Historicist interpretations of the Book of Revelation
Christian eschatology |
---|
Christianity portal |
Historicism is a method of interpretation in Christian eschatology which associates biblical prophecies with actual historical events and identifies symbolic beings with historical persons or societies; it has been applied to the Book of Revelation by many writers. The Historicist view follows a straight line of continuous fulfillment of prophecy which starts in Daniel's time and goes through John of Patmos' writing of the Book of Revelation all the way to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.[1]
One of the most influential aspects of the early Protestant historicist paradigm was the assertion that scriptural identifiers of the Antichrist were matched only by the institution of the Papacy. Particular significance and concern were the Papal claims of authority over the Church through Apostolic Succession, and the State through the Divine Right of Kings. When the Papacy aspires to exercise authority beyond its religious realm into civil affairs, on account of the Papal claim to be the Vicar of Christ, then the institution was fulfilling the more perilous biblical indicators of the Antichrist. Martin Luther wrote this view into the Smalcald Articles of 1537; this view was not novel and had been leveled at various popes throughout the centuries, even by Roman Catholic saints.[2] It was then widely popularized in the 16th century, via sermons, drama, books, and broadside publication.[3] The alternate methods of prophetic interpretation, Futurism and Preterism were derived from Jesuit writings, whose counter-reformation efforts were aimed at opposing this interpretation[4][5][6][7] that the Antichrist was the Papacy or the power of the Roman Catholic Church.[8]
Origins in Judaism and Early Church
The interpreters using the historicist approach for the Book of Revelation had their origins in the Jewish apocalyptic writings, such as those in the Book of Daniel, which predicted the future time between their writing and the end of the world. Throughout most of history since the predictions of the book of Daniel, historicism has been widely used. This approach can be found in the works of Josephus, who interpreted the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 as the Roman empire with a future power as the stone "not cut by human hands", that would overthrow the Romans.[9] It is also found in the early church in the works of Irenaeus and Tertullian, who interpreted the fourth kingdom of Daniel as the Roman empire and believed that in the future it was going to be broken up into smaller kingdoms, as the iron mixed with clay,[10] and in the writings of Clement of Alexandria and Jerome,[11] as well as other well-known church historians and scholars of the early church. But it has been associated particularly with Protestantism and the Reformation. It was the standard interpretation of the Lollard movement, which was regarded as the precursor to the Protestant Reformation, and it was known as the Protestant interpretation until modern times.
Antichrist
Church Fathers
The
Protestant view of the Papacy as the Antichrist
The Protestant Reformers tended to believe that the Antichrist power would be revealed so that everyone would comprehend and recognize that the Pope is the real, true Antichrist and not the vicar of Christ. Doctrinal works of literature published by the
In calling the pope the "Antichrist", the early
The identification of the Pope with the Antichrist was so ingrained in the
"This teaching [of the supremacy of the pope] shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ, because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God".[32]
and,
"nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of the very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny."[33]
John Calvin similarly wrote:
"Though it be admitted that Rome was once the mother of all Churches, yet from the time when it began to be the seat of Antichrist it has ceased to be what it was before. Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt .. I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in
II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy."[34]
John Knox wrote on the Pope:
"Yea, to speak it in plain words; lest that we submit ourselves to Satan, thinking that we submit ourselves to Jesus Christ, for, as for your Roman kirk, as it is now corrupted, and the authority thereof, whereon stands the hope of your victory, I no more doubt but that it is the synagogue of Satan, and the head thereof, called the pope, to be that man of sin, of whom the apostle speaks."[35]
Thomas Cranmer on the Antichrist wrote:
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons."[36]
John Wesley, speaking of the identity given in the Bible of the Antichrist, wrote:
"In many respects, the Pope has an indisputable claim to those titles. He is, in an emphatical sense, the man of sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled, the son of perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers, destroyed innumerable souls, and will himself perish everlastingly. He it is that opposeth himself to the emperor, once his rightful sovereign; and that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped – Commanding angels, and putting kings under his feet, both of whom are called gods in scripture; claiming the highest power, the highest honour; suffering himself, not once only, to be styled God or vice-God. Indeed no less is implied in his ordinary title, "Most Holy Lord," or, "Most Holy Father." So that he sitteth – Enthroned. In the temple of God – Mentioned Rev. xi, 1. Declaring himself that he is God – Claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone."[37]
Roger Williams wrote about the Pope:
"the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself ... speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the Son of Perdition."[38]
The identification of the Roman Catholic Church as the apostate power written of in the Bible as the Antichrist became evident to many as the Reformation began, including John Wycliffe, who was well-known throughout Europe for his opposition to the doctrine and practices of the Catholic Church, which he believed had clearly deviated from the original teachings of the early Church and to be contrary to the Bible. Wycliffe himself tells (Sermones, III. 199) how he concluded that there was a great contrast between what the Church was and what it ought to be, and saw the necessity for reform. Along with John Hus, they had started the inclination toward ecclesiastical reforms of the Catholic Church.
When the
The
In 1870, the newly formed
Today, many Protestant and
There are two principles that mark the papacy as the Antichrist. One is that
antichristian rule in the church. All popes hold the same office over the church and promote the same antichristian belief so they all are part of the reign of the Antichrist. The Bible does not present the Antichrist as one man for one short time, but as an office held by a man through successive generations. It is a title like King of England.[57]
Other views
Some
Some of the debated features of the Reformation's Historicist interpretations reached beyond the Book of Revelation. They included the identification of:
- the Antichrist (1 and 2 John);
- the Beast of Revelation 13;
- the 2 Thessalonians 2 (2:1–12);
- the "Little horn" of Daniel 7 and 8;
- The 12; and
- the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17.
Seven churches
The non-separatist
- The age of apostolic age.
- The age of Smyrna is the persecution of the Church through AD 313.
- The age of Pergamus is the compromised Church lasting until AD 500.
- The age of papacy to the Reformation.
- The age of Sardis is the age of the Reformation.
- The age of Philadelphia is the age of evangelism.
- The age of Laodicea is liberal churches in a "present day" context.
The age of Laodicea is typically identified as occurring in the same time period as the expositor. Brightman viewed the age of Laodicea as the England of his day. In the Millerite movement, each church represented a dateable period of ecclesiastical history. Thus, William Miller dated the age of Laodicea from 1798–1843, followed by the End of days in 1844.[60]
The Roman Catholic priest Fr. E. Berry in his commentary writes: "The seven candlesticks represent the seven churches of Asia. As noted above, seven is the perfect number which denotes universality. Hence by extension the seven candlesticks represent all churches throughout the world for all time. Gold signifies the charity of Christ which pervades and vivifies the Church."[61]
Seven seals
The traditional historicist view of the Seven Seals spanned the time period from
Seventh-day Adventists view the first six seals as representing events that took place during the Christian era up until 1844.[64] Contemporary-historicists view all of Revelation as it relates to John's own time, with the allowance of making some guesses about the future.[65]
Seven trumpets
The classical historicist identifies the first four trumpets with the pagan invasions of Western Christendom in the 5th century AD (by the Visigoths, Vandals, Huns, and Heruli), while the fifth and sixth trumpets have been identified with the assault on Eastern Christendom by the Saracen armies and Turks during the Middle Ages.[66][page needed][67] The symbolism of Revelation 6:12–13 is said by Adventists to have been fulfilled in the 1755 Lisbon earthquake, the dark day of 19 May 1780, and the Leonids meteor shower of 13 November 1833.[64]
Vision of Chapter 10
The classical historicist view of the vision of the angel with the little book, in Revelation 10, represents the
Two witnesses
The classical historicist view takes a number of different perspectives, including that the
Beasts of Revelation
The historicist views of Revelation 12–13 concern prophecies about the forces of evil viewed to have occurred in the
In 1798, the French General
Adventists believe that the second beast (from the earth) symbolizes the
Number of the Beast
Adventists have interpreted the number of the beast, 666, as corresponding to the title Vicarius Filii Dei of the Pope. In 1866, Uriah Smith was the first to propose the interpretation to the Seventh-day Adventist Church.[71] In The United States in the Light of Prophecy, he wrote:
The pope wears upon his pontifical crown in jeweled letters, this title: "Vicarius Filii Dei," "Viceregent of the Son of God;" [sic] the numerical value of which title is just six hundred and sixty-six. The most plausible supposition we have ever seen on this point is that here we find the number in question. It is the number of the beast, the papacy; it is the number of his name, for he adopts it as his distinctive title; it is the number of a man, for he who bears it is the "man of sin."[72]
Prominent Adventist scholar J. N. Andrews also adopted this view.[73] Uriah Smith maintained his interpretation in the various editions of Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation, which was influential in the church.[74]
Various documents from the Vatican contain wording such as "Adorandi Dei Filii Vicarius, et Procurator quibus numen aeternum summam Ecclesiae sanctae dedit",[75] which translates to "As the worshipful Son of God's Vicar and Caretaker, to whom the eternal divine will has given the highest rank of the holy Church".
The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, and Adventists used Roman numerals to calculate the value of "Vicarius Filii Dei" whose word is in Latin language. "Vicarius Filii Dei" is Latin, and it does not exist in the New Testament, which was written in Koine Greek.
We noted that contrary to some Catholic sources who deny the use of Vicarius Filii Dei as a papal title, we have found this title to have been used in official Catholic documents to support the ecclesiastical authority and temporal sovereignty of the pope. Thus the charge that Adventists fabricated the title to support their prophetic interpretation of 666, is unfair and untrue.[79]
However, Bacchiocchi's general conclusion regarding the interpretation of Vicarius Filii Dei is that he, together with many current Adventist scholars,[80][81][82] refrains from using only the calculation of papal names for the number 666:
The meaning of 666 is to be found not in the name or titles of influential people, but in its symbolic meaning of rebellion against God manifested in false worship. ... the true meaning of 666 is to be found not in external markings or on a pope's title, but in the allegiance to false worship promoted by satanic agencies represented by the dragon, the sea-beast, and the land beast.[79]
Commentaries
Notable and influential commentaries by Protestant scholars having historicist views of the Book of Revelation were:
- Clavis Apocalyptica (1627), a commentary on The Apocalypse by Joseph Mede.[83]
- Anacrisis Apocalypseos (1705), a commentary on The Apocalypse by Campegius Vitringa.[84]
- Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (1720), a commentary on The Apocalypse by Charles Daubuz.[85]
- Alexander Keith.[86]
- Horae Apocalypticae (1837), a commentary on The Apocalypse by Rev. Edward Bishop Elliott.[87]
- Rev. Dr. Keith, in reply to his strictures on the "Horae apocalypticae" by Rev. Edward Bishop Elliott.[88]
- Lectures on the Apocalypse (1848), a commentary on The Apocalypse by Christopher Wordsworth.[89]
- The Final Prophecy of Jesus (2007), An Historicist Introduction, Analysis, and Commentary on the Book of Revelation by Oral E. Collins, Ph.D.[90]
See also
- Abomination of Desolation
- Apocalypticism
- Book of Daniel
- Christian eschatology
- Judgment day
- Prophecy of Seventy Weeks
- Whore of Babylon
- 2300 day prophecy
- Historicist interpretations of the Book of Daniel
Notes
- ^ History of the Church of God, pp. 252, 253 (1876)
- ISBN 9780809130405.
- ISBN 978-0-945636-29-8.
- ^ "Jesuit scholarship rallied to the Roman cause by providing two plausible alternatives to the historical interpretation of the Protestants. 1. Luis de Alcazar (1554-1630) of Seville, Spain, devised what became known as the 'preterist' system of prophetic interpretation. This theory proposed that the Revelation deals with events in the Pagan Roman Empire, that antichrist refers to Nero and that the prophecies were therefore fulfilled long before the time of the medieval church. Alcazar's preterist system has never made any impact on the conservative, or evangelical wing of the Protestant movement, although in the last one hundred years it has become popular among Protestant rationalists and liberals. 2. A far more successful attack was taken by Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) of Salamanca, Spain. He was the founder of the 'futurist' system of prophetic interpretation. Instead of placing antichrist way in the past as did Alcazar, Ribera argues that antichrist would appear way in the future. About 1590 Ribera published a five hundred page commentary on the Apocalypse, denying the Protestant application of antichrist to the church of Rome." M.L. Moser, Jr., An Apologetic of Premillennialism, p.27
- ^ M.L. Moser, Jr., An Apologetic of Premillennialism, pp.26, 27.
- ^ H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation From the Standpoint of Prophecy, p. 268 (1887)
- ^ Rev. Joseph Tanner, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 16, 17.
- ^ The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4 [4BC], 42.)
- ^ Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 10:10, in William Whiston, trans., The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1988), pages = 280; cf. Froom 1:199.
- ^ Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 5, chap. 26, in Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., Ante-Nicene Fathers (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1885 [reprint 1989]), 1:554Ð555; cf. Froom 1:244Ð245, pages = 407.
- ^ Gleason L. Archer, trans., Jerome's Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958), 32
- ISBN 9780802807328– via Google Books.
- ISBN 978-0-8006-3735-4
- ^ HIC OSCULA PEDIBUS PAPAE FIGUNTUR
- ^ "Nicht Bapst: nicht schreck uns mit deim ban, Und sey nicht so zorniger man. Wir thun sonst ein gegen wehre, Und zeigen dirs Bel vedere"
- ^ Mark U. Edwards, Jr., Luther's Last Battles: Politics And Polemics 1531-46 (2004), p. 199
- ^ Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 32, in Ante-Nic. Fath. I:210.
- ^ Against Heresies, III: 7:2, in Ante-Nic. Fath. Ib., V:30:3-4.
- ^ Against Marcion, V:16, in Ante-Nic. Fath. III:463f.
- ^ Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, chs. 25 to 63, in Ante-Nic. Fath. V:209-18.
- ^ Fragments from Commentaries, 2:1-3, in Ante-Nic. Fath. V:178.
- ^ The Deposition of Arius, paras. 2 & 4, in Nic. & Post-Nic. Fath., 2nd Ser., IV:69.
- ^ Jerome, Commentary on Daniel 2:40, as found in Gleason L. Archer, trans., Jerome's Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958), 32; cf. Froom 1:442Ð443.
- ^ Clarke, Adam. Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. IV, p. 596.
- ^ ISBN 9780511495847.
- ^ ISBN 0-8091-3040-8.
- ^ Froom 1948, pp. 244–45: "The reformers were unanimous in its acceptance. And it was this interpretation of prophecy that lent emphasis to their reformatory action. It led them to protest against Rome with extraordinary strength and undaunted courage. [...] This was the rallying point and the battle cry that made the Reformation unconquerable."
- ^ "Smalcald Articles – Book of Concord". 8 November 2019. Archived from the original on 10 October 2008. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
- ^ Philip Melanchthon, Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope (full text Archived 2008-10-10 at the Wayback Machine) in the Triglot translation of the Book of Concord.
- ^ Archived copy at the Library of Congress (May 8, 2009).
- ^ "UMC.org : the official online ministry of The United Methodist Church".
- ^ Smalcald Articles, II.
- ^ Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196–197.
- ^ John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 3, p. 149.
- ^ John Knox, The History of the Reformation in Scotland, p. 65.
- ^ Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.
- ^ John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, p. 216.
- ^ Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, p. 52.
- ^ Principle Works of Zwingli, Vol. 7, p. 135.
- ^ Tyndale, William, Parable of the Wicked Mammon, c. 1526, (facsimile copy of later printing, no ISBN, Benediction Classics, 2008) at pages 4-5.
- ^ "Tyndale's Doctrine of Antichrist and His Translation of 2 Thessalonians 2", R. Davis, New Matthew Bible Project; a shorter version of this article was also published in the Tyndale Society Journal No. 36, Spring 2009, under the title Tyndale, the Church, and the Doctrine of Antichrist).
- ^ ISBN 0-8386-3988-7.
We reject the idea that the teaching that the Papacy is the Antichrist rests on a merely human interpretation of history or is an open question. We hold rather that this teaching rests on the revelation of God in Scripture which finds its fulfillment in history. The Holy Spirit reveals this fulfillment to the eyes of faith (cf. The Abiding Word, Vol. 2, p. 764). Since Scripture teaches that the Antichrist would be revealed and gives the marks by which the Antichrist is to be recognized (2 Thessalonians 2:6–8), and since this prophecy has been clearly fulfilled in the history and development of the Roman Papacy, it is the Scripture which reveals that the Papacy is the Antichrist.
joseph mede The Key to the Apocalypse.
editions:0Jd_1u5XcTyztj.
Works cited
- Eijnatten, Joris van (2003). Liberty and concord in the United Provinces: religious toleration and the public in the eighteenth-century Netherlands. Leiden: Brill. pp. 84–5. ISBN 978-90-04-12843-9.
- Froom, Le Roy Edwin (1948). Pre-Reformation and Reformation Restoration, and Second Departure (PDF). The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation. Vol. 2. Washington, DC: The Review and Herald Publishing Association.
- Newport, Kenneth G. C. (2000-08-28). Apocalypse and millennium : studies in biblical eisegesis. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 978-0-521-77334-8.
- Nichol, Francis D (1980), Bible commentary, SDA.