Before Jerusalem Fell
by Kenneth L. Gentry by Kenneth L. Gentry
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons 51 have been given by the author of the Book. For the author was seen on earth, he lived and held converse with his disciples, not so very long ago, but almost in our own generation. Thus, on the one hand, he lived years after he wrote the Book, and there was abundant opportunity for him to expound the riddle, had he wished to do so; and, on the other hand, since he lived on almost into our generation, the explanation, had he given it, must have been preserved to US.”2 2 Chase’s observations are quite perceptive. Upon recognizing the ambiguity of the passage when narrowly conceived in terms of purely grammatico-syntactical analysis, he then proceeds upon sound hermeneutic principle to elucidate Irenaeus’s precise point by consideration of the contextual flow. This sort of argumentation is why Wetstein, too, understood ‘~ohn” (which immediately preceding the verb becomes “him who saw the apocalypse”) to be the nominative of &Jpa6q, rather than “Revelation.”2 3 Macdonald agrees, and states the case dogmatically: [Irenaeus] argues that if this knowledge [i.e., regarding the identity of 666] had been important at that time it would have been communicated by the writer of the Apocalypse, who lived so near their own time. . . . There was therefore really no ambiguity to be avoided, requiring him to use the name ofJohn or the personal pronoun as the subject of q, the verb of sight. The scope requires this nominative and no other. 24 But there is still more to the contextual argument. In his Ecclesiastical Histou (5:8:5,6) Eusebius again cites Irenaeus’s statement (Against Heresies 5:30:3), this time with more of the context (Against Heresies 5:30:1): He states these things in the third book of his above-mentioned work. In the fifth book he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John, and the number of the name of Antichrist “As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and ancient copies, and those who saw John face to face confirm it, and reason teaches us that the number of the name of the beast, according to the mode 22. Chase, “Date,” pp. 431-432. 23. See James M. Macdonald, Th Ltj2 and Writings ~ St. Jolm (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1877), p. 170. He also noted that Guericke once held this view, but later retracted it. See also Stuart, Apoca@pse 2:265. 24. Macdonald, Lye and Writings, p. 169.
52 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL of calculation among the Greeks, appears in its letters. . . .” And farther on he says concerning the same: “We are not bold enough to speak confidently of the name of Antichrist. For if it were necessary that his name should be declared clearly at the present time, it would have been announced by who saw the revelation. For it was seen, not long ago, but almost in our generation, toward the end of the reign of Domitian.”2 5 Notice should be made of the personal knowledge that is emphasized by Irenaeus: “those who have seen John face to face testifj.” It rather clearly seems that the .bptieq (“was seen”) of the latter quotation (the very one under consideration) is but the dim reflection of the former quotation’s more precise statement: papwpotivmv czdz~v kK&ikw TC3V Ka~4 dynv dv ‘Io&wqv $opaK6zav (“those who have seen John face to face testifj”). In fact, the very verb in question (d@o, at Herewk 5:30:3) appears in this immediate context (in Agaimt Hereszks 5:30:1 ) employed of John himself ‘Ititiwqv topaK&ciw.26 Furthermore, “this interpretation is in harmony with the characteristic thought and phraseology of Irenaeus. “2 7 By this is meant that Irenaeus constantly emphasizes the organic and living unity of the Church’s life. Irenaeus shows a concern to demonstrate carefully that one Christian generation is in touch with the next generation since the time of the apostles. “The men of one generation heard from the lips of the men of the previous generation what they themselves had heard and seen. “2 8 We must recognize that Irenaeus’s work sought to demonstrate that “the same gospel which was first orally preached and transmitted was subsequently committed to writing and faithfully preserved in all the apostolic churches through the regular succession of the bishops and elders. “2 9 In the 1913 Bampton Lectures at the University of Oxford, George Edmundson offered his analysis of the problem, which is 25. Eusebius, 5:8:5-6. Cited fmm Philip Schaff and Henry Waee, eds., A Select Libraty of Nicttu and Post-Nicsme Faths of the Christuzn Church: Second Se&s, 14 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, [1890] 1986) 1:222. 26. Macdonald, Life and Writings, p. 169. 27. Chase, “Date,” p. 432. 28. Ibid., p. 433. He cites references from Irenaeus’s work at 3:3:3; 427:1; 5:30:1; and even fragments of a letter preserved in Eusebius’s work at 5:20. 29. Philip Schaff, M.sto~ of t/u Christian Church, 8 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, [1910] 1950) 2:753. Cp. F. F. Bruce, New Tat-t Htitory (Garden City, NY Anchor Books, 1969), p. 405.
- Page 18 and 19: . . . Xvlll BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL I
- Page 20 and 21: PART 1 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
- Page 22 and 23: 4 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Thus, both
- Page 24 and 25: 6 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Regarding t
- Page 26 and 27: 8 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL noted a qua
- Page 28 and 29: 10 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL in 1910 th
- Page 30 and 31: 12 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL all, as Re
- Page 32 and 33: 14 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Milo Conni
- Page 34 and 35: I 16 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL In the s
- Page 36 and 37: 18 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL the two ge
- Page 38 and 39: 20 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Regarding
- Page 40 and 41: 22 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL conviction
- Page 42 and 43: 24 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL to exclude
- Page 44 and 45: 26 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL The proble
- Page 46 and 47: 28 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL was in tur
- Page 48 and 49: 30 Source Documentation We will cit
- Page 50 and 51: 32 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Heinrich B
- Page 52 and 53: 34 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Hermann Ge
- Page 54 and 55: 36 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL James M. M
- Page 56 and 57: 38 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL Moses Stua
- Page 58 and 59: 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE EXTERNAL EVID
- Page 60 and 61: Introduction to the External Eviden
- Page 62 and 63: 4 IRENAEUS, BISHOP OF LYONS As we b
- Page 64 and 65: Irenaas, Btihop of Lyons 47 nounced
- Page 66 and 67: Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyn.s 49 (i.e.,
- Page 70 and 71: along the lines of Chase’s: Irena
- Page 72 and 73: Irenaeu.s, Bishop ofLpns 55 accept
- Page 74 and 75: Irenaeu-s, Bishop of Lyons 57 tian
- Page 76 and 77: Irenaeus, Bishop of Lpn.s 59 rule.
- Page 78 and 79: Irenaew, Bishop of Lyon.s 61 narrat
- Page 80 and 81: Irenaeus, Bishop of Lpns 63 accept
- Page 82 and 83: Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons 65 upon t
- Page 84 and 85: Ireruzeus, Bishop of Lpns 67 John c
- Page 86 and 87: Clement of Alexandria 69 ~17E161j y
- Page 88 and 89: Clement of Alexandria 71 In the Syr
- Page 90 and 91: Clement of Alexandria 73 which lay
- Page 92 and 93: Clement of Alexandria 75 Another pa
- Page 94 and 95: Clcm.ent of Alexandria 77 Book 8 of
- Page 96 and 97: Clement of Alexandria 79 that he wa
- Page 98 and 99: Clement of Alexandria 81 now as the
- Page 100 and 101: Clement of Alexandria 83 of Christ,
- Page 102 and 103: Clemwn.t of Alexandria 85 here at M
- Page 104 and 105: Additional Extend Witnases 87 he ac
- Page 106 and 107: Additional External Witnases 89 Wit
- Page 108 and 109: Additional External Witnesses 91 mo
- Page 110 and 111: Additional External Witnesses 93 Wi
- Page 112 and 113: Additional Ext+mal Witnesses 95 als
- Page 114 and 115: Additional External Witnesses 97 vi
- Page 116 and 117: Additional External Witnesses 99 St
52 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL<br />
of calculation among the Greeks, appears in its letters. . . .” And<br />
farther on he says concerning the same: “We are not bold enough to<br />
speak confidently of the name of Antichrist. For if it were necessary<br />
that his name should be declared clearly at the present time, it would<br />
have been announced by who saw the revelation. For it was seen, not<br />
long ago, but almost in our generation, toward the end of the reign<br />
of Domitian.”2 5<br />
Notice should be made of the personal knowledge that is emphasized<br />
by Irenaeus: “those who have seen John face to face testifj.” It<br />
rather clearly seems that the .bptieq (“was seen”) of the latter<br />
quotation (the very one under consideration) is but the dim reflection<br />
of the former quotation’s more precise statement: papwpotivmv<br />
czdz~v kK&ikw TC3V Ka~4 dynv dv ‘Io&wqv $opaK6zav (“those<br />
who have seen John face to face testifj”). In fact, the very verb in<br />
question (d@o, at Herewk 5:30:3) appears in this immediate context<br />
(in Agaimt Hereszks 5:30:1 ) employed of John himself ‘Ititiwqv<br />
topaK&ciw.26 Furthermore, “this interpretation is in harmony<br />
with the characteristic thought and phraseology of Irenaeus. “2 7<br />
By<br />
this is meant that Irenaeus constantly emphasizes the organic and<br />
living unity of the Church’s life. Irenaeus shows a concern to demonstrate<br />
carefully that one Christian generation is in touch with the<br />
next generation since the time of the apostles. “The men of one<br />
generation heard from the lips of the men of the previous generation<br />
what they themselves had heard and seen. “2 8<br />
We must recognize<br />
that Irenaeus’s work sought to demonstrate that “the same gospel<br />
which was first orally preached and transmitted was subsequently<br />
committed to writing and faithfully preserved in all the apostolic<br />
churches through the regular succession of the bishops and elders. “2 9<br />
In the 1913 Bampton Lectures at the University of Oxford,<br />
George Edmundson offered his analysis of the problem, which is<br />
25. Eusebius, 5:8:5-6. Cited fmm Philip Schaff and Henry Waee, eds., A Select Libraty<br />
of Nicttu and Post-Nicsme Faths of the Christuzn Church: Second Se&s, 14 vols. (Grand Rapids:<br />
Eerdmans, [1890] 1986) 1:222.<br />
26. Macdonald, Life and Writings, p. 169.<br />
27. Chase, “Date,” p. 432.<br />
28. Ibid., p. 433. He cites references from Irenaeus’s work at 3:3:3; 427:1; 5:30:1; and<br />
even fragments of a letter preserved in Eusebius’s work at 5:20.<br />
29. Philip Schaff, M.sto~ of t/u Christian Church, 8 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,<br />
[1910] 1950) 2:753. Cp. F. F. Bruce, New Tat-t Htitory (Garden City, NY Anchor<br />
Books, 1969), p. 405.
Change language