Part 5

And further, as the love and wisdom of God once operated in bringing the universe into existence, so from that period have they been unceasingly employed in preserving the creatures which they formed; for, as the _end_ of creation was the "bringing of many souls into glory," so, to the present, has that end been answered by the constant exercise of the Divine protection over the universe of matter and its rational inhabitants; that the one might continue a fit habitation for the creatures of God; and that by the constant procreation of the human race, a succession of men might be brought into being as candidates for everlasting glory. But the expected dissolution of the universe, and the end of human succession, will at once put a stop to this infinite design. If, after a certain number of persons have been born into the world, the procreation of man must end, then the purpose of creation cannot be _infinite_; for that which has reference to a certain number and a definite period of time, is not an _infinite_ purpose; and that which is not an infinite purpose, is not the off-spring of _infinite love_. Or, if the purpose of God in creation _did_ spring from infinite love, then it must be an infinite purpose; and if the purpose of creation be infinite, then it is not bounded by a few thousand years, nor will it end with a few generations.

Nor is the popular doctrine more consistent with the character of God than with the infinity of his designs. We have seen that _love_ was the cause of the world's creation; but what motive, I ask, can lead to its destruction? There is nothing in the Almighty contrary to love; therefore, if it is destroyed at all, _love_ must be still the motive. But love never works except for the good of its creatures; therefore, if the universe is dissolved, it must be because such dissolution will confer a benefit upon mankind. And the question then arises: What benefit can mankind derive from the destruction of this material world? The answer of some will be ready. "The world" they tell us, "has been changed by sin, and it will be dissolved in order that it may be restored to its pristine glory and beauty;--that a new heaven and a new earth may spring from its ashes." But does the change here supposed in the constitution of the world, require its dissolution? When sin entered into the universe, and the mind of man was contaminated, an immediate and corresponding effect was produced upon the world of matter; but the production of that effect was not accompanied by a _dissolution_ of the material system; it operated surely indeed, but slowly, and without any outward destruction. Why, then, should not the change from evil to good, be effected in like manner as the change from good to evil? When the earth is "filled with the knowledge of the Lord,"--when all shall experimentally "know Him from the least even unto the greatest,"--when man is again restored to his former state of peace and purity, a corresponding change must once more take place in his material habitation; but that change requires no destruction of the world to effect it. Similar causes produce similar effects; and as a change in man from good to evil, produced an alteration in the system of the world, but without any dissolution, so a change in the souls of men from evil to good, must likewise produce an alteration in the earth, but without dissolution.

But this destruction, it is said, is to usher in "a new heaven and new earth." We are, therefore, justified in asking, for what purpose is this new material system created? Since it is believed that the succession of man will cease with _this_ earth, why should _another_ earth be formed? Is another race of men to be created? This, the strongest advocates of the doctrine do not even suppose. Is it, then, to be the habitation of the righteous of the present earth? This, it cannot be, for the bodies of the departed will no longer be material, but _spiritual_; and to assert that a _spiritual_ substance can dwell and walk on a material earth, however pure that earth may be, is to assert what every one sees to be preposterous. Since, then, it will not suit the departed righteous, and another race is not to be formed, why, we continue to ask, will this new earth be created? Here we are left completely in the dark; nor amidst all the reasoning of the advocates of the popular doctrine, can we find a single clue to direct us to an answer.

And here the former inquiry properly comes in. Since there is nothing in the nature of God contrary to _love_, and since that love only works for the temporal or everlasting benefit of man, what motive can induce the Almighty to destroy this visible universe? We have seen that the state of mankind in time will not be improved by it; for a change in the constitution of the earth has been already, and may again be, effected without it: and, besides, whenever such an event takes place, time and the temporal existence of man will be no more: and the eternal happiness of the blessed can in no degree be increased by an overthrow of material nature; for when the spirit has left this sphere, it has done with matter, and no longer depends upon it for its feelings or its pleasures. If, then, such a dissolution of the earth as Christians in general look for, will neither benefit mankind in time nor in eternity, then it is contrary to the character of God that He should bring such an event to pass; for He never operates unless to effect some benevolent purpose; and this will effect none, either here or hereafter.

The same reasons which induced the Almighty to call the universe into existence, will therefore induce Him to continue its existence. The desire which He felt to make as many rational beings as possible happy, led to creation. The same feeling has preserved the world in existence to the present moment. And as God is unchangeable, that desire must operate as powerfully ten thousand ages hence, as it does now; and the operation of that desire must, as a necessary consequence, lead to the preservation of this earth, from which a succession of rational creatures is to spring. If, then, at a future period the world is destroyed, and the multiplication of the human race ceases, it must be either because the Lord is unable to save more, or is unwilling to do it. The first supposition is impious, and the other supposes a change in the Almighty; for then that desire which led to creation must have ceased to exist in the Divine bosom; the infinite love of God must have ceased to operate; and of consequence, the Lord Himself must have changed both his desires and his operations. The destruction of the world is, therefore, opposed to the character of God, as a Being of infinite Love and unbounded power.

We may now sum up the arguments which have been adduced.

1. When the literal sense of a passage of Scripture is opposed to common sense and reason, such literal sense must be laid aside, as not containing the true meaning. But the literal sense of those passages which speak of a destruction of the earth, is both absurd and unreasonable. Therefore the literal sense of these passages must be abandoned, and does not contain the proper interpretation. Again: when two prophecies are found couched in the same language, and referring to a similar event, one of which is fulfilled while the other remains unaccomplished; the manner in which the latter will be fulfilled, must be judged of by the previous fulfillment of the former. But the first prophecies relating to the first coming of the Lord, are exactly similar to those which refer to His second coming; yet they never were _literally_ fulfilled: therefore we have no just reason to look for a literal fulfillment of the latter. 2. When any text of Scripture is, in the letter, inconsistent with itself, or with other plain and express passages of the Word, the interpretation must be sought for in the spiritual meaning of the words. But the proofs of this earth's destruction are inconsistent with themselves, and are opposed to other plain and direct portions of the Word of God; therefore the meaning of those alleged proofs must be found, not in the literal sense, but in their spirit. 3. In the explanation of every part of the Sacred Scriptures, a due regard must be had to the connexion in which it stands; and any mode of explanation which tends to break such connexion, or is at variance with it, may be beautiful but cannot be _true_. But the connexion in which the passages referred to are found, is completely at variance with the doctrine derived from them; nor can they in any way support that doctrine until severed from this connexion. Therefore that explanation which the generality of Christians gives them, cannot be correct. 4. And, lastly, whatever doctrine is opposed to the character of God, as a God of unbounded love and infinite wisdom, is not a doctrine of the Bible. But the doctrine before us is thus opposed both to his nature and perfections; therefore it cannot be true.

The arguments arising out of these propositions might be carried to a great extent. If, however, they have been supported by reason as well as Scripture,--if we have no right to expect a literal fulfillment of the prophecy relating to the Lord's second coming; and if the literal sense of the passages must be abandoned; then we have no reason to look for an overthrow of the universe, and the improbability of such a destruction has been fairly established.

Having thus gone through the principal part of the subject, and having shown that the common interpretation, against which so many and serious objections lie, cannot be the true meaning; I proceed, as a necessary conclusion, to notice briefly the spiritual meaning of the prophetic symbols used in the passages that we have noticed, and their connexion with each other. That the whole of these passages relate to the Christian church, we have already stated; and that they are of importance to us, may be fairly inferred from their being found in the Sacred Volume. It is, therefore, scarcely possible to conceive that even learned and pious men have been able to perceive nothing within them but earthly concerns,--mere temporal events; the destruction of Jerusalem; the conversion (whether real or pretended) of Constantine; wars in Italy; the irruption of the Goths; and the famine of the Antonines; as if these events were either able, or likely, to give that saving wisdom which it is the object of God by his Word to bestow. Everything in the Sacred Volume is intended to contribute to our salvation; but transactions like these do not tend to make us wiser or better. It is to the Christian church, and to its principles and practice, therefore, that these descriptions refer; and as they relate to the general body, they apply to every individual of which that body is composed, and thus demand our most serious attention.

The principal symbol used in these prophecies is, "the sun;" and this is said to "become black," and to be "turned into darkness." Our first inquiry, therefore, is, what principle in the spiritual world of Christianity, corresponds with this luminary in the world of matter. And in this inquiry we shall be aided, if we consider the functions it performs. The sun is the source of all natural heat and splendor; and without his influence, the worlds in the solar system, now glowing in light and beauty, would be dead and unattractive masses of matter. He is the cause of all vegetable and animal life: deprived of his beams, vegetation would decay, and the animal kingdom sink in death. He is the principal agent in the production of sight; the eye without him, would be a useless organ. In a word, if we were called upon to name the most important agent in the material world, our thoughts would turn at once to the sun. Now, in the spiritual world, including both the church of God and the individual spirit of man, what is that which produces the same effects as the natural sun does in the system of matter? What is the source of love and wisdom, spiritual heat and spiritual light?--What is it that produces in the mind those fruits of righteousness which are the characteristics of true religion? What gives to reason (the eye of the mind) its power of discerning spiritual things? and invests the soul, naturally dark and lifeless, with spiritual life and glory? It is Divine Love that does this. This is the Sun of the spiritual universe,--the Fountain of all heavenly light and life,--the Cause of every good word and work. And in giving this meaning to the natural image, we are supported throughout by the Sacred Scripture. The Lord is called "the Sun," and, "the Sun of Righteousness." He is said to _rise_ upon the mind, when the spirit turns itself toward Him; and to _turn away_ from man, when he departs from his Maker. In the same manner, whenever the prophets or apostles were favored with a visible representation of the Divine Majesty, they describe the face of God as shining like _the sun_. Now the face of God is his Love. Hence the Psalmist says, "Lift upon us _the light of thy countenance_, and cause thy face to shine upon us." And this love of God is described as the sun, rising, shining, and giving light. Thus, too, in the visions of John, when the apostle beheld an image of the pure church of Christ, he describes her as "a woman _clothed with the sun_;" or encompassed on every side by the Divine Love. By the sun, then, in the internal sense of prophecy, we understand the infinite and unbounded love of the Almighty, which alone is the cause of life and light; and which gives strength, support, and beauty, to the spiritual system of man.

Having obtained the meaning of this principal symbol, we shall be at no loss to determine that of the other. "_The moon_," as regards apparent splendor, is the second great luminary in the visible heavens. In herself, however, she is a dark body, and possesses no power of communicating light except by the reflection of the sun's beams. In this case, therefore, we have to seek a second principle in the heaven of the church, corresponding with this second light in the heaven of matter; a principle which, though it enlightens and cheers the soul, has no brightness in itself; but derives all its usefulness and beauty from a conjunction with LOVE. And this principle we find in FAITH; that faith which springs from charity. As the moon derives all her light from the sun, so does true faith draw all its glory from love. As the moon separated from the sun's influence, is dark and lifeless, so is faith without love, dead and useless. And as the light proceeding from the moon is but the rays of the sun reflected from her surface, so is the faith that springs from a modification of the love of God, a reflection of his infinite benevolence.

And here, again, the apostle confirms this idea. While he represents the church of God as being _clothed with the Sun_, he also describes her as standing upon the moon, or having "the moon under her feet:"--pointing out the love with which she is continually encompassed, and the faith upon which she is securely founded. Thus Paul, speaking of the universal church of Christ, declares that it is "built upon the _foundation_ of the apostles and prophets:"--that is, upon their doctrines, and upon the truth which they made known; "Jesus Christ Himself," as THE TRUTH Itself, being "the chief corner stone." Eph. ii. 20. With this, too, agrees the sublime prophecy of Isaiah. When speaking of the church restored to its full perfection and glory, he says, "_Thy sun_ shall no more go down, neither shall thy _moon_ withdraw herself; for JEHOVAH shall be thine EVERLASTING LIGHT and the days of thy mourning shall be ended." ix. 20. That is: Thy love shall no more depart, neither shall thy faith and charity decay; for God shall dwell in every soul by his love, and his beams shall be reflected from every bosom.

We might go through the whole of those predictions which relate to this subject; and in all cases we should find that this interpretation of the figures not only makes a complete and consistent sense, but that the passages so interpreted would stand in the most complete agreement with the general tenor of the Scriptures, and with the hopes of the best and wisest among men.

The third symbolic figure is, "the stars:" and these, as regards the quantity of light transmitted to the earth, are secondary luminaries in the visible system. They shine not with any borrowed radiance, but with their own native splendor. And here, again, we must repeat the inquiry, what are those luminaries in the _mental heaven_, which hold a secondary place in the concern of salvation, to love and faith; yet shine, not with reflected light, but with the real brightness of the Divine Glory? The answer is easy: They are the doctrines of religion or the _knowledges_ of truth;--those portions of the eternal reason, which THE MANIFESTED TRUTH has Himself revealed. But some may be ready to observe, that these are already included in the Faith of which I have just spoken. A single remark, however, will obviate this objection. That FAITH and the _knowledge of truth_ generally go together, is certainly true,--even as the moon and stars shine at the same time. But to _know_ the truth is one thing, and to have faith in God is another and widely different thing; as different as the light of the stars is from that of the moon. And as the stars frequently shine when the moon is not seen, so does the knowledge of truth frequently exist in the mind when true faith has no existence. I am, therefore, consistent in declaring that the _light_ of the stars,--the knowledge of doctrines, though a valuable acquisition, is secondary in importance both to Christian _faith_ and to Divine _Love_. Yet the doctrines or truths which are the objects of this knowledge, are not derived from any source lower than divinity itself; they are, as just observed, portions of eternal wisdom designed for the guidance of the church of God; and derived from the "Father of lights," from whom proceeds "every good and every perfect gift."

In thus mentioning _doctrines_, (or the term which I have used as synonymous, _truths_, for pure doctrines are but truths embodied) I by no means refer to the tenets of a sect or party, but to the eternal wisdom of the Almighty, as revealed in his word: and with respect to this, the parallel between it and the natural image may be carried through all its parts. As the stars are of the same nature with the sun, and like him shine with their native and proper light, so is the wisdom of God of the same nature with his love; both being essential attributes of Divinity. As the stars, however, though in themselves splendid bodies, communicate no heat to the earth, and are but of secondary importance in comparison with the sun and moon, so does the mere knowledge of truths, (although the truths in themselves possess the nature of divinity,) leave the soul as cold and lifeless as before; and is of far less importance in the spiritual system than the love of God, or faith, its reflection on the soul. Carry the comparison as far as we may, still the stars of the natural heaven correspond exactly to the _truths_ of the church; and the light which they emit, to the _knowledge_ of that truth.

And this interpretation of the symbol agrees, too, with the vision of the apostle. The church clothed with the Sun of love, and standing upon faith; the symbolic _moon_ had upon her head (the seat of intelligence and wisdom) a crown of twelve _stars_;--denoting the knowledges of pure truth which should ornament that church in her last state of peace and holiness. So the great red dragon, who is described as fighting with Michael and his angels, is said to have drawn the third part of the stars from heaven;--pointing out the almost total extinction of real truth in the corrupted Christian churches. We might again trace this meaning in every passage where the natural image occurs, and we should still find that the sense it gives to each of them is consistent both with the Word of God, as referring to the great concern of salvation, and with the connexion in which the passages are found.

In these symbolic representations we, therefore, perceive the three sources of light in the Christian heaven, love, faith, and knowledge. The first being the diffused affection of the Father of spirits; the second, its reflection in the soul of man; the third, the truths of doctrine which enliven and ornament the church, proceeding immediately from the Source of all Wisdom. The glory of each is the same in substance, as the light of the sun, moon, and stars, is the same in nature; but it differs in degree, as the luminary whence it springs is of more or less importance to the eternal happiness of man. Knowledge is the least important; of itself merely, it produces nothing. Faith rises above knowledge; yet even faith by itself is useless. Love is the chief; this quickens, animates, and renders fruitful, the church of God, and the soul of each individual member.

I press this interpretation on no one; yet I may say, without breaking the bounds of Christian liberty, that it carries probability on its very face. The parallel between the natural image and its spiritual correspondent, is complete throughout; but this can by no means be said of the various constructions which have generally been put upon them. The sun, it is said, is the civil government of a state; and the moon, its ecclesiastical policy. But in vain shall we attempt to draw a comparison here between the natural figure and the object said to be signified by it. The civil government of an empire is not the source of all wisdom, love, and prosperity, as the sun is of heat, light, and fruitfulness. It does not give to the ecclesiastical all its power, glory, and beauty, as the sun does to the moon; nor would the church become dead and lifeless if separated from the state, as the moon would if severed from the sun. The pastors of the church, which it is affirmed are the stars, do not, like the stars, shine with their own native splendor. The comparison, therefore, does not in any degree hold good: while in the meaning we have given above, consistency both with Scripture and reason, as well as with the best interests of man, is preserved throughout.