Agreeably to these observations, it should be noticed that the doctrinal type of the book before us is not exactly the same as that presented in the fourth gospel and first epistle. Thus in eschatology it has a first and second resurrection—a thing un known in the writings of the N. T. ; for, though the evangelist speaks of a twofold resurrection (v. 21-3o), the second only, which occurs at the I,ord's return, is literal ; the other being a spiritual re surrection from sin (v. 24-27 ; I Epist. iii. 14). In like manner, the idea of antichrist differs in the Apocalypse and first Epistle of John. The anti christ of the former is a notable instrument of Satan ; but the antichrist of the latter is a con centration of many antichrists—one who destroys Christianity from within by corrupting its funda mental faith, The antichrist of the Apocalyptist is outside Christianity, hating both Jews and Chris tians. False prophets are termed antichrist in the first epistle.
The doctrine of redemption, so far as allusions to it in the book enable us to judge, is more Jewish than in the gospel. It is represented by the strong figure of washing in blood, which is of Jewish origin ; but certain terms, such as dpviov, ecydpdTety, Scopecty, .0.7pol, resemble Paul's manner. Christianity at first was strongly impregnated with the O. T. ideas of sacrifice and atonement, which were more sen suous than spiritual ; and some time was required for leavening it with the pure essence of the gospel. The love of God in sending his Son into the world to be the life and light of men, quickening within them that higher principle which sin debases, broke through the grosser conceptions of propitiation which the Jewish Christians inherited from their fathers, only by degrees.
Though the Apocalyptist wrote in Greek, he followed Hebrew sources, especially the later pro phets, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, perhaps Enoch. So thoroughly Judaic is he, that he is not without examples of what was afterwards developed in a bad form in Judaism under the name of Kabbala ; as in xiii. IS, where the mysterious number of the beast sounds as Genzatria. The sacred number seven, which enters into the plan of the hook, as well as that of three, savours of Kabbalism. So does the description of the heavenly Jerusalem in the twenty-first and twenty-second chapters.
The views of angels, demons, and spirits are also Jewish, unlike those of the fourth gospel. These seven spirits are said to be before the throne of the Almighty (i. 4), meaning the seven highest spirits ; an idea taken from the Zoroastrian religion into the Jewish, as we see from Zech. iv. 2-7 ;
but modified in the Hebrew conception, so that in our book the seven spirits are representatives of the one spirit of God. So intimately are these seven associated with the Supreme, that grace and peace ore invoked from them equally with him. An angel interpreter attends to John. Seven angels sound trumpets ; and the same number pour out vessels filled with the divine wrath. An angel comes down from heaven. An angel stands on the sea. An angel has a book in his hand. An angel takes up a great stone. An angel of the waters is spoken of, etc. Liicke correctly remarks, that the fourth gospel employs angels only on moral and spiritual errands ; while the Apocalypse makes them preside over the phenomena of nature. It is inappropriate to quote, as Stuart does, the analo gous case of the angel at the pool of Bethesda in proof of the gospel representing angelic control over the material elements ; because the passage is spurious. In like manner, IIengstenberg adduces the place, without the least hint of its later interpo lation. We cannot agree with Stuart's assertion, that there is no case in the Apocalypse which is not justified by analogy in the Hebrew Scriptures ; for where does the O. T. present an example. of an angel taking up a great millstone and casting it into the sea ? Thus angelology plays an important part in the book, showing its likeness to the apoca lyptic Daniel and Enoch. We admit that the envelope of visions in which the author clothes his Messianic hopes required some such spiritual ma chinery as that of angels ; but they are introduced so frequently, and the representations of them are so peculiar, as to show another idiosyncrasy than the evangelist's. The view of demons is also singular. Out of the mouths of the three confederate beasts three unclean spirits issue ; and these are termed the spirits of demons, seducing the kings of the earth by bringing them to join the antichristian leader in his attack upon Rome. In like manner, Satan is conspicuous in the Apocalypse. He is even chained and loosed again. He is the great dragon, the arch-enemy of the faithful. He is at the head of other spirits ; is cast out of heaven with them to the earth ; and is said to have accused the brethren before God continually. Some of these ideas resemble Pauline ones ; but they are unlike anything in the fourth gospel or first epistle.