The coming of the great king ...

Preface

I am exceedingly glad of the opportunity which the good old custom of prefacing books affords me, of introducing this little volume to the public in a few salutatory and explanatory remarks. First, and salutatorily, I present to you my most hearty greeting, assuring you of my sincere regard, and of the very grateful sense I have of a constantly growing interest in, and sympathy with humanity of every clime and shade and tongue. I wish further to assure you of my yearning desire for, and glad expectation of a speedy emancipation of humanity from many, at least, if not from most of the perplexing cares, the misfortunes, and the sorrows, to which it now is and ever has been subject since the peaceful days of Eden, and which are to be brought to a close by the coming of the "Great Deliverer," and his inauguration of a new era, to describe the glories and the peace of which Sacred Scripture has exhausted all the poetry of language.

Explanatorily I wish to say, that while at first view, the comparatively recent publication of a number of volumes upon practically the same subject as this one, written by men of recognized scholarship and ability, whose names are familiar to the literary world, supplies every need in this line, and ought perhaps to have discouraged a further publication, at least by one who can lay no claim to scholarship, and who has never yet emerged, and probably never will, from the shadows of literary obscurity, yet, upon a further view of this same fact, and one taken from another standpoint, both the motive and excuse for this little volume may be easily found.

The publication of the scholarly and exhaustive expositions of this subject, above referred to, are only one of a series of evidences of a revival of interest in the subject. The holding of prophetic conferences in recent years, both in this country and in Europe is another. It is not surprising, therefore, nor blamable, that others besides those whose names are enrolled among the literati, and who also have been for years interested students of the subject, and have thought long and deeply upon it, should be prompted at a time like this to lay before the public their contribution to the general expression upon the theme.

In writing this volume, the aim has been to treat the subject comprehensively enough to satisfy the ordinary reader, and yet to keep it within the limit of a hundred and fifty pages or so, having in mind the fact that, while the average reader, moved either by interest in the theme, or by simple curiosity, might readily enough take up and read a book of this kind which he could peruse in a few hours, he would persistently ignore a ponderous volume of from five hundred to six hundred pages on the same subject.

If a knowledge of this subject, and an interest in it, is imparted by what is here written, and especially if it prompt to its further and more mature study among the larger and abler expositions referred to, the writer of this one will be satisfied.

It may also be truthfully, and I trust modestly, urged as an additional plea for the publication of this volume, that, taken as a whole, the thoughts and arguments which it presents are original and independent; that it contains the result of much careful, personal research into the Scriptures and other sources, and that the book is therefore not a mere repetition "a le perroquet"* of what has already been said by others.

In the treatment of Scripture, that principle of interpretation has been followed which is recognized by Alford, and which is the only rational one, viz: that "a figurative sense of words is never admissible except when required by the context," and the effort is uniform and consistent throughout this volume, to rescue the truths of Scripture from the perversion and corruption which they have suffered by the figurative or allegorical method of interpretation which is so common and so popular.

It is very reasonably assumed in these pages that the Bible was intended to be a revelation and not an obscuration of truth; that the Holy Spirit, in the selection and guidance of His various amanuenses (by which is meant the original writers, and not the mere copyists, including the translators) with unerring wisdom provided for the exact and clear expression of His mind, or of the truths He purposed to reveal; that the office of the exegete, therefore, in the strict sense of the term, is useless and officious, and that no man, nor body of men, has ever been commissioned, authorized, or qualified to interpret, but simply to teach, the Scriptures. The interpretation and elucidation of Scripture truth belongs exclusively to the Holy Spirit. This is His office, and His alone, and this powerful and efficient aid is vouchsafed to every candid and believing student of God's Word. If, in connection with the study of the Word, it were relied upon alone, it should lead ultimately and inevitably to uniformity of belief. I say ultimately, because all Scripture truth, even with this powerful aid, is not grasped or apprehended at once by the human mind, no more than is any other truth, but progressively; neither is the perceptive power of all minds equal. I say it should lead inevitably to uniformity of belief, because truth is fixed and immutable, and the Holy Spirit, who is declared by Christ to be the "Spirit of Truth," can not, therefore, teach one thing out of the Word to one mind, and contradict that teaching to another mind. "God is not the author of confusion." The BabH of creeds in the world to-day, which fills the mind of the earnest seeker after truth with dismay, must not, and can not be charged to the Holy

Spirit. They are the product of the human exegete, alone.

These remarks do not, of course, apply to the symbolic Prophecies. The design of God in these Prophecies being, evidently, to reveal certain truths in such a way that the unfolding of the history of the world and of the race, alone, would make them understood, and understood only at and after the time they became due.

Wm. Houliston.

Minneapolis, Minn.

Chapter I. Nature And Manner Of The Lord's

RETURN.

Page.

Scripture Teaching on This Point — No Obscurity Nor Ambiguity about it — The Literal Personal and Visible Return of Christ Plainly Taught 13

Chapter II. A Digression

Popular Objection to the Doctrine of the Literal, Personal, and Visible Advent Discussed — Modern Philosophy and Theology in Conflict with Scripture and Science — No Agreement Between the Soul of Scripture and the Philosophical and Theological Soul— What is the Soul? 25

Chapter III

EXACT TIME OF THE SECOND ADVENT UNKNOWN. ITS PROXIMITY DIS- CERNIBLE TOWARD THE END OF THE AGE.

Ignorance of the Savior on this Point — Ignorance of the Apostles— of the Writers of the

Epistles — of All Men in Apostolic Times — of Men Now, and to the End of the Age — Proximity of the Event Discernible Toward the End of the Age, by the Exhaustive Fulfillment of Prophecy, and by the Signs 47

Chapter IV. The Second Advent Will Be Premil- Lennial

Testimony of Scripture on this Point — Views of the Early Christian Church — The Literal, Personal, and Premillennial View Held by Able Men and Scholars During Every Age of the Church, and Increasingly Prevalent Now — Origen as anExegete — His Aims and Scheme — Origen Primarily Responsible for the Perversion of Christian Truth 71

Chapter V

PROPHECIES AND SIGNS. WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?

Examination of Prophecy — Evidence of the Approaching End of the Age and Imminence of the Savior's Return — Times, Periods, Dates — Views and Computations of Mr. H. Grattan Guiness — Views and Chart of Mr. J. B. Dimbleby, Premier Chronologist to the British Chronological and Astronomical Association, London — The Principle of "Septiform Periodicity ,, — Signs 93

Chapter VI. The Millennium And The Future Life

Popular Idea of the Future Life Fanciful and Erroneous — Examination and Analysis of One or Two Sample Passages of Scripture upon which, as They Appear in Our Common Version, the Popular Belief has Its Foundation or is Supposed to Have Support — What the Scriptures have to Say of the Future Life — Old Earth to be the Theater of its Manifestation — To be Inaugurated by the Resurrection of the "Dead in Christ" and the Establishment of the Millennial Kingdom — Removal of the Curse — Political Features of the Millennial Period — Future Life Manifested Through a Material Organism — Answer to the Question, "Shall We Know Each Other in the Future Life? ,, ... 137

Chapter I. Nature And Manner Of The

LORD'S RETURN.

Scripture Teaching on this Point — No Obscurity

nor Ambiguity about it — The Literal, Personal,

and Visible Return of Christ Plainly Taught.

At the risk of being tedious and wearisome to the reader, for a few pages, by the multiplication and repetition of quotations from the Bible, it is purposed to lay down in this chapter, a foundation of Scripture testimony, broad, deep, and solid enough, not merely to sustain the superstructure that shall be reared upon it, but to mock the shafts of sophistry which may be hurled against it by prejudice and the hostility of theorists. We bespeak, therefore, the patience and good nature of the reader.

No ordinarily intelligent person whose mind has not been biased in education, or by prevalent and popular notions, or, who has not accustomed himself, as the result of those influences, to habitual juggling with God's word, can read the multiplied and various statements of, and references to the second coming of Christ, scattered throughout the New Testament, and understand them otherwise than as meaning a literal, personal and visible return of the Lord to this earth.

In support of the above premises, a few of the more explicit and precise statements of Scripture on this point may be examined: — statements worded with such evidently intentional care and definiteness, that they can not be misunderstood, but must be deliberately and wilfully preverted or set aside, with the intention of avoiding their destructive effect upon the theory of a tropical or figurative second coming, or return of Christ The explicitness and precision of some of these statements suggest , if they do not almost force one to the conclusion that the Holy Spirit in inditing them, aimed to forestall any attempt that might be made in later times to corrupt this doctrine, and so constructed the statement of it as to thwart and defeat the attempt.

For example: When the Lord was ascending from Mount Olivet, and the disciples were gazing in astonishment at their departing Lord, "two men in white apparel stood by them, which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven; 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."

Now, observe carefully and critically the points of emphasis in this passage, and note in these points of emphasis, the very obvious intention of fixing definitely and beyond all mistake, or all controversy, two things; first, the identity of the Person, or Being, concerning whom the statement was made that He should come again, and second ;

the sense in which His coming was to be understood, as well as the manner, — the precise manner of His advent.

The points of emphasis are these, "this same Jesus" "shall so come" "in like manner" Now it is certainly obvious and beyond all dispute that the introduction of the adjective same between this and Jesus is to emphasize the identity of the Person spoken of, viz: Jesus, Jesus himself; not his Spirit; not the Holy Spirit; not an influence or emanation from Jesus or from God the Father, but this same Jesus who was at that moment being taken up into heaven, — the resurrected Jesus of "flesh and bones" and wounded side and hands, who, for the purpose of assuring His disciples of His identity some weeks before this event, had said "behold My hands and My feet, handle Me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have." (Luke 24:39) The same Jesus who, a few hours before His death, had promised to "drink of the fruit of the vine" with them in the kingdom of God, — this still incarnate and ever to remain incarnate "Son of God" — none other, none different. It is also equally obvious that the introduction of the adverb so between shall and come is to emphasize the sense in which His coming is to be understood, as well as the manner of His coming. And, as if such emphatic declaration was scarcely strong enough to fix the sense, the words "in like manner" are super-added.

Now, how did He go, for the witnessing disciples were assured that He would so come, in like manner as they had seen Him go into heaven. Why, He simply ascended from the earth, bodily, while the disciples were gazing at Him, until a cloud received Him out of their sight. It follows, therefore, on the authority of the angelic visitants, that He shall so come; that is to say, as He then ascended from the earth, so, when He comes again He shall descend to the earth; as the cloud received Him out of their sight, so, when He comes the clouds will accompany Him; and, as all human eyes present at His ascension saw Him go, so, when He comes "every eye shall see Him."

Now, does this accord with other Scripture, and can the testimony of these angels be corroborated by Scripture? Yes, Jesus said "if I go away I shall come again" He had also said, "and then shall they see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with great power and glory." In Rev. 1 17, we read, "Behold He cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see Him" Daniel, in prophetic vision, says, "and behold one like the Son of Man

came with the clouds of heaven and there was

given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom etc."

Thus we have the statement of His reappearance, or second coming, not only clothed in such language, and so constructed, as to render any other than a literal interpretation rationally and scientifically impossible, but we find the statement in accord with, and supported by other Scripture statement, and by the words of Jesus, Himself, so far as relates to the nature and manner of His coming; viz: literally, personally, visibly, and in the clouds of heaven.

The Scriptures so abound with passages referring to the second advent of Christ to the earth, — three hundred or more of times, I believe, it is stated or referred to, — that it almost wearies one to make selections. We will however select a few for the purpose, especially, of indicating there uniformity and harmony, as in the instances cited above.

We read, "For the Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout etc." (Thes. 4:16). "For our citizenship is in Heaven, from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile bodies, etc." (Phil. 3:20„2i). "Repent ye therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord, and He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you; whom the Heavens must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all His Holy Prophets since the world began." (Acts 3:19, 20,21). In these passages we have the identity of the Savior again emphasized, as in the ones formerly quoted. "The Lord Himself." "We look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ" "He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you" This same Jesus, you see.

Not only this, but these passages, by the only honest and fair interpretation, affirm His descent or return to earth. "The Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven," "Our Citizenship is in Heaven, whence also we look for the Savior," "He shall send Jesus Christ, whom the heavens must receive until the times of restitution of all things," "then shall they see the Son of Man coming in the clouds."

Nothing, it w y ould seem, but the blindest and most obstinate devotion to some extra-biblical theory of the second advent could obscure the light or resist the force of these explicit and emphatic statements of the literal, personal, and visible return of our Lord.

Compare now Math. 24: 26, 27, with Rev. 1: 7. In the former we read, "wherefore if they shall say unto you, behold He is in the desert; go not forth, behold, He is in the secret chambers; believe it not; for as the lightning cometh out of the east and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." The meaning of these words to any candid mind is quite obvious. It is this, — the Savior warns them against deception from false christs who, He said, should appear in the course of the events or signs preceding the end of the age, so that, if any one should say, "lo, here He is, or lo there, or behold He is in the desert," etc., it must not be believed; because, the coming of the Son of Man will be universally visible and universally recognized. No one will need to be told of it, when it occurs, for all will see it, and all will know it, just as in the case of the lightning which, though the electric discharge comes from a cloud in the eastern horizon, nevertheless it flashes its lurid light from east to west, and through all the space within the visible circle of the heavens, — from the one part under heaven, as Luke has it, to the other part under heaven, — so that every one who is not blind must see it and know it. Now read Rev. i : 7, "Behold He cometh with clouds and every eye shall see Him"

Indeed, the terms most frequently used to express His second coming, suggest, if they do not assert it, that the event is one which is especially cognizable to the sense of sight; as, for example, the following: "To them that look for Him, shall He appear the second time, etc/' "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the Great God and our Savior." "For we know that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for w<e shall see Him as He is." "See that thou keep the commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord." "I charge thee, therefore, before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and kingdom," and a multitude of other passages.

Only a small portion of the evidence from Scripture has been given to prove the literality, personality, and visibility of Christ's second coming, but it is already overwhelming. Such fanciful notions, therefore, as that by Christ's second coming we are to understand His invisible presence and influence at conversion, or His presence either in person or representatively at the death of the believer, are utterly without warrant from Scripture yea more, they are a flagrant perversion of Scripture.

But, to settle more effectually and completely the assumption of any Scriptural warrant, or even permission for these notions we have only to turn to John 21 : 18, where we read, — "Verily, verily I say unto thee (that is to Peter) when thou wast young, thou girdedest thyself, and walkedest whither thou wouldst, but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thine hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldst not. This spake He, signifying by what death he (Peter) should glorify God, and when He had spoken this, He (Christ) saith unto him (Peter) follow me. Then Peter turning about seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved (that is John) following; * * * Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple (John) should not die." Now, as every one knows, Christ here foretold Peter's death by martyrdom, and as Peter was very curious or anxious to know what would be the fate of John, his beloved friend and companion, he asks the question of Jesus, what should become of John. The reply of Jesus is, "if I will that he tarry till I come what is that to thee?'' and we are very carefully told that Jesus did not positively say or predict that John should remain alive till His coming again, but that He simply said to Peter, that if it should be His (Jesus') purpose that John should remain alive till He came again, what concern was it of Peter's?

But, in doing this, Jesus has most emphatically distinguished between these two events, viz.: between the death of a believer, and His own second coming. Peter's dying, it is here practically affirmed would not be tarrying till Christ's second coming, and John's tarrying till Christ came would not be death for John. Thus the death of a believer is not Christ's second coming.

Now we will proceed to show that conversion is not Christ's second coming. Turn to Acts, 3: 19. We read, "repent ye, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; and He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you; whom the heavens must receive until the times of restitution of all things, etc."

In the first place we remark, the exhortation here is to be converted first, as preparatory to the second coming of Christ, therefore, these two things can not be identical. In the second place the exhortation is to be converted now, while Jesus' second coming is, in the same passage, said to be due only at the time of the restitution of all things; — the heavens must receive or hold Him until then, — that is, until the restoration of creation or of the earth to its primal condition, or as it was before the curse.

Before closing this part of the theme, let us ask this question: If Christ's second coming were not literal, personal, and visible, what application is possible, and what congruity is there in the warning given to the disciples concerning false christs, who should appear in the course of the age "shewing great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible they shall deceive the very elect ?" Are not these false christs who exercise those powers, literal, visible persons? And, if they are, which must be admitted, must not the elect be sadly ignorant of the spiritual nature of Christ's second coming, when they are so imminently liable to be deceived by these gross, material, and visible imposters? Or, on the other hand, must not the coming of these false christs, material and personal as they are, present a very striking resemblance to, and correspondence with the true advent, to prove so dangerously deceptive, even to the "very elect?"

So much as to what the Scriptures, at least, teach with reference to the nature and manner of the Second Advent, and it is equally clear, from the writings of the early Fathers, as will be shown later on, that these were the views and teachings of the apostolic and early Christian Churches. And, outside of these writings, among the inscriptions on the tombs in the catacombs of Rome, and from other sources, the evidence is not only abundant, but overwhelming on this point. It is simply impossible for any person well informed on this subject to doubt this, and they only, among those who reject the doctrine of the personal return of the Lord, are rational, who admit that these are indeed the teachings of Scripture, and were the views of the early Christian Church, but who claim that this was due to the misapprehension of the writers of Scripture, and the ignorance of the Church; the crudity and immaturity of its religious ideas and conceptions, and that, as it grew older, and its religious ideas developed or evolved, as the result of greater spiritual enlightenment and intellectual expansion, these gross and materialistic notions were abandoned.

For this latter opinion, how r ever, with all its show of fairness, w r e have no respect, as it practically repudiates the Bible as the Word of God, and a divinely inspired record of revealed truth, and is nothing more nor less than a masked and hypocritical deism. Moreover, it is a characteristic product of the self-conceit of the present age, which arrogates to itself intellectual superiority over all past ages.

The Bible either is, or it is not, the Word of God. If it is, its plain teaching may not be ignored nor set aside because it conflicts with the philosophies of men, or because it is materialistic. Its teachings are, it is true, materialistic, and immeasurable injury has been done to truth by the attempt in all ages to spiritualize and etherialize those teachings so as to adapt them to human philosophy.

The Bible teaches uniformly and unequivocally the restoration of the earth to its primal condition; to its edenic perfection and splendor, and the resurrection of man to dwell therein. This was the hope of Paul as stated by himself on the occasion of his examination before the Roman centurion and the high* priest Ananias. It was the hope of the Jews, as further affirmed by the same apostle in his superb speech before Agrippa (Acts 26:1, 8, 9). It was his theme on Mars hill, and apparently, his theme everywhere, for we are told that he went everywhere ''preaching Christ and the resurrection," — not the resurrection of Christ, but the resurrection of the dead, through Christ, who was the earnest and first fruits of them that sleep. From the promise to Abraham that he should be "the heir of the world," (as explained by the apostle, Rom. 3:4) to the sermon on the mount, where Jesus taught that "the meek shall inherit the earth," and indeed from Genesis to Revelation, this is the plain and obvious teaching of Scripture.

Chapter II. A Digression

Popular Objection to the Doctrine of the Literal Advent Discussed. — Modern Philosophy and Theology in Conflict With Scripture and Science. — No Agreement Between the Soul of Scripture and the Philosophical and Theological Soul. — What is the Soul?

Perhaps it will be profitable and helpful at this point to digress from the main subject, to discuss at some length the ground of the popular objection to the literal and personal return of our Lord.

The ground of objection is, as we have intimated, that this view or conception of the second advent is gross, materialistic, and unphilosophical. We wish to say first, that philosophy, notwithstanding the pretentious etymology of the term used to designate it, is not by any means unerringwisdom or knowledge; much less is it absolute truth. Much of philosophy is sheer speculation, fancy, imagination, and in some of its departments it is in demonstrable conflict with both science and truth. Especially is this the case in its theological, psychological, and anthropological departments.

Alas for the integrity of religious truth, and particularly of Christian truth, the poison of Grecian philosophy in general, and of Neo-Platonism in particular, has shattered it in every nerve and fibre, and almost annihilated it. Christian truth, even in its early propagation by the Apostles, had no more subtle, dangerous, and persistent foe, and the teachers of Christianity had to be ever watchful to resist the insidious encroachments of a foe whose aims and assaults, where successful, were always more or less ruinous to truth. Again and again had Paul to warn his pupils and converts against "philosophy and vain deceit/' and "science falsely so called. "

The fact is, as any careful and unbiased student can satisfactorily prove for himself, that, with reference to the question of man's future, the fundamental difference between the teaching of Christ and his apostles on the one hand, and the current philosophy of the world at that day, on the other, was, that the Christians taught a future life through a resurrection or re-living of the body, or organism, — changed somewhat, it is true, as to its elements and powers, but not as to its identity, — while philosophy taught the immortality of the soul, as the conscious and intelligent part of man, which death and the dissolution of the body only liberated.

Philosophy has not changed. To-day, in the three departments referred to, in dealing with the subject of man, — his structure and nature, — it postulates a soul to which it assigns certain characteristics and powers, and which it constitutes the seat and source of reason, intelligence, of all moral attributes, and of consciousness, of course, as these other functions and powers imply and demand the latter.

Sir William Hamilton says, "Man is not an organism, he is an intelligence served by an organism. " This proposition contains the whole modern philosophical idea of the nature of man, and expresses concisely and accurately the popular notion. But, it does not rest on scientific ground. It is purely metaphysical. So far as science speaks or can speak on the subject, it contradicts and reverses this proposition. It affirms that man is an organism, and is intelligent as an organism, and because he is an organism, the relative intelligence in individuals, as to both quantity and quality, being dependent upon the structure and condition of their respective organisms, plus or minus, of course, the culture applied to each. It affirms that consciousness and intelligence cease when the functions of the organism cease, and that when man dies, and the dissolution of the body takes place, he is practically extinct. The logical corrollary, therefore, is, that if ever man returns to consciousness hereafter, it will be when, in the resurrection, by the omnific power of God he is reorganized, — not necessarily by a recombination of the same materials, or materials of the same kind, but by a combination of materials of some kind. And, this is precisely the teachings of Scripture, — the teaching of Christ and the apostles. Man has a body now, and he is to have one hereafter. The present one has been designated a natural body, the future one a spiritual body, — a body at all events, not an "immaterial spirit" not a phantasm, not a formless, intangible, invisible nothing, but a body, and very reasonably so, for, if the saints are to live and reign with Christ for a millennium on this material earth, as taught by Scripture, if they are to sit upon thrones (that number of them at least whose privilege this will be) judging the twelve tribes of Israel, if they are to sit down with Christ in His Kingdom, and drink with Him "of the fruit of the vine" as He promised them He would, then they must have material bodies. [See chapter VI, Quotation from McClintock & Strong's Encyclopedia.]