IV. Mede Confirms Historical Interpretation and Year Day Principle

JOSEPH MEDE, or Mead (15861638), professor of Greek at Cambridge, was born at Berden, Essex, and educated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, from which he received M.A. (1610) and B.D. (1618) degrees. His accomplishments in philosophy, history, mathematics, physics, and antiquity were conspicuous. He twice refused the provostship of Trinity College, Dublin. With the Puritans, he held the pope to be Antichrist, but took no part in the theological controversy between Calvinists and Lutherans. He was widely informed, and maintained an extensive foreign correspondence.PFF2 542.1

Mede declined official position, preferring to teach. With deep insight into the divine Word, he made prophecy his special study, and materially advanced the science of interpretation. His expository fame rests chiefly on his Clavis Apocalyptica (The Key of the Revelation), ^{27Published in 1627, and in 1632 and 1642. Translated into English by Richard More in 1643.} which sets forth the structural outline of the Apocalypse. This, he maintained, was prerequisite to its sound interpretation.PFF2 542.2

Mede’s The Apostasy of the Latter Times, also devoted to prophecy, was issued in 1641 and 1644, and reprinted, significantly enough, in 1836 and 1845. His Daniel’s Weekes was published in 1643, 1648, and 1677. His Works were first collected in 1648, followed by an enlarged edition in 16634, and reprinted in 1677. Such was the popularity and the permanence of his writings.PFF2 542.3

1. SYNCHRONISM OF FOUR PROPHECIES OF 1260 YEARS

Mede did what interpreters had previously failed to do. In his Key of the Revelation (Part 1) he laid down the basic principle that, for the correct understanding of the Apocalypse, it is first necessary to fix the order and mutual relationships of its principal visions from internal evidence, apart from the question of their interpretation. He sought out, accordingly, the synchronism and succession of the visions, or the order of the prophecies found in the Apocalypse. Their mutual relationship provided a valuable clue to their significance. Then in part 2 (the Commentary based on this method) he gave the historical illustrations in harmony with the proper synchronisms. He is said to have been the first to attempt a tabular scheme to illustrate a commentary. ^{28Joseph Mede, The Key of the Revelation ... With a Comment Thereupon, pp. 1, 27-29; Guinness, Romanism, p. 272; Elliott, op. cit., vol. 4, pp. 487-489.}PFF2 543.1

The first synchronism Mede established was that of what he termed “a noble quaternion of prophecies,” remarkable for the equality of their times: (1) The three and a half times, or1260 days, of the woman in the wilderness; (2) the forty two months of the domination of the beast; (3) the forty-two months of the treading under foot of the outer court of the temple; and (4) the 1260 days of the witnesses prophesying in sackcloth. Mede contended that not only are these times equal in length, but they begin at the same time and end together, and must therefore synchronize throughout their course. They reach from the era of the rise of the Papacy, and extend on to the era of the over throw.PFF2 543.2

2. ALL VISIONS FIND RELATIONSHIP TO 1260 YEARS

He also contended that the revived Roman head of the first beast of Revelation 13 parallels the second, or lamblike, beast, which acts for the revived head, and that these are necessarily synchronous. He then traced the remaining visions of the Apocalypse as they are related to these central visions, seeking to establish the connection of the entire series of visions-apart from the question of interpretation.PFF2 543.3

Mede’s revival of interpretation of the millennium as still future was epochal in its repudiation of the Augustinian theory, which computed the thousand years’ binding of Satan as from Christ’s first advent, or from Constantine’s time. Mede placed it from the second advent onward, believing it would be introduced by the literal resurrection of the saints and the destruction of Antichrist. ^{29According to Dr. Worthington, in a sketch prefixed to Mede’s Works (1663-64 ed.), Mede was led by the law of synchronisms to again place the millennium in the future, contrary even to his own inclinations. The deceptions of Mohammedanism that came in the Augustinian period, Antichristian idolatry, and persecution of the servants of Christ-indications that the devil was not chainecl were all determining factors.}PFF2 544.1

3. MEDE’S COMMENTARY AUTHORIZED BY BRITISH PARLIA MENT

It is noteworthy that Mede’s The Key of the Revelation—with Preface and comprehensive summary by Dr. William Twiss, prolocutor of the Westminster Assembly, and translated from the Latin into English by Richard More, one of the burgesses in the English Parliament—was authorized for publication by none other than the British House of Commons in 1642. ^{30The authorization by the committee of Parliament, dated February 21, 1641, and April 18, 1642, appears opposite the title page (1650 ed.).} Thus the censorship of this Puritan Parliament accepted as orthodox this exposition of the Historical School of prophetic interpretation, called by some the “continuistic view.” And at the time Mede’s work was approved by the Parliamentary Committee Concerning Printing, the large Westminster Assembly of 121 divines, headed by Dr. Twiss, drew up the Confession of Faith, which was subsequently adopted by the Presbyterian Church. This confession endorses the Historical School of prophetic interpretation regarding the Papacy as declared in chapter 25, sec. 6:PFF2 544.2

“There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God. [Footnote refs: “2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4, 8, 9; Revelation 13:6.”]” ^{31Philip Schaff, Creeds, vol. 3, pp. 658, 659.}PFF2 544.3

Thus premillennialism rose again to real eminence in the seventeenth century, and high on the list of its exponents stands the illustrious Mede. He also made a valiant stroke against Futurism, and its literal three and a half years. So the year day principle was again sustained.PFF2 545.1