Christianity and Anti-Christianity in Their Final Conflict. Samuel J. Andrews

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ the Church, and in the movements and tendencies of our day, the foreshadowing of him, and the preparation for him. This involves a consideration of the place of Christ in the Divine purpose, and of His person and prerogatives.

      But, before entering upon this enquiry, it will be well to define the term antichrist, and to give a brief outline of the several phases of belief in the Church in regard to his person and work.*

      * Among the more important writers on the Antichrist are the Roman Catholics, F. T. Malvenda, De Antichristo Libri undecim,

       (xix)

      xx INTRODUCTION.

      The term "antichrist" plainly denotes an enemy of Christ, but leaves indefinite whether a person or a series of persons; whether one arising from within the Church or without it; whether one who has ap- peared or is yet to appear. Nor does the word itself determine whether he is simply an enemy of. Christ, or both an enemy to Him and a substitute for Him. Many find only the element of hostility. This cer- tainly is the predominant idea, but does not exclude that of substitution. This appears if we note that the work of Christ in our redemption has two chief parts, that of atonement—the propitiation for our sins and the heavenly intercession based upon it; and that of judging and ruling, or the administration of the Mes- sianic kingdom. The first of these Antichrist wholly denies. He will know no atonement, no cross, no priesthood. Here his hostility to Christianity is openly avowed. For the second of these, the Mes- sianic kingdom, he will substitute an earthly king- dom, the elements of which will be fraternity, liberty, equality, and in which will be the highest de- velopment of man. It is here that he offers himself as a substitute for Christ. He will be the Messiah of the nations, and under him all will be blessed. As said by Archbishop Trench ("Synonyms," sub voce),

      ________________

      ome, 1604 A.D.; Cardinal Bellarmine, De Controversiis Christianae Fidei, 4 Tomi, 1622. In Tomus I he treats at length the charge of Calvin that the papacy is Antichrist. A good sum- mary is found in Stem's Commentar, Die Offenbarung, ch. xiii, 1854. Among recent Protestant writers, aside from the com- mentators, are C. Maitland's "Apostolic School of Prophetic Interpretation"; Dr. J. H. Todd's "Discourses on the Prophe- cies Relating to Antichrist," Dublin, 1840. For a very recent statement of early and mediaeval belief see Wadstein in Hilgen-felds Zeitschrift, 1896-6.

       INTRODUCTION. xxi

      "He will not call himself Christ, for he will be filled with deadliest hate, both against the name and office, against the whole spirit and temper of Jesus of Naza- reth, now the exalted King of Glory. . .He will not assume the name of Christ, and so will not in the letter be a false Christ, yet assuming to himself Christ's offices, presenting himself to the world as the true centre of its hopes, as the satisfaction of its needs, and healer of its hurts, he will, in fact, take upon himself all names and forms of blasphemy; will be the false Christ and the Antichrist both at once.''

      In giving a brief outline of the various beliefs in the Church respecting the Antichrist, we find three periods clearly marked.

      First, the belief in the early Church, and in general down to the Reformation. Second, from the Reforma- tion to the French Revolution. Third, from the French Revolution to the present time.

      I. In the first period, extending over some fifteen centuries, there was not absolute uniformity of be- lief, but substantial agreement. To quote in detail the words of the early fathers would demand more space than we can give, nor is it at all necessary for our purpose. That there is such agreement is af- firmed by all who have investigated the matter, both Roman Catholics and Protestants. Some quotations from the more recent writers will be sufficient here. Thus it is said by Greswell ("Parables," Vol. II), "Another article of belief on which the fathers are unanimous is this: That before the end of the world Antichrist must be expected to ap- pear. It made no difference whether they were advo- cates or opposers of the doctrine of the millennium in particular; in the reception of this opinion there was

      xxii INTRODUCTION.

      perfect agreement among all parties. . . The fathers are likewise agreed in considering Antichrist to be a real person, and not merely a figurative or symbolic character. . . They are unanimous that the appearance and rise of the Antichrist would be accompanied by the persecution of the followers of the true Christ, and that his kingdom would be estab- lished on the ruins of the Church." It is said by Bishop Wordsworth (Com. on 2 Thess.), "The gen- eral opinion of the fathers was that a personal .Anti- christ would appear a short time before the second coming of Christ."

      In like manner it is said by Todd ("Discourses," note p. 18), "All more ancient writers unanimously agreed that an individual Antichrist was described in the prophecy, and that he was to appear at the end of the world immediately before the second coming of the Lord." After stating the early opinions in brief, S. B. Maitland says: "I believe that the opinions which I here attribute to the early Church, were held by all Christian writers until the twelfth century." Prof. Eadie remarks ("Essay on Man of Sin") "That the man of sin was to be one human be- ing, one man, . . was the first and prevailing inter- pretation." So also J. H. Newman ("The Patristi- cal Idea of Antichrist"), “That Antichrist is one in- dividual man was the universal tradition of the early Church." Perhaps these statements should be some- what modified as regards the Alexandrian School.

      This agreement of the fathers embraced the fol- lowing points :

      1. That before the end of the world or age, there would be an apostasy, which in its culmination would be not merely a corruption of the Christian faith, but

       INTRODUCTION xiii

      a total denial of it—an apostasy not universal, but very general.

      2. That the last representative and leader of this apostasy would be a man, "the man of sin," "the wicked one," "the son of perdition," or "the Anti- christ."

      3. That this man would attain to universal domin- ion, all nations becoming subject to him.

      4. That this dominion would continue but a short time, forty-two months, or three and a half years.

      5. That he would claim divine honours for himself, and persecute all upholding the faith of Christ, and suppress, as far as possible, all Christian worship.

      6. That the time immediately preceding and dur- ing his reign would be one of great tribulation.

      7. That many of the Jews would receive him as their Messiah.

      8. That he would be destroyed with his adherents by the Lord at His appearing.

      Besides these points of general agreement, there were diverse particular opinions about the person of the Antichrist, of which we may mention: a. That he was Satan incarnated. b. That he was a son of Satan by a human mother, c. That he was a man possessed by Satan. d. That he was a man who vol- untarily gave himself up to do Satan's will, and was endowed by him with miraculous powers—Organum diaboli—and to him Satan would give the rule of the kingdoms of this world. e. That he was a man raised from the dead by Satan, and so a counterpart of the risen Christ.

      The surmises of some of the fathers as to his birth in Bethsaida, and his education in Babylon, are of no importance. It was held by many that he was to be

      xxiv INTRODUCTION.

      a Jew, and of the tribe of Dan, chiefly on the ground СКАЧАТЬ