Part 3

Again: at the time of our Lord's ascension, the two angels who appeared to the disciples declared, "this same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall _so come in like manner_, as ye have seen him go into heaven." Acts i. 11. It would therefore appear that, if these angelic messengers are worthy of credit, the _descent_ of our Lord is to be exactly similar in circumstance to his ascent. Now, in his ascension into heaven, there are several things which require notice. 1st: It was _private_. He led his disciples from the city to the Mount of Olives. 2d: It was seen by none but his followers. The generality of the Jewish nations did not even know that such an event had taken place; they considered our Lord as a dead man; and hence when they accused Paul before Festus, one part of that accusation was that he affirmed one Jesus to be alive, who was (in their opinion) dead. Acts xxv. 19. 3d: His ascension was a _solitary_ one. There is no account whatever that any persons were _seen_ ascending with Him:--"_He_ was taken up; and a cloud received _Him_ out of their sight." And, 4th: It was _unattended by any outward pomp_. The Jews knew nothing of it;--there was no alteration in the visible world; and even those who witnessed the event, beheld nothing save a bright cloud into which he passed and disappeared. The ascension of the Saviour was therefore to the world a _private_ occurrence, so far as privacy consists in general ignorance respecting it. It was seen by none but his disciples; it was without pomp or show. Of those who afterwards heard of it, numbers gave no credit to the story. And the only visible proof that it had taken place, was the effect which followed--the extraordinary out-pouring of the divine influence.

And if we keep to the literal sense of the words, _this_ is to be his descent from heaven: He is to come _in like manner_ as He went up. If, then, this be the case, then such descent will be an occurrence unknown to the generality of mankind, or only known by its following effects. It will be unaccompanied by any destruction, and even by any commotion in the realm of material nature. And many of those who hear of it may be expected to deny it, according to his own words: "When the Son of Man cometh shall He find faith on the earth?"

Such, according to the passage before us must be the manner of his Second Coming: but let us, if we can, reconcile this with the former descriptions. In the one case all nature is to be _destroyed_; in the other it is to remain unshaken. In the former instance He is said to descend with thousands of angels; in the latter, to come unattended. By the first description, He is to be seen visibly by all; in the second, He will be invisible to all except his followers. The two accounts thus stand in direct contradiction to each other. If He comes again in the same "manner" that He ascended, then the former passages cannot be literally understood: or if He comes literally in the manner they describe, the passage before us cannot be true.

I might here, as in the former case, go through every passage, and show that each of them contains within itself accounts which are inconsistent with those of the others: in one it is said that the Lord shall descend from heaven in flaming fire: in another, in the clouds: in a third, on a great white throne. In one it is declared that, before his face the earth and the heaven shall flee away, and their place be no more found: in a second, that _after_ His coming the departed shall rise from the earth, and the grave and the sea give up their dead; consequently, if the latter part be true, the earth will not pass away at the time of His descent. In the whole there are inconsistencies which science, according to the literal meaning, may disguise, but can never reconcile.

We now turn to the consideration of other passages which, taken even in their literal sense, militate strongly against the doctrine in dispute. After the destruction of the antediluvian earth by the flood, Jehovah affirmed, "I will not _again curse the ground any more_, though the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every living thing as I have done." This _curse_ which the Lord is here inferred to have pronounced upon the former world, in whatever sense the terms be taken, was accomplished in its destruction; and the end of that world by a flood of waters, completed its fulfillment. The curse of the Lord, therefore, when pronounced upon the earth, leads to its dissolution. But God Himself affirms that He will not thus curse the ground any more,--that He will not again suffer it to be destroyed, neither will He again smite everything living. The declaration is absolute. It is not said that He will refrain from it during a _limited period_, but that He will not do it _any more_--to all eternity. Yet if the commonly received doctrine be correct, this declaration of Jehovah must be untrue. If _again_ everything living _is_ to be smitten,--if again the earth is to be cursed with destruction as complete, if not more so than the former one; then it cannot be true that every living thing is _not_ again to be smitten, nor the earth again to be cursed. In this instance the literal proofs clash with the solemn declaration of God.

If, however, it be objected that these words refer not so much to the _destruction_ of the globe, as to the _mode_ of that event, I reply that no such qualifying language is found in the text. The words are general; they are not "I will not again curse the earth _with water_," but I will not curse the ground,--I will not destroy the earth "_any more_," either in this way or in any other. "I will not smite any more everything living as I have now done," by an universal destruction. And, in fact, the promise that _a flood_ should no more destroy the world, would have afforded little consolation to Noah, had he understood that another destruction more awful than the former, was approaching, in which not this world only, but the whole universe would perish; and when not the greater part, but _all_ things living, would be destroyed, without the preservation even of a remnant. The flood is certainly in the following chapter referred to particularly as the more recent danger, and a repetition of which would be most dreaded by the survivors; but the very same declaration of Jehovah, which interdicts a flood of waters, equally interdicts any other entire destruction:--"I will not in any way curse the ground any more."

There is another subject upon which I must touch, but very briefly, since the arguments arising out of it might be carried to a length far exceeding my prescribed limits. The prophetic writings abound with descriptions of what is called "the kingdom of David:"--a kingdom which was to arise in the latter day, and upon which every blessing of heaven was to descend. "In those days," says the prophet Amos, "I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old." ix. "And in the days of these kings (that is, literally, in the latter times of the Roman power,) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; but it shall break in pieces, and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." Dan. ii. 44. Again, the same prophet: "I saw in the night visions, and behold one like unto the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away; and his kingdom, that which shall not be destroyed." That these descriptions refer to the Redeemer, is evident. Isaiah when predicting his approach, and the establishment of his kingdom, says, "Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever." ix. 7.

Now the question is, to what authority or kingdom do these predictions refer? That it is not to the general government of God, is clear,--this had existed from eternity; but the dominion spoken of, was to commence at a definite period of time,--"at that time," and "in the days of those kings." The general subjection of all things to the Divine Being, is also something arising out of his very nature, and is neither given nor acquired; but this was something to be acquired. "The Lord God shall _give_ unto him the throne of his father David:"--"The saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom." Nor can it refer to the kingdom of the just in glory, for the descriptions are such as can only apply to the state of men on earth. "He shall feed his flock like a shepherd; He shall gather the lambs with His arm, and carry them in His bosom." Isa. xl. 11. "I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David." If, therefore, this kingdom be neither the general dominion over all, nor the state of the righteous in eternity, it can only relate to the kingdom of the church on earth. And that it does so, is plain from the very terms used. David is, by almost all professed Christians, acknowledged to have been a type and representative of the Messiah; and the Jewish nation over whom he reigned, most certainly prefigured the Christian church: the throne of David is therefore the authority of the Lord in his church on earth, and his kingdom is that church itself. Now this kingdom and this throne,--this church and authority _are everlasting_; they shall "never be destroyed;" they shall "not pass away;" they shall "stand for ever." But if _the earth_ on which this church exists, is hereafter to dissolve and pass away, the kingdom must pass away with it. For though it is true that the just in heaven would still constitute a kingdom of the Lord, yet that kingdom would no longer be "_the kingdom of David_." The very declaration that the kingdom of the Lord _on earth_ will _never be destroyed_, supposes as a necessary consequence, that the earth on which it is erected will also continue to exist.

In agreement with this are the words heard by John; "There were great voices in heaven, saying, the kingdoms _of this world_ are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and He shall reign for _ever and ever_." Rev. xi. 15. And over what is He thus to reign? Most certainly over the kingdoms which He is here said to have obtained--the kingdoms of _this world_; and over these He is to reign "for ever and ever." But how is He to reign for ever over the kingdoms of the world, if the world and its kingdoms are to be destroyed? Whenever the earth is dissolved, the kingdoms of the world will be no more; and he cannot reign over that which has no existence! If, then, the world and its kingdoms are to be destroyed, He can never reign _for ever_ over them: or if He will thus reign for ever over the kingdoms of the world, then those kingdoms must exist for ever; and if the _kingdoms_ exist for ever, _the world_ on which they are founded must exist for ever with them.

And exactly in accordance with this assertion are the words of the Psalmist: "He (the Lord) built his sanctuary in high places, like _the earth_ which He hath established _for ever_." And those of Solomon:--"One generation passeth away, and another cometh, _but the earth abideth for ever_." The same is declared of the heavens: "His name shall endure _for ever_; His name shall be continued _as long as the sun_." Psalm lxxii. 17. "His seed shall endure _for ever_, and his throne _as the sun_ before me; it shall be _established for ever as the moon_, and as a faithful witness in heaven." lxxxix. 36.

Nothing can be more directly opposed to the common opinion than these explicit declarations of the Bible. It is certain that these passages refer to the visible earth and to the material heaven; and these it is expressly declared are to continue not for a limited time, but for ever: while in the passages adduced to prove the opposite, we are left to struggle among difficulties, without any certainty that the visible earth is at all intended, since even those commentators who believe the tenet are compelled, in most instances, to abandon the proofs of it.

I have now established, as far as is necessary, my second proposition. I have shown that the literal sense of the passages brought forward to confirm the doctrine of the earth's destruction, are inconsistent with each other, as well as with other parts of the Sacred Volume; and therefore, that such literal meaning cannot be the true one. I have shown that the words of Jehovah assert that the world shall not be smitten any more. I have further shown that the duration of the kingdom of God, runs parallel with that of the visible world, and that therefore both must endure for ever. And lastly, that the sacred writers declare in explicit language the endless duration both of the earth and the heavens.

3. I now proceed to consider the third part of the subject: that the passages brought forward, when taken in their proper connexion, give no countenance to the popular doctrine, but on the contrary, afford evident proofs that they have no reference to it. In doing this, I shall adduce them one by one in the order they are laid down. And first, the passage in the Gospel of Matthew: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn when they see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

I have already noticed the inconsistencies which arise from adopting the literal meaning of the passage; and I now remark further, that in their literal and obvious application, the words refer not to any destruction of the world in general, but to the approaching overthrow of the Jewish nation and polity. I admit that they have a spiritual reference to the state of the Christian church of which the Jews were a type; but of this we shall speak hereafter. It is with the literal meaning we have now to do, since on the literal meaning the doctrine is founded.[5]

Our Lord had been addressing the multitude in the temple; and in that address He had solemnly warned them of their approaching danger. On his departure, his followers pointed to its stately and magnificent buildings; and He again seized the opportunity to repeat to them the prediction of its final destruction. Naturally anxious to learn the fate of their country, and, perhaps, too uneasy on their own account, they came to Him privately and asked, "When shall these things be?" and "what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the consummation of the age?"[6]--that is, the period of the Jewish government and religion. In reply, He delivered the splendid prophecy before us; first warning them against those pretenders to Messiahship, who, soon after His ascension, overrun the land of Judea; and then going on to describe the miseries which were coming upon the Jews, and the final overthrow of their temple and city;--He delivers to them this prediction, not in the common language of narrative, but, in the magnificent figures of the ancient prophecy. A method of speaking which, while it pointed out the mutation of earthly things, had a further reference to things spiritual. And thus while He pointed out the overthrow of the Jewish power, He referred likewise to the degraded state and corruption of the Christian church,--the spiritual Jerusalem,--when, having lost its love or charity, it sunk down into a state of formal observance as lifeless as the departed spirit of Judaism.

In neither of these senses, however, does the passage point to any destruction of the visible universe. If we take it in its outward reference to the Jewish nation, then the darkening of the sun and the withdrawing of the moon, together with the other parts of the description, can only be representative images of their multiplied distresses. This view of the subject is taken by most of those who have commented on the words. "The sun shall be darkened," "that is, (says one,) all their glory and excellency shall be eclipsed; all their wealth and prosperity shall be laid waste;--the whole government, civil and ecclesiastical, shall be destroyed; and such marks of misery found upon them, as never were seen upon a people."[7] But among the believers of the tenet in dispute, we presume there is not one more highly celebrated for learning than Dr. Adam Clarke; yet he, in commenting upon this passage, gives up all idea of a literal destruction. The following is the doctor's explanation:

"'Immediately after the tribulation.'--Commentators generally understand this and what follows, of the end of the world and Christ's coming to judgment. But the word _immediately_ shows that our Lord is not speaking of any distant event, but of something immediately consequent on calamities already predicted; and that must be the destruction of Jerusalem. The _Jewish heaven_ shall perish and _the sun_ and _moon_ of its glory and happiness shall be darkened,--brought to nothing. _The sun is the religion of the church; the moon the government of the state_; and _the stars_ are the _judges and doctors of both_. In the prophetic language, great commotions upon earth are often represented under the notion of commotions and changes in the heavens. The fall of Babylon is thus represented by the constellations of heaven withdrawing their light, and the sun and the moon being darkened:--the destruction of Egypt by the heaven being covered, the sun enveloped with a cloud, and the moon withholding her light: the destruction of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes, is represented by _casting down some of the host of heaven_ and _the stars_ to the ground. And this very destruction of Jerusalem is represented by the prophet Joel, by showing wonders in heaven and in earth,--_darkening the sun, and turning the moon into blood_. This general mode of describing these judgments, leaves no room to doubt the propriety of its application in the present case." (_Commentary on Matthew._)

Thus, in the hands of one of the most learned advocates of the doctrine, does one of its principal proofs vanish into air. According to his showing, there is nothing in the whole passage referring at all either to the material earth, or the visible heavens; and the whole is a figurative account of the overthrow of the religion and government of the Jews,--"the _sun_ and _moon_ of the _Jewish heaven_." We might follow the doctor through the whole chapter, and show that in almost every point he confirms what has been formerly advanced. "The sign of the Son of Man was, (he says,) the signal manifestation of Christ's power and glory," in the destruction of Jerusalem. The "angels sent forth to gather the elect, the apostles and their successors in the Christian ministry." The sound of a trumpet, "the earnest affectionate call of the Gospel:" and "_the elect_," "the Gentiles who were now chosen or elected, in place of the rebellious obstinate Jews." In the same manner he explains the whole of this and the following chapter; and in the latter declares that the whole of the accounts up to the thirty-first verse, may be properly applied to the destruction of Jerusalem. And here we may leave him; for if there is nothing from the first verse of the twenty-fourth chapter, to the thirty-first verse of the twenty-fifth, which relates to the destruction of the world, surely nothing respecting it will be found in the remainder.

Thus does this passage, so often brought forward to add to the terror of the world's dissolution, which has been sounded forth from pulpits and re-echoed from the press, when calmly examined, prove to have no connexion with the subject: but to refer to an event as different from the general conflagration, as light from darkness.

But some may be ready to say, "Although it has not this reference in its outward meaning, yet you have already confessed that it relates to Christianity and the church; and is not the doctrine contained in this internal application?" I answer, no! The doctrine only stands upon the supposition that the heavens and the earth referred to in the passage, are the literal and visible portions of nature. We have seen that in its relation to the Jews, no such things are intended; still less, therefore, can it point to these in its _internal_ meaning. As the sun and moon in the literal application are, (to use the words of Dr. Clarke,) "the sun and moon of the _Jewish_ heaven" or state, so in spiritual reference, they are the sun and moon of the _Christian_ heaven, or state of the church; and, as pointing to spiritual principles and spiritual states, have nothing to do with the outward machinery of nature. As no destruction of the world, then, can be found in the _internal_ sense of the prophecy, it is confessed, even by the advocates of the doctrine, that there is nothing respecting it in the _outward_ sense. And if nothing is found relating to it either in the _spiritual_ or _literal_ meaning of the words, then it is not there _at all_; and the passage as a proof of the dissolution of all things, must be abandoned for ever.[8]

The next passage which claims attention, is that in the sixth chapter of the Revelation; for the words in the first chapter being those of the apostle previous to his prophetic visions, may be classed among the apostolic passages of which we shall speak hereafter. The text before us reads: "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." In this part of the subject I say nothing of the evidently figurative nature of the passage, nor of the absurdities before alluded to, as existing in the sense of the letter; but I shall make one remark obvious to the minds of all, and borne out by the connexion of the words themselves. The vision of the _seals_ (as well as that of the vials,) is one continued prophecy, which is not concluded until the breaking of the seventh seal in the eighth chapter. Now the events above described, whether representative or literal, happen under the _sixth_ seal; yet the descriptions of the _seventh_ as well as those of the others, refer to events which were to occur in the church and on this visible earth. The sealing of the hundred and forty-four thousand,--the prohibition of the wind to blow on the earth,--the seven trumpets and their consequences, evidently relate to states of the church in this world; yet all these things which were to be transacted in the visible world, happen _after_ the description above quoted.