Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

who survived the other apostles, lived to the time of Domitian, preaching the word to the people in Asia. When Domitian's edict for persecuting the christians was brought to Ephesus, and John refused to deny Christ, or to give over preaching, the proconsul ordered that he should be drowned in a vessel of boiling oil: but John presently leaped out unhurt. The proconsul would then have set him at liberty, if he had not feared to transgress the emperor's edict. He therefore banished John into Patmos, where he saw and wrote the Revelation. After the death of Domitian, his edicts having been abrogated by the senate, they who had been banished, returned to their homes: and John came to Ephesus, where he had a dwelling, and many friends.

Then follows an account of St. John's visiting the churches in the neighbourhood of Ephesus. Where is inserted also the story, formerly taken notice of, concerning the young man, as related by Eusebius from Clement of Alexandria: and as happening, not after the death of Nero, but of Domitian,

Newton proceeds: as well as the first author, whoever ' he was, of that very ancient fable, that John was put by 'Nero into a vessel of hot oil, and coming out unhurt, was banished by him into Patmos. Though this story be no "more than a fiction, yet it was founded on a tradition of the 'first churches, that John was banished into Patmos in the days of Nero.'

Who was the first author of that fable, I do not know. But it does not appear, that Tertullian, the first writer who bas mentioned it, thought it to be in the time of Nero. He might mean, and probably did mean, Domitian, the same who banished John into an island: as did also the two writers just taken notice of, Prochorus and Abdias, to whom we were led by Sir Isaac. Jerom, who h in his books against Jovinian, mentions this story, as from Tertullian, proconsul jussit eum velut rebellem in dolio ferventis olei demergi; qui statim ut conjectus in æneo est, veluti athleta unctus, non adustus, de vase exiit. Ad quod miraculum proconsul stupefactus, voluit eum libertati suæ reddere. Et fecisset, nisi timuisset edictum Cæsaris. Mitiorem igitur pœnam cogitans, in exilium eum relegavit, in insulam, quæ dicitur Patmos; in quâ et Apocalypsin, quæ ex nomine ejus legitur, et vidit, et scripsit. Post mortem autem Domitiani, quia omnia ejus decreta Senatus infringi jusserat, inter cæteros, qui ab eo relegati fuerant, et ad propria remeabant, etiam sanctus Joannes Ephesum rediit, ubi et hospitiolum, et multos amicos, habebat. Abd. Hist. Apostol. cap. v. ap. Fabr. Cod. Apocr. N. T. p. 533-536.

h Vidit enim in Patmo insulâ, in quâ fuerat a Domitiano principe relegatus, Apocalypsin.-Refert autem Tertullianus, quod Romæ, [al. a Nerone] missus in ferventis olei dolium, purior et vegetior exierit, quam intravit. Adv. Jovin. 1. i. tom. 4. p. 169.

6

according to some copies, says, it was done at Rome, according to others, in the time of Nero. However in the same place, as well as elsewhere, Jerom expressly says, that John was banished into Patmos by Domitian. And in the other place, where he mentions the casting St. John into boiling oil, he says: and presently afterwards he was banished ' into the island Patmos.' Therefore that other trial, which St. John met with, was in the same reign, that is, Domitian's. And indeed Jerom always supposes St. John's banishment to have been in that reign as he particularly relates in the ninth chapter of his book of Illustrious Men. Let me add, that if the story of St. John's being put into a vessel of scalding oil be a fable and a fiction, it must be hazardous to build an argument upon it.

It follows in Newton: Epiphanius represents the gospel of John as written in the time of Domitian, and the Apo'calypse even before that of Nero.' I have already said enough of Epiphanius in considering the opinion of Grotius. However, as one would think, Sir Isaac Newton had little reason to mention Epiphanius, when he does not follow him. He says, that St. John was banished into Patmos in the time. of Claudius: Sir Isaac, not till near the end of the reign of Nero.

Arethas,' says Sir Isaac, in the beginning of his com'mentary quotes the opinion of Irenæus from Eusebius, but 'does not follow it. For he afterwards affirms, that the Apocalypse was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, and that former commentators had expounded the 'sixth seal of that destruction.'

[ocr errors]

To which I answer. Arethas does indeed say, that' some interpreters bad explained things under the sixth seal, as relating to the destruction of Jerusalem by Vespasian: but they were some only, not the most. Yea, he presently afterwards says, that the most interpreted it otherwise. Nor does he say, that any of those commentators were of opinion, that the Apocalypse was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Arethas seems to have been of opinion, that things, which had come to pass long before, might be represented in the Revelation. Therefore immediately before

iSed si legamus ecclesiasticas historias, in quibus fertur, quod et ipse propter martyrium sit missus in ferventis olei dolium, et inde ad suscipiendam coronam Christi athleta processerit, statimque relegatus in Patmon insulam sit, &c. Comm. in Matt. xx. 23. tom. 4. P. i. p. 92.

* As before, p. 236.

Ουεσπασιανό γινομενην πολιορκίαν εξέλαβον,

1

Τινες δε ταυτα εις την ύπο παντα τα ειρημενα τροπολογη

σαντες. Οι δε πλείτοι των ἑρμηνευτων. κ. λ. Areth. cap. 18. p. 709. Α.

[ocr errors]

that passage, explaining Rev. vi. 12, 13, he says: Whatm is the opening of the sixth seal? It is the cross and death of the Lord, followed by his resurrection, desirable to all faithful and understanding men. “And lo, there was a 'great earthquake." Manifestly denoting, says he, the signs that happened during the crucifixion, the shaking of the earth, the darkness of the sun, the turning the moon into blood. For when it was full moon, being the fourteenth day, how was it possible, that the sun should be eclipsed by its interposition?'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

However, I must not conceal what be says afterwards, in another chapter of his" Commentary. He is explaining Rev. vii. 4-8. These, says he who instructs the evangelist, will not partake in the calamities inflicted by the Romans. For the destruction caused by the Romans had not fallen upon the Jews, when the evangelist received these instructions. Nor was he at Jerusalem, but in Ionia, where is Ephesus: for he stayed at Jerusalem no more 'than fourteen years.-And after the death of our Lord's ⚫ mother, he left Judea, and went to Ephesus: as tradition says: where also, as is said, he had the revelation of future 'things.' But how can we rely upon a writer of the sixth century for these particulars; that John did not stay at Jerusalem more than fourteen years: that he left Judea upon the death of our Lord's mother, and then went to Ephesus: when we can evidently perceive from the history in the Acts, that in the fourteenth year after our Lord's ascension, there were no christian converts at Ephesus: and that the church at Ephesus was not founded by St. Paul, till several years afterwards? What avails it to refer to such passages as these? Which, when looked into and examined, contain no certain assurances of any thing. And Sir Isaac Newton himself says: It seems to me, that Peter and John stayed with their churches in Jadea and Syria, till 'the Romans made war upon their nation, that is, till the "twelfth year of Nero,' or A. D. 66.

[ocr errors]

6

We proceed with this great man's arguments, who adds: With the opinion of the first commentators agrees the 'tradition of the churches of Syria, preserved to this day in 'the title of the Syriac version of the Apocalypse, which title is this: "The Revelation, which was made to John the

n

- Τις δε ἡ λυσις της έκτης σφραγιδος; Ὁ ταυρος το Κυριο και θανατος, οἷς ηκολέθησεν ἡ ευκταία πασι πιςοις τε και αισθητοις ανατασις. κ. λ. Cap. 18. p. 708. C. D. Cap. xix. p. 713, 714. - αλλα προς Εφεσον μετατηναι αυτόν λόγος, καθ ̓ ἡν, ὡς εἴρηται. κ. λ. Ibid. p. 714. in. PAs before, p. 243. P. 236, 237.

0—

'evangelist by God in the island Patmos, into which he 'was banished by Nero Cæsar." But how comes it to pass, that the tradition of the churches of Syria is alleged here, when the Apocalypse was not generally received by them? Moreover in the titles of the books of the New Testament received by them, there are manifest errors. Nor can we say when the Syriac version of the Apocalypse was made: nor is it impossible that the authors of that title might mean Domitian by Nero. It is not a greater error, than that of supposing the epistle of James to have been written by James the son of Zebedee. the celebrated Newton: The same is confirmed by a story told by Eusebius out of Clemens Alex'andrinus, and other ancient authors, concerning a youth, 'whom St. John, some time after his return from Patmos, 'committed to the care of the bishop of a certain city. This is a story of many years, and requires, that John 'should have returned from Patmos rather at the death of Nero, than at that of Domitian.'

[ocr errors]

Again, says

But, first, if this be only a feigned story, or apologue, as some have thought, contrived to convey moral instruction; circumstances ought not to be strained, nor the truth of history be founded upon it. Secondly, we must take the story, as it is related by Clement, and other ancient authors. Clement placeth it after the death of the tyrant, by whom John had been banished: and Eusebius" supposeth him to mean Domitian. Thirdly, if St. John lived in Asia two, or three, or four years after his return from Patmos, that is time enough for the events of this story.

6

6

Sir Isaac adds in the same place: And John in his old age was so infirm, as to be carried to church, dying above ninety years old: and therefore could not be then sup'posed able to ride after the thief.'

6

Nevertheless in the original account, which we have of

Ad Neronis imperium hoc exilium Syrus refert. maxime hujus versionis ætas, nulloque gaudet socio. 4. sect. vii.

Verum incerta est quam
Lamp. Proleg. 1. i. cap.

Quapropter nihil in hisce est, quod Syrum ab erroris culpâ liberare possit; quemadmodum nec supra erat, quod Epiphanium in nomine Claudii tueretur. Illud tantummodo adnotatum volo Syriacam Apocalypseos versionem haud æqualem cæterorum librorum interpretationi videri, uti nec primi codices in Europam adlati appositam habuerunt, quam demum Ludovicus de Dieu MDCXXVII. in lucem primum produxit, &c. Ch. Cellarius de septem ecclesiis Asiæ num. xvii. p. 428. • Sed forsan aliquis, honoris interpretis Syri solicitus et cupidus, posset in illius gratiam asserere, illum non Neronem, sed Domitianum, alterum Neronem, seu portionem Neronis, ut vocatur Tertulliano, &c. Le Moyne, Var. Sacr. tom. II. p. 1019. u H. E. 1. 3. cap. 23.

As above, p. 237.

[ocr errors]

this affair, St. John is expressly called an old man : Sir Isaac therefore has no right to make him young; for that would be making a new story. If a man allows himself so to do, and argues upon it; the necessary consequence is, that be deceives himself and others.

Upon the whole, I see not much weight in any of these arguments of Sir Isaac Newton; and must adhere to the common opinion, that St. John was banished into Patmos, in the reign of Domitian, and by virtue of his edicts for persecuting the christians, in the latter part of his reign. Says Mr. Lampe: All antiquity is agreed, that St. John's banishment was by order of Domitian.'

6

W

VI. We should now inquire, when St. John was released, or how long his banishment lasted.

According to Tertullian, Domitian's persecution was very short, and the emperor himself, before he died, recalled those whom he had banished. Hegesippus likewise says, that Domitian by an edict put an end to the persecution which he had ordered.

6

Eusebius says, that after the death of Domitian, John ' returned from his banishment.' And before, in another chapter of the same book, he said more largely: Aftera Domitian had reigned fifteen years, Nerva succeeded him, 'and the Roman senate decreed, that the honourable titles bestowed upon Domitian should be abrogated, and moreover, that they who had been banished by him might re"turn to their homes, and repossess their goods, of which they had been unjustly deprived. This we learn from such as 'have written the history of those times. Then therefore, as our ancestors say, the apostle John returned from his banishment, and again took up his abode at Ephesus.'

6

[ocr errors]

6

6

[ocr errors]

Jerom, in his book of Illustrious Men, says: When • Domitian had been killed, and his edicts had been repeal'ed by the senate, because of their excessive cruelty, John returned to Ephesus, in the time of the emperor Nerva.' I place below a passage of the martyrdom of Timothy επιλαθόμενος της ηλικιας αυτο-τι με φεύγεις τον γυμνον, τον γέροντα; προσελθοντα δε τον γεροντα περιελαβεν. κ. λ. Clem. ap. Euseb. Η. Ε. 1. 3. c. 23. p. 93. Tota antiquitas in eo abunde consentit, quod Domitianus exilii Joannis auctor fuerit. Lamp. Proleg. 1. i. cap. 4. sect. viii. Cœptum repressit, restitutis etiam quos relegaverat. Apol. cap. v. vid. supr. p. 415, note ".

[ocr errors]

y

X

W

Ap.

καταπαυσαι δε δια προςάγματος τον κατα της εκκλησίας διωγμον. Euseb. H. E. 1. 3. cap. 20. p. 90. B. 2 - απο της κατα

την νήσον μετα την Δομετιανό τελευτην επανελθων φυγης. Eus. Η. Ε. 1. 3. cap. 23. in. a H. E. 1. 3. cap. 20. p. 90. B. C. b See Vol. ii. ch. cxiv. num. viii. 4. • Νερβα δε τε Ρωμαϊκό κράτος το σκήπτρον αναδεδεγμενο, ὁ θεολογος Ιωαννης, της ύπεροριο φυγης αφεθεις, και

« PreviousContinue »