is impossible for God to lie.' If there be any difference arising from the varied allocation of the words in the two texts, it would seem, that the placing one before, and the other after the declaration to be attested by them, gives additional force to the attestation. The affirmation of his coming is then as it were encircled by the immutability of Jehovah. The kernel of the statement, that in which his elect are supremely interested, is defended on every side by an impenetrable and indestructible shell. The assurance of his speedy coming is made to appear so infallible, that the Sun of righteousness may be said to be seen as it were to be actually making his appearance in the heavens, the rays which encircle him leaving no doubt as to either the fact or the person. 3. We have, in like manner, found the Amen placed at the beginning and the end of a statement for double attestation (7; 12). Moreover, in four places the single Amen of immutability, and in three the single yea of truth occurs. But it is only at the beginning and the end of the book, and in reference to the advent, that the YEA: AMEN is introduced; and then it is uttered by him, who is designated "the AMEN, the faithful and true testifier" (3; 14), "the God of truth" (Heb., the amen God: Is. 65; 16). What more could be said? Or could it have been made more clearly evident, that the grand and primary object of the revelation was to comfort and sustain Christians of the time then present, under their sufferings for his name's sake?-Here let me take occasion to remark generally, in reference to the word Amen, that it invariably affirms the truth, certainty, or unchangeableness of that, to which it is prefixed or affixed, and never signifies "So be it," so as to constitute a prayer. It is remarkable, that, except as a concluding term of confirmation, it is found in the N. T. only in the words of our Lord; "Amen I say unto you." And still more singular is it, that, while he is reported by the first three Evangelists to have always used the word singly, he is represented by S. John as invariably doubling it. It is further worthy of notice, that the above phrase is reported in four times seven places of S. Matthew, in twice seven of S. Mark, in seven of S. Luke; and it may be reckoned to occur seven times seven in S. John's Gospel; for the phrase is found in twenty-five places, and, the term being doubled in each, gives the Jubilee-number, which was so reckoned. In Romans, again, it is inserted seven times, as a concluding word of attestation, thus dividing the epistle into seven parts.