Part 1

Transcriber's Note.

Apparent typographical errors have been corrected.

Italics are indicated by _underscores_. Small capitals have been converted to full capitals.

In the list of the publisher's other books, at the end of the work, the first line of each entry sometimes comprises only part of the title and sometimes extends beyond the title. The entire first line has been italicised in the original. In this version only the title has been italicised.

THE

NEW ESCHATOLOGY.

SHOWING

THE INDESTRUCTIBILITY OF THE EARTH

AND

THE WIDE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.

BY J. G. BROUGHTON PEGG.

PHILADELPHIA J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 1872.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1871, by J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

LIPPINCOTT'S PRESS, PHILADELPHIA.

NOTE.

This little work was published in England several years ago; but has never before been republished in this country. It deals with those texts of Scripture which have generally been supposed to foretell the destruction of the material universe; and shows conclusively that these passages have been entirely misunderstood by commentators; and that, rightly interpreted, they have no reference whatever to the outer realm of matter, but to the inner realm of mind; to the internal condition of the church, the loss or destruction of heavenly charity, and the eclipse of genuine faith, which it was foreseen and foretold would occur at the close of the first Christian Dispensation.

It is proper to add, also, that, although the name of Swedenborg nowhere occurs in the book, it is evident that the author was familiar with his teachings, and viewed and treated his subject from the Swedenborgian stand-point. But with the lovers of spiritual truth and the seekers after a Spiritual Christianity, this fact--now that so many earnest inquirers are beginning to read the writings of the Swedish seer--will rather add to than detract from the interest and value of the work.

AMERICAN EDITOR. PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 30, 1871.

THE NEW ESCHATOLOGY.

_For the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea_.--REV. xxi. 1.

While we blame the conduct of the Jews in adhering only to the literal sense of the Scriptures, and by such adherence rejecting their Messiah, we possibly forget that the Christian church has followed precisely the same line of conduct; and that to this we are indebted for the greater part of those absurd dogmas, which have so long exposed the Gospel to the derision of its enemies. Had men properly discriminated between those parts of the Sacred Volume which are _literally_ true, and those which are only _apparently_ so, we should never have heard of the doctrines of transubstantiation and Roman supremacy; nor of many other equally absurd beliefs which the generality of Christians entertain. We should not have seen a fallible and weak mortal exalted as Head over the church of God; we should not have heard of a morsel of bread being changed into the Lord's body; we should not have seen the Divine Nature divided among three separate and distinct Persons; nor should we have heard of the doctrine which we are about to bring under consideration.

But do not mistake me. When I assert that the Scriptures in the literal sense sometimes speak only apparent truth, I by no means deny the divine authority of the Sacred Record. The church whose doctrines I advocate, most explicitly declares that the _whole_ of the Scriptures,--every chapter,--every verse,--every word, nay, sometimes every _letter_--is filled with the inbreathed wisdom of God. But when I say that apparent and not _real_ truths are often laid down in the letter of the Word, I affirm what every man who possesses any share of discernment will readily admit. The fact itself is too plain even to require proof. Thus we read that the sun rises, moves, and sets; which is certainly true in _appearance_, but not in reality. Again we are told that the LORD repents,--that He is weary, and that He turns away His face from man; which, though correct as regards appearance, has no foundation in literal fact; for though the Sun of Righteousness is said to rise upon the soul, and to set when the mind is given up to evil, yet it is here as in the case of the _material_ sun. In God "there is no variableness nor shadow of turning;"--"He fainteth not, neither is _weary_;"--"He is not a man that He should lie, nor the son of man that He should repent;" but as the earth, by turning to or from the sun, causes the appearance of motion in that body; so the mind of man, by turning to the Lord, or by departing from Him, causes an appearance of change in God; yet it is not He that changes, but the mind itself.

And we may go still further. There are numerous passages in the Word of God, which in the literal sense only, do not convey even _apparent_ truth. Among others the following, "Thou ridest through them with thine horses." "He rode upon a cherub and did fly; He came flying upon the wings of the wind." "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him;" "for my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." "This (bread) is my body; this cup is the New Testament in my blood." "If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off and cast it from thee." "I am the Door of the sheep." "I am the true vine, and my Father is the Husbandman." In all these passages, and others which will occur to every reader of the Scripture, the literal sense conveys neither real nor apparent truth. The Lord does not really ride through the sea, nor does he even _appear_ to do so. The flesh of the Saviour was not to be _literally_ eaten. The bread which He held was not really his body, nor did it even _seem_ to be so. And as in these and similar instances, the outward letter of the Word conveys not its true meaning, it is to be sought for in the law of correspondence; or in that eternal connection which subsists between natural things and spiritual.

And upon this law of correspondence or analogy I must make a few preliminary remarks. It is what the world in general terms _figure_, or _metaphor_; but the New Church makes a distinction, and I will add, a very just one, betwixt _figure_ (properly so called) and _correspondence_. Figurative language is that in which a comparison is drawn between one natural object and another; the analogy between which exists only in the imagination, and has, therefore, no _real_ existence: but correspondence is the representation of spiritual things by natural; and the resemblance is not merely imaginary but real, consisting in the proper dependence of the latter upon the former, as an effect upon its cause. If we compare a mighty empire in its rise, glory, and decline, to an oak springing up, flourishing for centuries, and then decaying, we use _figurative_ language; since both the empire and the oak are _natural_ objects, which have no _real_ connection with each other, and between which the resemblance is only imaginary. But when the Creator is likened to the sun, the language is no longer _figurative_ but _correspondent_. It is not the comparison of earthly things with earthly, but of spiritual things with natural. And the objects compared have a real connection with each other, since the material sun depends on its Creator as an effect upon its cause. Again, when the church is described as the Lord's body, the language is correspondent and the connection real; for the rise and prosperity of the church depended upon the assumption of humanity by the Saviour; and it still hangs upon it as the cause of its existence.

We further notice that all passages of the Word, the historical as well as the poetical, bear within them such a correspondent or internal sense. This will be placed beyond a reasonable doubt if we consider, first, that "all Scripture," whether historical or prophetic, is, according to the Apostle, inspired or _God-breathed_. And as the breath of God is the infinitude of his love and wisdom, every portion of the sacred Volume must be filled with it. Not only every book in general, but every verse and every sentence;--for if we can find a single sentence which does not contain within itself the infinite wisdom of God, such sentence must either form no part of the Scripture, or the assertion of Paul must be untrue. And secondly, the Word of God from the beginning to the end is intended to "make us wise unto salvation." This is the design with which every part of it was written. But we can only become truly wise by being acquainted with our own state, and with the nature of the Divine Redeemer. Whatever part, therefore, does not relate both to God and to ourselves, cannot communicate saving wisdom; and consequently, (if the Apostle be correct,) cannot form any portion of the Sacred Volume. Now, independently of the passages which we have before quoted, the greater part of what is called "the historical Word," consists, in its mere _outward form_, of the records of the Jewish nation, their wars, and their policy. The prophecies themselves in their literal and obvious meaning, refer to the rise and decline of earthly states, and to the mutation of earthly empires. Either, then, such records and prophecies must have an internal and correspondent meaning, relating to spiritual and divine things, or if they have not, they cannot be fitted to communicate saving wisdom, and so cannot be accounted part of the Scriptures; seeing that the _Scriptures_ in every part, are, according to Paul, filled with this wisdom.[1]

If, then, there _are_ parts of the Word of God, the true meaning of which is not to be found in the literal sense; if that Word contains, within the outward letter, a spiritual and internal meaning; and if we are to resort to such meaning where the letter gives not the true one; the next inquiry which arises is, How are we to determine when a passage is true in the literal sense, or when it is only true in the corresponding one? The answer is easy. When the outward meaning of any passage asserts something at variance with reason,--or when it appears opposed to the known character of God, then such meaning must be abandoned, and the truth sought in the internal sense. This answer has been admitted as correct by the Protestant churches, in their contest with their Catholic neighbors. The latter argue that the words of our Lord, "This is my body," are to be literally understood; while the former very justly answer that, since such an interpretation is opposed to reason and at variance with the nature of God as a God of truth, it ought to be and must be rejected; and the words considered as _figurative_, or as I have already termed it, _correspondent_.

I have now proved a few preliminary points: _First_, that there are some portions of the Word of God, the true meaning of which is not to be found in the letter. _Second_, that when the literal sense of a passage is opposed to fact and reason, such literal sense is to be rejected. And _third_, that in such cases the interpretation must be sought in the correspondent or figurative meaning.

We turn now to what is commonly denominated "the End of the World;" and on stating the generally received doctrine on this subject, we shall quote the words of the celebrated John Wesley, both on account of his piety and learning, and because the views which he maintains may be fairly taken as those of the generality of Christians. First he observes:

"There shall be earthquakes, not in divers places only, but in _all places_; not in one part only, but in every part of the habitable world. In one of these every island shall flee away, and the mountains will not be found. Meanwhile all the waters of the terraqueous globe will feel the violence of these concussions. The sea and the waves roaring, with such an agitation as had never been known before since the hour that `the fountains of the great deep were broken up' to destroy the earth, which then stood 'out of the water and in the water!' The air will be all storm and tempest, full of dark vapors, and pillars of smoke resounding with thunder from pole to pole, and torn with ten thousand lightnings. But the commotion will not stop in the region of the air: the powers of heaven also shall be shaken. 'There shall be signs in the sun and in the moon, and in the stars;' those fixed as well as those that move round them. 'The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.' 'The stars shall withdraw their shining,' yea, and 'fall from heaven,' being thrown out of their orbits. And then shall be heard the universal _shout_ from all the companies of heaven, followed by the _voice of the archangel_, proclaiming the approach of the Son of God and man; and the _trumpet of God_ sounding an alarm to all that sleep in the dust of the earth. In consequence of this, all the graves shall open and the bodies of men arise."

After the following judgment, (which Mr. Wesley thinks must last several thousand years, considering "the number of persons who are to be judged, and of actions which are to be inquired into,") he proceeds:

"Then the heavens will be shriveled up as a parchment scroll, and pass away with a great noise. The very manner of their passing away is disclosed to us by the apostle Peter, 'In the day of God, the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved.' The whole beautiful fabric will be overthrown by that raging element, the connexion of all its parts destroyed, and every atom torn asunder from the others. 'By the same the earth also and the works that are therein, shall be burnt up;' the enormous work of nature, the everlasting hills, mountains that have defied the rage of time, and stood unmoved so many thousand years, will sink down in fiery ruin. How much less will the works of art, though of the most durable kind, the utmost efforts of human industry, tombs, pillars, triumphal arches, castles, pyramids, be able to withstand the flaming Conqueror! All, all will die, perish, vanish away, like a dream when one awaketh."[2]

Such, in substance, is the doctrine of the Christian world; and certainly if _fear_ and _terror_ were sufficient to drive men into a state of righteousness, here are horrors enough to excite the fears even of the most courageous. But not the eloquence of man any more than his wrath, worketh the righteousness of God. It is not sufficient that a doctrine be eloquently set forth; it must also have truth for its foundation. It is not enough that Scripture be quoted to support it; that Scripture must also stand in its proper connexion, and retain its proper meaning; for if this be not the case, however eloquent the preacher and however numerous the apparent proofs, the tenet can only rank with that "wood, hay, and stubble,"--those unsubstantial and airy doctrines, which, when tried by the fire of Divine Wisdom, are consumed and pass away. And if we can prove, _First_, That the passages which are quoted to support the doctrine before us, are _literally_ understood, while nevertheless such literal sense leads to absurdity; _Second_, If we can further make it appear that such a _literal_ application of them makes them inconsistent with each other as well as with many plain portions of the Bible; and again, that, even if we admit such outward meaning to be correct, it gives no countenance to the doctrine in dispute; while at the same time that doctrine is opposed to the end of creation and the character of God;--if these propositions can be made good, I trust it will appear, that the tenet itself has no countenance from the Scriptures; and that the true meaning of the passages adduced, must be sought for in the internal or spiritual sense of the Word.

The portions of Scripture on which the supposed destruction of the universe is founded, are far from numerous. Some of them are already quoted in the extract from Mr. Wesley; and previous to entering upon the consideration of our first proposition, we shall point out a few of the remainder. "Immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven shall be shaken; and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." Matt. xxiv. 29, 30, 31. "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, until all be fulfilled." Matt. v. 18. "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus who is taken from you, shall so come as ye have seen Him go into heaven." Acts i. 11. "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father." 1 Cor. xv. 24. "The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God." 2 Thess. i. 7, 8. "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth also, and the works that are therein shall be burned up." 2 Peter iii. 10.

But it is from the book of Revelation, that the principal part of the proofs are drawn. A book _confessedly_ figurative in its language, and which the wisest and most learned men have in vain striven to interpret. One could hardly commit or imagine a greater outrage upon the common sense of mankind, than that which the defenders of this doctrine have committed, by first confessing the Book itself to be figurative and inexplicable, and then adducing its language _literally_, in their support, as if they had all at once found out that it was no longer figurative but _literal_. If the visions of the Apostle are not literal, but grand and representative images, then ought they not to be understood in a literal manner, or if they are to be so understood, then as plain and literal narrative they may be easily explained; and the complaint which the receivers of this doctrine have so often made, that it cannot be understood, is to the last degree frivolous and foolish.

And what makes the matter still worse is, that the passages they have adduced are among the most highly figurative in the Apostle's descriptions. The following are among them: "Behold He cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see Him; and they that pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth shall wail because of Him." i. 7. "And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood, and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth; even as a fig-tree casteth her untimely figs when she is shaken of a mighty wind; and the heaven departed as a scroll, when it is rolled together, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places." vi. 12, 13, 14. "And I saw a great white throne, and Him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away, and there was found no place for them: and I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God." xx. 11, 12. "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away, and there was no more sea." xxi. 1.

Such are the texts of Scripture by which the doctrine before us is supported; the greater part of which have clearly no reference to the subject, and the remainder being not the literal language of narrative, but the _correspondent_ and mysterious words of prophecy. Yet, even viewing them in their outward meaning, we can scarcely fail to be struck with the wide difference which exists between them and the description of Mr. Wesley. There is nothing in them of an earthquake, amidst some general concussion in which every island shall flee away:--nothing of "the air resounding with thunder from pole to pole, and being torn with ten thousand lightnings:"--nothing of the connexion of every part being destroyed, and every atom torn asunder from the others. We may therefore fairly set these down as additional horrors, supplied by the imagination of the writer, and unsupported by anything like Scripture proof. And with regard to what remains, we will now see how far that _literal_ sense upon which it rests, will stand the criterion by which we are to determine the meaning of Scripture. If the outward meaning is reasonable and consistent, then it must be adhered to, and the doctrine is established: but if, on the other hand, such interpretation leads to absurdity, then, by the consent of every Protestant church, that meaning must be laid aside; and with it, too, must be cast off the tenet of this world's destruction.

But one cautionary remark must here be made. We are by no means authorized to mingle together literal and figurative language. That is, we have no right to interpret one part of a sentence literally, and another as figure. The passages before us are either _literal_, or they are _not_. If they _are_, then every part of them must be literally understood; if they are _not_, then no part of them can be literally interpreted. If, then, we adhere to the outward meaning, we must carry that adherence to every portion of the text; for if we reject such meaning in any part, we reject it in the whole; and the doctrine which depends for support upon it, must fall to the ground.

Keeping this in view our first proposition is, that, to affix a literal sense to the passages before us, is to give them a meaning at once absurd and unreasonable. We might in proof of this, go through every word in every text. It is declared in the letter that "the Lord shall _descend_ from heaven;" but heaven is not a place connected either by height or distance with the material world. Could we rise far into the regions of space, and ascend for ever in the oceans of worlds, still, as regards _distance_, we should be no nearer heaven than before. Where God manifests Himself in the fullness of his love, there is heaven; but God being a Spirit, can only manifest Himself thus in a spiritual region; and such a region has no relation of space or distance with a world of matter. Hence, therefore, a descent from heaven is not a literal going down from a higher place to one beneath, and consequently must not be _literally_ understood. Here the literal meaning fails at the very threshold. At the first step we are obliged to seek for a figurative or spiritual sense.

If we overcome _this_ difficulty, we have yet to encounter others. It is further said that He shall descend with "a trumpet." Now modern Christians ridicule the idea of visible habitations and outward objects in the spiritual world. What then are we to make of the description before us,--of this _trumpet_ with which the Lord is to descend? Is it _material_, or is it _not_? If it is material, then heaven, in which there are material objects, must be a material _place_; and the Being who uses this material trumpet, must be a material Being; consequently, we must materialize both heaven and its inhabitants. But if this trumpet is not a _material_ one, then let the defenders of the literal meaning tell us what is a spiritual trumpet? Whatever may be the answer, one thing is certain,--that which is spiritual is _internal_; and if by the words before us we are not to understand a literal trumpet, but something spiritual signified by it, then the literal meaning of the passage is not and cannot be the true one.