, flTO2 



BETJLBAUX-REVELATION. 



works, ra T?27 of Shakespeare, and later of Burger's 

 Ballads and other works. His illust rations attain, .1 

 popularity in England and Frnnce as well as in Gcr 

 inanv. He died at Dreadeo, June 11, 1857. 



REULEAUX. FU.VN/.. a German technologist, was 

 born at Esehweiler near Aix la-Chapclle, Sept 

 1*29. At the Polytechnic School of Carlsruho he 

 ptudied machine construction, but he also studied phi 

 losophy at Berlin anil limiu. After some service an a 

 practical engineer he became in I 85f> professor of ma- 

 chine^cotistruction at Hurich. In I Si>4 he was called 

 to a similar posit inn at Berlin. In 18i>7 lie served on 

 the jury of award at the Paris Exposition, in 1*7:; at 

 Vienna, and in 1876 at Philadelphia. His l.,i/,r.< 

 from 1'ltilnilrliililii (1S77) created a sensation in Gcr- 

 many by their severe criticism of the German inaim- 

 f.ictures displayed, and eventually brought about (treat 

 improvement in German workmanship. Kcnleaux 

 attended the exhibitions in Sydney and Melbourne in 

 1879 and I8S1. He has also been connected with the 

 Imperial Patent Office. He has published Komtmr- 

 f<r(|S7l). T/ieorfiittJte KutemaMc (1875), and Qutr 

 dnrcJi Indira (1884). 



RKUSS, EDOUARD GimxAUME EUOF.NE, a French 

 theologian, w;is born at Strasburg, .July IS, ISO}. He 

 was educated in his native city and studied theology at 

 Gottingen and Hallr.. and Oriental languages at Paris. 

 He began to teach Biblical and Oriental literature at 

 Strasburg in 1829, and became professor therein 1836. 

 He published Jli'ttdire tit In Tktnlnrjie ehrftienne an 

 tic'ea/>'i<tnttiiue('2vi)\s., 1852); Ilistm'rrdit C'unim <li'.i 

 S'tintr* Ecriturcx dun* T >]lae dirrtirnne (1863) ; 

 Geschlchte der hrilif/en Schrfften <l>:< Allen Testaments 

 (I8S1); Let }Aires lltidiititnnts (1883). He also 

 projected a new French translation of the Bible, with 

 introduction and notes, which was completed in 17 

 volumes (1874-79). Heuss was instrumental in intro- 

 ducing German criticism and methods of investiga- 

 tion am 'in: French theologians. He has taken part 

 in editing a new edition of Calvin's Wurk*. 



REUTER, PAUL JUI.ES, BARON, telegraphist, was 

 born at Cassel, July 21, 1821. While employed as a 

 banker's clerk at Gottingen he became interested in 

 the discoveries in electro-magnetism. The European 

 revolutions of 1848 suggested to him the importance 

 of rapid communication of news. In 1849 he at 

 tempted to Mart in Paris a system using lithographic 

 copies of condensations of daily news. But when the 

 Prussian government allowed the publi; use of the 

 telegraph from Berlin to Aix la-Chapelle, he removed 

 to the latter and sent the news thence to Brussels 

 by means of carrier pigeons. As fast as telegraphic 

 lines were extended, lie took advantage of them, and 

 supplied the deficiencies by couriers, steaniln>ats, and 

 other means, even building telegraph lines himself 

 when permission could be obtained. In 1851 he re- 

 moved his chief agency to London, whence he had 

 communication with all parts of the world. He was 

 naturalized as a British subject and formed a partner- 

 ship willi Baron Erlangcr. He established close rela- 

 tions with the newspapers, and the Tintrx called in his 

 aid durinit the war in Italv in 185'J. His title of baron 

 was conferred by the duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha 

 in 1871. 



v REVELATION, BOOK OP. This 



pTtte (it 510 book of . tlle Ncw Testament is closely 

 Am. Itep!). related in thought, and to some extent 

 in form, with the discourse about "the 

 last things," recorded in Matt, xxiv. ; Mark xiii. ; 

 Luke xxi. While it bears some resemblance to the 

 Jewiah "Apocalyptic Literature." it is as markedly 

 distinct from writings of that class as are the Canoni 

 eal Gospels from the Apocryphal Gospels. The diffi- 

 culty of interpreting the book arises in part from its 

 unii|i|e ch.-iractiT. and from (lie avowedly prophetic 

 nature nf itscnnteiiis. Dr. Ilarnack, in the article in 

 the ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANMCA. speaks of it as 

 "the most intelligible book in the New Te-ta- 



ment," but the inteHii:ibility he claims for it is 

 lie illy purchased. It will IH> impossible to discuss his 

 views in detail, but the critical method of investiga- 

 tion he adopts has no right to call itself " historical," 

 since it gives little or no weight to historical testi- 

 mony, and deals in the most arbitrary fashion with the 

 internal evidence furnished by the Apocalypse itself. 

 As a result the greatest uncertainty is thrown about 

 the question of authorship, the one question that is 

 most readily answered ; while the really difficult ques- 

 tions of interpretation are regarded as easy of expla- 

 nation. 



1. Thf. Author of the Ajwilypsr. External evi- 

 dence point! to th'e apostle John as the author; the 

 witnesses on the other side usually show some preju- 

 dice against the book itself, and MOM seek to deny 

 its apostolic authority. That some other John was the 

 author seems impossible, and the supposition "thai 

 the name of John was inter|Milated in the last revision 

 (after the death of the apostle John)" is without 

 any support, external or internal. This view scarcely 

 differs from that which deems the book a forgery. 



The objections urged by Harnack against the view 

 that the apostle John was the author are not con- 

 vincing. (1). The opinion of the so-called "Alogj " 

 cannot outweigh the positive testimony supporting 

 the genuineness of the Apocalypse. (2). The internal 

 reasons are invalid ; the apostle in describing his vis- 

 ions need not designate himself as a personal disciple ; 

 his language about the twelve apostles airrees with the 

 character of the Apocalypse ; his descriptions of 

 (Ihrist need occasion no difficulty. The psychological 

 iinintelligibility, alleged in the article in the BR[PAN- 

 NICA, is based upon prejudgment in regard to the theo- 

 logical position of the assumed author. The main 

 difficulty Is bused upon the obvious difference of style 

 between the Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel, 'fhe 

 Tabingen school accept the former as the work of the 

 apostle John, in order to deny the genuineness of the 

 latter. Some critics who regard the apostle as the 

 author of both works, accept an carlv date for the Apoc- 

 alypse, in order to account for these differences by 

 the long interval. But this is not necessary ; the two 

 books are totally distinct in diameter ; one a simple 

 historical narrative, the other a description of visions, 

 alleged by the author to be supernatural. This of 

 itself would account for the difference in style. The 

 variations in language have been overestimated: the 

 doctrinal positions are not diverse; there nre, indeed, 

 positive evidences of a common authorship, in plan, 

 and thought, and phrase. The difficulty of forming a 

 consistent theory lather than the so-called " tradi- 

 tional" one will appear from the variety of opinions 



proposed by reccntcritics ; most of them purely i j.-c- 



tural, or at best based upon assumptions respecting the 

 origin of the New Testament books. In the case of 

 l>oi!i books the burden of proof rests with the oppo- 

 nents of the " traditional " view. If an early date be 

 assigned to tho Apocalypse the name of .loiin could 

 scarcely be interpolated, and apostolic authority so uni- 

 versally admitted. A later date to the Gospel calls for 

 an author worthy of the book, and the second century 

 does not reveal any one who could have written that 

 Gospel. If both were written in the first century, we 

 may must consistently accept the apostle John as the 

 author of both. 



2. The Datt nf Writing. Recent scholarship ac- 

 cepts :i <late shortly before A. D. 70. The grounds 

 for the opinion nre (1) that the book implies that 

 the destruction of Jerusalem had not yet occurred ; 

 (2) that the Antichrist is Nero, the number of the 

 ticast (668, chap. xiii. 18) indicating "Emperor 

 Neron;" (3) that the earlier date allows sufficient 

 time for the change of style noticeable in the Ano'-a- 

 nd the Fourth Gospel. The lust argument is of 

 course rejected by those who deny the genuineness of 

 culicr of lhe.se bonks. Yet the. external evidence sup- 

 porting the later dale (under Dumitian, bct. >i 



