Interpreting Revelation 11

Thomas Cartwright on the two witnesses

Below is a commentary on part of Revelation 11 in which the author refutes the Jesuit doctrine that the two witnesses are Enoch and Elijah and that the 42 months and 1,260 days represent a literal three and a half years.

Thomas Cartwright
A Confutation of the Rhemists (1618).

(2) By "two witnesses" is meant a few faithful Ministers which God will raise up here and there amidst the power of darkness in the greatest strength of the Antichristian reign, according to His promise of never quite taking away His Word and His Spirit from His Church, not in the greatest wastes and desolations of the Church. And yet this scarcity and rarity of able Ministers of the Gospel shall be so moderated that the Lord shall not leave Himself without provision for witnesses of the truth of the Gospel as may be sufficient as well for the salvation of those in the ruins of the [false] Church, out of whom He will deliver [His people]. These same Ministers whom God raises up for a special work will, within the confines of this Babylonian confusion, preach the deeper condemnation of that usurper, the Antichrist of Rome.

Here if it be asked why the Apostle used the number "two" rather than another, it may be answered: First, because the Law of God requires this minimum number of witnesses to try a matter of controversy (Deut. 19:15); and secondly, according to his accustomed manner of alluding to the prophecies under the Law, he might make his speech conformable to the prophecy of Zachariah, which he evidently alludes to (Zach.11:14). Look [for the fulfillment of this prophecy] in the Acts and Monuments of Master John Foxe, and that of Flacius Illyricus' book called The Catalogue of the Witnesses of the Truth. And as this exposition frameth well with the words of the Apostle, considering his manner of writing throughout this book which is almost entirely figurative, consisting of tropes, thus it is strengthened by the context, so that whosoever shall oppose this truth (after considering the context) shows himself either full of conceit, or given over to a love of his own opinion, without any reverent regard of the truth, though it hits him square in the face. For first, how shall only two witnesses and no more, and in so short a time frame as 3 ½ years, in one city only, Jerusalem, as the Jesuits have it - I say, how can they make the truth of the Gospel known to all the Nations, Tongues and Tribes of the earth, since, for the proclaiming thereof in the Kingdom of Christ, besides many Prophets and Evangelists, it was necessary that twelve Apostles, endowed with such virtue and power of miracles and gifts as were never before seen nor shall ever be again, and continuing in their ministries for several years, having been sent to all coasts and corners of the world? Not to mention the ordinary Ministry of Pastors and Teachers (who, in the language of the Jesuits are called Parsons and Vicars), whom the Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists appointed for the continuation of the work which they had begun. Unless, therefore, these two witnesses had the voices of thunder itself, reaching to the ends of the earth, it is impossible for only two men to accomplish that which this prophecy predicts will be done. Secondly, how could the Nations, Tongues, Tribes and People behold their dead bodies in Jerusalem, when those who maintain the teaching that the Jews will be restored to their ancient country, make them the rulers and governors thereof? [It is illegal under Jewish Law to allow a corpse to remain unburied one day, let alone 3 days, Deut. 21:22-23] Thirdly, who will allow that the city [and temple] of Jerusalem will be rebuilt (upon which this dream of theirs subsists)? Where is their warrant for such an allegation? On the contrary, our Savior Christ had it razed to the foundations so that all the world might know that the Ceremonial Law is utterly abrogated.

[Furthermore, it is impossible that Enoch and Elijah are still in their flesh in Paradise] because flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, nor can corruption inherit incorruption. If, therefore, it is true, as we Protestants hold, that these two are already freed from all corruption, then how can a sinless immortal be made mortal? It is true that the souls of a few departed have, for the glory of God, returned to their bodies again [e.g., Lazarus], but to say that those who have been perfectly blessed in body and soul should be sent from the height of happiness back to the lowest, basest, greatest misery upon the earth needs a much sounder argument then that which the Jesuits have attempted here.

Also, by declaring Enoch and Elijah to be those two witnesses who are killed for their testimony, the hope of eternal life is dashed, since though they have both gone to heaven, yet allegedly God has returned them to earth to suffer great persecution and martyrdom. What then can be said of the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection, whereby we teach the immortality of our bodies in the Kingdom of Heaven? This doctrine is clean overthrown by alleging Enoch and Elijah as the two witnesses!

The testimony of the Scripture, Matt. 17, has been shown to be speaking of John the Baptist, who is called "Elijah" because of the similar gifts of the Spirit possessed by each, and also because of their conformity in the repair of the great ruin of the Church in which they labored. The Jesuits quote Malachi for confirmation of their doctrine, yet they lay hands upon their own cause. For seeing it is well known that the Prophets under the Law (in any prophetic utterance of things to come) reach no further than to the time of our Savior Christ. Our Lord has hidden the specific prophecies which concern the Church after Christ in the writing of the Apostles, especially in John. It is evident that the prophecy of Malachi must be understood of John the Baptist.

(3) That the doctrine whereby is taught that Antichrist comes 3 ½ years before the end of the world is a vain fable hath been before declared upon by me in 2 Thess. 2., and that it hath no credulity in this prophecy is evident. First, by the words forty two months is not meant a precise term of years, but (according to its usage in Scripture in divers places) an uncertain time for a certain; and yet so, as thereby he teacheth both that the time of persecution shall not be at the pleasure and lust of the world, but according to the will of the most High; and also that for the chosen's sake it shall be cut short [Matt. 24:22], for which cause he later calls it time, times and half a time [Rev. 12:14]. And even in this very chapter, that which he first calls forty two months, he later calls twelve hundred and sixty days, which are both 3 ½ years. He then uses the time period of 3 ½ days, [all relating to the same time of great tribulation.] For who doubts (especially seeing it in our day) that during the whole time of Antichrist's persecution the Ministers of the Gospel are most cruelly handled, and for not only 3 ½ days. His rage against them is so great that he cannot be satisfied with their blood alone, but he makes the fire of his indignation also feed upon their dead bodies. This is yet further confirmed when the Apostle in this Book notes one and the same time known to God alone indifferently by an hour, day, month, or year. Further, that the forty two months cannot be taken precisely for 3 ½ years only, it is manifest, for after the 3 ½ year period there are yet still other events which must take place; e.g., the slaughter of a great part of the wicked City, as well as a conversion, under God, of another part. The Jesuits well know these conversions will not be effected by a trental of Masses, but must be wrought by some good continuance of the preaching of the Gospel. Last of all, when the two witnesses whom they imagine to come into the world after Antichrist, and who go out of the world before him, are said to preach 3 ½ years during the same time frame that Antichrist persecutes, [it is impossible, if they come after him and are killed before he is killed]. Thus, if the one should not be understood of a specific length of time, neither should it be inextricably tied to the other! [Editor's note: Like Pareus after him, Cartwright does not necessarily posit a year for a prophetic day in this chapter, as other Protestant Commentators do. Thus, he is not dogmatic in postulating the length of time the witnesses and Antichrist will run their course. But one thing is certain, he does not hold to a literal 3 ½ years for either the witnesses or Antichrist, having proved the impossibility of so short a time in which to fulfill all the prophecies.]

(5) The City of Jerusalem is not the seat of Antichrist. For not only is there no attempt at rebuilding it [and the temple], but all the other reasons previously mentioned negate that possibility. Furthermore, the description of the "great city" in no way agrees to it. First, Jerusalem was never called "Sodom". Neither are the banished Jews characterized anywhere in the world as Sodomites because of their proclivity for partaking in such monstrous uncleanness. But all the world knows, both by word of mouth and by reading of their books which defend homosexuality, that such a description most agreeably fits Rome and its Clergy. Again, it is also well known that the title of "spiritual Egypt" cannot agree to the Jews, who today abhor the gross idolatry and adoration of creatures, showing no evidence whatever in suddenly changing their worship into one of palpable idolatry. This particular sin of Egypt is one which most properly agrees to Rome, the Western Babylon, the mother of spiritual fornications, which in her worship of bread is more filthy than the Egyptians ever were, though they worshipped venomous snakes. As to the other point, that it is called the place where Christ was crucified, it cannot agree to the City of Jerusalem. For first, it was impossible that our Savior Christ be crucified inside the city. He needed to be crucified outside the City if the prophecies were to be exactly fulfilled, Hebrews 13:12. Secondly, He was not crucified by any authority of Jerusalem or its Jews, John 18:31, but rather by Rome, who held dominion and had the sole authority to execute. This agrees perfectly to papal Rome, who executes Christ in His members, and especially His Ministers.