Eschatology

Front matter

t UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, f fan $

V k %

OK,

Preface

Early in his ministry, the writer attempted to gain some definite views on the subject presented in this volume. He consulted authors, and especially commentators. The effect was "confusion worse confounded." He then, as the only hope, went directly and alone to the volume of Inspiration, and attempted to study the Scriptures scripturally, — to make the Bible its own interpreter. The result is the opinions expressed in the following pages.

He had thought several years since of submitting his views to the public. But just then, that volume of brilliant truths and startling errors, " Bush on the Resurrection," made its appearance. This was soon followed by a volume in reply, full of gross personal abuse, and of the odium theologicum, and withal utterly without discrimination or logic. It was supposed that the public, by that time, must have become wearied, if not disgusted ; and that nothing more on the general subject should, for the time being, solicit its attention.

It has been an object with the writer to make his book as small as possible. Instead of attempting to make the

VI PREFACE.

argument on each separate point complete and full, he has aimed in most cases to be suggestive only, by giving merely the outline of thought. The strongest argument in support of the theory advocated, is found in the contemplation of the subject as a whole, and in the fact that it goes through the Bible, and by a natural and easy exegesis, disposes of an entire class of texts that have given great embarrassment to commentators. We have not designedly passed over a single point of difficulty. The evidence that you have the true skeleton-key to the building, is not in the fact that some of the doors are opened by it, but in the fact that at every door the bolt yields readily to its touch. This is claimed for our theory.

The reader not familiar with Greek, must pardon the constant reference to the original Scriptures. The subject can be thoroughly discussed in no other way. Every translation of the Bible, must be, to some extent, a paraphrase. The authors of the Common Version had a theory on the subject of this volume. Of necessity their translation was modified by that theory. This the reader will see as he proceeds. The reference by us, therefore, must be direct to the words which the Holy Spirit has taught. We have taken special pains to render the book readable to the mere English scholar. And we hope, that while such will not be able to appreciate fully some of the criticisms, they will so perceive the general course of argument to be in keeping with the general drift of the Scriptures, as to recognize their harmony.

It would savor of presumption to say that the hypothesis we propose, will, when once propounded, commend itself

PREFACE . Vii

to those familiar with the New Testament, as too obviouslytrue to need labored proof. It is certainly true that most that is said in the New Testament on the subject, seems to necessitate our theory by an import obvious and positive. The few apparent exceptions are found in instances of Hebrew idiom transferred to the Greek language, and which, as a consequence, have been understood literally.

To such of his brethren in the sacred office as may dissent from the theory here advocated, the author would propose that, with the common theory, they go through the New Testament with as rigid an exegesis as is here attempted, — if they can.

The author commends his little work to the blessing of the great Head of the church. He could not have consented to its publication, with the inevitable sequences, but for the hope that the cause of the Bible might be promoted by it. It is believed that one of the conditions of a more spiritual religion, and of a fuller development of Christian character, is, bringing the realities of the unseen world very much nearer. The primitive church were constantly waiting for and "hasting" the Coming of the Lord. To the modern church, that Coming is far away in an indefinite future. To the primitive church the Coming i of the Lord was a doctrine soul-stirring and of mighty j power. To the modern church it is merely a matter of theory and of creed, but in no sort a practical theme. Are the utterances of the modern pulpit on this subject, the same as were those of apostolic preaching ?

Chapter I. Page

THE COMING OE THE SON OP MAN . . 1

Son of Man 11

The Coming 12

"16:27,28 17

" 19:27-29 19

" 13 : 24-30, 36-43 21

" 13:47-50 30

Subordinate Texts . .32

« 21 : 33-45 33

" 22:1-14 34

" xxv 45

" 26:63, 64 . 51

(ix)

CONTENTS.

Chapter II. The Coming Of The Loud . . 53

Opinion of Dr. Watts 55

Olshausen . . 58

Conybeare 59

Thomas Arnold ..... 61

Locke 64

Tholuck and German Commentators . 68

Destruction of Jerusalem — James 5 : 7, 8 . .72

Coming of the Lord — what ? . . • . . . 74

Texts that refer to the close of the present life.

1. Considered as a state of suffering, trial, or probation 79

2. With the Judgment as an associate event . . 82

3. And heaven as then having its commencement . 85

4. And hell as then having its commencement . . 90

Objections .91

"2:1-9... . . . . .93

Locality of Heaven . . . . , . 114

Chapter I. The Coming- Of The Son Of Man

The language of the Saviour can be understood only as we know the circumstances in which it was uttered, and especially the character and opinions of the persons addressed. This is preeminently true of what he says of himself as " The Son of Man," of his " kingdom," and of his " coming in his kingdom."

Most modern commentators seem to suppose that the Jews, and especially the disciples of Christ, occupied the same stand-point as themselves, and that the language addressed to them on this subject, must mean what it would mean if addressed to the men of this day. As well might it be assumed that what should have been said in the days of the Messiah, of the earth, the starry heavens, the rising of the sun, meant what it would mean now. The Saviour meant to say and did say what he knew his honest hearers would understand him to say. He knew of course that the unbelieving Jews would not understand him. In them would be fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand, and seeing ye shall see and shall not perceive. But his disciples understood him, or if they did not at first, they asked for explanations. Jesus took special pains to have them understand him. In one instance, after uttering several parables, and giving, of some of them, private explanations to his disciples, he says to them, " Have ye understood all these things ? " " It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven " (Matt. 13 : 11, 51). On another occasion, " I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes " (Matt. 11 : 25). There may seem to be exceptions, but these will be found on examination rather to establish the rule. When Christ told his disciples that he was going up to Jerusalem, and should there be betrayed and delivered to the Gentiles to be crucified (Mark 9: 31, 32), they did not understand him. Not but the words were of obvious meaning ; but it was no part of their programme of the Messiah's work. They knew not how to reconcile this with

CHRIST UNDERSTOOD BY HIS DISCIPLES. 3

other supposed facts. And as the subject was so tender and so awful, they refrained from again introducing it and asking for explanations. But this only confirms the general rule that the disciples understood what Jesus said to them either at first, or after seeking explanations.

Of course it is not denied that there was a length and breadth and depth and height of meaning in the words of the Saviour, the whole of which neither the disciples nor any other man in any age, could, while in this world, fully comprehend. What we claim is, that while their conceptions must be inadequate, the Saviour did not designedly leave them with erroneous impressions of the import of his language. What he said might imply more than they understood, and than he knew they would understand, but it was designed to imply that.

The disciples were sometimes in error. But whenever they expressed that error, the Saviour corrected it. When, for instance, they were discussing the question who should be the greatest in the kingdom he was soon to establish, and with, as he very well knew, erroneous and secular views, he told them their error. In one case he took a child and set him in their midst, and told them, if they would be great in his kingdom they must be like little children (Matt. 18: 1-6). At another time he taught them that to acquire distinction and honor in his kingdom they must be servant of all, as he himself was, — rebuking thus their ambition and correcting their error.

There were some truths which the Saviour did not at that time reveal. While, for instance, he knew that they were looking to his kingdom in its temporal aspects, almost exclusively, if not quite so, he did not in that particular correct them. The time had not yet come for life and immortality to be brought to light. That belonged to the illumination of the Christian Dispensation. While in this particular their opinions embraced but a part of the truth, it was yet truth and not error. There was in fact to be an exalted felicity and unfading honor connected with their relations, in this world, -to the kingdom of the Messiah.

If this be not so, — if, when the Saviour spoke of coming in his glory and rewarding them for their fidelity, he had reference only to the future world, while yet they understood him to refer to what was temporal, did he not of purpose deceive them ? Did he not, again and again, amid the discouragements connected with discipleship to him in his state of humility, hold out to them encouragements which, as understood by them, and known of course to him as so understood, had no foundation in fact ? What I know a man understands by what I say to him, that I do say to him.

THE KINGDOM.

"THE KINGDOM."

What — let it be distinctly propounded — did the disciples understand by " the kingdom " which the Messiah was to administer? (We say administer; for reign or administration, rather than "kingdom," is in most cases the proper rendering of fiaoilsia.) Were their ideas of it chiefly as of this world, or of the future ? Unquestionably the former. That after the illumination subsequent to the glorification of Christ, they saw that kingdom in its higher glory in a future world, we know. But we are considering them as attending upon the man Christ Jesus in the days of his humiliation, and are seeking for the import of language as addressed to them at that time.

These disciples were Jews. Their education, so far as they had received any, was Jewish. Their religious opinions and impressions were from the Old Testament — as interpreted at that time.

It was no part of the design of the Old Testa^ ment to teach a future state. It taught it only by indirection, and then very obscurely. The Hebrews were on this subject behind the more intelligent nations of heathendom, their cotemporaries. And so far as they had any notions of a hereafter, they seem to have derived them from these nations. In the earliest and almost the only allusion to a future state

1* as one of rewards and punishments, found in the Old Testament, it is spoken of as taught by travellers, and as the belief of foreign lands. " Have ye not asked them that go by the way [travellers] ? and do ye not know their tokens [testimony], that the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction ? " (Job 21 : 29, 30.) The writings of the Greeks and Romans and also of the Eastern nations furnish very much more on this subject than do the Old Testament Scriptures. A marked effect of the captivity was the development of this idea. Not that the inspired Writings of a subsequent date present it ; but it is found in other Jewish literature. (See 2 Mace. vii.)

If we refer to the Mosaic Institute we shall find that its motives are drawn not from the future, but the present world. The rewards of fidelity and the penalties for disobedience were of time and earth.

And when we come to the time of the Saviour we find the fact of the future state an open question. The Pharisees asserted it : the Sadducees — the more educated and refined part of the community, denied it. And by this denial they did not lose caste as "orthodox." They, in common with the Pharisees, were members of the Sanhedrim. The philosophical habits of the Alexandrian Jews seem not to have taken the direction of this question. They were the advocates and the exemplifiers, some of them, of a spiritual religion, in the Platonic sense, — a religion that had direct connection with God, in the absence of form and ceremony. But it was a present religion. So far as we are able to learn, it looted not beyond the grave. It contemplated man as he now is.

The prophetic representations of the reign of the Messiah would lead the unspiritual to understand it as of this world.

The fact of the Messianic reign is more distinctly brought to view in Daniel than in any other of the prophets. But what is this presentation ? Turn we to chap. ii. Here are symbolized the Babylonian, the Medo- Persian, and the Grecian kingdoms, with that, so complex, of the successors of Alexander. In succession to these " the God of heaven sets 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 forever." Here we notice that the reign of the Messiah is indicated by the same terms as are these secular governments, and the same qualities and functions are attributed to it. It is not to be left to other people. It breaks and consumes all other kingdoms. Not a word to indicate its spiritual character.

Chap. vii. is an advance upon chap. ii. Still the whole description is temporal and secular. One like

" a son of man" appears, and under the especial divine patronage stands at the head of power. " There is 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." " And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High."

There is indeed in chap. 12: 1-3 an allusion to what is more spiritual. In that " time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation" — the same as that to which the Saviour refers Matt. 24 : 21, and which implied the end cf the Jewish civil and ecclesiastical polity — there would be saved all the truly spiritual, and they, with that Gentile "dust" that should be roused to life, would constitute a new organization, — save the drawback of those to whom the gospel should prove a savor of death unto death. The good would shine as the brightness of the firmament, and turning many to righteousness, as the stars forever and ever. But this language, exceedingly obscure till after the events had transpired, would be unintelligible to a Jew. Yet with this exception all the descriptions of Daniel are such as a Jew — such Jews as were most of the nation in the days of the Saviour — would understand as applying to a temporal kingdom.

And if we refer to other cotemporary and earlier Prophets, we shall find the same temporal and especially Jewish imagery employed. Ezekiel sees a new city — a new Jerusalem and Temple, and the most ample accommodations for the ceremonies of the Mosaic Institute; and the Holy Land apportioned off anew for the several tribes, all of which were to be restored to their integrity and distinct locality. Here was Judaism glorified.

Isaiah is presented with scenes of prosperity and of surpassing glory to the friends of God. Eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither had entered into the heart of man, the things that God had prepared for them that love him.. There should be a new. heaven and a new earth. The sun should no more go down nor the moon withdraw her shining. But this was all to be Jewish prosperity. All nations were to come up to Jerusalem with their gold and their silver as offerings to the God of Israel. The flocks of Kedar and the rams of Nebaioth should minister to the Temple service. •

As a matter, of fact this language of the prophets was, in the time of Christ, understood to imply that there was to be raised up a mighty prince who should rule over the Jews in power and splendor, and who should lead them oh, not only to the attainment of their liberty from the yoke of oppression, but to the conquest of the nations. And it was to posts of honor in such a kingdom and under such a prince, that the disciples aspired. It was with reference to such positions of distinction that they repeatedly disputed among themselves who should be greatest — and that, almost up to the very hour of the crucifixion (Luke 22 : 24—30). Maternal aspirations operated in this direction : " Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom." It was this secular and unsanctified anticipation that led Peter, — when Christ told the disciples that he must go up to Jerusalem and there be rejected by the chief priests and scribes, and be crucified, — in startling forgetfulness of himself and of propriety, to rebuke (!) his Master, — though we may hope that love for that Master had some place with ambition in his heart. It was this hope of national deliverance that led the multitudes when Jesus was entering Jerusalem, to spread their garments and branches of trees in the way, and cry Hosanna to the Son of David — the very multitude that in a few brief hours, and when their selfish hopes were disappointed, cried, Crucify him ! Crucify him !

That the oft repeated instructions of the Saviour in relation to the nature of his kingdom, could not have failed to produce a deep impression on the minds of the disciples, we believe. They doubtless felt that there was that in the subject which they but

SON OF MAN. 11

imperfectly understood, and which it was the pleasure of their Master not then to explain more perfectly. He told them there were many things which they could not then bear, and which would be explained at a future time.

If the view we have taken of what were the theories of the disciples be correct, it must modify very materially our interpretation of no inconsiderable portion of the Gospel. It has seemed to the writer that most modern commentators have perpetrated a very flagrant anachronism, in assuming that the disciples, when attending upon Christ in the days of his flesh, had substantially the same views, as had those same disciples after the day of Pentecost and the gift of the Spirit.

These remarks premised, we proceed to the more direct and scriptural consideration of the subject of this chapter, — " The Coming of the Son of Man," TtanovGia rov vlov xov dv&QGJTtov.

" The Coming of the Son of Man " is to be distinguished from " The Coming of the Lord." This latter will be considered in the following Chapter.

SON OF MAN.

"With one exception, the phrase " The Son of Man" is used in the New Testament only by the evangelists, and by them always as from the lips of the Saviour himself. It denotes ordinarily the Man Christ Jesus, and when not, the Messiah as ens-aped in introducing- his kingdom to the world, rather than as presiding in it. The Saviour was glorified and definitively constituted the Son of God in power and authority at his resurrection. Rom. 1 : 4. Acts 2 : 33, 36. 5 : 31. Phil. 2 : 9. Heb. 10 : 12. Still, his kingdom as embracing the only religion from heaven, was not completely constituted. The Jewish Religion, as embodied in the Mosaic Institute, was in the world, and by divine authority ; — an authority not yet revoked in form. And it was not till the providence of God, by the annihilation of the Jewish polity, civil and ecclesiastical, had put an end to that Institute, that Christianity stood the sole religion by divine appointment. Then the kingdom of Christ had fully come. The Saviour indeed remarked, on one occasion, that the Law and the Prophets were until John ; but by that did not design to say that the ceremonies of the Old Testament, were abrogated, for himself observed them (Matt. 26 : 18), but only that with John began the dawning of the day of the Messiah's kingdom.

"THE COMING/'

" The Coming of the Son of Man " is to be interpreted with the same latitude, and applies to the work

SCKIPTURE ARGUMENT. 13

of the Messiah from the time of his resurrection to the overthrow of the Jewish power. Not till then — when the seventh angel had sounded — were there great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ. Then the transition period closed. As instances of the use of this phrase as referring to the time of his resurrection, see Matt. 10 : 23. Luke 22: 69. " Hereafter (clao rov vuv^from now) shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power of God." The parallel text in Mark (14 : 62) is, « Ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." So in Matt. 26 : 64. See also Eph. 1 : 20-22 ; Rom. 1 : 4. Heb. 1:3. As instances of the use of the language in application to Christ down to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the complete introduction of the Christian Dispensation, see Matt. 24 : 30, 37-39. Mark 13 : 24-26. Luke 21 : 25-27.

SCEIPTUKE AEGUMENT.

The language of the New Testament concerning the Coming of the Son of Man will be understood only as the following extract from the captive Prophet is rightly interpreted. We have briefly alluded to it on a previous page.

" I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool : his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (10) A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him : thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him : the judgment was set, and the books were opened. (11) I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake : I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame. (12) As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away : yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. (13) I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. (14) 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."

It is unnecessary here to go into an extended examination of the prophetic significance of this language. The views of the writer are substantially those of Prof. Stuart in his commentary. The Prophet is chiefly occupied in this chapter — as indeed in most of his prophetic record — with what should befall his people in the latter days. They were to exist as a weak and feeble nation for a long period, in the neighborhood of a great and cruel nation under successive dynasties, and at length a fierce and terrible persecutor should arise in the person of Antiochus Epiphanes — the " little horn " — by whom the daily sacrifice should be taken away. But God would preside over these mighty agencies, and bring them to an end in his own good time. This is represented by vs. 9-12. The Prophet sees a court organized : thrones are put in place : the Ancient of days is seated as Judge, surrounded by myriads of angels in waiting to hear and execute his decrees. The books are opened, and the facts adduced. The verdict is given and executed. These kingdoms are among the things that were ; and especially is the beast of the little horn slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame. Antiochus the persecutor is brought to a sudden and terrible death.

The next great fact of importance to the holy people, is the advent of their Messiah, and the introduction of the Messianic Dispensation. This is represented in vs. 13, 14. One " like to a son of man" is seen enthroned on moving clouds. He approaches the Ancient of days and receives from him a glorious and everlasting kingdom.

It is with reference to this scene, and the language employed to describe it, that Christ is called " The Son of Man" and Ms inauguration as " Head over all things to the church " described as " The Son of Man coming in his kingdom " — " in his glory " — "in the glory of his Father:' Matt. 16: 27, 28. 25: 31.

There is of course an especial appropriateness in applying to the Messiah as God manifest in the flesh, and while acting as the man Christ Jesus, the designation " Son of Man." The Scriptures are emphatic in declaring and in making prominent as a great fact, that Christ was a real and proper man, made of a woman. And it is doubtless for this purpose that Christ so often calls himself the Son of Man. Still this phrase with its adjuncts as quoted above has evident reference to Dan. 7 : 13. See Ezek. 1 : 26-28. Rev. 1 : 13.

Let us now turn to the New Testament, and see if its language does not admit of easy explanation on this hypothesis.

"But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another : for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come."

This is an extract from the instructions which the Saviour gave to his disciples as he sent them forth to preach and to say, " The kingdom of heaven is at hand." He did not conceal from them, he distinctly forewarned them, that they would suffer persecution. But let them be encouraged : the glorious event which was to be the burden of their message, and to prepare men for which, their work, was very near. Before they should have gone over the cities of Israel in their missionary tour, it would become reality. The Messianic Dispensation would be commenced.

This language of the Saviour decides positively that by the coming of the Son of Man was meant, not his appearance in the flesh, nor the commencement of his public ministry, but an event then future, yet near. Understood as referring to Dan. 7 : 13, 14, it would imply the introduction of the Christian Dispensation.

" For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father ■with his angels ; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. (28) Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

Here are two facts that have greatly embarrassed commentators. 1. The Son of Man would soon, — during the life of some who heard him, — come in his kingdom — in the glory of his Father with his angels. " Shall come," pllla eqxsg&cu, is now about to come. 2. His " coming " would imply his elevation to the office of Judge of all men. " Then," that is, when he comes and receives his kingdom, he would reward every man according to his works. Henceforth the Father would judge no man, having committed all judgment unto the Son. John 5 : 22, 27.