Before leaving this opinion, we would call the reader's attention to a single point, which demonstrates more than any other, what vague and arbitrary modes of fixing the application of particular parts of the prophecy, have satisfied the ablest writers, in endeavouring to attach the whole guilt of Antichristianism to the church of Rome. The great sir Isaac Newton finds the number of the beast, mentioned in Rev. 18, to be contained in the Greek word Aurezvo.7, the man of Latium ; and also in the Hebrew, n"v", the man of Rome ; the nu meral letters in each of these words amounting exactly to 666. But, unfortunately for this argument, the num ber 666 may be gathered from many other words with equal exactness ; from the names of several of the Roman emperors ; from the Hebrew tor Luther ; from the Hebrew for the Most High, the Lord, the Holy God, (see Calmet's Diet. Artie. Antichrist ;) and, as has been lately most ingeniously discovered, from the great name of Napoleon ! All this is just as good and satisfactory, as the idea of Mr Potter, who will have the number referred to, which is expressly six hundred threescore and six, to mean nothing more than the cube-root of that number ! 9. It was to be expected, that the members of the church of Rome should look for Antichrist in a differ ent quarter. Accordingly, many of them maintained, that Antichrist appeared in pagan Rome. Bossuet was particularly zealous in defending this opinion. It has even found able and strenuous abettors among the re formed. One of these is the celebrated Grotius, who has laboured hard to prove that the pope is not Anti christ, and that divines have mistaken papal for pagan Rome. He makes Caligula to have been the " Man of Sin," and Simon Magus the " wicked one." The reason assigned for Grotius taking this view of the sub ject is more creditable to his charity as a Christian, than his integrity as an author. It is alleged, that he was grieved to see the mischiefs produced by theolo gical quarrels ; and that, conceiving a union between the catholic and protestant churches to be necessary for putting an end to these, he endeavoured to remove the great obstacle to such a dcsireable event, by per suading the protestants to transfer the character of An tichrist from popery to paganism. This account is suf ficiently plausible ; but it is an account given by his op ponents, and therefore not to be implicitly received. The reader may hear Grotius speak for himself, by con sulting his learned treatise, entitled, Append. ad Com ment. de ?ntichristo, Oiler. Theol. torn. iv. p. 475. Wet stein applies the prophecy of Paul to Titus, or the Fla vian family. See Wetst. in loc.
10. Many Romanists, not seeing that the characters of Antichrist apply to any power that has yet appeared in the world, attending to the prediction of Paul, which seems to fix his coming at the period immediately pre ceding the universal judgment, and thinking it pro bable, from the limited reign of Christianity, that the second advent of our Saviour is still at a great distance, have concluded that Antichrist is not yet revealed, and may not come for many ages. Calmet seems to be of this opinion. See his Dict. ut sup.
11. Lightfoot thinks, that Antichrist consists of three branches ; and that this term may be justly applied to Judaism, Pagan Rome, and Popery. " Antichristum," says he, " secundx editionis multo auctiorem, priori illo inter Judos celebri, quern supra in 2 Epist. ad
Thessalon. notavimus, succedaneum, Antichristum pro vectx xtatis et plane adultum. Verum fateor, Roma, dun sub ethnicismo insaniit, Antichristum in parte no bis exhibuit : Papismum vero amplexa, multo insig nias. Stella turn vere de cello cecidit. Oiler. tom. ii. p. 122.
12. Mr Kett, in a work published some years ago, seems to allow, that " we first discover the existence of this power (Antichrist) in a general sense, in the age of St John, when the gnostic and other heresies began to arise : " For," says he, " it is acknowledged, that many of these prophecies (respecting Antichrist) allude to the different heresies that have troubled, and do trouble, the church." " But these appear," he sub joins, " to be three great forms of Antichrist, which were to continue stedfastly in great power, and assume much more alarming appearances of corruption, per secution, and hostility." These three forms he alleges to be Popery, Mahometanism, and Infidelity. See Kett's Hist. the Inter/2. of Proph.
13. The newest opinion concerning Antichrist is, we believe, that of Mr Faber. He maintains, that revo lutionary France is Antichrist ; that this formidable power was revealed in all its terrors in the year 1792, when monarchy was abolished, and atheism openly avowed ; and that, by the surrender of the title of Ro man emperor by the Emperor of Germany, Bonaparte is become, what he at first conjectured Charles V. to have been, the last head of the great Roman beast. This opinion, it must be acknowledged, is supported by its author with great learning and ingenuity. But when we recollect, that most of the facts on which it is found ed are drawn from the fanciful and exaggerated state ments of Barruel; and that the abolition of monarchy, and the avowal of atheistical tenets, were but the deed of a comparatively small number, actuated by a tempo rary frenzy ; and that the one was soon succeeded by the return of regular government, and the other by the re-establishment of the Christian religion, we cannot feel disposed to attach much credit to the theory of Mr. Faber. It seems to derive its chief interest from the extraordinary nature of the events which have taken place in France, and from the desire that we na turally, but illiberally, feel, to load that country and its ruler with all that we have been accustomed, as a re ligious nation, to regard with most abhorrence, and consequently to justify, upon system, the spirit of eter nal warfare. See Faber's Dissert. on the Proph. and the Supplement to it.
14. The only other opinion on this subject, that we shall mention, (and we only mention it on account of its curious analogy to that of Mr Faber,) is, that Oliver Cromwell was the Antichrist ! There is, it is said, a large manuscript volume in the Bodleian library, writ ten to prove it. This may appear very ridiculous to us, but it did not perhaps appear so to those who lived in the times of the usurpation. And in a century or two hence, Mr Faber's book, so greedily swallowed by many of the present times, may be equally a subject of gene ral wonder and pity. Cromwell and Bonaparte have each of them, in his time, been called by the Jews lit tle less than the lessiah ; and by some divines they have been, on the other hand, both denominated Anti christ. (7)