Images de page
PDF
ePub

Paul's departure from Corinth was in the early part of the year, as is evident from the purpose of his journey being named: he wished by all means to keep the approaching passover at Jerusa lem, v. 21. After being at Jerusalem he went to Antioch, where he spent some time, and then went over Galatia and Phrygia, and having thus passed through the upper coasts, came again to Ephesus (xix. 1). How long he stayed at Antioch after he had gone from Cesarea to Jerusalem and come thence to Antioch, is not stated, nor how long he was in passing through Galatia and Phrygia; but it seems obvious enough that all this was within a few months, for his journey was not intended to be lengthened, as is plain from his leaving Aquila and Priscilla at Ephesus, with a promise that he would return again (v. 21). Having returned accordingly, his whole stay there on this second visit was, as has been noticed, three months (xix. 8.) and two years (v.9): nor did any farther time elapse before his departure for Macedonia; for the particulars related respecting the vagabond exorcists, the burning of foolish magical books, and the pretendedly religious uproar of Demetrius and his fellow craftsmen, though related after the duration of Paul's stay, belong to the same period. And, therefore, the whole time intervening between Paul's departure from Athens, and his subsequent departure

from Ephesus, could hardly exceed four years, if it were even so much. The Bible chronology places Paul's visit to Corinth in A. D. 54,Macknight, Hales, and some others, with more reason, in the year 51. If to this date we add two of the above four years, this will bring us to the year 53, as that in which the believing Ephesians were put into full church order by Paul himself;—so that it is not impossible that, before the death of Claudius, this church might have so failed in love as to deserve the reproof given in Rev. ii. 1.-" What!" an objector may say, "while Paul himself was residing at Ephe"sus? for, if his visit to Corinth was not earlier "than the year 51, he must have been in that "city when the Apocalyptic Epistle was sent "to the Ephesians-if sent in the reign of Clau"dius." And why should this be impossible? Did not the conduct of all the churches, very soon after they were established, call for reproof?—and were they not reproved in the different Epistles of the New Testament, by the Apostles who founded them?—This naturally leads to the examination of another, and, indeed, what those who employ the argument consider as the principal objection against an early date to the Apocalypse:

[ocr errors]

"It appears," say they," from the book it"self, that there had been already churches for

"a considerable time in Asia: for as much as "St. John, in the name of Christ, reproaches "faults that happen not but after a while. The "church of Ephesus had left her first love. That "of Sardis had a name to live, but was dead. The "church of Laodicea was become lukewarm." In brief, it has been objected that the state of the churches in Asia, in the reign of Nero, was different from that described in the second and third chapter of the Apocalypse; and, therefore, the Revelation could not have been delivered to John so early as that reign, and still less in that of his predecessor. To this it has been answered, "What the state of the churches was "in the reign of Nero, can best be decided from "the writings of the Apostles; for all their

[ocr errors]

epistles were written during the reigns of CLAU"DIUS and NERO...... The state of the churches 66 as described in the Revelation is as follows: "The church of Ephesus is commended for "her sufferings for the name of Christ, for her patience, for her unweariness in tribulation. She "would not bear the wicked, and discovered those "that were false apostles; she hated the Nico"laitans, whom the Lord hated also; but is charged with having departed from love and

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

charity, and is therefore called unto repentance. "The church of Smyrna was pure, only pes

"tered with false apostles. The church of Per

"gamos [held fast the name of Christ and his faith

66

but] had such as held the doctrine of Balaam, "seducing the people to eat such things as were "sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication; "and had also such as adhered to the doctrine of "the Nicolaitans.-The church of Thyatira is "praised [for charity, service, faith, patience, and

66

good works], but at the same time there was fault "found with some of the congregation, for suffer"ing the woman Jezebel to teach and seduce "the people to fornication, and to eat things "sacrificed to idols.-The church of Sardis is

66

greatly reproved, for having the name of being "Christians while spiritually dead; [but even "in her there were a few names who had not de'filed their garments].-The church of Philadelphia was pure, and nothing laid to her

66

66

૯૯

[ocr errors]

"charge. The church of Laodicea was found "lukewarm.

"If we read the Epistles of the Apostles, we "find the churches in general pestered with all "these evils. St. PAUL wrote to the Corinthians "about eating those things which were sacrificed to "idols; St. PETER writes against those that held "the doctrine of Balaam. St. JUDE did the same. "St. JAMES, greatly incensed against those whose "faith was mere words, and their deeds wicked, "means the Nicolaitans, who afterwards took

[ocr errors][merged small]

"that is, of wise men. And the false apostles "made their appearance every where, and were complained of by all the Apostles. Love and

66

66

charity slackened in many churches; witness "ch. xiii. of the 2d Epist. to the Corinthians, and "the whole 1st Epistle of JOHN . . . . . . The "2d Epistle of PAUL to TIMOTHY, who was "then bishop of Ephesus, which was wrote in "the year 67 ..... is full of complaints against “wicked Christians; and he mentions the names "of several of them, who were of the churches "of Asia-DEMAS, ALEXANDER the smith, HERMOGENES, PHILETUS, and others......These "evils were all in the churches when the Apos"tles wrote their epistles; and they were all "wrote during the reigns of CLAUDIUS and NERO. "Who then will say, that the state of the churches "in Asia, in the reign of NERO, was different "from that described in the Revelation?"

66

The objection to an early date, founded on the state of the churches in Asia at the time when the Apocalypse was written, and which has been met in the manner just quoted, has since been urged by Mr. Woodhouse (in his Dissertation prefixed to The Apocalypse Translated') as strenuously as if it had never been before proposed or answered. As he is the last writer, I

"Bachmair on the Revelation.

« PrécédentContinuer »