« PrécédentContinuer »
properly, “the Lamp.” In all the versions the supplied substantive verb “is,” or “was,” tends
" to hide the sense, converting the concluding clause into an independent and distinct proposition; whereas, in the text it is connected with the verb singular šÓticey, enlightens : that is, ó aúxvos aúrñs tò apvíov, literally, “the Lamp of her, the Lamb,” is that which enlightens her (the city) :—there is but one enlightener, and, therefore, " the splendour of the Omnipotent” (or God) which “enlightens her,” and “the Lamp of her, the Lamb,” are equivalent terms, both referring to the one source of the light by which the city is illuminated, and consequently indicating one person. To remove every ambiguity the conjunction xal should be taken in the sense of the Hebrew copulative » (vau), which frequently requires to be rendered even, to make the sentence fall in with the English idiom.
The verse when literally'rendered, in the order of the Greek, reads thus : " and the city hath no need of " the sun or of the moon to shine in her (or it); for " the splendour (or brightness) of the OMNIPO
TENT enlightens her, even the lamp of her (or it), “ THE LAMB.”
The argument need not be carried farther, for the purpose for which it was undertaken ; namely, to ascertain, how the Names and Attributive Nouns, which are found combined together in the Apocalypse should be translated, so as to prevent the possibility of the reader applying them to any other person than the one to whom they are applied in the Greek text. The collateral points which the enquiry has brought under review, though of great importance, have not been dwelt on longer than was necessary for the purpose for which they were adduced ; these not being the direct object of the investigation. I am not aware of a single objection that may, for a moment, be urged against any part of the general argument, except, perhaps, the reference to Ch. xxi. 5, 6., where “the Kathēmenos on the throne” calls himself “ the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End.”— The objection that may be started is : that the Kathemenos there spoken of may be different from the Kathemenos sitting on “ the throne set in the heaven;" for the throne of Ch. xxi. 5.
be the «
great white throne" of Ch. xx. 11. This objection, however, would come with an ill grace from those who have hitherto held, that the Kathemenos of both of these thrones is the same individual ; though they never contemplated Jesus Christ as being the one upon either throne. But it so happens that, in our chain of argument, many of the links are double, and this is one of these. Let the objector take it out, if so inclined, and still the chain will remain unbroken; for “ The First and the Last,"
Ch. ii. 8., is the one who dictated the Epistles to the Churches, namely Jesus CHRIST; and “the First and the Last” is “the Alpha and the Omega" Ch. xxi. 6. and xxü. 13.; and “the Alpha and the Omega” is Kúpos ó Ocòs, Jehovah Elohim, (C. V. the Lord God) Ch. i. 8. and iv. 8., who is the Kathemenos Ch. iv. 10. It is impossible to evade the conclusion :- the Kathemenos (the Sitting one), on both thrones, is the same individual, Jehovah Elohim [the Eternal Omnipotent), the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, Jesus CHRIST; who appeared in the midst of the Golden Lamp-stands; who, in the Sanctuary, dictated the Epistles to the seven Churches; who is the Root and the Offspring of David, the Lamb in the midst of the throne :—the same individual who hath declared, that “He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father.”
The author is fearful that he may have failed to express himself with that perspicuity and energy of which, from the premises, the general argument was susceptible; but in whatever stronger light it might, in abler hands, have been placed, he holds the general conclusion to be completely established : for, after a truth has
been demonstrated, there is no room left for “modest diffidence" on the point. With such a torrent of evidence, all furnished by the Apocalypse itself, that JESUS CHRIST is JEHOVAH, THE OMNIPOTENT, what shall we say of a critic of considerable eminence, who has asserted, that “the true and eternal Godhead “ of Christ is certainly not taught so clearly in “the Apocalypse, as in St. John's Gospel?” It cannot be more clearly taught than in this book; and though John, as an inspired writer,----one taught personally by his Master while on earth, and enlightened by the Holy Spirit after bis · ascension-had no need to apply to the Apocalypse for information respecting the Godhead of CHRIST, in writing his Gospel,--and indeed the very nature of the history therein delivered (the life and death of CHRIST) precluded reference to the Apocalypse, in the course of the narrative,-it is not a little surprizing that, in the very outset of his Gospel, declaring this Godhead, he begins by using an Apocalyptic expression (as is indeed noticed by the critic alluded to)-a title applied to the Messiah in the Revelation ; and which he instantly follows up by other expressions which evidently show that the phraseology of that book was full in his mind. In Rev. xix. u. John sees the rider on the white horse (the same who went forth con
quering and to conquer in Ch. vi. 2.) returning as victor, bearing many crowns, who is called FAITHFUL AND TRUE, who has “ eyes as a flame of fire,” v. 12., “and his name is called (v. 13., “1080x, the LOGOS) the WORD OF GOD." We have seen already that he “whose eyes are as a flame of fire,” Ch. i. 14., is, Jesus CHRIST, whom John saw in the likeness of a son of man, i. e. in human nature, and who said to John “I
I am THE FIRST AND THE LAST, and the Living
I became dead, but behold living I am to Eter"nity,"—the same who, in Ch.iv. 8., is called Kúριος ο Θεός, JEHOVAH THE OMNIPOTENT, and to whom are ascribed “the glory and honor and power,”—“because,” say the worshippers, “ thou hast created all things, and as they were made, so also, they exist by thy will,” Ch. iv. 11.Now what does John say in his Gospel ?.-" In “the beginning was the WORD, [. Arox]and the “ WORD was with God, and Godwas the WORD
.. all things were made by him, and without him “ was not any thing made that was made .... and the “ WORD was made flesh [appeared in human na“ture) and duelt among us. ]
But-not to detain the reader,---with this torrent of evidence before us—how much ought we to commiserate the blindness of those who persist in denying the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and, in derogation of his high characters, continue to call him “a