destroy the Antichrist, stamping out every shred of life from his body. If this moment could not be precisely dated, the beginning could be, and it fell in the year 1716. 69
|
Mather admired this method of periodization and adopted it. For a few years after reading Whiston, probably shortly after the Essay 's publication in 1706, he accepted Whiston's contention that the second woe, the Turkish hostilities against the Romans Empire, had passed. (Whiston's self-confidence is nowhere clearer than in his commentary on this matter: the second woe, he wrote, began with the Ottoman becoming Sultan on May 19, 1301, and it ended with the victory of Eugene of Savoy over the Turks on September 1, 1697.) This news delighted Mather for it meant that the seventh trumpet (which in the prophetical scheme was the third woe trumpet) would soon sound signalling the appearance of Christ. And before that, the beginning of the end of the Antichrist would occur with the destruction of his power everywhere in the world. 70
|
Mather discussed Whiston's chronology most fully in the Biblia Americana, which he began well before reading the Essay on Revelation and continued to revise until a few years before his death. Although by 1717 the failure of Whiston's prediction was clear, Mather never got around to expunging the excited passages he wrote on the wonderful developments to be expected in 1716. Every prophecy, Whiston had written, pointed to that glorious year. For example, John's first vision under the "little book open" had forecast the future state of Christ's Church. The primitive Church, Whiston said, had been pure until 456 A.D. when it was infested by Antichrist. When one added the 1260 years prescribed for his reign to that date, the result was 1716, when Antichristian idolatries were to be cast from the temple. This was one result of his "precision," indicating that 1716 was the yearand the slaying of the witnesses provided another. 71
|
The second vision, the slaying of the two witnesses, had always confused theologians, who divided over the question of whether it had already occurred or was still to come. With many other scholars, Mather had announced his belief in 1690 that with the Edict of Nantes and the slaughter that followed, particularly in France, the prophecy had been fulfilled. He acknowledged the influence of Pierre Jurieu on his thinking, and of Peter Boyer's
|
|