DID THE APOSTLES EXPECT THE RETURN
OF CHRIST IN THEIR TIME?
By
G. H. LANG
Something
less than twenty years after the ascension of the Lord, about A.D. 51, Paul
wrote to the Thessalonians and said: "We that are
alive, that are left unto the parousia
of the Lord,” etc. On the
strength of this it has been asserted that "the
writings [of the New Testament] have most
pointedly and specifically identified themselves with the living"
at the parousia, and the
question of our title is held to require an affirmative answer. But this depends upon the sense here of the
"we," "we
that are alive."
The
usage of the "we" and "ye" does not amount to proof: it might mean this;
it may not.
1.
Num. 15: 2. At Kadesh
Barnea (ch. 14)
2.
Deut. 11: 7. At the close of the desert
wanderings Moses said to the nation, "your eyes have seen all the great work of Jehovah which He did." This included His works in
3.
Jg. 2: 10, 11. All who had come out of
4.
Is. 64.
Speaking for the godly remnant to come in the last days, the prophet
cries for God to come down, to melt the mountains, etc. (1, 2). He
glances at the far past, when God did come down and Sinai quaked, and says (3), "when Thou didst terrible things which
we looked not for," though neither he nor those for whom he speaks
had been at Sinai.
5.
Dan. 9: 5, 6. The godly prophet says, "We have sinned, and
have dealt perversely, have done wickedly, have rebelled, have turned aside
from Thy precepts,” etc., though ch. 1: 4-8
show that from his youth Daniel personally had lived quite the reverse of this.
6.
Tit. 3: 3.
Similarly, Paul says, "we also aforetime were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving
divers lusts and pleasures,” etc., though he himself had not so lived,
for he says that from his forefathers he had served God with a pure conscience
(2 Tim. 1: 3,
and see Acts 23: 1 and Phil. 3: 6).
While these statements do not mean that he had been sinless, they do
forbid that he had been characterized by disobedience and given up to lusts and
pleasures.
7.
Rom. 6. When Paul (1) says, "Shall we continue in sin?" he does
not intend that he personally had any such idea. When he adds (8), "if we died
with Christ," he is not raising a doubt as to himself, for he had
[in a sense]
been crucified with Christ and had died with Him as an
accepted and experienced reality (Gal. 2: 19, 20;
6: 14).
8.
Acts 6: 14. The accusers of Stephen speak of
"the customs which Moses delivered unto us,"
though they lived fifteen centuries after Moses.
9.
Acts 7: 38. So also Stephen speaks of Moses
having "received living oracles to give unto us."
10.
2 Cor. 4: 14. Still more decisively as to the point in
hand, Paul himself said to the Corinthians that "God
shall raise up us also with Jesus, and
shall present us with you."
What other meaning can this have than that Paul expected
to die and be raised? Had he, then,
changed his mind since he wrote to the Thessalonians five years earlier? If so, which of his expectations was from
God? And, if so, what becomes of his
inspiration and his authority as a teacher?
It
is a common usage of "we" and the like
pronouns that the speaker thereby merely associates himself with the race,
society, or class of which he is a member.
Thus: "I cannot promise myself to be
present, but I propose to the club that we join in this
celebration." Or an
Englishman may say even now, "We won Trafalgar and
"We that are alive, that are left unto
the parousia,"
can fairly mean no more than, "those of the Christian
society that shall be alive at the parousia."
But more definitely. The
positive proof that Paul did not contemplate himself living in
the parousia is of great
weight.
1.
1Thes. 5: 1. "But
concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that ought to
be written unto you. For yourselves know
perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."
The "but" of verse 1 (de)
links that paragraph with the preceding.
It is a conjunctive particle super-adding somewhat to that which has
preceded, not a disjunctive particle separating the clauses. And there is no antecedent to "times and seasons" other than the parousia just mentioned. "But concerning the times and the seasons" for
what? The only answer is, For the events before stated. In the same way the gar "For"
connects verse 2 with verse 1, as the de
of verse 1 connects with ch. 4:
"You have no need that ought to be written unto
you as to the times and the seasons, for as to them you know that the day of
the Lord so cometh,” etc. The
argument contained in the gar simply
prohibits the taking the "day of the Lord"
as a new subject to which he now turns.
It does not need to be said that the chapter divisions are of no
authority. Here the division is most
misleading. It should have come at verse 13 of ch. 4.
The
events just mentioned, the parousia,
resurrection, and rapture, are therefore connected with the day of the Lord,
and so to the times and the seasons for them Paul had already, when with them,
given instruction.
The second, and quickly following,
letter ([2 Thess.] ch. 2: 1, 2) similarly joins the parousia,
our gathering together with Christ, and the day of the Lord, and most
expressly warns them against the notion that that day of the Lord had already set
in, for it could not do so until certain events had occurred and the Lawless
One had been revealed. He was reminding
them with emphasis not to expect the parousia,
our gathering together, or the day of the Lord before these events. He considered such a false expectation as a beguilement, and hints that there were spirits, as well as
men, who would seek the deception of saints upon this point.
The
A.V. rendering of [the Greek word] huper
"I beseech you by the parousia,” etc., is incorrect and misleading. It makes the parousia and the gathering of the saints a ground
of the appeal that they be not shaken in mind, and seems to disconnect those
events from the day of the Lord. Of the
some 160 places where the word is found it is not once elsewhere rendered by,
and it is a force the word does not have.
This is one instance from many how the A.V. prevents the reader from
accurate knowledge in prophetic study.
The R.V. "We beseech you touching
the parousia,"
with its margin "Gr. In behalf of,"
i.e. in reference to, connects the parousia
and the gathering with the day of the Lord, the former being events to take
place within that Day. For this meaning of huper
comp.
Now
whoever will visualize the tremendous series of world events that the prophets
and the Lord foretold as to lead up to the Day of the Lord must surely pause before asserting that Paul considered that they might
commence and be completed within his lifetime, or rather in that shorter
portion that he could expect when writing to the Thessalonians. Only ten years later he spoke of himself as
aged (Philemon 9). There was no sign of them in the year A.D. 52
when he was writing.
The
attempt to break this argument by asserting that Paul is not here speaking of
the parousia at the Day of the Lord, but of a
previous and secret parousia only revealed to him
when he was writing to the Thessalonians, and not made known before, is
inadmissible, being without evidence or reason in support, contrary to these
passages and all passages. The definite
article in 2 Thess. 2: 1,
"touching the parousia
of our Lord Jesus Christ," shows that Paul knew of only one parousia, the one when we shall be gathered unto Him,
therefore the one mentioned in the former letter, [1 Thess.] ch. 4; and the contexts in both letters prove this
to be connected with the Day of the Lord.
Scripture knows of no previous parousia or descent from the throne of God, as far as
we can find. He is to sit there until
the time for the subjection of His enemies.
The suggestion in question requires Him to leave the throne and come
down to the air before that subjugation is to commence, indeed, before the
greatest of all His enemies, the Beast, has even come on the scene. We
shall revert to this point in para. 5 below.
Details
will compel and confirm this idea of Paul’s attitude and will show that he could not, at the time he wrote, have
been expecting a near return of Christ.
1.
2.
Peter was not yet dead, nor yet old (Jonn. 21: 18, 19). It
is assumed here that he was about the same age as his Master when he was called
by Him. Both events had to take place,
as all the brethren knew. It was
this expectation, not in that of the return of Christ in his life, that Peter lived.
The Lord had said unto him, "when thou shalt be old
another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldst not." John understood this to "signify the manner of death by which Peter should glorify God." Over thirty years later than Christ spoke
Peter wrote: "I think it right, as long as I am in
this tabernacle, to stir you by putting you in remembrance; knowing that the
putting off of my tabernacle cometh swiftly, even as our Lord Jesus Christ
signified unto me" (2 Pet. 1: 13, 14). What Christ had signified, therefore, was
that John understood, Peter’s death, not any spiritual experience, as has
fancifully suggested, but "the putting off of his
tabernacle," which he at once turns into its literal sense by
adding, "Yea, I will give diligence that at every
time ye may be able after my decease to call these things to
remembrance."
3.
Five or six years later than when he wrote to the Thessalonians Paul was a
prisoner in Jerusalem, and received from the Lord, present in prison, the
specific announcement, "Be of good cheer: for as
thou hast testified concerning Me at Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also
at Rome" (Acts. 23: 11). Three reflections arise. (a) That Paul could
not henceforth expect the parousia
until, at the earliest, after he should have testified at
4.
When Paul wrote to the Thessalonians the gospel had reached but a small portion
of even the Roman world and it had to be taken to the whole earth. The thought must not be confined to that
invention of prophetic students "the Roman earth"
or "the prophetic earth." Great territories were known to exist that
[*
It is very uncertain whether Paul reached
5.
Those who maintain that we ought to be
expecting the parousia momentarily, because, as they say,
the apostles did so, commonly assert that the supposed secret rapture they
teach was revealed for the first time when Paul was writing his first letter to
the Thessalonians. They are obliged so
to assert for, as has always been admitted, it is plain that the Old Testament
and the Gospels speak only of the coming of Christ in glory. This admission involves that when present at
Thessalonica Paul could only have spoken of the latter event, the
coming in glory, no other coming or rapture having been revealed until later,
i.e., when he wrote to them. Yet, as
seen above, his second letter (2: 1, 5) shows incontrovertibly that when with
them he had told them of "the parouisia
of the Lord," our gathering together unto Him, and the Day of the
Lord: "Remember ye not that when I was with you I
told you these things?"
Therefore,
as the secret rapture, prior to the rise of the Lawless One, had not been
revealed when Paul was with them (as we wholly agree), that parousia
and gathering to the Lord of which he did speak at that time cannot have been this alleged secret coming and rapture, for
these, as the theory owns, had not then been revealed. It could only have been that the parousia and gathering of which
Christ had spoken (Matt. 24: 29-31), and
which were to follow next after
the tribulation of those Latter Days, for no other coming and gathering had
been made known. And the reason is, that there is to
be no other coming of Christ than that of which He himself spoke. Of this Paul himself is a witness in chief,
for he has declared with the utmost preciseness that "the blessed hope" of the church is "the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus
Christ" (Tit. 2: 13), and not
any prior and secret event. See later
under prosdechomai.
It
cannot be alleged that when with them he had indeed spoken of the same coming
and gathering as taught by Christ, but that now, in his first letter, he was
bringing before them something fresh, for the first letter shows (5: 1, 2) and the second letter distinctly asserts
(2: 5) that he was reminding them of the
very things he had told them by word of mouth.
If
any disputant will now give up the assertion in question, and, changing ground,
will say that the secret coming was revealed before Paul wrote to the
Thessalonians, it will be his duty to prove this by Scripture, which, as far as
we know, cannot be done nor has been attempted.
Thus
the facts as to Paul are, that about A.D. 50 or 51 he was teaching at
Thessalonica that the apostasy must come
before the return of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him: that
shortly after, when writing his letters to that city, he repeated the same
things: that five or six years later he wrote to the Corinthians about his
being raised from the dead to be presented with them before the Lord: that
within two years thereafter he was explicitly told by the Lord that he would
live to testify at Rome: that perhaps nine years later he wrote to Timothy that
his death was now at hand, and gave him instructions as to continuing the
teaching by passing on to other faithful men what he had heard from himself (2 Tim. 4: 6; 2: 2).
Thus
his attitude was exactly that of Peter, contemplating death and taking steps to
perpetuate the testimony after his departure.
It is impossible to thrust into this consistent attitude and teaching
the notion, so contradictory and dislocating, that when he wrote the first
letter to the Thessalonians he set forth a new scheme as to the parousia never heard of before and
never mentioned again. The other great
passage on resurrection and rapture (1 Cor. 50: 15-58) contains not a word that requires
its fulfilment before the Tribulation, but the references to the last trump and the swallowing up
of death in victory connect most naturally with Rev.
11: 15-18 and Hosea. 13: 14, both
dealing with the Day of the Lord at the
end of the Tribulation. The same is true of 1 Thes. 4: 13-18.
Taken by itself it can be as well put after the Antichrist period as
before, for it gives no hint either way; but taken in its proper connection
with the paragraph next following, it agrees with the Corinthian passage as to
this point. But deprive the theory of a
secret, any moment rapture of these two scriptures and it really has nothing left.
6.
The apostolic outlook was of necessity conditioned by the statements of the
Lord made to them (1) that he was going on a long journey ("a man going into a far country," Luke 19: 12), and (2) it would be only "after a long time" that the Master of the house
would return (Matt. 25: 19): and (3) His
further statement a few weeks later, noticed above, extended that "long time" until at least Peter should have grown
old and have died a violent death (John. 21: 18-23). The first of these statements was made in
public; the second to four apostles, of whom Peter was one (Mark. 13: 3); the last "went forth among the brethren," i.e., passed
beyond the seven present (verse 2) to the
brethren generally.
It is therefore beyond credence that only a few weeks later Peter was
publicly assuring the Jewish people that, if only they as a nation would
repent, Christ would then and there return.
This is an impossible sense to import into his words in Acts. 3: 19-21.
He knew from the Lord’s own words that the nation would not repent, but
was rejected, and that their city would be destroyed and themselves
dispersed. The sense imposed upon what
he here said throws it into disharmony with his appeal in the preceding chapter:
"Save yourselves from this crooked generation"
(2: 40), the contrary idea to that of the
generation being saved.
But
in fact Peter’s words in ch. 3 carry the
refutation of this misleading notion.
He declared that "the heavens must
receive [Messiah] until the times of the
restitution of all things whereof God spake by the mouth of His holy prophets
from of old". Thus Peter asserts that the whole of those
mighty world changes of which the Old Testament so largely speaks must take
place in connection with the return of Christ, and he would know that they could not be condensed into a brief time,
but would take years to complete. The last "week"
of Daniel 9 alone would require seven years.
7.
In connection with the prediction of Peter’s death, and in answer to a question
by Peter as to what awaited John, the Lord said, "If
I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" The disciples then showed they were like
disciples are to-day, quick carelessly to read into words what is not said. They took these words to mean that John would
not die, but should live till the Lord should come again. Late in life John took pains to correct this
false notion, pointing out that Christ had not said that, thus hinting
incidentally that words must be construed strictly, not be taken loosely. The fact that this mistaken expectation was
held concerning one particular believer shows that it was not held concerning
all believers. If it had been the
expectation that all believers might live to the return of Christ, no special
word would have been needed to create that expectation as to one of them. But the emphasis in the Greek makes clear
that the notion was based on that special saying and was confined to John:
"Went out therefore this the word among the
brethren that that disciple would not die"
8.
Further, the Lord’s definite assertions quoted, that His absence would be
lengthy, must be remembered steadily when the sense is sought of His earlier
statements that His followers are to be like unto men waiting for their Lord. It were grievous
irreverence to suppose that at first He created an assumption that He had
afterwards to correct. Yet to this there
is no alternative if it be held that His earlier teaching had meant that the
apostles and their contemporaries were to expect His return in the near future.
One
of the earliest of these sayings is typical of others (Luke
12: 35-40):"Let your loins be girded about,
and your lamps burning and be ye yourselves like unto men looking for their
Lord, when he shall return from the marriage feast; that when he cometh and
knocketh, they may straightway open unto Him."
The
very picture employed forbids that the servants should imagine that their
Master might return "at any moment"
or without notice. They were too well
acquainted with the bustle and excitement attending an eastern marriage
procession to gather the notion that it might arrive and no one know it was
near, if he was awake.
Thus in the parable of the virgins a "cry"
went forth "Behold the bridegroom";
and in the same discourse it was said, "When ye see
all these things know ye that
He is nigh" (Mt. 24: 33). Thus the Lord’s teaching was never
consistent; not cannot it be said that this does not refer to the coming for
the church, for the warning to the church at Sardis is to the same effect,
implying that the watchful will know
when the hour has come, while the unwatchful will in no wise know: "IF therefore thou shalt not watch I will come as a
thief, and thou shalt in no wise know what hour I will come upon thee"
(Rev. 3: 3).
Moreover,
(1) the servants knew that the bridegroom had to go to the house of the bride’s
father; that there the customary ceremonies and festivities (usually protracted
affairs) had to be accomplished; and that the return journey had to be made.
(2) The picture implied that therefore they need not expect him during the
first watch of the night (6 to 9 p.m.) of which Christ made no mention; and it
was left open if it might be in the second watch (9 to 12 p.m.),
or whether it might not be till the third (12 to 3 a.m.). (3) In the explication
of this parable the Lord contemplated the business of His house going on so
long that a good servant might
degenerate into a bad one; for he says, "My
Lord delayeth his coming," which it would
not occur to any one to say until some considerable lapse of time after the
master had left and beyond the full time when he might have returned. The
good servant turning from his fidelity is the clear force of what is said. It is only when he starts to entertain the
notion of the delay of his lord that he "begins"
his misconduct, which means that up till then he had done his duty. The pronoun "that evil servant"
is emphatic: If an evil servant, or if any
evil servant: but He did not so speak.
On
a later occasion (Lk. 17: 20), answering a question as to when "the
These
remarks apply to the parables in Matt. 24
and 25. In Matt.
13 a series of parables had already indicated developments and changes
to go on throughout this present age, from the time when the Son of Man began sowing
the good seed until the harvest, which latter would be when the Son of Man
should send forth His angels at the consummation of the age (49). All
that then was intimated had to come to pass before that consummation and
harvest could come; and so later, in Matt. 24: 14,
it was repeated that the gospel [‘of the kingdom’] had to
be taken to the whole world, and many other mighty events come to pass, before
the Son of Man would send forth those angels. It was in the light of His prior instruction
that the Lord repeated the call and warning as to the servants of His household
watching as men ready for their lord, and the watching required
cannot nullify the earlier instruction that many things would take place before
He would come.
The
parable of the ten virgins as distinctly implied a lengthy absence as did the
parable from Luke. 12 considered above. The bridegroom has gone to fetch the bride,
and he is away so long that the virgins pass the interval sleeping. This is followed by a further picture of the
household during the Master’s absence (Matt. 25: 14),
which ends only after "a long time." It is to be observed how frequently this
figure of the "house" is employed, and
in passages regularly to do with the coming of the Son of Man. As to what is the "house" during the absence of the Lord there can
be no question. The later New Testament
writings settle this. The "house of God" is the "church of the living God" (1 Tm. 3: 15: etc., etc.). So
that the house, the church, is to continue on earth until the coming of the Son
of Man,* that coming of
which His parables speak, which indeed is the only future coming known to
Scripture.
[* Not
the whole ‘church,’ that is, every
regenerate believer; for the watchful, who are ‘able to
escape’ will be removed via rapture, before the Great Tribulation
commences, (Luke 21: 34-36).]
9.
We pass now to expressions which some think to be inconsistent with this view
of New Testament.
The
terms "wait for," "look for," do not in themselves
carry the force of momentary expectation, but are used of events known to be
distant and to take place after other
events to precede.
(1)
Ekdechomai is
used (a) of the man at the pool waiting for the moving of the
water (John. 5: 3). This took place (kata kairon), which term in
(2)
Apekdechomai,
the intensive form, is used (a) of the creation waiting for the
revealing of the sons of God (Rom. 8: 19);
yet this is unintelligent waiting, since the creation cannot enter consciously
into the plans of God, which shows that no "any
moment" attitude is necessary to the word. (b) And even when used
of the believer waiting for the redemption of the body (Rom. 8: 23), it is (c) then at once shown (verse 25) that it is a patient
waiting, as for something that is not expected instantly. (d) It is therefore in this sense of patience
of hope that (e) "we wait for a
Saviour" (Phil. 3: 20), that (f)
He will be manifested to them that wait for Him (Heb. 9: 28), and (g) that the apostles waited
for His coming (1 Cor.
1: 7), and (g) for the hope of righteousness (Gal.
5: 8). The force of this word
lies in the intensity of the longing, and this is not dependent upon brevity of
interval.
(3)
Prosdokao is
another cognate. It is used of Peter
looking for events so admittedly far distant as the parousia
of the Day of God and the coming of the new heavens and earth, which are to be
later than the millennial era itself (2 Pet. 3:
12-14).
The
derivative prosdokia comes only twice. (a) The Jews were expecting Herod
to execute Peter (Acts 12: 11), but they
could not know just what day the king would fix, whether near or later. (b) In the last days men’s hearts will be failing
for fear and for expectation of what terrors the future may hold
(Luke 21: 26); but again the fear is
undefined as to the precise events or the time of their occurrence. It is this very vagueness which causes and
aggravates the fear.
(4)
Prosdechomai. The same sense attaches to this word. So much of uncertainty may lie in it that it
is used (a) of men looking for a promise of which it is quite
uncertain whether it will be given at all, that of the chief captain to bring
Paul before the council (Acts 23: 21). Then it is used (b) of Simeon looking
for the consolation of
It
is both certain and significant that Paul so employed the word, and indicates
that his attitude was as here shown, for he says that the Christian is to be
"looking for the blessed hope and [even the, or, which is the] appearing of the glory of the great God our Saviour Jesus
Christ" (Tit. 2: 13). The grammar simply forbids the common but
erroneous notion that the "blessed hope" is a first event and the
"appearing" a later. Alford remarks:
"Hope and appearing belong together." So
It
is thus clear that this word, like its cognates, is used of events that are
known to be distant and may be preceded by other expected occurrences, so that
the sense of immediacy is no necessary part of their New Testament meaning. They deny any validity to the assertion that
one cannot be looking for an event if he thinks that other events may first
occur, as that one cannot be looking for Christ if he thinks that Antichrist
must come first. In the New Testament
sense of these words one can be so looking for Christ, and very
many have been and are thus looking for Him. What is positively contrary to New Testament
facts and usage is that the apostles were looking for Him in any other
manner. Linking, as before noticed, the parousia of Christ, our gathering unto Him, and His Day,
Paul has most categorically affirmed that "it will
not be except the apostacy come first and the man of
lawlessness be revealed" and that any other notion is a deception (2 Thes. 2: 1-3). It will not be affirmed that no one looks for,
waits for, expects, new heavens and earth because we all expect other events
first.
10.
It has been shown that "I come quickly"
does not mean soon, but swiftly. Difficulty,
however, is felt by some with such statements as "Yet
a very little while the Coming One shall come, and will not tarry"
(Heb. 10: 37). It is urged that such phrases would not have
been used by men who did not expect the event shortly, and they are made a
basis for the charge that the apostles taught their converts an outlook which
time falsified. Yet moderate attention
to the facts of Scripture usage would avoid this misconception.
(1)
Habakkuk 2: 3 is
similar. "The
vision is yet for the appointed time and it hasteth
toward the end, and shall not lie: though it tarry wait for it; because it will
surely come, it will not delay." "The end"
is to be when "Jehovah is in His holy temple"
and "all the earth [is to] keep silence before him" (verse 20). Under Seal 6
this will be shown to mean the day of the Lord. The vision is pictured as a runner panting as
he nears the goal. Yet time is implied
in the words "though it tarry."
The words "it
will not delay" explain the "He will
not tarry" of Heb. 10: 37. There is only delay or tarrying if the person
lingers beyond the appointed time for moving. In Matt. 25: 5
the translation "while the bridegroom tarried,"
though the same word as in Heb. 10, is
misleading, for there would be no set hour for the cessation of the festivities
at the bride’s house and so no tarrying. The sense is: "As
the bridegroom did not come for some long time"; and this gave
occasion for the virgins to slumber. Thus this parable, like others, suggested some
lengthy absence of Christ.
(2)
Many centuries earlier than Habakkuk Moses had sung of Israel’s "end" (Deut. 32: 20),
even their "latter end" (verse 29), and had said: "the day of their calamity is at hand, and the
things that are to come upon them shall make haste,"
which is at once connected with their final restoration (35 and ff.). Thus the Bible language "at hand" may mean three and a half millenniums
later and "make haste" means quick
work once it has commenced.
(3)
Again, Isaiah (56:
1), speaking of the still future day of Messiah, said: "Thus saith Jehovah ... My
salvation is near to come," yet we still await it.
God
speaks from His own standpoint and outlook, and measures distance by His own
standards, not by man’s [standards]. It is for
us reverently to habituate our thinking to His, not to reduce His conceptions
to our measures. A strong man might
point to his homestead across the valley, and say, We
shall soon be there, but this weary little boy might think the walk very long. It is strictly in this connection that Peter
says that the Lord is not careless as to His promise to return, and that we are
not to forget that God’s unit of time measurement is not a day but a millennium
of years. From His standpoint His
salvation of
(4)
Speaking of the overthrow of "the terrible one,"
Antichrist, and the salvation of
It
will be shown shortly that there is another view-point (a human, as the
foregoing is the divine) from which these phrases may be regarded, each view
being consistent with the other.
The
conceptions of Scripture are everywhere consistent, and the expressions of them
also; but the force of the words must be gained from Scripture itself, not from
inexact colloquial English usage. Yet
even if the strict force of the English terms expect, look for, wait for,
be observed, it can be seen that these, as surely as the Greek words they
translate, do not necessarily require immediacy as part of their
meaning, but are equally proper when a lengthy interval may be in question. From the hour that a husband leaves his home
on a lengthy foreign journey his wife will expect, look for, wait
for his return. Indeed, waiting of
necessity implies some lapse of time in which to wait; looking
for a person implies that he is not yet in sight; expecting an event implies no
more than it will take place. Such expressions will be equally applicable if
it is known that the time is near, or distant, or is quite undetermined.
The
other term to be examined is gregoreo,
usually rendered watch. It comes from egeiro, to rouse from sleep, to cause to rise
up; hence, to live (1 Thes.
5: 10); then, to be awake, and hence to watch. It is found first at Matt.
24: 42: "Watch therefore; for ye know not
on what day your Lord cometh." This follows an intimation that the parousia of the Son of Man will be
as it was in the days of Noah and the coming of the Flood. For that dread event Noah surely waited and
watched in faith, though he knew it was not to come until after he had built
and stored the ark, and his family and the beasts should have been gathered
therein. Here is a Scriptural picture of
watching; it means to be thoroughly alive to a situation and taking all
measures required in the light of what is expected.
This
last thought is the essence of the Biblical idea of watching. It means exactly the reverse of so regarding
an event that one does nothing, but lapses into inactivity. Said the humorous Spurgeon: ‘Ye
men of
The faithful wife, by nurturing constant desire of heart
for her husband’s return, and by caring well for his house and interests while
he is away, will be more truly "watching"
for him than if she sat at a window all day gazing down the street. Her heart would ceaselessly watch, that is, be
alive to his return, looking for it, longing for it, even though she knew much
must transpire ere he could return from a distant land.
That
about the year A.D. 30 Christ did not intend His followers so to watch as if He
might return very shortly may be inferred from the fact that sixty years later
He was still exhorting His people to watch (Rev. 3:
2; 6: 15).
One
other consideration is important and illuminating. Prophetic utterance was often ecstatic, the
speaker, as to his consciousness, being transported from his own place and time
into the realm and period concerning which he prophesied. The very first prophetic utterance given
through a man demonstrates this. Enoch
spoke of the coming of the Lord as if he had seen it happen, saying, "the Lord came
with ten thousands of His holy ones" (Jude
14). Similarly the last prophet
says: "I became in spirit in the Day of the Lord"
(Rev. 1: 10). Hence the descriptions he sometimes gives of
events as having taken place, for they had done so in vision before his
consciousness. An elder says to him:
"These are they who are coming out
of the Tribulation," as if they were watching the procession in
motion (7: 14): and later, great voices
proclaim that "the kingdom of the world
became the kingdom of our Lord" (11:
15). It is in keeping with this
that God himself, to Whom the future is as the
present, speaks of His salvation as near, and that in a very little while
Christ shall come. More will be said on
this aspect later.
The
assertion that the Lord taught the apostles, and they their converts, that His
return might be in that generation carries serious and destructive
implications. Time quickly and
completely falsified the notion. So,
then, either:
1.
The Lord misled them and they the church, in which case the modernistic
challenge of their and His authority is justified. But more. The Lord declared that "as the Father taught Me, I speak ... I spake not from Myself, but the Father who sent Me He hath
given Me a commandment what to say, and what I should speak" (John 8: 28; 12: 49; 14: 10). He further said that it would be thus with the
[Holy] Spirit
of truth also: He too would not "speak from
Himself; but what things soever He shall hear shall He speak: and He shall
declare unto you the things that are to come" (John 16: 13). The misleading therefore upon this weighty
matter of prophecy must be attributed finally to God the Father; the Son and
the [Holy] Spirit
and the disciples being all misled. But
this being impossible, no such teaching can have been given. Therefore:
2.
Neither the words of the Lord nor of the apostles carry the sense supposed, but
their meaning was everywhere consistent with what God knew the facts would be. If the present discussion contributes in any
measure to the demonstrating of this it will be of value. That the prophecies of the Bible always find
exact [and literal]
fulfilment is a chief and self-employed evidence of
its truth and of its being from God. Yet
some who glory in this as to the Old Testament have laboured a scheme of
interpretation which falsifies it as to the New Testament, by maintaining that
Christ and His apostles encouraged a hope which failed utterly. These are among the wounds which He receives
in the house of His lovers.
Note.
The opinion, expounded in this commentary, that there is to be a removal of
watchful believers prior to the End Days does not conflict with what is
above mentioned, that the Lord will not leave the throne of the Father and come
to the air till the close of the reign of Antichrist. For the Lord will not come for those thus
removed: they will simply be caught away as were Enoch and Elijah.
But
this removal of the watchful of the days in question, though deeply important
for its bearing on the conscience and life, will affect only a very small
minority of the church of God, and is exegetically but subordinate to the
main prophetic programme of the End Times.
-------