Christian Jews, who did apoftatize, were never united under any one head or leader, famous or infamous enough to merit the title of the man of fin. The Jewish nation too with their highpriest and fanhedrim were already revealed; and most of the inftances which this author allegeth, of their oppofing the Christian religion, and exalting themselves above all laws divine, and human, were prior to the date of this Epiftle. He was himself aware of this objection, and endevors to prevent it by faying, "that these are the descriptions of the man of fin, by which the "Theffalonians might then know him, and "they run all in the prefent tenfe, fhowing "what he already did." But it is the known and usual stile of prophecy to speak of things future as prefent, intimating that tho' future they are as fure and certain as if they were even now present. "He who now letteth is the "Roman emperor Claudius, and he will lett "until he be taken out of the way, that is, he "will hinder the Jews from breaking out into "an open rebellion in his time, they being fo "fignally and particularly obliged by him." But how utterly improbable is it, that the apostle should talk and write of Jewish politics

to Gentile converts? If Claudius withheld the Jews from revolting from the Roman government, did he withhold them alfo from apoftatizing from the Chriftian faith? or what was it that withheld them? and what then becomes

of that interpretation ? "When Claudius fhall "be taken out of the way, as he was by poifon, "then they fhall be revealed, either by actual "apoftafy from the Roman government, or

by the great apoftafy of the believers of that "nation." But the apoftafy of believers was not near so great nor universal as the apostasy from the Roman government. Here too is the fame ambiguity and uncertainty as before. The prophecy plainly intends one sort of apoftafy, and this learned commentator propofeth two, and inclines fometimes to the one, and fometimes to the other, as may best fuit his hypothefis. He is guilty too of the fame inconfiftency as Le Clerc, in interpreting the coming of Christ in the former Epistle, and in this Epistle, and in the first verse of this very chapter, of his coming to judge the world; and yet in verse the eighth, of his coming to deftroy Jerufalem. But if the deftruction of Jerufalem only was meant, what need had the Theffalonians to

(1) Intelligo Titum five domum Flaviam •pusngion ang

be

arousas, Eo tempore Vefpafianus. confulatum jam gefferat, trium

be under fuch confternation, to be shaken in mind and to be troubled, that the wrath is come upon them to the uttermoft, (as the apostle faith, 1 Thef. II. 15, 16.) who both killed the Lord Jefus, and their own prophets, and have perfecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, that they might be faved. It was matter of confolation, rather than of trouble or terror to the Theffalonians; and as such the apostle mentions it in his former Epiftle.

5. But of all the applications of this prophecy none is more extraordinary than that of the late profeffor Wetstein, the learned and laborious editor of the New Teftament with the various readings and copious annotations. "By the man of fin and the wicked one he (1) underftands Titus or the Flavian family. The mystery of iniquity was then working, because at that time Vefpafian had borne the office of conful, had received the honors of a triumph, and even under Caligula had entertained fome hopes of the empire. He who letteth was Nero, who was now adopted by the emperor." One is really ashamed and grieved to fee a scholar and critic fall into fuch abfurdities. What was Titus

phalia acceperat, et jam fub Caio in fpem imperii venerat.

Cc 2

xxTEX, Nero jam adoptatus erat &c. Wettenius in locum. (2) -cui

Titus then, as well as the emperor Julian, an apoftate? Was he, who was one of the best emperors, the love and delight of mankind, to be branded with the odious appellations of the man of fin and the wicked one? Even Domitian was not worfe than feveral other emperors both before and after him. How did Titus and the Flavian

>

family oppofe and exalt themselves above every God or emperor? How did they as God fit in the temple of God, showing themselves that they were Gods? Why was Vefpafian's hoping for the empire the mystery of iniquity, more than Galba's, or Otho's, or Vitellius's hoping for the fame? When Nero was taken out of the way, were not these three emperors, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, all, revealed before the Flavian Family? How was the coming of Titus, and the Flavian family with all power, and figns, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteouf nefs? How were their adherents and followers fuch eminently as received not the love of the truth that they might be faved, but believed a lie that they might be damned, and had pleasure in unrighteoufnefs? How were Titus and the Flavian family destroyed in the deftruction of Jerufalem, when they were themselves the destroyers

of

(2)—cui fi, uti fpero, vel vel conatum faltem meum non interpretationem Apocalypfeos, difplicuiffe intellexero, fublimi

of it, and reigned feveral years afterwards? Was there an illuftrious coming of Christ, when Titus or any of the Flavian family died? Or how can the Lord be faid to confume them with the Spirit of his mouth, and to destroy them with the brightness of his coming? It furpasseth all comprehenfion, how this learned profeffor could think of such an application, without asking himself fome fuch queftions; or how he could ask himself any such questions, without clearly perceiving the impoffibility of answering them. We cannot fuppofe that he would have made a compliment of his religion, but he hath certainly of his understanding, to Cardinal Quirini, in this inftance as well as in his comment upon the Revelation, which, (2) as he humbly hopeth, will not displease his eminency, and then he shall be tranfcendently happy.

It is a farther objection to Wetstein, as alfo to Grotius, Hammond, Le Clerc, and Whitby, that they are fo fingular in their opinions; they differ as much from one another, as from the generality of interpreters; and as they diffent from all who went before them, fo they are followed by none who come after them. If this prophecy was fulfilled, as these critics con

ceive,

feriam fidera vertice. Idem de Interpret. Apoc. Tom. 2. p.

894.