'The task of theology today consists in overcoming rationalistic unhistorical historicism. . . through the knowledge of sacred history.’ (Quoted by G. Weth, op. cit., p. 97.)

Dr. Karl August Auberlen
(1824-1864)

The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation of St. John in Their Mutual Relation (Andover: 1857) | Die Theosophie Friedrich Christoph Oetingers (Tubingen: 1847) | Theology Professor 1824-1864 Basel | Lebensbilder: Gründungszeit

"regards (the book of Revelation) it more generally, and less specifically, as an outline of Epochs of the History of the world and the great forces which shape it into a Kingdom of God" (Farrar)

(On Matthew 24:28)
"...Christ Himself represents the destruction of Jerusalem as His Messianic coming (Matt. xxiv. 28)." (p. 101)

(On Typological relationship between Joseph and Daniel)
“The one stood near the beginning and the other near the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both were representatives of God at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world; so representing Israel’s calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel’s destination to be a light to lighten the Gentiles, as Romans 11:12, 15, foretells.”

WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID

Greg Bahnsen (1984)
"A partial list of scholars who have supported the early date for Revelation, gleaned unsystematically from my reading, would include the following 18th and 19th writers not already mentioned just above: John Lightfoot, Harenbert, Hartwig, Michaelis, Tholuck, Clarke, Bishop Newton, James MacDonald, Gieseler, Tilloch, Bause, Zullig, Swegler, De Wett, Lucke, Bohmer, Hilgenfeld, Mommsen, Ewald, Neander, Volkmar, Renan, Credner, Kernkel, B. Weiss, Reuss, Thiersch, Bunsen, Stier, Auberlen, Maurice, Niermeyer, Desprez, Aube, Keim, De Pressence, Cowles, Scholten, Beck, Dusterdiek, Simcox, S. Davidson, Beyschlag, Salmon, Hausrath. Continuing on into the 20th century we could list Plummer, Selwyn, J.V. Bartlet, C.A. Scott, Erbes, Edmundson, Henderson, and others. If one's reading has been limited pretty much to the present and immediately preceding generations of writers on Revelation, then the foregoing names may be somewhat unfamiliar to him, but they were not unrecognized in previous eras. When we combine these names with the yet outstanding stature of Schaff, Terry, Lightfoot, Westcott, and Hort, we can feel the severity of Beckwith's understatement when in 1919 he described the Neronian dating for Revelation as "a view held by many down to recent times."[40] By many indeed! It has been described, as we saw above, as "the ruling view" of critics," by "the majority of modern critics," by "most modern scholars," and by "the whole force of modern criticism." The weight of scholarship placed behind the Neronian option for the dating of Revelation has been staggering. In our won day it has gained the support of such worthies as C.C. Torrey, J.A.T. Robinson, and F.F. Bruce and has been popularized by Jay Adams.[41] In 1956 Torrey could write about the number 666, "It is now the accepted conclusion that the beast is the emperor Nero."[42]" (Historical Setting for the Dating of Revelation)

F.W. Farrar (1882)
"Moreover, if we accept erroneous tradition of inference from the ambiguous expressions of Irenaeus, we are landed in insuperable difficulties.  By the time that Domitian died, St. John was, according to all testimony, so old and so infirm that even if there were no other obstacles in the way, it is impossible to conceive of him as writing the fiery pages of the Apocalypse.  Irenaeus may have been misinterpreted ; but even if not, he might have made a "slip of memory," and confused Domitian with Nero.  I myself, in talking to an eminent statesman, have heard him make a chronological mistake of some years, even in describing events in which he took one of the most prominent parts.  We cannot accept a dubious expression of the Bishop of Lyons as adequate to set aside an overwhelming weight of evidence, alike external and internal, in proof of the fact that the Apocalypse was written, at the latest, soon after the death of Nero. [10]..[10] This result is now accepted, not only by Lücke, Schwegler, Baur, Züllig, De Wette, Renan, Krenkel, Bleek, Reuss, Réville, Volkmar, Bunsen, Düsterdieck, &c., but also by such writers as Stier, Neander, Guericke, Auberlen, F.D. Maurice, Moses Stuart, Neirmeyer, Desprez, S. Davidson, the author of The Parousia, Aubé, &c." (The Apocalypse)

"The school of Historical Interpreters was founded by the Abbot Joachim early in the 13th century, and was specially flourishing in the first fifty years of the present century. [There are two school of the interpreters who make the Apocalypse a prophecy of all Christian history.  The school of Bengel, Vitringo, Elliott, &c., make it mainly a history of the Church.  Another school regards it more generally, and less specifically, as an outline of Epochs of the History of the world and the great forces which shape it into a Kingdom of God.  To this latter school belong Hengstenberg, Ebrard, Auberlen, &c.]"

The internal evidence that the book was written before the Fall of Jerusalem has satisfied not only many Christian commentators, who are invidiously stigmatised as "rationalistic," but even such writers as Wetstein, Lucke, Neander, Stier, Auberlen, Ewald, Bleek, Gebhardt, Immer, Davidson, Dusterdieck, Moses Stuart, F.D. Maurice, the author of "The Parousia," Dean Plumptree, the authors of the Protestanten-Bibel and multitudes of others no less entitled to the respect of all Christians.

The two wings of the great eagle in xii.14 are the two Testaments (Wordsworth); or the eastern and western divisions of the empire (Mede, Auberlen); or the Emperor Theodosius (Elliott)." (The Preterist Interpretation)

Robert Jamieson (1871)
"2. leopard . . . bear . . . lion--This beast unites in itself the God-opposed characteristics of the three preceding kingdoms, resembling respectively the leopard, bear, and lion. It rises up out of the sea, as Daniel's four beasts, and has ten horns, as Daniel's fourth beast, and seven heads, as Daniel's four beasts had in all, namely, one on the first, one on the second, four on the third, and one on the fourth. Thus it represents comprehensively in one figure the world power (which in Daniel is represented by four) of all times and places, not merely of one period and one locality, viewed as opposed to God; just as the woman is the Church of all ages. This view is favored also by the fact, that the beast is the vicarious representative of Satan, who similarly has seven heads and ten horns: a general description of his universal power in all ages and places of the world. Satan appears as a serpent, as being the archetype of the beast nature (Revelation 12:9). "If the seven heads meant merely seven Roman emperors, one cannot understand why they alone should be mentioned in the original image of Satan, whereas it is perfectly intelligible if we suppose them to represent Satan's power on earth viewed collectively" [AUBERLEN].

"A new and worse heathenism breaks in upon the Christianized world, more devilish than the old one of the first heads of the beast. The latter was an apostasy only from the general revelation of God in nature and conscience; but this new one is from God's revelation of love in His Son. It culminates in Antichrist, the man of sin, the son of perdition (compare Revelation 17:11); 2 Thessalonians 2:3; compare 2 Timothy 3:1-4, the very characteristics of old heathenism (Romans 1:29-32) [AUBERLEN]."

"12. power--Greek, "authority." before him--"in his presence"; as ministering to, and upholding him. "The non-existence of the beast embraces the whole Germanic Christian period. The healing of the wound and return of the beast is represented [in regard to its final Antichristian manifestation though including also, meanwhile, its healing and return under Popery, which is baptized heathenism] in that principle which, since 1789, has manifested itself in beast-like outbreaks" [AUBERLEN]. which dwell therein--the earthly-minded. The Church becomes the harlot: the world's political power, the Antichristian beast; the world's wisdom and civilization, the false prophet. Christ's three offices are thus perverted: the first beast is the false kingship; the harlot, the false priesthood; the second beast, the false prophet. The beast is the bodily, the false prophet the intellectual, the harlot the spiritual power of Antichristianity [AUBERLEN]. "

"Thus 666, the judged world power, contrasts with the 144,000 sealed and transfigured ones (the Church number, twelve, squared and multiplied by one thousand, the number symbolizing the world pervaded by God; ten, the world number, raised to the power of three the number of God) [AUBERLEN]." (Commentary Critical and Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible)

A.R. Fausset (1871)
"for the overspreading of abominations--On account of the abominations committed by the unholy people against the Holy One, He shall not only destroy the city and sanctuary (Daniel 9:25), but shall continue its desolation until the time of the consummation "determined" by God (the phrase is quoted from Isaiah 10:22,23), when at last the world power shall be judged and dominion be given to the saints of the Most High (Daniel 7:26,27). AUBERLEN translates, "On account of the desolating summit of abominations (compare Daniel 11:31 12:11; thus the repetition of the same thing as in Daniel 9:26 is avoided), and till the consummation which is determined, it (the curse, Daniel 9:11, foretold by Moses) will pour on the desolated." Israel reached the summit of abominations, which drew down desolation (Matthew 24:28), nay, which is the desolation itself, when, after murdering Messiah, they offered sacrifices, Mosaic indeed in form, but heathenish in spirit (compare Isaiah 1:13 Eze 5:11). Christ refers to this passage (Matthew 24:15), "When ye see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place" (the latter words being tacitly implied in "abominations" as being such as are committed against the sanctuary). TREGELLES translates, "upon the wing of abominations shall be that which causeth desolation"; namely, an idol set up on a wing or pinnacle of the temple (compare Matthew 4:5) by Antichrist, who makes a covenant with the restored Jews for the last of the seventy weeks of years (fulfilling Jesus' words, "If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive"), and for the first three and a half years keeps it, then in the midst of the week breaks it, causing the daily sacrifices to cease. TREGELLES thus identifies the last half week with the time, times, and a half of the persecuting little horn (Daniel 7:25). SIR ISAAC NEWTON explains the wing ("overspreading") of abominations to be the Roman ensigns (eagles) brought to the east gate of the temple, and there sacrificed to by the soldiers; the war, ending in the destruction of Jerusalem, lasted from spring A.D. 67 to autumn A.D. 70, that is, just three and a half years, or the last half week of years [JOSEPHUS, Wars of the Jews, 6.6]." (in loc.)

"CHARACTERISTICS OF DANIEL. The vision mode of revelation is the exception in other prophets, the rule in Daniel. In Zechariah (Zec 1:1-6:15), who lived after Daniel, the same mode appears, but the other form from the seventh chapter to the end. The Revelation of St. John alone is perfectly parallel to Daniel, which may be called the Old Testament Apocalypse. In the contents too there is the difference above noticed, that he views the kingdom of God from the standpoint of the world kingdoms, the development of which is his great subject. This mode of viewing it was appropriate to his own position in a heathen court, and to the relation of subjection in which the covenant-people then stood to the world powers. No longer are single powers of the world incidentally introduced, but the universal monarchies are the chief theme, in which the worldly principle, opposed to the kingdom of God, manifests itself fully. The near and distant are not seen in the same perspective, as by the other prophets, who viewed the whole future from the eschatological point; but in Daniel the historical details are given of that development of the world powers which must precede the advent of the kingdom [AUBERLEN].   AUBERLEN compares Daniel to Joseph: the one at the beginning, the other at the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both representatives of God and His people at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth, expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world: so representing Israel's calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel's destination to be a light to lighten the whole Gentile world, as Ro 11:12, 15 foretells. As Achilles at the beginning, and Alexander at the end, of Grecian history are the mirrors of the whole life of the Hellenic people, so Joseph and Daniel of Israel. " (Commentary on Daniel)

C.H. Spurgeon (1865)
"AUBERLEN (CARL AUGUST, Ph.D.) The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, by C. A.A. Translated by Adolphe Saphir. 8vo. Edinb.,T. & T. Clark. 1856. 5/-Not a textual commentary, but a treatise upon the mysterious prophecies. Auberlen's spirit is reverential and his views are evangelical, or we should not have found Mr. Saphir translating it. He acknowledges his indebtedness to Roos, No. 799. We must leave the interpretations to be judged by those who are learned in such subjects." (Commenting and Commentaries)

OTHER AREAS OF INTEREST

"January 27, 1843: J.G. Fischer, Christoph Schwab, and Karl Auberlen visit Hölderlin, who drinks coffee and smokes cigars with them: "...despite his disturbance, he still has a spirited appearance," and still shows "traces of his former beauty." Hölderlin admits tht he is the author of his poetry, and that Schiller had been a good friend. Schwab gives the poet a copy of the second edition of his poetry. Hölderlin thanks him and thumbs through the book, saying: "Yes, the poems are genuine, they are from me, but the title is false; never in my life was I called Hölderlin, but rather Scardanelli or Salvator Rosa or the like." Fischer to Hölderlin: "Your Diotima must have been a noble creature," to which Hölderlin responds: "Ah, my Diotima, don't talk to me about Diotima. She bore me thirteen sons; one is Pope, the other is Sultan, the third is the Czar of Russia." In a shrill Swabian accent, he suddenly says: "and do you know what happened to her? She went crazy! Crazy, crazy, crazy!" (Friedrich Hölderlin Chronology)

John M. Brenner 
"The Wuerttemberg pietist and scholar, Johannes Albrecht Bengel (1687-1752), perhaps more than anyone else opened the door to chiliasm for Lutherans. Through his study of the Book of Revelation Bengel became convinced that the date of our Lord's return could be accurately determined. Following a rather elaborate chronological scheme he set 1836 as the date of Christ's Second Coming, the binding of Satan, and the beginning of the millennial reign.32 Bengel was an able linguist, careful scholar, and capable exegete. His reputation and academic stature gave premillennialism "scholarly standing in Germany" and paved the way for other academics to pursue millennial studies. Bengel's influence was felt by the Erlangen school and can be seen in the Zahn commentary.33 In the nineteenth century there was a resurgence of premillennialism among biblical scholars in Europe including the Lutheran exegete, Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890) and the Swiss Reformed exegete Frederic L. Godet (1812-1900).34 A history of Christian doctrine produced in the nineteenth century also lists Karl Auberlen (1824-1864), Johann von Hofmann (1810-1877), Richard Rothe (1799-1867), and the Dutch Reformed theologian Johannes van Oosterzee (1817-1882) among European theologians who were advocating premillennialism.35 Lindberg adds the names of Christoph Luthardt (1823-1902) and Franz Frank (1827-1894) to the list.36 American Lutherans were aware of these European theologians. Some Lutherans emigrating to America brought these millennialistic views with them. " (American Lutheran Views of Eschatology)

Robert Jamieson (1871)
"the other is not yet come--not as ALFORD, inaccurately representing AUBERLEN, the Christian empire beginning with Constantine; but, the Germanic-Slavonic empire beginning and continuing in its beast-like, that is, HEATHEN Antichristian character for only "a short space." The time when it is said of it, "it is not" (Revelation 17:11), is the time during which it is "wounded to death," and has the "deadly wound" (Revelation 13:3). The external Christianization of the migrating hordes from the North which descended on Rome, is the wound to the beast answering to the earth swallowing up the flood (heathen tribes) sent by the dragon, Satan, to drown the woman, the Church. The emphasis palpably is on "a short space," which therefore comes first in the Greek, not on "he must continue," as if his continuance for some [considerable] time were implied, as ALFORD wrongly thinks. The time of external Christianization (while the beast's wound continues) has lasted for centuries, ever since Constantine. Rome and the Greek Church have partially healed the wound by image worship."