THE SAINTS’RAPTURE

 

 

TO THE

 

 

PRESENCE OF THE LORD JESUS

 

 

 

 

 

 

BY ROBERT GOVETT

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Two women shall be grinding at the mill.” - Matthew 24: 41.

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLISHERS COMMENTS

 

[Page ii]

As Christians look toward the return of Jesus Christ, and know that “The Saints’ Rapture” is imminent, they are challenged and encouraged to ready themselves and be found well-pleasing in all good works. To this end, it is both our privilege and responsibility to return this valuable work to the Christian that wished a full reward and an abundant entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

 

 

CONLEY & SCHOETTLE

 

[Page iii]

PREFACE

 

 

THE work now before the reader, does not profess to be elementary. It is written with the desire to bring before those students of prophecy, who are already agreed with the writer on first points, some further views of the prophetic word.

 

 

Hence many points are previously assumed as supposed to be already admitted by the reader. A brief sketch of these is subjoined. It is taken for granted, that the Roman destruction of Jerusalem under Titus, did not fulfil the Saviour’s prophecy on Olivet; that the Jews will shortly return to their own land in unbelief; that they will rebuild the temple and offer sacrifices, fulfilling amidst their outward obedience to Moses, those dark pictures of avarice, unbelief, hypocrisy and bloodshed with which the prophets teem. It is supposed, that out of this restoration of the temple rites, Jewish blasphemy will burst forth against Jesus, and that European infidelity will second their words. About that time will come the falling away from the Christian faith. But a new witness for God and Christ will be raised up among the Jews in their own land, in persons professing Judaism, but looking for the Messiah; instructed in their own scriptures, and having [Page iv] more or less faith that Jesus is the Messiah. I suppose them not to stand in the full faith of the Church of Christ, but in the transitional position held by the twelve ere the day of Pentecost. These I call, in the ensuing work, Jewish disciples. They will have to pass through the day of the great False Christ; but they will be victors over him, either as slain for the truth or as escaping into the appointed refuge, the wilderness. It is to these that the first half of the Saviour’s prophecy on Olivet is addressed.

 

 

A friend who looked over the sheets as they came from the press, observed to me - ‘Your doctrine on the main subject of the book, appears to rest on your change of the word “coming” for “presence.”’ This remark is quite correct. So greatly are our ideas governed by our words, that I did not perceive the true Scripture doctrine of the return of the Lord Jesus till the real rendering was substituted for the ordinary; it appears necessary. therefore, somewhat more fully to justify the rendering.

 

 

That the Greek word used means “presence every Greek scholar will at once admit. It means the opposite of absence; the being alongside of certain other things supposed in the circumstances. This is evident from the apostle’s words, “Wherefore my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absencePhil. 2: 12. “For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already1 Cor. 5: 3. “I who in person, am base among you, but being absent am bold toward you; but I beseech you that I may not be bold when I am present, with that confidence wherewith I think to be bold.” “For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful, but his bodily presence is weak2 Cor. 1: 10.

 

 

This sense will translate it everywhere. I add therefore, that the word ([… see Gk.]) never signifies motion, though motion is frequently implied in the circumstances.

 

 

“I was glad of the coming of Stephanas1 Cor. 16: 17. “Nevertheless God that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; and not by his coming only, but both the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you2 Cor. 7: 6. Paul was comforted by the presence or company of Titus. It is seen from the circumstances indeed, that, that company could not be obtained by Paul without motion on the part of Titus. But motion is not expressed in the word. The first verse would have remained the same, though Paul and he had never parted company from the first of his apostolic journeys to the last. And so with other instances, on which it is needless to insist.

 

 

The reason why our translators have preferred the [Page vi] rendering “coming may be traced to their great deference to the Vulgate. That version translates the Greek by “coming” in all but four places. 1

 

1 1 Cor. 16: 17; 2 Cor. 10: 20; Phil. 2: 12; 2 Peter, 1: 16; Adventus is their word. Only in one place does the English version differ: 1 Cor. 16: 17: where the word is praesentia, Dependence on the Vulgate accounts for the many mistakes in regard to the article in our English Version.

 

 

The present work originated in a re-consideration of the Saviour’s last prophecy. Finding that many deep students of the word of God refused to admit that the taking and leaving, of the two in the field refers to the rapture, the author determined candidly to weigh the evidence afresh; and now presents it as a settled truth in his own mind, established by new arguments.

 

 

But while satisfied of this main truth, the writer would also admit that he was in error in supposing “The Fig Tree,” and “The Days of Noah,” to be signs to the church. They are indeed transitional, as was formerly observed; but they are signs to the Jewish disciple. 2

 

2 “The saints” of 1 Thess. 3: 13, he now holds to be taken in the Old Testament sense, of “angels;” not as relating to the ransomed of the Church.

 

 

Hence, should any wish to give the fairest consideration to this view, they would find that “the Prophecy on Olivet” would be the best preparation for reading this work. It would probably clear up any thing, which, unperceived by the writer himself, is not sufficiently clearly stated in this.

 

 

-------

 

[Page vii]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

CHAPTER 1

 

 

Nature of the Lord’s Presence -Tabular View of Matt. 24. - Presence of the False Christ. - Signs and Types of the Presence. - Presence of the Son of Man.  [Page 1]

 

 

CHAPTER 2

 

Difference of the Questions the basis of the difference of Prophecy on Olivet as given by the three first Evangelists. - Review of the first half of the Prophecy - ‘The sign of the Son of Man in Heaven,’ What? - Twofoldness of aspect in the two parts of the Prophecy.  [Page 22]

 

 

CHAPTER 3

 

The Figtree. - Sin of the End of the Age - The Evil Generation, What? - The world not Converted before the Coming of Christ.  [Page 38]

 

 

CHAPTER 4

 

The Days of Noah. - Resemblances. - The taking. - Mysterious disappearance. - Its nature and application. - Types of it in the Old Testament and in the New. - The sign of the Presence. - Comparison with the former sign. - Preparation for the next Parables. - Both the taken and the left Believers. [Page 51]

 

[Page viii]

CHAPTER 5

 

The Three Companionships. - 1. Raising of the Daughter of Jairus. - 2. The Transfiguration. - 3. The Agony in the Garden. - Connecting truths. - The Day of Temptation. - The Resurrection Presence. [Page 90]

 

 

CRAPTER 6

 

The Householder and Thief. - Connexion with the foregoing Parable. - What the House, the Householder, the Thief, the Theft? - The Rapture as the act of the Heavenly Thief. - Application of the Parable. [Page 107]

 

 

CHAPTER 7

 

The Steward. - Two aspects of his case. [Page 119]

 

 

CHAPTER 8

 

The Ten Virgins. - Are the five foolish hypocrites? - Proofs against the idea. - Why ten in number? - The first and second oil. - The Sleep, what? - The Procession, what? - The Reply of the Bridegroom to the Foolish. - Illustrations. - Sympathy of the external and internal. - Possible suppositions in interpretation of the Parable. [Page 124]

 

 

CHAPTER 9

 

The Talents. - Compared with the Pounds. - Its Analysis. - Connexion of the Presence-parables with each other and with the days of Noah. - The four treat of Believers only. - General principles supposed in the four. - Reward according to works. [Page 156]

 

 

CHAPTER 10

 

Luke 17: 20. - Its seven divisions. - The Kingdom within. - The Kingdom without. - Its relation to Matt. 24. - The Jewish    escape. - The Rapture of the Church. - The Unjust Judge. [Page 180]

 

[Page ix]

CHAPTER 11

 

THE EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS

 

 

SECTION I - Part of Chapters 4 and 5. - Case of the dead saints. [Page 206]

 

 

SECTION II - 2 Thess. 1. - Recompense to the Godly and Ungodly at Jesus’ return.

 

 

SECTION III - 2 Thess. 2. - The Man of Sin. - The Presence and the Day of the Lord discriminated. - Names of the Great Deceiver. - An individual. - Not the Popes. - The Popes acknowledge the true God. - The temple in which he sits the rebuilt temple of Jerusalem. - What the hindrance? - The two tendencies of human nature. - The Lawless tendency not that of Rome. - Tendencies of the Jew. - The priestly elements of Romanism necessarily offensive to Lawlessness. - Judaism, and Gnosticism. - The Man of Sin claims supreme Godhead. - What the hindrance? - Examples. - Signs and wonders of Antichrist. - Reason of their permission. - Summary of proofs that the Popes are not the Man of Sin. [Page 250]

 

 

CHAPTER 12

 

Comparison of Thessalonians with Matt. 25. - Resemblances and differences. - Jewish escape omitted by Paul, and the discrimination of the rapture. - 2 Thess. 2. - Dispensational differences. - Two classes of the elect. - History of the Thessalonian Church typical. - Why does Paul omit the discrimination of the rapture? [Page 259]

 

 

CHAPTER 13

 

Hebrews. - The first seven worthies typical. - Passive and active Faith. - Two heritages and two-fold seed of Abraham. [Page 280]

 

 

CHAPTER 14

 

2 Peter. - The abundant entrance. - The Abel and Enoch classes. - Two objections met. - Abiding force of God’s word - Noah and Lot typical. [Page 284]

 

[Page x]

CHAPTER 15

 

Must any events precede the rapture? - Evidence pro. and con. - More than one rapture. - Principle of reconciliation. - Difference of change and rapture. [Page 290]

 

 

CHAPTER 16

 

SECTION I - Presence in Revelation. - Epistle to Philadelphia. - Key of David. - The open door. - Three Promises. - The rapture supposed. - The hour of Temptation. - Promises to the conqueror. [Page 299]

 

SECTION II - Rev. 10 and 11. [Page 313]

 

SECTION III - Rev. 12-14. - The wonder in heaven. - More than one rapture.  [Page 314]

 

 

APPENDIX

 

Four points considered in Refutation of Dr. Cumming. - 1. The Mystery of Iniquity (lawlessness) and the Apostacy. - 2. Is the Man of Sin one person or many? - 3. His self-exaltation above every god. - 4. His sitting in the temple of God. - 5. His wonders. [Page 317]

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 1]

CHAPTER 1

 

THE NATURE OF THE LORD’S PRESENCE

 

 

 

IN order rightly to understand the doctrine of the saint’s rapture, it will be necessary first to propound the character of that Presence to which he is rapt.

 

 

I. It appears, from the Saviour’s own testimony in the Book of Revelation, that he is now seated on the Father’s throne. That seat he is to maintain till his enemies become his footstool. Then he leaves his position on the throne, descends from heaven into the air, and thither his saints ascend to meet him. The time of his tarrying in air, during which he is hidden from the world, and holding his court of inquiry into the deeds of his saints, is the time of his Presence. 1 For it is both a time and a locality: a place to which, by supernatural agency, his saints are caught up; a time during which the arrangement of his saints’ positions in the kingdom is effected.

 

1 It is for this reason necessary to translate … “Presence,” for by “coming,” we understand motion, but the Presence properly begins when the motion from heaven has ceased.

 

 

At that time certain great events, most deeply concerning the church of Christ, take place.

 

 

1. The Presence is the time beyond which the trial of the church will not last. “Be patient, therefore, brethren, unto the Presence of the Lord James 5: 7.

 

[Page 2]

2. For then will come the resurrection of the dead saints and the rapture of them and of the living ones. “In Christ shall all be made alive; but every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits, afterwards they that are Christ’s at his Presence1 Cor. 15: 23. “We that are alive and remain unto the Presence of the Lord, shall not prevent them that are asleep.” “We who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them (the dead saints) in clouds to meet the Lord in the air1 Thess. 4: 15, 17.

 

 

3. It is the centre of the saints’ assembling. “We beseech you, brethren, by the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind2 Thess. 2: 1. The Presence cannot take place without our assembling to it, nor our assembly without the Presence. Now we are gathered unto Jesus’ name, and there is his Presence, (in a certain sense,) with us even now. “Where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of themMatt. 18: 20 [see Greek]. The spirit is redeemed already, and Jesus in spirit meets his saints. But then the body too shall be redeemed, and the gathering will be to the Person of Jesus.

 

 

4. It is the time when the ministers of the gospel will present the souls whom they have turned from the error of their way. “For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye before the Lord Jesus Christ at his Presence1 Thess. 2: 19.

 

 

5. Then will the award of the saints take place, whether for praise or dishonour. “I pray God your whole spirit, and soul, and body be preserved blameless at the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ1 Thess. 5: 23; 3: 13. [Page 3] “Abide in him that when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be put to shame by him at his Presence.” 1 John 2: 28.

 

 

(1) The Presence means the Lord Jesus exhibited bodily to the eyes of his people who are risen from the dead. Now if the Presence which precedes the [millennial] kingdom be personal, then much more is the [coming messianic] kingdom a personal reign! The reality of the Saviour’s bodily Presence is the basis of the phrase which he uses instead of ‘the Presence when discoursing of the signs of the kingdom before the Pharisees. He spoke then of “the days of the Son of Man,” meaning thereby days wherein he would be returned from heaven, and present in body.

 

 

(2) The apostle Peter declares that what he and his privileged fellow-apostles saw on the Mount of Transfiguration was a specimen of the Presence. “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables when we made known unto you the power and Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye-witnesses of his majesty. … And this voice which came from heaven we heard when we were with him in the holy mount2 Pet. 1: 16, 18. The glory then that beamed from his face and raiment, and was participated by Moses and Elias, was a ray of the glory which will illumine the Presence-chamber of the sky, when the saints of Jesus meet him, in the air. Within is all light and glory, high above a sleeping and an unbelieving world, while clouds and night circle in the favoured mount. At the foot of the holy mount to which the happy three have ascended are still apostles, and the possession of evil spirits, and little faith, and the taunting of adversaries, emboldened by the waning faith of the disciples. Jesus [Page 4] descends and rebukes in indignation the faithlessness of the generation and of the troubled father of the demoniac, and casts out the evil spirit, bidding him no more to return. This is a scene of the [Lord’s] kingdom’s coming with power.

 

 

(3). We attain the same notion of its general character as the stationary point where Jesus is, and whereto the disciples of the Lord are gathered, if we consider the words dropped concerning the presence of the false Christ. The disciples, when they asked Jesus concerning the sign of his Presence, understood by it Messiah’s royal display of his grandeur to a favoured few, ere the world beheld him. This is the Jewish idea still, and Jesus therefore proceeds to correct it, as soon as he comes to treat of false Christs and their signs. Then he assures them that his Presence would not be pointed out by men on earth to men on earth, but would at once outrun all power of notification, and by its own irresistible evidence attract every eye. He intimates, too, that it would not be on earth, but a coming forth from the chambers of the sky. It would not be favoured earthly disciples led to him, but his coming forth in wrath and terror against his foes.

 

 

The presence of the false Christ is exactly and designedly conformed to Jewish expectations. They anticipate the presence of a man and a king. They expect his being shown first to a favoured few in secret. They look for him to be found in or near the temple. The true Messiah once presented himself in the temple, and the blind and the lame came to him there, and he healed them: while the children, as was foretold, gave him praise. But the Jew refused his Presence there. Such [Page 5] a Messiah was not to his taste, however beneficent the signs and wonders, and however marvellous the words of wisdom that fell from his lips. But the world’s false Christ is joyfully accepted as fulfilling all the Jew’s treasured thoughts, when, as God sitting in the temple, he exacts the worship of himself and his statue; and, in proof of his assumed godhead, works signs and wonders. He comes to reign in lawlessness, and in his own name. By this moral key he wins men’s hearts, where the true Christ was rejected, because he came in purity and obedience to the true God.

 

 

But the Presence of the true Christ below having been rejected, it is now transferred to heaven, and thither his favoured ones who recognize him as risen and ascended, are taken up. The Jew’s unbelief then becomes his snare. He looks for Messiah on earth, and refuses as a fable, Messiah on high. Thus he falls into Satan’s net. For there will be seen below, and in the temple now deserted by the true God and his Christ - Satan’s false Christ, and to him all but the elect will bow down. The true safeguard then to the Jewish disciple is the Saviour’s teaching of his Presence on high displayed in a moment to all the earth. While the true Messiah is present on high and has gathered to him his followers risen from the dead, the false Christ has gathered to himself below the mighty multitudes of the lost, who are deluded by God’s special appointment, because of their resistance to the truth. And when that scene of horror is come to its height, the Presence of the true Messiah flashing from on high strikes dumb and powerless his rival, and the kingdom of Satan is overturned. The temple is the place at once of the Presence and of the revelation of the [Page 6] usurper-Christ. “A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the Lord that rendereth recompense to his enemies Isa. 66: 6.

 

 

In order clearly to present the whole of the following subject to the reader’s mind, I request his particular attention to the following tabular view of the prophecy on Christ. It is divided into two great parts at ver. 31 of chap. 24. The first half I call A; it consists of seven parts:

 

 

A

 

 

Verses 4-6.          1. Wars, Rumours

 

 

Verses 7, 8.         2. War, famine, pestilence.

 

 

Veres 9-13.          3. Persecution, falling away, false prophets.

 

 

Verse 4.               4. The Gospel of the Kingdom preached.

 

 

Verses 15-22.       5. Abomination of desolation, flight, great tribulation.

 

 

Verses 23-28.       6. False Christs and prophets.

 

 

Verses 29-31.       7. Signs in heaven, mourning, Son of Man seen.

 

 

The second half I call B; it is divided into seven parables:

 

 

B

 

 

Verses 32-35.        1. The Fig tree.

 

 

Verses 36-41.        2. The Days of Noah.

 

 

Verses 42-44.        3. The Householder and Thief.

 

 

Verses 45-51.         4. The Stewards.

 

 

Verses 1-13.           5. The Ten Virgins.

 

 

Verses 14-30.         6. The Talents.

 

 

Verses 31-46,         7. The Sheep and Goats.

 

 

In A, then, (or the first portion of Matt. 24,) the, Jewish disciples’ thoughts about the Presence of Messiah - that he will appear at first (1.) in secret, and (2.) to a few favoured ones - are corrected. These views are indeed both true; but when combined with the belief that the Presence will be on earth, and manifested to the elect of Israel first, they are deadly; the very snare in [Page 7] which the great deceiver will entrap his victims. They are taught, therefore, that their security lies in expecting Messiah’s outbreak of glory suddenly from on high. For they have to do, not with the Presence while secret, but when its glory is displayed.

 

 

But in B, Jesus gives the other aspect of the Presence; its time of secrecy, its character as heavenly, and its true intent as designed to gather to him the elect of the church, before he comes forth from the heaven in glory with them.

 

 

It is interesting to observe, that the Presence of the false Christ is, in its great results, as might be expected, the exact reverse of the Presence and reign of the true. The city of Jerusalem is to be the great centre of the nations, whither they go up to worship, in the reign of the true Christ. In the reign of the false, it is the place whither the nations go up to destroy, the spot which they tread down while their day lasts. When the sign of the false Christ is lifted up, the elect of the Jews are to flee from Jerusalem, else captivity or death awaits them. But when the true Christ hangs out his sign from the sky, it is the indication of his angels being about to be sent with trump of loud sound to gather his Jewish elect to Jerusalem; that they may take them captives whose captives they were, and rule over their oppressors.

 

 

The [millennial] TEMPLE is to be hallowed at length by the Presence of the true Christ, and the worship of sacrifices and songs of praise, “the house of prayer for all nations But in the usurper’s day, it - [i.e., the soon to be built temple, in which antichrist will sit] - is to be the place of blasphemy: his idol polluting the holy place, and men adoring Satan and his deputy; while the [Page 8] sacrifices cease, and the temple is destroyed: Psa. 74, 79; Dan. 8: 11, 12. Israel refused Messiah’s two cleansings of the temple. It shall therefore be polluted to the utmost, ere it be cleansed for ever. In that awful day, Satan has power to unlock the bottomless pit, and to raise from its depths - [i.e. from ‘Sheol’ = Gk. ‘Hades’] - the false Christ. This is Satan’s first resurrection; but when the [millennial] reign of the true Christ and the true prophet is come, they are both cast alive into the lake of fire, and his saints take - [their promised inheritance (Acts 7: 5; cf. Gal. 5: 21; Eph. 5: 5) in] - the kingdom. In that awful day, Satan’s self is worshipped by the men of the earth, (Rev. 13,) while, in the time of the Saviour’s reign, Satan is shut up in the bottomless pit.

 

 

In the time of Antichrist, the NATIONS are full armed and harnessed for war; while, in the reign of the Christ of God, weapons are changed into the tools of peace, and war is learned no more. Then sin is come to its highest pitch; apostacy from the truth, persecution, and blasphemy prevail; while in the reign of God’s Messiah righteousness covers the earth, and praise resounds from every land. Then temptation is clothed with its most dread form, and damnable sin or death are the only alternatives. (Rev. 13.) In the Saviour’s day, temptation is at an end, because the Great Tempter and Deceiver is shut up, and his angels with him. Then the misery of man reaches its climax, men desire to die and cannot, being tormented like the very lost; and God’s most dreadful storm of wrath visits in turn whatever is beautiful to the sight, or necessary to the sustenance of man. That is the awful period of darkness, ere [i.e., before] the day of mercy and happiness in the Presence of the Great Redeemer shines on man. It is darkest before the dawn.

 

 

II. I would now notice briefly some other words which designate that most important period of the Saviour’s Presence; and will endeavour to limit their differences of meaning.

 

 

1. The “Presence” is distinguished then from the “Coming.” The coming is spoken of with twofold meaning: first as it regards the Church; and then the world. The coming of Christ to the church means his local motion from heaven into the air: and is frequently mentioned. This coming, ceases when the Lord takes up his temporary abode in that “Pavilion” of clouds and darkness to which the saints are introduced. In that, his court of iniquity and recompense, kept secret from the world, is held. When it is finished, he appears to Israel and the world, “seated at the right hand of power,” just before he descends to earth with the whirlwinds of his wrath, and “comes with the clouds of heavenMatt. 26: 64; Mark 14: 62. In these passages also the “coming” is local motion, his descent to earth, which takes place by these two stages: (1) the first invisible both to the world and Israel, (2) the second visible to both.

 

 

2. “The Presence” then is distinguished from that being “present with the Lord,” which the [deceased] believer attains - [in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’ the underworld of disembodied souls (see 1 Sam. 28: 11-19 cf. Rev 6: 9-11)] - at death. “While we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord “We are willing rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord” 2 Cor. 5: 6, 8.

 

 

3. It differs also from the Lord’s invisible presence with his disciples met for worship now: Matt. 18.

 

[NOTE: There are three Greek words (in Greek lettering) at the foot of this page which are not shown. “The last word is not used as a substantive, of Christ” - R. Govett.]

 

[Page 10]

4. As two of three words whereby the New Testament indicates the Lord’s return are partially adopted in English, I propose to use them with their Anglican termination. The third I shall call “Manifestation.” The Greek words are given at the foot of the page.

 

 

(1) The “EPIPHANY” of the Lord Jesus intends the same thing as his Presence. It means that period when he who is now concealed from his saints shall appear to them. This will appear, if we observe, that his Epiphany no less than his Presence, is made the term up to which the believer is called on to wait. “Keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the Epiphany of our Lord Jesus Christ1 Tim. 6: 14. “The crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge shall give me at that day, and not to me only, but unto all those who have loved his Epiphany 2 Tim. 4: 8. It is the time of judgment of the living and dead, and precedes the - [God-given promised inheritance to His friend Abraham in the millennial and messianic (Heb. 9: 27; cf. Gen. 13: 14, 15; Acts 7: 5; Rev. 20: 6, R.V.)] - kingdom. “The Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge the living and dead at his Epiphany and his kingdom2 Tim. 4: 1. The word “Epiphany” is applied to the light of the sun and stars: Acts 27: 20. Hence, while the New Testament speaks of both the Apocalypse and the Presence of the Man of Sin, it does not name his Epiphany; for his Presence is not brightness on high.

 

 

(2) The “APOCALYPSE” of the Lord Jesus appears to signify the same thing as the Presence - the time when he is disclosed in majesty to his risen and changed - [from mortal to immortal living] - saints. It is the term for which his saints are waiting and hoping. “That the trial of your faith ... might be found unto praise and honour and glory, at the Apocalypse of [Page 11] Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1: 7. “Hope to the end, for the grace that is to be brought to you at the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ” 13. “Waiting for the Apocalypse of our Lord Jesus Christ1 Cor. 1: 7.

 

 

(3) A compound expression indicates the display of Christ’s hidden glory to the world. The last of the two foregoing words in its very structure implies it. “The apocalypse” signifies “the taking off a veil,” which of course supposes that one is worn by the Saviour up to that time. We have then the very significant phrases, “the Epiphany of the glory which is spoken of as it affects the friends of Christ, and “the Epiphany of his Presence which overwhelms the Man of Sin. The former passage has been quoted. The latter is as follows. “Looking for the blessed hope and Epiphany of the glory of our Great God and Savior Jesus ChristTitus 2: 13. (Greek.) The ‘hope’ of the [promised millennial] glory is the thing that first stands before the saint’s eye. That hope is satisfied by his - [select and conditional (see Luke 21: 34-36 cf. Rev. 3: 10)] - rapture to the Presence of the Lord Jesus, and beholding it himself. Then comes a further - [and latter] - stage - the display of that glory to others.*

 

[* NOTE: This is when our Lord Jesus returns to earth at the end of Antichrist’s persecutions, He will resurrect the holy dead and translate the ‘left’ living. See 1 Thess. 4: 14, 15. cf. 1 Cor. 15: 52, R.V.

 

Therefore, there must be two RAPTURES of living saints; the FIRST - before the Great Tribulation commences - which will consist of those “accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass” (Luke 21: 36, cf. Rev. 3: 10 A.V. & R.V.). This escape will depend upon an undisclosed standard of the ‘disciples’ PERSONAL righteousness; and not upon our LORD’S imputed righteousness, - which all the justified and regenerate presently possess! (See Matt: 5: 20; 7: 21.). Whereas, the SECOND and last rapture, at the END of the Great Tribulation, will occur when our Lord resurrects the ‘holy’ dead (Rev. 20: 6, R.V.). This rapture of living saints is also accompanied by “the first RESURRECTION” (from ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’) of the “holy” dead: Gen. 37: 35; 1 Sam. 28: 7-20; Psa. 16: 10; Acts 2: 25-27; Heb. 11: 35; Rev. 20: 6. Rev. 6: 9-11.  See also; Matt. 16: 18; Luke 16: 23; John 20: 17, ff.; 2 Tim. 2: 16-19ff. etc,)]

 

 

“The apocalypse of the glory” also is mentioned as a time of joy to the sufferers for Christ’s sake. “But inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings, rejoice, that in the apocalypse of his glory ye may be also glad with exceeding joy1 Pet. 4: 13. The force of the above seems to be, that the martyrs and sufferers for Christ will reign with Christ a thousand years; but Paul seems to add here, that even in the very first outburst of his glory on the world their reward and especial exultation would begin. Another expression is employed when the manifestation represents the out-flashing of his [Page 12] glory on the persecutors. “To you who are troubled rest with us at the apocalypse of the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, with the angels of his power2 Thess. 1: 7. The idea of previous concealment is kept up in the application of the word to the Antichrist. “Then shall the lawless one be revealed This comes after the declaration of the mystery of lawlessness being then already at work, and only kept down for awhile.

 

 

(4) The word translated “manifest” is applied to the Saviour’s former appearing on earth: 1 Tim. 3: 16; Heb. 9: 26; 1 Peter 1: 20. It appears to be equivalent, in its general meaning, to those which have preceded. “When Christ shall be manifested, ye also shall be manifested with him in the gloryCol. 3: 4. “When the Chief Shepherd shall be manifested, ye shall receive the crown of glory which fadeth not away1 Peter 5: 4.

 

 

III. Having now noticed the words by which the Presence is described, I would proceed to speak of (1) its PHASES, and (2) its SIGNS. It has first, its phase and period of secrecy, and its appropriate sign. It has secondly, its moment of manifestation, and its answerable sign; presented, however, (as it would appear) to Israel alone.

 

 

1. The sign of the Secret of the Presence is the sudden rapture of the watchful - [and ‘accounted worthy to escape’] - saints of the Church of Christ. Matthew shows us only that motion of the Presence which is visible from earth. But Paul discovers to us the two answering motions, that of the Lord descending from heaven, as well as that of the saints ascending to meet him. It is a sudden, thief-like, momentary, untraceable operation of an unseen hand; a sign not beheld by the world, and inexplicable to any but believers.

 

[Page 13]

The Presence takes place in secret, before the Great Tribulation begins, while men are enjoying the pleasures of the world in unbelief. The rapture then precedes the Great Tribulation. Hence the force of the apostle’s consolation: 2 Thess. 2: 1. The day of the Lord in its terror is not begun, for that will not take place till he has descended into air; and then, at the same moment, your ascent to him will be effected.

 

 

The lightning is not the sign of Christ’s appearing, but only a type of its sudden manifestation.

 

 

2. But there is a second sign, when the Presence is just about to be disclosed to Israel. “Then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven I believe, on certain grounds stated in my former treatise, that this will be THE CROSS. That will be exhibited to the nation of Israel, and will bring to mind their sin against Messiah.

 

 

This is “the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.” It seems doubtful which of the two following constructions we should prefer. Should we read it as the sign of the Son of Man in heaven; or should we say that it means, “then shall appear in the heaven the sign of the Son of Man I do not feel sure which of the two is correct, but rather suspect that the last is so. Still the Son of Man is in heaven when that signal is made, and it is the token of the Presence on high. The Son of Man is in the heaven ere his sign appears there; and the rapture is his thief-like approach to his church, ere he discovers himself to the Jew. Joseph has his Asenath (Gen. 41: 50) in his Presence and home, ere he reveals himself to his brethren. And he reveals himself when all others are bid to depart out of his presence: Gen. 45: 1.

 

[Page 14]

There are then two signs of the Presence, one on earth and one on high - one a sign of its commencement in secrecy, one of its close in manifestation. To Israel belongs the exterior of the Presence: to the Church, the interior whilst it is concealed, and a partaking in the glory when it is manifested. We walk by faith, they by sight. The [select] rapture is the sign of the Presence; the cross the sign of the coming, and of their beholding Jesus when he is about to descend - [at an undisclosed later time] - from the sky to the earth.

 

 

The rapture is to be exhibited to the Jewish disciple alone; the cross, to the nation of the Jews. The first takes place before the Great Tribulation, the other after it: Matt. 24: 29, 30. It seems to be an answer to the formerly-refused demand of the Jew. More than once they asked of Jesus “a sign from heaven.” The request was rejected. To the unbelieving generation no sign but that of Jonah should be given. As then the sign at length is granted, it is a proof that the evil generation has been cut off in the Great Tribulation. The elect alone (of Israel at least) survive. But the sign from heaven, though given at length, is not for the glory of Israel, but for their rebuke, to call their deed of transgression before them. It avails to do so, and the Saviour forgives them, and on their desire to receive him in the name of the Lord, he appears. The - [select and pre-tribulation] - rapture is a sign which is met by unbelief on the part of all but the elect. It is a sign of the great day of trouble at hand. The cross in heaven is the token that the wrath against Israel is past.

 

 

Amidst the darkening of the heavens, by the eclipse of the sun and moon, and the falling of the stars, how brightly the cross will shine! The angelic powers are [Page 15] to be shaken, that the lord of angels and of men may come forth in his full glory. Before the cross, even during the sufferings of the Lord, the sun was darkened: how much more now that the cross is erected in heaven, when the crucified one comes to reign! Formerly the Jews jeered at that sign, now they mourn. The rejected ‘stone’ [Acts 4: 11] is now exalted to the heavens, and about to descend, grinding to powder his foes. Do not the words of Mary - “he bath put down potentates from thrones, and exalted humble ones,” (Luke 1: 52,) refer in their fulness to the casting down of the rebel powers of the heavens before her Son, and his saints? The rainbow was the sign of the covenant with the earth; it was to be set in the cloud, as a signal that the waters should not overflow the earth: this seems to be the token of the new covenant, and that the waters of wrath are past. The signal of antichrist’s presence is the idol in the temple, the proof of power given into the hands of the lawless one. The flood has begun; Enoch is on high; Noah escapes into the ark.

 

 

The Presence to Israel is a thing of cloud and darkness, a period of temptation, peril, and tribulation. As, for three years and a half they despised and rejected the true Messiah; so, for the same period the false Messiah lords it heavily over them. The Presence is on high and in secret during this terrible era. It is the day of vengeance, when the Lord comes out of his place, to witness and avenge the sins of his people and the world. Sodom’s cry is come up before him, and he goes down to deal with it as the case demands. But though in general the Presence is to Israel a secret, with whose interior they seem to [Page 16] have no concern, yet there appear to be some passages in the Psalms which evidently refer to it. “Oh how great is thy goodness which thou hast laid up for them that fear thee: which thou hast wrought for them that trust in thee before the sons of men! Thou shalt hide them IN THE SECRET OF THY PRESENCE from the pride of man: thou shalt KEEP them secretly in A PAVILION from the strife of tonguesPsalm 31: 19, 20. What the pavilion is, is described in Psalm 18. “He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet. He made darkness his secret place: his pavilion round about him were dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies 9, 11. The 91st Psalm is engaged altogether with the security of those in the Presence or pavilion.

 

 

IV. I would now consider some of the TYPES of the Presence as seen in the history of the Old Testament.

 

 

1. The first account of the Lord’s Presence with man, is when he cites the guilty pair before him, and sentences them and the serpent.

 

 

2. Again, we find Cain and Abel in the Lord’s Presence at the sacrifice when he pleads with Cain; and when the murderer is sentenced by the Most High: Gen. 3: 8; 4: 16.

 

 

3. At the flood, the earth in the Lord’s Presence appears corrupt, and wrath comes down from on high: Gen. 5: 11.

 

 

4. After the flood, Nimrod acts the hunter before the Lord, and Babel rises; then comes down the Most High and scatters the builders. These instances exhibit the Lord’s Presence as the centre of judgment.

 

 

5. But in the history of Abraham, just before the [Page 17] destruction of Sodom, the father of the faithful stands in the Lord’s Presence, and communes with him, pleading for the guilty cities. Does not this teach us what is the hindrance to the coming of the day of the Lord? Is it not the intercession of the faithful saint? The vengeance that overtakes the plain of Sodom, comes down from the Presence: Genesis 18: 22; 19: 13, 27.

 

 

6. During the time of God’s patience and Israel’s suffering in Egypt, the Presence appears not. But when Moses is to become the deliverer of Israel, the Lord draws nigh and communes with him out of the bush, instructing him thenceforward invisibly, how he is to conduct himself towards Pharaoh.

 

 

7. Then comes the deliverance of Israel, and God goes before his people in a cloud. It is the instrument of severing between his friends and foes. And in the morning he looks forth from his Presence-cloud upon the host of his enemies, first troubling and then destroying them.

 

 

8. At Sinai, the Presence is displayed in all its majesty: and to develop all the light it throws upon the prophecy on Olivet would demand more space than can be given here. It is proposed to Israel, that they be God’s priests and kings on the footing of their obedience to God. They accept the proposal. Then says God, “Lo I come unto thee in a thick cloud.” - “Go unto the people and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes, and be ready against the third day: for the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people on mount Sinai9, 10. Bounds are set around the mount, but Moses passes beyond them. Seventy of the elders, after [Page 18] the blood of the covenant is shed, go up and feast before God. A sign of the Presence, is also given - the glory of the Lord like devouring fire appears in the cloud on the Mount for seven days. Of the two brethren Moses and Aaron, Moses is taken up high amidst the heavenly things, and Aaron is left, and told to remain with the others who feasted before God. Does not this hint to us certain truths as to the present dispensation? There are three levels. (1.) The people’s at the foot of the mountain. (2.) That of Aaron and the seventy elders of Israel, who feast before God. (3.) That of Moses, who enters into the peculiar Presence of God, on behalf of both these parties.

 

 

But Aaron descends from his height; the lawless people, full of unbelief concerning the return of Moses, will have a molten god: and Aaron bows to their will, and becomes the leader of their idolatry. Apostacy takes place thus in the Presence of the Lord at Sinai, just as it is foretold it will be again [amongst many from within His Church]. The Lord knows it, and tells Moses of it, and he descends in wrath as the avenger of their sin. But again he goes up after his intercession is accepted, and a new covenant, resting on him as the basis, is made with Israel.

 

 

Then Moses descends in glory with the two tables of the covenant in his hands.

 

 

Moses thus, in these two descents, types the one great descent of Jesus which will be both in wrath and in glory: in wrath as the Avenger of the first covenant, and in glory as the Mediator of the new covenant.

 

 

The DESIGN of the Presence as presented in the first part of the prophecy on Olivet is seen related to the great objects it effected of old. (1). The Lord Jesus takes this station [Page 19] when sin is come to the full, and the iniquity of the world is to be avenged. (2) It is God’s mode, as of old for delivering Israel, as at Sinai, for God’s glorious dwelling in the Holy Place.

 

 

V. But there is one point on which it will be well to say a few words, lest the evidence which has gone before should seem vain, while this objection stands. It will be observed, then, that the Presence in Matthew is generally spoken of as the “Presence of the Son of Man.” Now it is maintained by some, that the title “Son of Man” is never used in any passage, which directly relates to the Church of Christ: that being the Saviour’s title in reference only to the earthly department of the kingdom.

 

 

I do not think so myself: but be it as it may, I am quite sure that it ought not to decide the question. And I would now produce some passages in which, it appears to me, the church is certainly designed.

 

 

1. Was not Stephen of the Church, and inspired of the Holy Ghost? when he said, “Behold I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of GodActs 7: 56.

 

 

2. It is a title given to our Lord in one of the Epistles. There it is used in connexion with his promised [Messianic] kingdom of earth, in virtue of his being a man. “For unto angels hath he not put in subjection the world [Gk. ‘age’] to come, (the habitable earth, as it shall be,) whereof we are speaking. But one in a certain place testified, saying, ‘What is man that thou art mindful of him, or the Son of Man that thou visitest him.’” This, I suppose, is the key to its application, “Son of Man” is the name given by Daniel to our Lord as the head of [Page 20] the fifth and triumphant kingdom, by investiture of which, he becomes ruler of all the works of God’s hands, and therefore of the heavens no less than of the earth. Several passages combine to prove this. “Hereafter ye shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man John 1: 51. By virtue of this title he is the executor of judgment in the [coming millennial] kingdom. The Father “hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of Man.” “Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation John 5: 27-29. Here the title stands connected with the judgment and the resurrection of the just, which precede the kingdom. “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him also shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels Mark 8: 38. In two other passages it is clearly connected with the [Father’s promised (Ps. 2: 8) Messianic and Millennial] kingdom: Matt. 19: 28, 29; and 25: 31.

 

 

3. It appears as our Lord’s title in the sequel to the parable of the wheat and tares. They who gather in the church are angels. “The Son of Man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend &c.: 13: 41.

 

 

4. The Saviour assumes this name when the church is first mentioned, and the Lord sets the disciple on the same path of self-denial which he himself was called to tread. “For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of [Page 21] his Father with his angels, and then shall he reward each according to his works. 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 kingdomMatt. 16: 27, 28. Now that scene of the transfiguration is by Peter in his epistle called the “Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ2 Peter 1: 16.

 

 

5. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last dayJohn 6: 53, 54. Here it is in connexion with life in Jesus by faith, and the resurrection of the saint.

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

CHAPTER 2

 

THE QUESTIONS OF THE DISCIPLES

 

 

We shall now somewhat minutely discuss the Prophecy on Olivet.

 

 

The inquiries made of our Lord are presented, with some considerable differences, in the three gospels. The gospel of Matthew offers three questions: those of Mark and Luke, but two.

 

 

The questions, as gathered from a comparison of the three gospels, are as follows:-

 

 

1. “Tell us when shall these things be

 

 

2. “And what shall be the sign of thy Presence

 

 

3. “And of the End of the Age, when all these things shall be about to be fulfilled to come to pass?”) Luke.

 

 

The words in roman letters give the questions as exhibited in Matthew, Mark and Luke agree with Matthew as to the first of the three questions: but they totally omit the second, and instead of the third, they inquire - “What shall be the sign when all these things shall be about to be fulfilled

 

 

Accordingly, there is a considerable difference in the answers returned. Matthew, as he is the fullest in his questions, is also the fullest in the reply. Mark and Luke have all the information given by Matthew, save [Page 23] the notice of the gospel of the kingdom preached among the Gentiles. (A 4.)

 

 

The abomination of desolation is the sign of the temple’s desolation, as given by Matthew and Mark. The armies encircling Jerusalem is the sign of the desolation of Jerusalem, or the City, in Luke. This takes place at the same time, and is the reason of the headlong flight of those who listen to Jesus.

 

 

The false Christs and their signs are not given by Luke in his account of the prophecy. They had before been touched on. (Luke 17.)

 

 

Mark and Luke as they nearly agree in the questions, so do they much accord in the general version of the prophecy. And as all three agree very nearly in the first question; so do all three very nearly agree in the first part of the prophecy, or that which relates to the destruction of the Jewish temple, which has yet to take place. For the Roman destruction of the temple was not that foretold by Daniel; therefore the Jewish temple must be rebuilt, and its sacrifices restored, in order to its accomplishment.

 

 

Let us now inquire into the two remaining questions.

 

 

1. First, the opinions of the disciples, which prompted them to make these inquiries, may well be noted. They ask, then, not for the sign of the Saviour’s return, as a Christian would; but for the sign of his “Presence By this word they intended, not his return from heaven, for they did not believe in his death and resurrection, though often forewarned of it, but the time when he would appear as the king of Jerusalem. They may have had some notion, either from the Scriptures or from [Page 24] the Rabbis, of the Presence of Messiah so often spoken of in the Psalms and Prophets: or their ideas may have been drawn from the history of Solomon, and the manifestation of kingly glory on earth.

 

 

2. They seem to have considered the Presence and the End of the Age as so connected, that one sign would serve for them both. This appears from the question. But the occurrence of the article before both “the Presence” and “the End of the Age,” shews that they regarded these two periods as distinct, though closely connected. In that they were right.

 

 

If now we look at Mark and Luke we shall find, in their second part, (which is the answer to the second question,) but one sign given. This is the tenderness and budding of the tree in spring. It occurs in all three gospels. That therefore is the answer to the third and last questions of the apostles; which, as given in Mark and Luke, may be considered as a general one. “The fig tree” is the signal when all the scriptures of the prophets hitherto unfulfilled, will be accomplished. And accomplished they will be in that period - the End of the Age - which embraces the whole time of the Saviour’s Presence, both in its secrecy at first, and in its glorious out-shining at the close. Thus the second questions of Mark and Luke agree very nearly with the third of Matthew. “The sign when all these things shall be about to be ended ([… see Greek]) answers very nearly to “the sign of the end ([…Greek]) of the age

 

 

But as “the End of the Age” affects not the Jew only, but the Church of God and the Gentiles, (and is the subject of two of the parables in Matthew 13, the Wheat and Tares, and the Drag Net - the one referring to the [Page 25] Church of God, the other to the Gentiles,) the Saviour, at the conclusion of each division, addresses a word of exhortation to each of the two first parties in turn. Thus the exhortation in Luke 21: 28. “And when all these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh is a word to the Jewish disciple, and follows immediately on the prediction of Jerusalem’s desolation, and of the Lord’s appearing in the clouds. Then comes the parable of the Fig Tree, or the sign of the End of the Age. But the exhortation which follows that, is one to the Church of Christ, though different in words both in Mark and Luke.

 

 

The new generation is the sign of the new age: the evil [and apostate church] generation at its height of sin, the signal for the terrible judgments of God, like those of the Flood and of Sodom.

 

 

But the disciple might, like Peter, be blind to the signs given. He would be, if his heart were overtaken by worldly cares, or sunk in worldly pleasures. Hence the lessons which follow both in Mark and Luke. (Mark 13: 32, 33; Luke 21: 34-36.) If so found, he would only, like Peter, be recovered after his fall and bitter repentance, together with Christ’s rebuke at his appearing.

 

 

“The Days of Noah” (B 2) is not found in either Mark or Luke, because the question to which it is the answer is not there. Hence too, both the aspects of the Presence, whether in A or B - whether the secret Presence, or the appearing as lightning, are omitted.

 

 

The parts then peculiar to Matthew are the answer to the special and peculiar question - “What shall be the sign of thy Presence The five parables then that [Page 26] follow on “the Fig Tree,” I call “THE PRESENCE PARABLES;” and the first of them, or “the Days of Noah,” gives, I am persuaded, “the sign of the Presence” - or the Rapture. The four which follow next are the application of that great and weighty subject to the Church of Christ. The sign is for the Israelitish disciple: for he will behold it, but not be caught up: the parables are for the church: for they describe in what way this Presence of Christ, invisibly acting, will affect both the living and the dead who are his members. The rapture is the door through which (when once pointed out as the sign to the Jewish disciple) the Saviour passes to instruct those who were to be both believers in his resurrection, and apostles of his Church.

 

 

The [select] Rapture then is the visible sign of Christ’s secret Presence begun on high. It is in the strictest sense a sign - a thing supernatural, the suited indication of his supernatural position in the air. “The Jews seek a sign:” and the Saviour gives it to them, refusing it indeed to the evil generation according to his former threat: but granting it to those who typify the faithful remnant, spared at his second Advent to people the land of Promise.

 

 

But why is the parable of the Sheep and Goats omitted by Mark and Luke? It is observable first, that they omit also the parables (given in Matthew 13) which relate to the end of the age. But the main reason seems to be, because this scene of the judgment of the Gentiles is to come to pass after the destruction of the temple, and is the last act of the old age, preparatory to the introduction of the new age, or the [millennial and messianic] kingdom. Now the questions in Mark and Luke [Page 27] embraced only the events previously to the end of the age, “When all these things shall be about to take place.” But Matthew’s question takes in the end of the age as a period, and gives both the sign of the beginning of the time of the end, and of its conclusion.

 

 

The Presence in short is the great characteristic of Matthew’s version of the prophecy.

 

 

1. To believe in the secret one on earth is the Jew’s bane [‘destruction’]. He is to expect only the open and visible one from heaven.

 

 

2. The secret one is for the [obedient and watchful] Christian. Not to believe in that, is the spring of unbelief; not to be ready for it, the ground of loss.

 

 

A 5 and A 6 give us the Presence secretly judging the Jews on earth.

 

 

B 3 to B 6 give us the Presence secretly judging the church in the air.

 

 

The Sheep and Goats are the Gentiles openly judged on earth by the kingly presence; the Jews and the church being already judged and received into favour.

 

 

As the prophecy is divided into two great parts, so it appears that there are two sets of answers to the three questions proposed: the one in A, the other in B.

 

 

1. The first inquiry is concerning the time of the destruction of the temple.

 

 

Now as there are two destructions of the temple, so there are two answers; 1. The Roman destruction [under Titus], as it comes first, so it is first answered. The signs are the coming of many in the name of Christ, and real and rumoured wars. (A l.) But of this point I do not feel sure. 2. The sign of the second desolation of the [Page 28] temple - that foretold by Daniel - is the idol of the false Christ set up in the temple. This is yet future.

 

 

2. The second inquiry is concerning the sign of the Presence. To this the replies are two; one in A, one in B.

 

 

(1.) The sign of the Presence (in A 7) is the cross in the sky, after the great tribulation, and just before the Lord’s appearing. (2.) The sign (in B 2) is the rapture of the watchful saint. The last does not occur in the series of signs.

 

 

3. The third inquiry is concerning the sign of the end of the age. (1.) In A 4, the sign is the gospel of the kingdom preached among the Gentiles. In B 1, the sign is Israel’s repentance.

 

 

The temple belongs to the Jew alone. Therefore that question is treated in A only. As the end of the age affects both the Jews and the Gentiles, we have the parables of the Fig-tree and of the Sheep and Goats, taking up their cases respectively. And as the Presence affects the Church of God most nearly, while the sign of the secret Presence is given to the Jew, the lessons from it are read to the church.

 

 

The following is a brief tabular view of the second great division, (or B.)

 

 

*B 1. The Fig-tree. Sign of End of Age.

 

 

B 2. The Days of Noah. Sign of the Presence.

 

 

B 3. Householder. > Transactions relative to the Presence. > External.

 

 

B 4. Steward. > Transactions relative to the Presence. > External.

 

 

B 5, Virgins. > Transactions relative to the Presence. > Internal.

 

 

B 6. Talents. > Transactions relative to the Presence. > Internal.

 

 

*B 7. Sheep and Goats. End of the Age.

 

 

With the end of the age the parables begin. Why is this ? Is it not because it belongs to the time of the [Page 29] mystery, which is concealed from Israel, In that lie the mysteries of the kingdom, as in the Jewish prophets are given the manifestation of the kingdom. The time of mystery is that of Israel’s blindness, and to the blind God put on a veil. This is the reason given for parable in Matthew 13.

 

 

But let us review the whole prophecy more particularly.

 

 

The first answer to the disciples’ inquiries, refers, I believe, to the Roman destruction: and the not perceiving the interval which lies between that and the great destruction foretold by Daniel, has been the reason of the errors of interpretation in this portion of Scripture. Let us then briefly survey the first part of the prediction. Jesus had foretold, that of the wonderful building that greeted their eyes not one stone should be left upon another. Their first question therefore was regarded so grievous a calamity. When should it take place?

 

 

The true time of the end of which Daniel had spoken was to occur at the time of the temple’s overthrow. But there was to be a previous destruction of the temple by THE PEOPLE of the future antichrist: Dan. 9: 26. But when the temple is at once polluted and destroyed, it is by antichrist in person. Jesus, therefore, notices, that the destruction of the stones of the temple which they were then beholding, would be before the end. It was to be effected by the Roman nation, the people from whom the antichrist is to spring: the future antichrist being asserted to be a king of Rome who had deceased in John’s day: Rev. 17: 8. “But the end is not yet Thus, while Jesus points to those words of Daniel, “The [Page 30] people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary the words which follow immediately after - “And the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined” - were not then fulfilled. “All things,” said the Lord Jesus, “must come to pass,” that the prophets had foretold, but not all at the same period; “the end is not yet.” Moreover Jesus had himself distinguished between the Roman destruction - sent on Israel because of their slaughter of himself and of the other messengers of God - and the final desolation of antichrist. For in the last day of his ministry in the temple he spoke the parable of the wicked husbandmen, in which he put it to his hearers to say what would be the result of killing the son of the lord of the vineyard, in addition to their ill-treatment of the other messengers? They replied, that those wicked men would be miserably destroyed, and the vineyard let out to others. That sentence the Lord confirms, and the Gentiles are intimated as about to receive the kingdom of God. That wrath the Roman legions executed in forty years from the delivery of the parable. Jesus, for the present, takes the place of the stone lying passively on the ground during the time of the builder’s rejection of him. But when he returns, as the Headstone of the Corner, he comes with a descending force that crushes to atoms his foes.

 

 

The same Roman destruction appears in the next parable of the wedding garment. The king who sends out the invitation, angry at the slaughter of his messengers, “sent forth his armies and destroyed those murderers, and burnt up their city Then comes the invitation addressed to the bad and good, the Jew and Gentile alike. [Page 31] But among the guests, at length assembled, there are those that are unworthy, and are cast out.

 

 

During the time then between the destruction of the temple then near at hand, and the coming of the time of the end, the Gentile dispensation was to come in. l

 

1 I use this term, well aware that Gentiles alone do not constitute the saved of the dispensation, and that the Gentiles stand on promises primarily made to Abraham and the Jew.

 

 

When A 2 begins, the Jews are returned to their own land, and the prophetic part of the Revelation begins. It was suitable that Israel should be found again in their old circumstances, that the proof of the unchanging character of the nation might appear the more conspicuously. In the temple the true Christ was rejected; in the temple will the false Christ be welcomed. The Lamb was refused in Jerusalem, they “wondered at him and went their way at the Wild Beast they wonder, and they follow him. “All the world wondered after the Wild Beast

 

 

The next section in A describes the beginning in Israel of the apostacy, out of which the great antichrist takes his rise. There are offences, betrayals, hatred. Many false prophets, possessed of the spirit of antichrist, (1 John 4: 1,) and showing his advent near, arise and deceive, that is, seduce many to false doctrines. Iniquity abounds; then, “when transgressors are come to the full,” the great adversary of God and man appears. This view of the state of Jewish disciples shews us the preparation for the abomination of desolation in the temple at Jerusalem; as the corresponding apostacy among nominal [and apostate] Christians, (described in the Epistle to the Thessalonians,) paves the way for the man of sin and his session in the temple [Page 32] of God. “The den of robbers” 1 is then ready for the chief robber - the malicious generation is then ready for Abaddon, the destroyer. At that moment, then, the disciple is to flee. The great tribulation is begun - the city and its temple are given up to Satan, to his false king, and his false prophet. (A 5.)

 

1 [See Greek …] not “a den of thieves

 

 

The succeeding section (A 6) exhibits the deceits of all kinds that will be abroad in that day of darkness and of trouble. False Christs and false prophets will then arise, working signs and wonders such as Jesus, at once the true Christ and true Prophet, manifested of old. But he in spite of them was rejected: they are received.

 

 

Jesus is on high - the apostacy and the wrath on it both take place during the time of the Presence apparently, as in Israel before Sinai, and at the exhibition of unbelief [and apostasy] at Kadesh Barnea. Beneath the very mountain of the covenant, that abomination, the calf of Sinai, is made and worshipped. Its high priest is one of God’s two witnesses to Pharaoh. But for the prayers of the Mediator, wrath had then swept away the whole of the guilty generation. At Kadesh Barnea, again, the congregation rises in rebellion at the report of the [ten] spies, and threatens to stone God’s two witnesses. The Lord’s glory appears, the sentence is passed upon the unbelieving generation, the two witnesses are delivered from the rage of the ungodly. In the time to come the two witnesses - [believed to be Elijah and Moses] - are given up to death, but more gloriously delivered, and the generation is more suddenly cut off: Rev. 11.

 

 

The tribulation which cuts off the evil generation, being ended, the signs in the heavenly bodies are given, [Page 33] and the world trembles with expectation of the appearing of Jesus. Then shines the luminous cross, signal of the sin of Israel, of the rejection of the stone by the builders, and of his exaltation on high. That is the “sign from heaven which the nation demanded of Jesus. First, they asked a sign, after rejecting the Lord’s casting out of evil spirits, which had been promised as a sign of the kingdom: Zech. 13: 2. They blasphemed the Holy Spirit by whom it was effected. How then could the kingdom come? For it is only to those regenerate by the power of the Holy Spirit that the kingdom is to be given; and only by his power on earth against the spirits of evil, that the obstacles to - [God’s promise (Psa. 2: 8)] - the kingdom can be surmounted. Jesus, therefore, refuses the evil generation any other sign than that of his death and [select (John 3: 13)] resurrection, typified by the apparent death and resurrection of Jonah; entailing thereby upon his nation the calamity suspended over Nineveh if it had not repented. “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown Mercy could indeed spare the generation and the city longer than the “forty days” of Nineveh; but the world, in spite of mercy, would only grow worse and worse after an interval of apparent improvement; it would end in Sevenfold possession by Satan: Matt. 12.*

 

[* Beware of praying against what God has planned before His return! “Therefore pray not thou for this people” - (i.e. for apostates who ‘steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely … and walk after their own godsvv. 8, 9) - “neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee:” (Jer. 7: 16, R.V. Cf. Acts 20: 30ff. ; 2 Pet. 2: 1, 2; Jude 4, 5.).]

 

 

2. A second time the evil generation ply him with the like request. They tempt him by now demanding “a sign from heavenMatt. 16: 1. Jesus replies, that it was their fault, if, from the aspect of the moral heaven, they could not rightly anticipate the times which were coming. They could distinguish in the appearances of the sky, between the healthy red, that portended fair [Page 34] weather, and the dusky red, that foretold a storm. Had then the moral horizon no signs? Was the connexion between the world’s happiness or misery, and the state of the men living on the earth, less certain or less close than that between the clouds of heaven one day, and the weather on the next? They knew the difference between the signs of fair weather and those of foul; and expecting accordingly, they found their expectations realized. But in spiritual expectations they were fools. They were looking for the kingdom and its glories - that bright summer-time foretold by the prophets, “the days of heaven upon the earth” - while the generation of men was a seed of hypocrites, malicious, adulterers [and liars]. Now the prophets had foretold not only fair weather, but a period of awful storm. The prophets had connected that time of storm - “the great and terrible day of the Lord” - with just such a moral horizon as then presented itself in Israel. On whom was the vengeance of the false Christ to fall? On a nation of hypocrites: (Isa. 9: 8-21; 10: 1-34; see especially 9: 17; 10: 6.) Again, the generation was adulterous: now against that sin the vengeance of the day of the Lord was threatened: (Jer. 5, 7, 9, 23; Hos. 4, 7; Mal. 3.) They were tempting God, as their fathers did in the desert; yet did not believe that God would cut them off as he did their fathers (Numb. 14) for the same sin. Thus they were foolish indeed. While in the moral horizon the clouds hung thickly, and the heaven was red and lowering, they - [solely on the basis of their redemption and sheltering under the ‘blood’ in Egypt (Ex. 12: 22, 23. Cf. 1 Cor. 10: 5-11, R.V.)] - were anticipating the bright and fair weather of the kingdom, instead of the terrors of “the time of the end.” They were asking a sign from the heaven, when, if any were given, it could only be a sign of wrath; such [Page 35] as the law foretold, when it said: “The heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron. The Lord shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust; from heaven it shall come down upon thee till thou be destroyed Deut. 28: 23, 24.

 

 

The meaning of the Saviour then in the passage of Matthew under consideration has been misunderstood. Jesus did not mean to say that Israel was indifferent to the signs of the times, but that they misinterpreted them, and grossly erred in regard to the then impending destinies of their nation. They looked to their religiousness and efforts to proselyte, to their imagined alms and fasts, and, therefore, that they deserved the promised glories of the [coming] kingdom. But He who looks beneath the surface assured them that their seeming piety was hypocrisy, provoking that final threatened wrath on which the prophets so largely dwell. The point blamed by the Lord is their foolish inference from the signs before them; their want of discrimination in not perceiving the difference between the form and the power; and their overlooking the flagrant sins which were abroad. Is not this the very mistake of our day? Are not [multitudes of regenerate] Christians, in as entire contradiction to the evidence and the signs before them, expecting the kingdom instead of “the day of the Lord”?

 

 

It is not that Christians and men of the world are indifferent to the signs of the moral atmosphere, it is that they misinterpret them. From the broad signs of foul weather at hand, the heart of nature drew the conclusion of fair days to come. So now, the worldly, and the neglecters of prophecy draw hopes for the future from the state of things now, which should lead them rather [Page 36] to anticipate those days of darkness, temptation, and wrath from God, of which the New Covenant deals forth predictions neither few nor doubtful.

 

 

Jesus then twice resists the evil generation’s demand for a sign, once when they asked for that simply, once when they asked for a signal from heaven. On both occasions he refers them to his own [select] resurrection [“out of dead ones” (Acts 4: 2, lit. Greek)], as the sign which would suffice to prove them guilty if they rejected it. But at length the sign from heaven is given. If the cross in heaven be that sign, it was fitting that it should not be exhibited till the great sin of crucifying Messiah had been committed. It is brought to their memory afresh, I believe, by the crucifixion of the two witnesses at Jerusalem, and the earthquake which attends their resurrection. Jesus, like Joseph, strikes on the consciences of his brethren ere he forgives them: Gen. 42: 21-23. The old generation then has passed away, from Israel at least. In proof of this, they to whom it is exhibited, mourn, as prophecy had foretold.1 Then comes the long-deferred appearing of Jesus. Is not this the point of time to which Jesus referred in his words before his Jewish judges? “Thou hast said. Moreover, I say unto you, hereafter ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, [i.e. of God the Father,] and coming on the clouds of heavenMatt. 26: 64.

 

1 May we not be reminded of the remarkable effect exerted on the native Indians by the prophecy of Columbus, concerning the darkening of the moon by an eclipse? He used it unwarrantably to persuade them that the Spaniards were the servants of God, and that the eclipse betokened his anger. - Robertson’s America, Vol. 1

 

[Page 37]

The gathering of the outcasts to Jerusalem succeeds. The fathers refused to be gathered beneath Messiah’s wing, therefore the bird of prey scattered them, or carried them off; but now they recognize him as their only deliverer, and the angels his servants restore them to their land. The controversy of the Lord with Israel is finished.

 

 

The two-foldness of sense in many of the words of the prophecy is worthy of notice. In A they are used literally, in the sense of the old covenant. In B some of the same words are used in the new covenant, or spiritual sense. Thus “salvation” is twice used of deliverance of the body from death, (5: 13, 22.) “the elect,” “the enduring,” “the Presence,” “the Gospel” are used in A in the old covenant sense. But in B the “sleep,” the “taking and leaving,” the “day,” and “hour,” are taken in a spiritual and new covenant sense.

 

 

The “day” in A is literal, they are to pray against its being on a Sabbath day; in B it is spiritual. i. There are two classes of prayers. (1.) The Jewish disciple is to pray for a proper opportunity to escape; - “Pray ye, that your flight be not in the winterMark 13: 18. He is to pray for the vengeance of justice on his adversary:-Luke 18: 1. (2.) But the Christian is to “Pray always, that he may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to be set before the Son of Man Luke 21: 36.

 

 

The exhortations are also different. (1.) To the Jewish disciples, “When ye see the abomination of desolation, then let them which be in Judaea flee to the mountains!” (2.) To the christian, “Watch therefore, for ye know not in what hour your Lord is coming.” “Be ye also ready, for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of Man is coming

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 38]

CHAPTER 3

 

THE FIG TREE

(B. 1)

 

 

“But from the fig tree learn its parable: when already its branch is becoming tender, and putteth forth the leaves, ye recognize that the summer is nigh; so likewise ye, when ye see all these things, recognize that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, this generation will not pass away, until all these things be fulfilled. The heaven and the earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away

 

 

We have now arrived at the second great division of the prophecy - the parabolic part. It contains the answer to the second and third questions of the disciples; or (since the second and third questions are closely bound together) we may perhaps call them the second question of the four apostles.

 

 

The parabolic part treats of the end of the age, and of the Presence of Jesus. The Fig Tree is the sign of the end of this evil age. The Sheep and Goats give the last act of the age, preceding the full enjoyment of the [millennial] kingdom on earth. The Days of Noah give the sign of Jesus’ Presence; and the four following parables instruct us concerning the Lord’s adjustment of the position of the saints in glory.

 

 

Thus the four parables belonging to the Presence, occur before “the king” is manifested, (in the Sheep [Page 39] and Goats,) and occupy the place of a parenthesis. That is the time of the secret between Christ and his church; his revelation to Israel is found in the close of the first part: his revelation to the Gentiles by judgment is seen in the Sheep and Goats.

 

 

The disciples’ second question ran thus - “What shall be the sign of thy Presence and of the end of the age

 

 

It is supposed, then, that but one sign would be given, applying alike to each. But Jesus gives two signs; one for the End of the Age, one to identify the time of his Presence. He also reverses the order in which the two seasons are spoken of. The disciples had mentioned first the Presence, then the End of the Age. Jesus gives first the sign of the End of the Age, then treats of the sign of the Presence, and its interior invisible on earth; and finally he closes with the End of the Age, in its last adjudication of the controversy between Israel and the Gentiles. The Saviour’s, of course, is the real order. Thus the secret meeting of the believer with his Lord precedes the manifested glory: thus “the day” is treated of before the especial “hour” of the Presence.

 

 

The last point mentioned before the Fig Tree, was the ingathering of the Jewish elect from their dispersion and captivity, at the time of the Lord’s appearing. The old generation of Israel refused Messiah’s oft-repeated attempts to gather them beneath his wings. They slew those who invited them to their rest; Jerusalem being the most guilty spot of the land. Hence God gives them up, and Jerusalem especially, to the scattering and captivity of the false Christ. But at length the evil generation is cut off, the better generation [Page 40] comes; and Jesus, as Israel’s shepherd, gathers them into the fold, and meets no resistance on their part, but rather finds praise and gratitude on their lips. Then arises the dispensation of the fulness of times, in which all things in heaven and earth, all things, both Jewish and Gentile, the saints raised [out] from the dead and the angels of God are united in Christ Jesus - the great appointed head of all. The Jew is received - life from - [amongst (Luke 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11] - the dead is come. They who were once hardened are tender now: they who scoffed at the crucified, confess their sins, and welcome him as the sent of God.

 

 

I take for granted, that by the Fig Tree is intended the Jewish nation, on which the Saviour had found the leaves of Mosaic ceremonies, but not the fruits of holiness.

 

 

The appointing this as the sign of the new era of the blessedness which is one day to visit the earth, was of a piece with the Saviour’s usual manner, and like his marvellous wisdom, who was able to take up any event or object before him, and to make it the type of the thoughts of his unsearchable understanding.

 

 

The time of the year when Jesus and the four apostles were seated opposite the temple, was spring: according to Greswell, it was the 3rd of April. Doubtless there were, upon the Mount of Olives, fig trees, as well as those trees whence the mount took its name. “Behold the fig tree, (says Jesus,) and all the trees

 

 

Israel’s repentance and softening of heart, is to be the signal of God’s blessings about to descend on the world, according to his promise. On that Peter suspends it, in his sermon to the Jews in the temple. “Repent ye, therefore, and turn, that your sins may be blotted out, that [Page 41] the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and he may send Jesus Christ, who has been before prepared1 for you

 

1 The true reading.

 

 

As Israel’s unbelief and rejection of Messiah, with his answering rejection of them, and of their temple, was the sign of the coming winter and darkness of the earth, so the turning of Israel to repentance and faith in Messiah, is the sign of the new age at hand. Their expecting the promised time of happiness and glory, while they were still in unbelief refusing him, is considered by Jesus as the full disclosure of Israel’s blindness. They were looking for the promised summer of the prophets, while the nation’s state discovered only the omens of the predicted storms of winter. They were expecting the palace, when, as debtors who refused to pay, they were about to be cast into the prison.

 

 

The fig tree is the natural sign of a natural season of the year. The Jew, God’s spiritual fig tree, is the sign of the better spiritual summer. Now it is winter; coldness, slipperiness, and death reign around. The Jewish tree, though not for ever dead, yet seems so. Its buds are sealed, its leaves are enfolded. But the summer is at hand, the season of light and warmth, of splendour, growth, fruit, and the song of birds. The Age to come and the Time of the End are Jewish seasons: the sign of them is Jewish also. Not till the Jew repents and turns to God, can the world’s joy come. To the Jewish disciple then (not to the church directly) is this sign given. They are set to observe the previous signs, as the still accumulating proof that the time of their hope draws near. “So likewise ye, when ye see [Page 42] all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors The church is independent of times and seasons, and no series of events (it would appear) must first take place on earth, ere it be caught away to glory. It walks by faith, not by sight; while it is written here, “When ye shall see all these things.” Again, those words “all these things,” stand closely connected with the former part.

 

 

1. The blood of the innocent was yet to be exacted. “All these things shall come upon this generation

 

 

2. The temple’s destiny was one of the matters in question. “See ye not all these things “There shall not be left one stone upon another

 

 

3. The first strokes of judgment belong to the enumeration, “But all these things (war, famine, pestilence, earthquake) are the beginning of sorrows

 

 

The same expression occurs twice in the Fig Tree. “When ye shall see all these things, know that it is near “This generation will not pass away, until all these things be fulfilled

 

 

In one point our parable is given more definitely by Luke, than by the other two evangelists. Matthew and Mark say, “When ye see all these things coming to pass, know (recognize) that it is near, even at the doors What is intended by “it?” That is left to be supplied by research. Luke has it, “When ye see these things coming to pass, know that the kingdom of God is near The words to be supplied in Matthew and Mark, should probably be, “the end of the age.” The expression in Luke harmonizes well with that idea. If the end of the old age be near, the coming of the new age, or the kingdom of God, must be near also. If the [Page 43] departure of the winter be at hand, the coming of the summer is equally near.

 

 

But the evil generation will not fail from the earth until all the terrors of the day of the Lord have been accomplished. Sign after sign, judgment after judgment, will fail to convince their blinded eyes, or to open their barred hearts. Hardest of all will those be, who have heard the gospel of grace, and hated it. On them in righteous indignation God will send an energy of delusion that they may believe the lie of Satan; so that we might affirm that the signs of winter will be abroad in all their sternness, even when the warmth and glory of summer are nigh. Are the wicked generation the snow and ice of winter? Then never will the snows lie thicker, nor the ice be deeper or more compact, than just before the great and final thaw. For this reason Jesus does not adduce the state of mankind in general as one of the proofs of the kingdom being near. On the contrary, he assures us, as one of the strange things that needed the strong proof of his assertion, that in spite of the good news of the kingdom which will be published among all the nations, and in spite of the judgments coming thickly and heavily upon them, neither mercy nor justice will soften the guilty mass of mankind. Therefore the word “will” (in verse 34) should have been substituted for “shall“This generation will not pass away For the words are not a promise, on Christ’s part, that his power shall take care to cut off the wicked: but it is a prediction of the result. It means not, ‘It shall be my care that thirty years shall not pass away ere the whole of my prophecy be fulfilled;’ but it indicates the rooted unbelief of man’s [Page 44] heart, that nothing in the way of means, whether of terror or mercy, will avail to change the enmity of the human race.

 

 

The evil generation and the evil age go together: the new generation, and the new age. The wickedness of the earth is the cause of the sorrows of this present time. Therefore until sinners are consumed out of the earth, the evil age in which they have their being, will not come to an end. So that the destruction of the ungodly out of the world, is the proper work of the end of the age, as well as the preparing of those who shall inherit the earth, or of those who shall rule over it during the future happy age of Messiah’s reign.

 

 

Solemn then is this lesson. Vainly do christians expect that the message of mercy in the gospel will convert the world, and change the tares into wheat. Yea rather, these vile weeds will grow ranker and broader, until they are rooted by angelic hands out of the field, which is the world. While then there will be in one respect a beautiful resemblance to spring, in the returning and repentance of Israel, there will be on the other hand, the increase of iniquity throughout the world. The conflict of soul produced by the perception of these two opposites is embodied in the 73rd Psalm. Therein one of Israel’ tender ones complains of the abounding of iniquity, and his inability to reconcile the flourishing of the workers of wickedness with the justice of God. As if one should complain - ‘Summer seems near by the trees’ budding and their leaves appearing, but winter also is at its height, for look how thickly the icicles hang from the eaves, and mark the deep snow, and the chill frosty air.’ Nor is it till the Psalmist sees [Page 45] the suddenness of the change that is to come - the instantaneousness of the wrath - that his mind is satisfied.

 

 

This seeming counter-indication then is taken up by the next parable, and the destiny of the elect of Israel, and of the unbelieving world, is marked out there. In one respect the moral summer will not resemble the natural. The destruction of the wicked will not be slow, gradual, and noiseless, as the raising up of the elect; but the Lord’s giant arm, as the man of war, will assail and ruin it with breach on breach. Sudden as the flood, and swift as the burning and engulphing of Sodom, will be the destruction wherewith the Lord will visit the evil at last.

 

 

The above view gives the only sufficient and satisfactory solution of the chief difficulty (to most persons) in the prophecy. That generation was not to pass away till all was fulfilled. If the generation be a certain physical thing - a certain portion of time - an insuperable obstacle must ever remain to its right interpretation. But when we see that the “generation” is a moral thing, which abides as unchanged, as human nature in its evil state, throughout the long course of this present evil age, the difficulty is gone. The continuance of the wicked generation is the cause of these wintry times.

 

 

The generation offers itself to our view in three great forms: as (1) the world, that hears the gospel, but loves its lusts too well to come to Christ; (2) unbelieving Israel, whose unhumbled heart repulses a crucified Messiah; (3) and the pagan nations, who go on benighted amidst the deceits and wickedness of idolatry. The posture of things now resembles that of Israel at the borders of the land of promise. God set before them the [Page 46] land, and bid them enter and possess it. They refused, and the Lord sware that that faithless generation should not inherit it. They were compelled then to traverse the wilderness till the whole of that ungodly mass had perished; two only, as men of faith, entering in: Num. 32: 10-13. Thus the kingdom cannot come till the children of unbelief are cut off. Only in that case the generation was cut off in a certain foretold space of time, and by degrees; in neither of which points does it resemble the instance before us.

 

 

The generation was not cut off at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans; for the Saviour tells us, that the blood of all the righteous that had been slain unjustly should come upon “this generation23: 36. But in the Revelation, written twenty-five years after, we find that the souls under the altar are represented as still unavenged, and demanding wrath upon the inhabitants of earth; while they are informed, that they must still wait for a little season, till a further army of martyrs shall succeed them.

 

 

The generation is to exhibit itself at the close according to the type of three most wicked characters; Cain, Balaam, Corah: Cain, denying the doctrine of the atonement, or approach to God by blood as the only way for the guilty. Balaam, teaching unrighteousness against his better knowledge, for gain; and Corah, resisting the priesthood and kingly authority of Christ, and perishing therein. All these three had forms of religion; all three were persecutors. The generation too is not Jewish alone. It began in Cain, ere Jews were distinguished from Gentiles. Accordingly, we find that both Jew and Gentile are described in this prophecy as persecutors. [Page 47] The Jew is seen up to the very close persecuting the messengers of God: Matt. 23: 1. The Gentile is found hating and bringing up as criminals those who go forth preaching the gospel of the kingdom among them. Jerusalem itself becomes the metropolis of the generation, and the temple of God, even in Jesus’ day a den of robbers, and a scene of the murder of God’s saints, would become the dwelling of the Great Usurper of the titles of God - the great destroyer of men. Thus in the present prophecy the three great divisions which appear at the close of the age, are all addressed as then present before Jesus. (1.) The evil generation comes first. “Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.” “How can ye escape the damnation of hell23: 32, 33. (2.) The remnant, or the elect “Jews.” “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation (3.) The [‘left’ (1 Thess. 4: 15, R.V.)] believers of the church. “Watch therefore; for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.” “Watch therefore for ye know neither the day nor the hour

 

 

The generation, then, being unchanged by all the means brought to bear on it, would pass away in the final wrath, but not till then. The day of the Lord is the day of perdition of ungodly men. While Israel’s elect ones soften beneath the judgments, the nations harden. As in Egypt faith in Moses preceded the worship of the God of Israel, and the deliverance out of Egypt; so in the coming day.

 

 

But what is the connexion of the succeeding verse - “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” - with the preceding? The Lord, I believe, regards the period of the destruction of the ungodly, as lasting through the whole extent of the day [Page 48] of the Lord. The judgments before the millennium cut down the evil generation to the very narrowest limits, if indeed any be spared. But, at the close of the thousand years, wickedness, showing that man is still unchanged, breaks forth again, and then heaven and earth pass. Certain it is, that Peter thus connects the passing away of the wicked with the passing away of the heaven and earth. “The heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men2 Peter 3: 7. But he adds a caution: when I say “the day of judgmentdo not understand me to mean a day of twenty-four hours. The day of the Lord is a day of a thousand years. And as at its commencement the first strokes of vengeance fall on the ungodly, so at its conclusion comes the judgment of the great white throne, the destruction of the earth, and the raising up of new heavens and a new earth, as the dwelling-place of the righteous.

 

 

How vain, then, the expectation of the gospel’s converting the world! Nay, the evil generation will abide to the close!

 

 

Can this emblem receive its accomplishment until Israel has returned to his own land? Is not Israel now as the fig tree rooted up? If so, the sign of the end of the age, no less than the signs of the temple’s overthrow by antichrist, cannot begin, until the Jews be once more restored (though not by the miraculous power of God) to the land of their fathers. The same idea seems to be sustained by the meaning of the fig tree’s putting forth its leaves. The rites of Israel, sacrificial aid of other kinds, can scarcely be manifested while [Page 49] away from Palestine. The true centre of them all is the temple at Jerusalem. Severed from that, they pine and disappear. The promise of the restoration of Israel’s rites, before the Lord appears, is included in the promise concerning Elijah. “Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things Matt. 17.

 

 

But lest the thought should arise, that the coming of the kingdom of God might as surely be traced as the departure of one season, or the coming of another, Jesus drops a word as to the utter uncertainty of the time.

 

 

As a further illustration of the principle involved in the doctrine of the Fig Tree, that Israel must believe ere they receive the promises, we have at hand the history of their deliverance from Egypt. They refuse Moses, and he leaves them for forty years, during which period they groan beneath the severest bondage. But the promise must receive its fulfilment. At length God’s two witnesses, Moses and Aaron, appear before Israel, declaring that God, the God of their fathers, had called them to go into the wilderness, and they give signs in token of the reality of their mission. “And the people BELIEVED: and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel, and that he had looked upon their affliction, they bowed their heads and worshipped Exodus 4: 31. With faith, the time of Israel’s deliverance was at hand.

 

 

As, when Israel’s heart is softened before God, the heart of the evil generation and of its prince grows more and more hard, and his tongue becomes more bitter and blasphemous, so was it also in the time of old; while the Lord foretells that the signs wrought by his two witnesses should be effectual in turning the heart of [Page 50] his people to faith, he testifies also that the heart of Pharaoh and his servants would be hardened, and that he would perish in the wrath of his stretched out arm.

 

 

The dealings of God in vengeance, then, suitably introduce the doctrine of the Presence, or of the Lord’s witness against the evil world.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 51]

CHAPTER 4

 

DAYS OF NOAH

 

(B 2.)

 

 

 

 

36. “But of that day and hour knoweth no one, no not the angels of the heavens, but my Father only

 

 

The question naturally arises, on reading these words - Of what “day” is this spoken? It might seem to refer to one of three times.

 

 

1. The Saviour’s Presence.

 

 

2. The Day of the Lord.

 

 

3. The End of the Age.

 

 

The two latter seasons have especial reference to the ungodly world: the former principally to the saints. The section itself deals with the Jew, the Gentile, the Church of God.

 

 

I believe that it refers to the End of the Age, of which the preceding parable treated: that by “the day” is meant that long and comparatively indefinite period, the end; and that by “the hour” is meant that special time of the Presence, which is signalized by the [select] rapture of the [repentant, obedient and watchful] saint. If so, then the Fig Tree is the sign of “the day;” and is accordingly somewhat indefinite in its note of time: for who can point out the moment when the fig tree’s bark begins to become tender? Then comes the shorter period of the Presence, and its [Page 52] sign - the rapture - which is very definite, and is instantaneous in point of time.

 

 

37. “But as the days of Noah, so shall be also the Presence of the Son of Man. 38. For as they were, in the days that were before the flood, eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39. And knew not, until the flood came and took all away, so shall be also the Presence of the Son of Man

 

 

The resemblance of those days, when the Saviour will have descended from the heaven into the air, will consist in four especial points, which are here touched on.

 

 

1. The employments of men will evince their unbelief of any judgment about to come on the world. In spite of warning, they will live as if all things were to continue as they had so long done.

 

 

2. There will be an escape of a few - [watchful and ‘accounted worthy A.V.] - from the impending destruction. As God provided an ark for Noah and his family, so has he for the earthly elect. In the ark, Noah and his sons were preserved through the storm of divine indignation, and came forth to people the new earth. The desert is the ark into which the Jewish elect are to flee, and where they escape the flood which the dragon pours after them: Rev. 12. Has not the Saviour’s temptation in the wilderness - when he answered Satan from the Jewish Scriptures, and conquered - purchased this portion of earth as a refuge for Israel? Certainly, after it, Satan leaves him, and the angels come, apparently bringing food for his hunger. In the desert the first angel appears to help Hagar, who answers, as we know, to Israel. In the wilderness the woman is to be fed, as Hagar was.1

 

1 Not to detain the reader too long from the main features of the resemblance to Noah’s times, I throw into a note an interesting question which arises, on comparing this view of the ark with that given in 1 Pet. 3: 21. The ark there is applied to Christians; and baptism answers to their escape through the waters. The ark, (to us,) then, is the righteousness of Jesus. The waters of which the apostle speaks were the wrath of God, the cause of the Saviour’s suffering. But his righteousness prevailed. He passed safely through, and we in him. The ark has rode through the waters of death and judgment. In token of the believer’s having gone through them, he has passed through the literal waters of baptism - type of those of wrath. Christ’s death was the time when the floods of wrath were loosed against him. His resurrection was the time of the flood’s restraint. His ascent gives the ark’s resting high upon the Mount of God. He is waiting, and we with him, for the day when God shall bid him come forth, because in the seventh month the ground is dry. Our ark is not a tangible one, as the waters also which Jesus passed for us are the spiritual ones of judgment. Now that is the distinction which Paul insists on as characterizing the difference between us and Israel. They stood before a palpable, tangible mountain; we, before an invisible one. So their ark is a worldly and visible one, as ours is a spiritual one. Thus also there is a twofold wrath; the one visible on men in the flesh, from which God vouchsafes them a deliverance. Ours is deliverance especially from the invisible wrath.

 

Our judgment is past, and we are on safe ground: Israel’s is at its height in the days here foretold, But the same Noah provides both arks by his righteousness. Jesus first gains a victory upon earth by his active obedience. Then he accomplishes his passive obedience by his sufferings unto resurrection. After his conquest in the wilderness Jesus comes forth into the land, with the power of the [Holy] Spirit, and the news of the kingdom on his lips, radiant with miracle. After his resurrection he appears to the disciples only, and then ascends to his Father, leading captivity captive.

 

[Page 53]

3. The sudden wrath that came with universal destruction upon the men of unbelief, when once the elect of earth had escaped, is the next feature of resemblance. And thus, immediately after the command to Israel to    [Page 54] flee when the abomination of desolation is lifted up, comes the announcement of “the great tribulation,” “the days of vengeance The resemblance to the “Days of Noah” would indeed be fully carried out, and only those in the ark of the desert be spared, but for the elect, both of Gentiles and of Jews, who remain, partly in the land of Palestine, and partly in the world in general.

 

 

4. The fourth point of likeness is contained in the verses which follow.

 

 

“Then shall two be in the field; the one is taken, and the other left. Two women grinding at the mill; one is taken, and one is left

 

 

The scene is presented as it will appear to the eye of a spectator, looking in the direction indicated. In yonder field are two men working - no other human being near - and now there is but one! The horses of the plough move onwards, but he who held the plough is gone! He has not hid himself, for there is neither tree nor bush near. There lies his coat beside the hedge: the trees, the clouds, the fields, seem unaltered - where is he? His comrade looks up; where is his companion? He turns himself about; rubs his eyes, as if doubting whether he were not in a dream; stands amazed; runs to the hedge. There is his garment, but not the master. Not even a sound does the rapt one utter: in the twinkling of an eye he is out of sight. “He is not!” Must we not add, as in Enoch’s case, and as the only consistent explanation - “FOR GOD TOOK HIM!” And what is the moral deduction concerning the taken one but that given in Enoch’s case? “By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him, for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased GodHeb. 11: 5.

 

[Page 55]

Here is sudden disappearance. To what shall we attribute it? (1.) It is not the effect of an invading army. There the army would be seen in the field; and the captive be beheld as he was borne away. Nor are men and women dealt with alike by an army: Zech. 14: 2. We should see an attempt at escape on the part of one or the other: and both would leave the field; the one by flight, the other borne away as a prisoner of war. (2.) It is not death by an arrow from a distance; then the arrow might be seen, and the hand that launched it; then too the corpse would be left on the field. (3.) Nor is it sudden death from the hand of God; still the corpse would be left: and one of the two is taken. (4.) It is not voluntary concealment on the part of one of them. Then his withdrawal of himself would be seen, and the activity he displayed would not accord with the passiveness supposed.

 

 

(5.) Nor is it the effect of flight. The one who fled would be seen escaping, as well as the one who remained still. The one removed is passive in his removal. In the supposed flight there need be no separation; for both could flee together. Hence, in the former part, where the flight is commanded, but one is presented to us. “He that is on the housetop let him not come down, to take any thing out of his house. Neither let him that is in the field return back to take his clothes.” If again activity could be supposed on the part of one of the men, it could not on the part of the women; for grinding is a posture in which flight could not be begun.1

 

 

1 The following extracts descriptive of the mode of grinding in the East will not be uninteresting to the reader:-

“Scarcely had we reached the apartment prepared for our [Page 56] reception, when looking from the window into the court-yard belonging to the house, we beheld two women grinding at the mill in a manner most forcibly illustrating the saying of our Saviour. … They were preparing flour to make our bread, as it is always customary in the country when strangers arrive. The two women seated on the ground opposite to each other, held between them two round flat stones, such as are seen in Lapland, and such as in Scotland are called ‘querns.’ … In the centre of the upper stone was a cavity for pouring in the corn; and by the side of this an upright wooden handle for moving the stone. As the operation began, one of the women with her right hand pushed this handle to the woman opposite, who again sent it to her companion, thus communicating a rotatory and very rapid motion to the upper stone: their left hands being all the while employed in supplying fresh corn, as fast as the bran and flour escaped from the sides of the machine.”- Dr. E. Clarke’s Travels, Vol. 2, p. 428.

 

“In another tent was a woman kneeling and grinding at the handmill. These mills are doubtless those of scriptural times; and are similar to the Scottish quern. They consist of two stones, about eighteen inches or two feet in diameter, lying one upon the other, with a slight convexity between them, and a hole through the upper to receive the grain. The lower stone is fixed, sometimes in a sort of cement, which rises around it like a bowl, and receives the meal as it falls from the stones. The upper stone is turned upon the lower by means of an upright stick fixed in it as a handle. We afterwards saw many of these mills; and saw only women grinding, sometimes one alone and sometimes two together. The female kneels or sits at her task, and turns the mill with both hands, feeding it occasionally with one. The labour is evidently hard: and the grating sound of the mill is heard at a distance, indicating, (like our coffee mills) the presence of a family, and of household life. We heard no song as an accompaniment to the work.” [The time at which the grinding was going on was soon after four o’clock in the morning. ]- Robinson’s Palestine, Vol. 2, 180.

 

Again - “May 28th. We rose before four o’clock, hoping to set off early. Very soon the grating sound of the hand-mill was heard from a cave not far off, where an Arab family had taken up their abode during the harvest.” p. 471. “On one occasion (p. 385) the grinding occurred at about three in the afternoon

 

[Page 56]

6. It is not an earthquake that with sudden yawn has swallowed up the one; the rocking earth and trees and its opening gulf had been objects of sight.

 

[Page 57]

7. The wrath that is to come on the ungodly is not to discriminate; it is to be universal, like that of the flood, and of Sodom. “The flood came and took them all away.” “It rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all

 

 

8. “The one shall be taken Nor is the other left because concealed from the eye of man; for both are in the field, where the eye would take in the two as in the same open space together. Both are equally in the daylight, in Matthew; both equally in bed, and so probably in darkness - in Luke - when this mysterious force separates them. Can this be the act then of any other than God, of whom it is written, “The darkness and the light to THEE are both alikeThere is no security against this hand within doors or without. But walls and doors are barriers to all of mortal bodies.1

 

1 The description given by the Saviour may remind the classical reader of the alleged mysterious and supernatural disappearance of Romulus. Nec deinde in terris Romulus visus fuit.

 

 

A like explanation will suit also the succeeding case, of the two women at the mill. By the mill is meant, not a more or less lofty building, as in our own country, but a hand-mill, consisting of two stones, the upper one turning upon the lower by means of a handle fixed in the upper. Beside this mill two women, seated opposite [Page 58] to each other, push the handle round, pouring in the grain through a hole in the upper millstone. [See Frontispiece.] The work, with its jarring, grating sound of daily labour is proceeding as usual, when suddenly the handle stops. The terrified maid looks up - her companion is gone! Her seat is empty - the hand that should move the handle is no more. She could not have fled without rising, and being seen to rise. Where is she?

 

 

i. Let us now notice, first, the parties taken.

 

 

1. Both the classes exhibited to us are of an inferior grade, as society reckons. They are workers with their hands in the labours of agriculture, or daily domestic servitude. The maid-servant (or female slave) behind the mill is set forth as the greatest contrast to the king on the throne: Ex. 11: 5. But while the Pharaohs of earth would disdain companions so ignoble, Jesus takes them to himself as worthy of his Presence, his love, his glory, his kingdom. “He hath chosen the poor, rich in faith, to be heirs of the kingdom The passage in Exodus describes the Lord’s going forth as the Mighty one to destroy his enemies: when the elect of Israel were to be brought out. But now the Saviour speaks of his descending to select his fellows in the [coming messianic] glory, companions in the cloud, ere Israel is brought out of bondage; before the smiting, and ere the cry, greater than that of Egypt’s desolation, arises from a rebel world. In Exodus it was the midnight cutting off the firstborn of the female slave. In Matthew it is the mid-day translation of the servant herself to glory.

 

 

2. The parties taken are close together, two in the same bed, two at the same mill, two in the same field; [Page 59] but a mysterious hand severs between them with equal ease everywhere. Can any cause but one explain this? The open country, the bolted door, the clearness of daylight, the obscurity of night are both alike - to God!

 

 

3. They are in the same occupation and attitude, yet they are discriminated, to teach us, that the difference of their lot comes from Him who reads the heart, and not from man who judges after the sight of his eyes. Two sets, one of men and the other of women appear before us, that we may learn that the difference now rests not on the diversity of sex. It did when the question was the active flight from Jerusalem. Then “woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suckWherefore the difference now? but that we have reached a higher region, where questions of the flesh take a very subordinate place.

 

 

ii. Next, a word concerning the taking.

 

 

1. The taking is quite sudden. To them there has been no previous signal. Neither sight nor sound has disturbed them from their daily round of toil. This unexpectedness then finds them in their ordinary posture of soul. Had they, by sound or sign, been aware of the day or hour, then surely they would have been upon their knees in the midst of the assembly of the saints.

 

 

2. The separation is most rapid. Quickly as the sentence which describes it is uttered, so speedy will the severance be. And the Saviour’s words are in this case peculiarly brief, to intimate the speed of the removal. That they are men and women, is known only by the gender of the participles. There is no connecting particle between the words descriptive of the destiny of the women and the men.

 

[Page 60]

“Then shall two be in the field; the one is taken and the other is left: two grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left The language hurries, and would suggest to us the celerity of the result.

 

 

3. The taking is mysterious. To the worldly it will suggest only thoughts of human knavery: from the believer alone will it receive its supernatural explanation. The act then will resemble the words now. Can the words now be explained away? So will the deed then.

 

 

4. The sign thus granted is miraculous. A sign in its fullest sense in Scripture is always so. Thus were the signs to Gideon, to Moses, to Hezekiah of his recovery from sickness; to Ahaz the sign was a miracle either in the heaven above, or in the deep. The sign of Jesus’ supernatural descent from heaven is itself a thing supernatural.

 

 

5. But the difference is not a matter of sovereignty, taking whom it will and leaving whom it will, without rendering a reason. Then the appropriate exhortation to us had been simply to submit, without asking a reason from Omnipotent omniscience. But Jesus founds thereon the solemn lesson of watchfulness; to teach us that the discrimination will be according to the believer’s state. Then the scene in its full force comes home to our bosoms.

 

 

At this point, the questions will naturally arise:-

 

 

To what class do the taken and the left belong? And of what character are the taking and the leaving?

 

 

Now these points mutually affect each other, as we shall see on considering the answers given to the questions above supposed. It may be replied -

 

 

1. The two are Jew.

 

[Page 62]

2. The two are Christians: one a nominal, the other a real [and regenerate] believer.

 

 

3. Both are believers: the one watchful, the other unwatchful.

 

 

1. Now if we take up with the idea that both are Jews, then the taking will be in wrath, for destruction; and the leaving will indicate God’s mercy sparing the other to enjoy length of life on the millennial earth.

 

 

2. If the parties be both Christians, then, as length of life on earth is not the promise to believers in Jesus, the leaving will signify dishonour, and the taking the rapture to [millennial] glory. This applies to both the two last suppositions.

 

 

3. And again, if the taking be for honour, the parties are Christians; as, if the taking be for wrath, the parties are Jews. This is the point by which the question will be decided.

 

 

In regard to the meaning of the taking and leaving, it is granted on both sides that the two are opposites. If therefore we know the moral meaning of the taking, we know that of the leaving; and the converse. Now the alternatives as to the meaning of the taking are these:- It signifies either (1) the removal in wrath, or (2) the removal in mercy. If then the taking be not a removal in wrath, it is for mercy. But here, again, we must distinguish. The removal in mercy may be of two kinds:- Either (1) the earthly escape from the wrath upon Jerusalem and the world; or (2) the heavenly rapture to the Presence.

 

 

(i) First, then, the taking is not for wrath, as appears by the word employed. It is quite different from that which describes the destruction wrought by the deluge. [Page 62] “The flood came and took them all away([… see Greek].) The word used to describe the separation between the two in the field and at the mill is another. ([… see Greek].) To which I add, that the same word is used by both Matthew and Luke, when speaking of the same thing; which, I infer, implies, that there is a peculiar appropriateness in it to express the thing intended.

 

 

Now the idea expressed by the word in question, is the taking one as a companion by our side. It is ordinarily the result of friendship. It is the word used by the Lord Jesus, to describe his final reception of his people to himself. “I will come again and take you to myself, that where I am, there ye may be alsoJohn 14: 3. By the same word Jesus describes the evil spirit’s choice of companions. “Then goeth he and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himselfMatthew 12: 45. It is the word which is used where Jesus on three special occasions took, by way of privilege, three of the disciples to behold the raising of the daughter of Jairus, the Transfiguration, and his sufferings in the garden. The evidence of the three latter instances is so important, that they will be considered by themselves.

 

 

This sense of the word appears yet more evidently, where another preposition, implying a conjunction, is added to the word. “And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem and took with them John whose surname was MarkActs 12: 25. “Barnabas, determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought it not good to take him with [Page 63] them “I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me alsoGal. 2: 1.

 

 

But against such a view of the case an instance occurring in the history of Jesus is alleged. “Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified: and they took Jesus, and led him awayJohn 19: 16. Was this a case of honour? Certainly not. But the radical idea of the word is the same here as in the other cases. It intends that they made him walk by their side. In that case it was the act of wicked men, and their intent in the matter was evil. But he who takes in the present instance, is the Holy One, and his design in taking any as his companions, cannot be for evil, but is with intent to do them high honour.

 

 

(ii.) But it may be pleaded that, while indeed the taking intends honour done to the party taken, yet it follows not that this power is the rapture heavenward, but only the earthly escape. - The taking may mean one put into a place of safety on earth, no less than in heaven. “Athaliah arose and destroyed all the seed royal. But Jehosheba took Joash and stole him from among the king’s sons that were slain, and they hid him, even him and his nurse in the bed-chamber from Athaliah, so that he was not slain2 Kings 11: 1, 2. Thus also the angels laid hold on lot, and led him out of the devoted city. Now, in order to negative such a plea, we have only to regard the points of discrimination furnished by the prophecy itself.

 

 

The Saviour, where the earthly escape is in question, demands, as the condition of that deliverance, the most earnest and instant flight. Had that been the matter here, the passage before us must have borne marks of it [Page 64] in some such way as follows:- “Two shall be in the field: one shall flee, and one shall be left and taken In such case the taking would be manifestly evil, implying the captivity of the party, and his being caught in the danger which the other evades. The two deliverances in the history of the flood are either, Enoch’s passive removal, or Noah’s active escape: the first before the tribulation, the other at its crisis.  Now the deliverance here is wholly passive. In the present case, both are one moment together, the next, without any effort, on either of their parts, severed: one only remains in the field. “The one is taken: the other is left.” The same force that took but one, could, had it so pleased, have taken both.

 

 

1. This deliverance is passive, and therefore discovers the Enoch rapture. “God took him,” “in the days that were before the flood The flood overwhelmed all not in the ark. The difference then was not, that both the preserved and the drowned being in the same circumstances when the wrath began, the one was left on earth, and the other removed from it in destruction; but that the saved were in different circumstances from the lost, the righteous being within the ark, the lost outside it.

 

 

2. Messiah must come attended by his “fellows:” (Psalm 45: 6, 7, Hebrews 4: 14, Greek:) and this expression points out his choice of companions. The present taking, however, differs from his former choice of the twelve as his companions. Then both were on earth, and no visible exertion of miracle attended it. But now, he being on high, and they in spirit already his, and like him rejected by the world - their lot is, like the Saviour’s, to ascend. This, in truth, is the hope [Page 65] of our calling. How we need the spirit of wisdom and revelation to discern and keep it ever before us! Eph. 1. May it ever be granted us!

 

 

3. Where honour is in question, the word “take” has a good sense. All Israel is brought into the Presence of Jehovah- for a king is to be chosen. The tribe of Benjamin is taken; then the family of Matri, and then Saul the Son of Kish. He hides himself. On being informed where he was, “they ran, and took him”* from among the stuff.

 

* Taking in the above case is the result of favourable choice. So again - “He chose David also his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds ...to feed Jacob his peoplePsalm 78: 70.

 

 

In the first part of the prophecy on Olivet the warning is directed against the physical burthens which unfit for active bodily exertion: in the parables and exhortations which succeed this sign, the Saviour’s voice is raised against the spiritual burthens of covetousness, love of the pleasures of life, and engrossment with its cares. “Take heed to yourselves” as regards your moral state, is the cry to the church: “beware of things withoutis the call to the earthly elect.

 

 

iii. We may now enter on the signification of the other word “left,” which will corroborate our conclusion. Leaving may indeed have either a good or an evil sense, according to its connexion.

 

 

1. It has a good sense, where the question lies between the destruction of earthly life, or its prolongation.

 

 

“If Esau come to the one company and smite it, then the other which is left, shall escapeGen. 33: 8. “They shall surely die in the wilderness. And [Page 66] there was not a man left of them, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of NunNum. 26: 65. “The inhabitants of the earth are burned and few men leftIsaiah 24: 6.

 

 

But in the passage before us, the alternative is not, as we have seen, destruction of life, but the taking as a companion; and (as will be afterwards shewn) as the sign of the Saviour’s Presence. Here then to be left is not a mark of favour. To be left, where earnest flight from the destroying sword is the only escape, is not set forth as mercy, but heralded by the Lord with a “woe24: 19.

 

 

2. To be left, has an evil sense, implying comparative dishonour, where the choice is that of an intelligent being. (a.) When David is to go to the camp to his brethren he leaves the sheep: 1 Sam. 17: 20. When the woman of Samaria’s heart is touched, she leaves her waterpot, as a thing now of inferior moment: John 4: 28. (b.) The above instances regard things; but the meaning is similar when persons also are in question. “Why have ye left the man says Jethro, blaming his daughters for their disregard of Moses’ kindness; “call him, that he may eat breadExodus 2: 20. “Leave, the dead to bury their deadsays Jesus, “but go thou and preach the kingdom of GodLuke 9: 60.

 

 

3. Who leaves? is the great question. And for what are the parties left? When Jesus leaves some, taking others as his companions, on certain moral grounds, the being left is disgrace. When the Pharisees tempt Jesus by asking a sign, he “left them and departed to the other sideMatthew 8: 13.

 

 

4. If the leaving be in mercy - the favourable alternative - [Page 67] the parables which follow must have presented the case of the left in another light. Then the sentiment must have been somewhat of this kind - “Happy the person left! He, like the mariners left when Jonah was swallowed up, shall rejoice and give thanks But on the contrary, in the parable which follows, the left one is regarded as the robbed householder, enduring loss because of his unwatchfulness after warning. So in the parables of the virgins, the left are the foolish, who suffer loss, because they are not ready at the Lord’s appearing. To be left, when the question is the Lord’s Presence, must be disgrace. The honoured are those within the Presence-chamber, the dishonoured those who tarry unwillingly without.

 

 

5. Further evidence arises to sustain this idea on connecting the words with another portion of that parable which immediately follows. Then the taking and the leaving are to be considered as the act of the Heavenly Thief. If silver and plated articles were together presented to the eye and grasp of an intelligent thief, we should infer, that the taken was the silver one; and the left, the plated one. But such a supposed difference would overstep the limits assigned to the present choice. The taken is carried away as watchful and as “ready,” (ver. 42 and 44) the left then remains behind as unwatchful, and unready. But that supposes only a difference of circumstance, not of essential nature. The difference would be fitly illustrated by the comparative ripeness of fruits. If peaches on a wall were exposed to a thief’s gaze and power, and he took some and left others, we should at once suppose that the taken were the ripe, and the left the unripe, or [Page 68] unready for his purpose. Similarly in the present instance. Both are fruits of the same kind; but one as unripe for the heavenly glory, is left awhile, exposed to the fierce sun of persecution.

 

 

6. They differ only as the watchful from the unwatchful. In other respects they are alike. That is, they are both saints. The command to “watch,” can only appropriately be addressed to those spiritually alive. Jesus dissuades the Pharisees from watching. They needed first the preparative within - “righteousness, joy, and peace in the Holy Ghost ere the doctrine of the [coming inheritance and] kingdom and its watchfulness had immediate and direct reference to them. To such the cry must first be, “repent.”

 

 

There are two groups in the parable. The one composed of those eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage; the other, of those in the field, and at the mill. On the one indiscriminate destruction falls: towards the other, discrimination is exercised. There are men and women in both parts of the picture; but in the one, the sexes are together; here, they are apart. In the one compartment are seen the enjoyments, in the other the toils of life. Feasting to excess, as we may collect from several passages, will characterize the latter-day unbelief. The evil steward is seen falling into this snare, and overtaken in it. But the servants of the Lord in general will be engaged in labouring with their hands.

 

 

In the literal part of the prophecy a visible object is set before the eye. “When ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies,” flee! “When ye see the abomination of desolation stand in the Holy Place,” flee! Here, [Page 69] as nothing is seen, so nothing is to be done by the parties in the field. Both are alike passive before this unseen One. Here the one left is the loser, as there the one left behind is lost. Here the power is irresistible and incapable of being fled from. Ere a sound of astonishment is uttered, or surprise can put itself in a suited attitude, the ready one is caught away. “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye is as true of the rapture as it is - [of ‘the first resurrection’ (Rev. 20: 5)] - of the change of the body from corruptible to incorruption, from mortal to immortal. The wheat is severed from earth the moment the sickle of the Great Harvestman touches it.

 

 

We may derive much confirmation to this opinion by considering the cases of rapture which are recorded for us in both Testaments.

 

 

1. The Lord especially refers us to Noah’s day, as the time which typifies the days of his Presence. Now about that period there were two races of men; in one of which the arts of life and civilization were cultivated. These were the sons of Cain. The other, the sons of Seth, walked as strangers and pilgrims. Out of this family, one prophet (Enoch) was taken to glory, and one (Lamech, Gen. 5: 29) was left.

 

 

But beside the passive removal before the flood begun, there is another of active preparation and escape just at the very crisis of [God’s coming] wrath. This is Noah’s case. He has to pass through the very turmoil and roar of the waters: while Enoch was in the heaven whence the wrath descended. Noah then is a type of the earthly and Jewish escape; and Enoch [who walked with and pleased God] of the heavenly, or of the [pre-tribulation] rapture of the Church.

 

 

2. The history of Abraham and Lot furnishes us with [Page 70] another specimen of that day, though not of the rapture. Hence we gather the reason why in Matthew the case of Lot is omitted; while in Luke, where the earthly escape is in question, it is given. Jehovah appears suddenly to Abraham. “He lifted up his eyes and lo three men stood over him ([… Hebrew]) and he ran to meet them, (1 Thess. 4: 17,) and entertains them. The Lord gives him the promise of a son, which was to him the trial of his faith in the resurrection of the dead: Rom. 4. 1 After the feast, the men look towards Sodom; for the Lord and his angels, after the resurrection of the just, will recompense the guilty world. Abraham’s place, as the Lord’s companion and partaker of his secrets, then comes into notice. “Abraham went with them The two men go on to Sodom, and rescue Lot. “But Abraham stood yet before the Lord Lot was below in the scene of iniquity and of vengeance, hardly escaping. Abraham, above, far from the scene of desolation beholding it in “the place where he stood before the Lord

 

1 At this promise Sarah laughs in unbelief, as the crowd in the ruler’s house do, when Jesus announces in another form the same truth of the resurrection.

 

 

3. The next instance is still more full to the point. Elijah and Elisha, both saints, both prophets, are together, when “the Lord would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind Elisha refuses to part from Elijah, though he must travel from Gilgal to Bethel, and Jericho, and beyond Jordan. “They two went on The sons of the prophets stand to view afar off; “they two stood by Jordan.” Elijah divides the waters; “they two went over on dry ground.” “And it came to pass as they still went on and talked, that behold, a chariot of fire [Page 71] and horses of fire, and separation was made between the two;1 and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven 2 Kings 2.

 

1. [… see the Hebrew]

 

Herein “the two” are four times presented to our notice. We have the same nearness of the two, the same passivity and instantaneousness of the separation. The way in which the rapture is twice spoken of by the sons of the prophets is also worthy of notice. “Knowest thou that the Lord will TAKE thy master from thy head to-day The taking was by the Lord, and it was to enter heaven.

 

 

But there are several great differences, which require remark. (1.) Elisha and the sons of the prophets are both aware of the day of the rapture. (2.) Elisha, who is to be left behind, asks for a double portion of the Spirit, and receives the promise of it under the condition of his seeing Elijah as he goes up. “And Elisha saw it.” “And he saw him no more.” In the Saviour’s prophecy, the one left behind sees not the ascent, but is only cognizant of the disappearance. (3.) Both parties were aware that the rapture was only for Elijah. It was, therefore, no disgrace to Elisha to be left behind. He obtained a double portion of the Spirit: though it was a “hard thing,” contrary that is, (I suppose,) to the tenor of the event to be illustrated by it in after times. (4.) Elijah’s rapture was not the sign of any thing beyond itself to the men of that day. The rapture spoken of by the Saviour is the sign of his [His] Presence.

 

 

But there is one other very interesting point. We have a third party as spectators of “the two.” The sons of the prophets in general are aware of the [Page 72] discriminating rapture about to take place. But that is not all. Fifty of them stand to view afar off, severed from “the two” by the [river] Jordan. To whom do these “children of the prophets” answer? [The apostle] Peter will tell us. After calling on Israel to repent, and forewarning them of the wrath to come on all who would not believe the prophet like Moses, he adds, “Ye are the children of the prophets Acts 3: 25. Now it was to Jews that the prophecy on Olivet was delivered, as it was Jews who asked. Jesus then gives the rapture of one of the churc and the omission of the other as the sign to “the sons of the prophets,” that is to the intelligent of Israel. Thus there are two classes of [regenerate] disciples; the one standing in the faith of [a selective (Luke 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11; Heb. 11: 35b; Rev. 20: 6, ff. R.V.)] resurrection, by which they have already crossed the Jordan; the others, possessed of a lower faith. The higher class of disciples then is made a sign to the lower, as it is written, “Behold I and the children whom God hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel Isa. 8: 18. Jesus was a sign and a wonder to Israel in his [selective] resurrection. His disciples are so in their [future select resurrection and] rapture.

 

 

4. The rapture of Jesus from the apostles is another case in point. “He led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them and carried up into heaven Luke 24: 50, 51. “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sightActs 1: 9. In both the accounts we observe the nearness to each other of the taken and the left: the passiveness of the one raptured, and the result of the rapture - the entrance into heaven. But the apostles see [Page 73] the Saviour ascend; and they return “to Jerusalem with great joy,” and so are not in the condition of the robbed householder.

 

 

The Saviour’s ascent is also spoken of by himself in a way that illustrates the subject. “Days will come when the Bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.” The passiveness of the rapt one is herein noticed, and the sorrow of those left behind, who are [regenerate] believers nevertheless. They could not mourn while companions of the Bridegroom: they would after his departure. But as the loss of the company of Jesus took place through his ascent from among them, so the joy of his company will be restored to them by their ascending to his Presence.

 

 

(6.) The same truth, with obvious differences, appears on the surface of the narrative of Philip and the eunuch. Philip is sent to preach to an Ethiopian eunuch, (Isa. 56; Psa. 68: 31,) and baptizes him in the desert. These two believers are close together, but lo! “when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more The eunuch, however, unlike the warned but unwatchful householder, “goes on his way rejoicing This rapture, too, was but a partial and typical one. Philip was not removed from earth. Unlike Enoch, who “was not found, because God took him Philip “was found at Azotus

 

 

(7.) As illustrating the point still further, I would offer the case of the two witnesses, or the two martyr’1 -prophets: Rev. 11. These two prophets (being, as I [Page 74] collect, Enoch - [or possibly Moses] - and Elijah) are gifted with supernatural powers, but are slain - [by the Antichrist] - and rise again. “And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in the cloud, (Greek,) and their enemies beheld themRev. 11: 12. In this case the differences are instructive, no less than the resemblances. - Both prophets are equally faithful, and both ascend the sky together. This is not the rapture strictly speaking of the living, but of the dead: yet their death so resembles that of “their Lord,” that they remain under its power but three days and a half. They are slain, because they slay others, (verses 5, 6,) and that because they belong not to the gospel dispensation of mercy, but to the dispensations preceding it. The ascent of these is beheld not by friends, but by enemies: while the [pre-tribulation] rapture of the watchful - [and ‘regarded worthy to escape’ (Luke 21: 36. Cf. Rev. 3: 10)] - saint is unseen by the world.

 

1 [The Greek…] in its fullest sense, signifies not only a witness, but a martyr.

 

 

Let me return a moment over the former ground. The great point of the parable to the Church of Christ is the sudden disappearance foretold.*

 

* The following passage is quite illustrative of disappearance being its proof of theft “Petty thefts were of nightly occurrence: Now a donkey was carried off, and now a tent was missing. To the Arabs, creeping out of their hiding-places (like jackals) after dark, nothing was too small or worthless to escape notice, and the disappearance of an old corn-sack, or a copper pot, often threw the whole encampment into commotion- The buried City of the East, p. 103.

 

 

It is mysterious, and therefore the more suited for a sign. It is a mysterious absence, the token of a mysterious Presence. It is unexpected. “In such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man is coming It is ambiguous, or at least capable of being misunderstood; the more suited therefore to fulfil that word, [Page 75] “The wise shall understand; but none of the wicked shall understandDan. 12: 10. And again, “Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent and he shall know them? for the ways of the Lord are right, and the just shall walk in them; but the transgressors shall fall thereinHos. 14: 9. It is the coming of the thief; noiselessly he takes with sound discrimination that which suits his purpose. The taken is his elect one - To pass away, not to be left, is the destiny of the evil [and apostate christian] generation. “Verily, I say unto you, this generation will not pass away, till all these things be fulfilled It in no way interferes with the world. Other things go on just as before. It is an act, not of judgment and of slaughter, but of mercy, leaving no trace behind it. It no more startles the ungodly from their feasts, than the raptures of Enoch, Elijah, and the Lord Jesus, troubled the men of those days. Men are terrified at things seen; such are the wonders of justice, which interfere visibly with the course of the world, which touch the grass, or the waters, or the heavenly bodies: Rev. 6: 11; Matt. 24: 31. This act takes place apparently ere the judgments of God by war or miracle have blighted man’s labours in the field [i.e., ‘the world’ (Matt. 13: 22, 38, R.V.]; and while household employments are going on as usual. It takes place before the coming of the flood: it is the Enoch rapture, disregarded or disbelieved; yet still the token of the flood at hand: a lesson to Noah that the time of his needing the ark is not far off. The ground of discrimination is no external mark which could only have misled. The two in each case are of the same rank in life, not one rich and the other poor. No external difference is seen to enhance the mystery to Israel, and the watchfulness of the church. [Page 76] Herein it differs from the Steward. There the unfaithful and unwatchful servant is found in a position which at first glance bespeaks his [wilful (Heb. 10: 26, ff.)] sin. This was necessary. It was suitable that the iniquity of the Steward should be broadly displayed to our eyes, in order to justify the severity of his sentence. Here there is no such difference between the two, that we may learn how important is the secret attitude of the soul. Some points of scripture history would seem to reflect light upon the scene under consideration.

 

 

1. The resurrection of Jesus in some remarkable respects resembled the event before us. The proof that he was risen, as given to the world on the day of his resurrection was principally negative. The body was in the tomb, it is there no longer. Two explanations might be given of the facts, the one of unbelief, which refused to see in it any thing more than a natural event, and referred it to theft. “His disciples came, and stole him away while he slept1 The other was the explanation of faith, given by the angels. “He is not here, he is risen They rebuke the women, appealing to prophecy. “Remember how he spake unto you, when he was yet in Galilee, saying, ‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again:’” Luke 24: 7. Jesus too takes up the same strain, save that his reproof arises from their unbelief of the Old Testament prophecy. “O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken25. Prophecy, then, [soon about to be fulfilled] should expound to [Page 77] us this scene, and prepare us for it. To it ye do well that ye take heed.

 

1 Observe, too, the theft supposed was of a person. “Stole him away.” The theft here is of a person, but of a person alive, carried off without resistance, and by no human hand.

 

 

2. The rising of Lazarus takes place after Jesus had concealed himself from the Jews, because of their making attempts upon his life: John 7: 1; 8: 59; 10: 39. After tarrying till Lazarus had been some time dead, he suddenly crosses the [River] Jordan, appears in Bethany, meets those whom he loves in the presence of some who believe, and then retires again with his disciples into a place of retreat and concealment near the wilderness, ere he comes forth (after the supper with the restored family) to present himself to Jerusalem, as her king: 11: 54; 12.

 

 

3. Would not the sign here given remind the disciples (at least those three out of the four that were present) of the sudden and secret taking to the mountain-top by night, and of the scene of glory there displayed? That was to be kept hidden [until after His select resurrection (John 3: 13. Cf. 20: 17)]: this is a secret, though spoken openly. How many have understood its force? That was a vision granted to [a select group of three] apostles as evincing a faith beyond that of their nation. And lastly, as the Saviour’s promise of beholding that glory fell without any pleading it, so the hope here supposed, and the command to watch, have both fallen, for the most part, on ears dull of hearing [and minds not able to fully comprehend]. Lord, be is not so with us. As, in the sign between David and Jonathan, there was a meaning in the words which the lad who bore his arrows knew not; a signification in the arrow beyond him, and the exhortation, “Make speed, haste, stay not,” “only Jonathan and David knew the matterso here. The words may be lightly passed, but there is an arrow beyond that first shot: 1 Sam. 20.

 

[Page 78] Was not the position of the four disciples who heard this prophecy significant? They were taken, the other eight left. They were on high, above unbelieving and doomed Jerusalem, with their Lord. Those three who were then present were the same who had been before in the glory of the Transfiguration; one more, Andrew, being added to their number. Their taking heed to the Saviour’s previous word of prophecy led them to that lofty height, and to that position of honour; a pointed lesson that those only who are students of [Bible] prophecy and take heed thereto will be in the [coming pre-tribulation] rapture of pre-eminence and reward.

 

 

Have not the prophets of the Old Testament given hints of this hour? (1.) “Woe is me! for I am as when they have gathered the summer fruits, as the grape gleanings of the vintage, there is no cluster to eat: my soul desireth the fruit, ripe fruit. The good man is perished out of the earth, and there is none upright among men; they all lie in wait for blood, they hunt every man his brother with a netMicah 7: 1, 2. This is the chapter quoted by the Lord in Matt. 10., as descriptive of the last times, when a man’s foes should be those of his own household. (2.) Similarly the twelfth Psalm: “Help Lord, for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. They speak vanity every one with his neighbour, with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak

 

 

So again, “The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart, and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come Isa. 57: 1.

 

 

I conclude, in short, that the taking is proved to be [Page 79] the [select] rapture of the watchful believer, by the following proofs. (1.) The force of the words used. (2.) The warning subjoined, which would be quite incongruous on any other view. (3.) The drift of the context, which implies that the leaving is the unfavourable alternative. (4.) The connexion of the parables which follow. Thus alone are the thief and the theft explained. (5.) Thus the leaving stands explained as seen in the virgins suffered to stand without. (6.) Thus the connexion with the Presence is discerned. (7.) This accounts for the passivity of the favoured one.

 

 

From the same view we learn that it is the sign of the Presence. The Presence is a certain definite hour, and to signify it therefore a momentary sign, definitely transacted, and noting that event to have then taken place is given. The drawing near of a season of the year is not a definite and momentary thing, hence its sign is of a different character.

 

 

I conclude, then, that nothing but the [coming select, and pre-tribulation ] rapture will satisfy the conditions of the parable, and that the two are [not nominal but regenerate] believers. To unbelievers it would be neither loss nor shame to be left. The two are suited companions of each other, but not equally ready to be companions of Messiah. Friend is severed from friend, and the loss is both more startling than that of the stranger, and answers so nearly to the separation between the wicked and the just, as to be deeply painful to the one left behind.

 

 

(1.) The eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, are not the sign of the Presence, being in fact only the ordinary course of this present evil age. (2.) Nor is the escape into the ark the sign of the [Page 80] Presence, but the sign of the flood, or of the destruction at hand. (3.) Nor is the destruction, which follows hard on that escape, the sign of the Saviour’s Presence, but only the effect of “the day of the Lord1 Thess. 5: 2, 3. “The day of the Lord is so coming as a thief in the night. … then sudden destruction cometh upon them

 

 

Let a word be added, instituting a brief comparison of “the Fig Tree” (B 1) and “the Days of Noah” (B 2.) They are both of them signs; the first, of the end of the Age; the second, of the Presence of the Son of Man.

 

 

The signs of the Day of the Lord, as given in 2 Thess. 2, are evil: consisting, (1) in the apostacy from the Christian faith, and (2) the appearing of the man of sin. As the day is a terrible and evil day, the signs of it appropriately are the development of the sin of men. But the sign of the end of this present evil age, as it is also the sign of the coming of a better, is as appropriately, a good thing. It is also (as Luke informs us) the sign of the coming of the “kingdom of God And as the sign is Israel’s repentance, so do we find a full confirmation of this in Peter’s sermon on the cure of the lame man in the temple, where the times of refreshing, and the return of Jesus, are made to hang upon Israel’s repentance: Acts 3. Thus too the coming of the times of refreshing, and of the Presence of Jesus, are put in immediate juxtaposition, which is also done by these two parables. (B 1 and B 2.)

 

 

The Jewish nation, God’s fruit-tree on earth, are the sign of the winter passing away, and of the summer coming to the earth. They are the sign of the Jewish or earthly thing - the End of the Age as affecting the earth. But [Page 81] the church is the sign to the Jew of the heavenly thing the Presence of Christ - which is kept hidden from both the Jew and the world, till, the court having been held and the respective places of the servants of Messiah having been adjusted, the glory bursts forth both to the Jew and to the world.

 

 

The Fig Tree exhibits the remnant of Israel, and the evil generation; the remnant being most prominent; in fact, their first rising into view is here presented. In the Sheep and Goats, the same two classes appear among the Gentiles. Matthew gives only the indications of summer appearing in the fig tree : Luke in “all the trees.” But Matthew compensates for this, by discovering to us, in the last of the parables, the living and dead boughs of the other trees.

 

 

Both these periods - the End of the Age, and the Rapture - will take place at times unknown therefore says Jesus once and again, “Ye know neither the day nor the hour

 

 

The Fig Tree is not the sign of the Presence. The sign of the coming age of glory is the return of the Jew to his land, his softening, his returning to the fulfilment of those rites which Moses commanded. These suppose the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem, apart from which they cannot rightly be celebrated. But during the Saviour’s Presence on high the Presence of the false Christ takes place below. And the Antichrist stops the ordinances of the temple, makes the daily sacrifice to cease, and changes the laws. The leaves then of the fig tree, so lately put forth in their fresh greenness, are thus suddenly nipped and frost-bitten.

 

 

In “the Days of Noah,” as well as in “the Fig Tree[Page 82] the Jewish remnant and the evil generation occur. The Fig Tree gave the state of these, their tenderness or hardness under the judgments of God; the Days of Noah gives the destiny of the two bodies. The Jewish elect have their present escape into their appointed chambers till the indignation is overpast, in order to their ultimate enjoyment of Messiah’s [millennial] kingdom now near at hand. The generation is found in unbelief; and swept away. There is, however, in the latter parable a third body which is made a sign of the Presence to the Jew; a body whose escape and judgment both take place secretly in the hidden pavilion of the Son of Man. Thus all the three great parties are seen as related to the Presence. (1.) The Jewish elect and (2.) the evil generation, are both ripe; the one for preservation, the other for destruction. (3.) But in the Church of Christ some only are prepared for the Presence; and these are the first-fruits presented there. In the Fig Tree, the Jewish remnant is made to itself a growing sign, as its preparation for the kingdom advances. In the Days of Noah, the saint who is rapt is made a sign to the Jew of preparedness completed. The removal of Enoch is the sign of the flood nigh at hand. But both the earthly and the heavenly elect are hurried away from the scene of the wrath about to burst. The earthly elect, in entire analogy with the principle of the law, are commanded to escape by their own efforts.1 The heavenly elect are removed by the grace of him for whom [Page 83] they wait, and by whom they are justified. It would appear, too, that the sign of the Presence, if given to the Jewish elect, must be fulfilled before their flight into the wilderness: both that the rapt one may escape the tribulation; and that it may be a sign to the elect. It seems obvious that the two in the field must be employed on cultivated land, and not in the wilderness.

 

1 In the flight of the Christians of Jerusalem to Pella, ere that city was taken by the Romans, the fleeing were saved, the left perished. But this was not the taking nor the leaving supposed by the Saviour. It was not the Christian hope of immortality - “for ever with the Lord,” but only life spared on earth.

 

 

Thus the favoured Jew escapes the destruction, but passes through the surges of that day: the watchful saint escapes not only the destruction, but its day. “The Presence” in the latter of the two parables is twice mentioned. “As the Days of Noah, so the Presence of the Son of Man.” As the flood swept away all the ungodly, “so shall also the Presence of the Son of Man be

 

 

The first time exhibits its aspect towards the Gentile and elect of the Jews: its aspect of sparing or of destruction. It looks backward to that view of it which had been given in the former portion of the prophecy. From the Presence of the Lord wrath to the evil frequently went forth. “The earth was corrupt in the Presence of God:” “And God said unto Noah, the end of all flesh is come before meGen. 6: 11, 13. So at Babel, “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language.” “So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earthGen. 11: 7, 8. At Sodom’s destruction again - “I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it.” “Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heavenGen. 18: 21; 19: 24. Thus also, when Israel is to be delivered, the cloud of the Presence severs between [Page 84] Pharaoh’s army and the host of Egypt: while the Lord looks out of the cloud in the morning, and troubles the Egyptians: Exod. 14: 24. The other is its aspect towards the Church, and looks forward to the Presence parables. While Israel is secretly tending towards repentance, Jesus is secretly near. When they openly confess him, and bewail their sin, he openly discovers himself. Each of these states of Israel has its sign. The secret rapture is the time when Jesus is secretly nigh: the cross in heaven is the sign that he is about to manifest himself to them. The rapture of some of the Church shows that others beside themselves are acknowledged by the God of Enoch and Elijah. The cross charges home upon them their sin of unbelief, and prepares them for faith and confession.

 

 

Thus the taking and the leaving have two fronts, the one the exterior, affording to the elect of Israel the proof of Messiah’s descent to save: the other is the door into the heavenlies, through which Jesus passes, and leads his people into the interior of the mysterious Presence, disclosing its principles, and addressing to them warnings, as the needful preparatives for his servants’ joyful meeting with him.

 

 

It results from what has been said, that the usual ideas of Christians concerning their true hope have swerved from the truth. The ascent to heaven of the disembodied [animating] spirit at death is the hope of most [Presbyterians], as though all the dead in Christ were there. The taking of the living to heaven WITHOUT DEATH is the true hope of the Christian. The taken tastes not of death at all. Those taken to the Transfiguration should not taste of death, till they had entered that representation of the [Page 85] kingdom. Those taken to the Real Presence shall not taste of death after they have entered it. The resurrection of the saintly dead at Jesus’ descent from on high, is the right expectation concerning the departed. The ‘Virgins’ throws some light on this. The sleepers, even the wise virgins, have to go to meet the bridegroom, they are not locally in his Presence till they arise.

 

 

The one who is left then, no less, than the one who is taken, is a believer. Could the one who is permitted to remain on earth be robbed, unless the taking were for glory, and both were joint heirs of the same hope, which is instantly realized to the one, but deferred for a long unnamed, and uncertain time to the other? Faith alone understands the loss of being left on the earth, and realizes the glory into which the other is translated. To unbelief the sudden disappearance were mystery and terror, and the ungodly would be thankful to be allowed to linger on earth. He would account for the startling fact on some natural and earthly principle, or consider it a deceit adroitly practised upon him by his comrade. Even the children of the prophets refused to acknowledge Elijah’s sudden removal as a translation to heaven. Has any but a believer, again, been made the witness of the removal to glory? Is not God’s great work revealed to faith alone, till the Great Manifestation comes, and every eye is compelled to behold?

 

 

The left one then is a [regenerate] believer; he knows the meaning of the sudden vanishing of his friend but knows it only to his sorrow. The Lord thus rebukes him as unwatchful. For the Lord’s secret coming takes a very different face, according to the spiritual position in which it finds the believer. Is he unwatchful? The coming is the knock [Page 86] of a thief breaking at one stroke into his house: Rev. 3: 3. Is he watchful? It is the knock of a friend long desired entering in to sup with his friend.

 

 

If, on the other hand, the one taken be a believer, but the one left an unbeliever, then the Saviour’s lesson is not only lost, but inverted. Instead of acting as a keen lesson to the saints to be vigilant at all times, it will have the effect of an opiate - [i.e., ‘a drug containing opium to induce sleep]. Then its strain must be as follows. ‘O happy believer! come Christ when he may, you are always ready. Fear not! Though you pamper the lusts of the flesh, though you are seeking to heap up riches as the sand, though you love the world, and mingle in all its gaieties, you will sustain no damage. Fear not! None but the wicked will be left. Sleep on and take your rest!’ This is the view, though not so broadly expressed, of those who hold - [that regeneration only will qualify all Christians for escape, and] - that attention to prophecy - [and the numerous scriptural warnings and conditional promises (1 Cor. 10: 5, 11; Col. 3: 25; cf. Rev. Chs. 2. & 3.] - is a needless and a dangerous study: needless, because preparation for death is enough; and dangerous, because it leads to such enthusiasm.

 

 

I must stand then by the interpretation which gives to Jesus’ words their highest force, which really ministers the most potent motive to vigilance; which, while it acknowledges the perseverance and final salvation of the saint, preaches yet the differences, great and eternal, of reward according to works.

 

 

The idea that we may substitute readiness for death in the place of readiness for the reappearing of Jesus must be rebuked, even if we could not discern any difference between the working of the two motives. God has given one object; at your peril, preacher, do you substitute another, and say that it will do as well! Are you wiser than God? But it is false. Death is not the hope of [Page 87] the believer, our unclothing is not joyous: at the death of no saint does the Son of Man appear “in the clouds with power and great gloryterrifying the nations, and gathering in his Jewish elect. Again, the only preparation supposed to be required for death is simply conversion, or the being born again, which is, indeed, the ground of beholding into the kingdom, but is not preparedness for the Lord’s Presence. Beyond that first step of the Christian’s career Jesus requires the standing aloof from the love of the present evil world, and from entanglement with its honours, pleasures, cares. Beyond the absolute question of entrance into, or shutting out from, the kingdom of glory, lies the farther one of our place there as one of honour or dishonour, to which motive the believer it is supposed is, or ought to be, fully alive. Many will finally be saved, who will escape only as the inmates of a house on fire. The ten virgins all fall asleep alike, but the wise rise to joy and honour, the foolish to rebuke and disappointment.

 

 

Death separates believer from unbeliever eternally, for a time it severs between believer and believer, but for that apostolic comfort is provided, in the Presence of Jesus being at hand, when that barrier shall be removed; for to him the waking and the sleeping are alike. But to the one left behind at the Lord’s Presence, what comfort is there?

 

 

The expectation of death is the prospect of nature, not of faith. Our expectation of death and of the Lord’s coming are opposite poles. Do we in our thoughts push the Lord’s coming into the far distant horizon? Then the nearest point at which eternity meets us, is at the unwelcome season of our unclothing, even death. Do [Page 88] we bring near our Lord’s return? Then ours maybe the blessed portion of being caught up to meet the Lord without tasting of death. Observe, too, how instantly the creeping unbelief of the Lord’s coming affects the heart; and through the heart, the conduct. The steward becomes evil in his actions, both towards the world, the church, and the Lord, the moment he entertains it. It was not that he disbelieved the reality or nearness of death. He knew, that to him as well as to the ungodly death was as near in his days, as in the days of Moses. Let none then attempt to shuffle away God’s motive of the required preparedness for Jesus’ return, in the vain assumption that preparedness for death is fully equivalent thereto.

 

 

Then comes the exhortation founded upon this scene.

 

 

“Watch, therefore; for ye know not at what hour your Lord is coming

 

 

1. In the former part of the passage, where the reference was especially to the Jew and the world, the coming is entitled twice, that of “the Son of Man.” Here it is the coming of “your Lord What can this signify then, but that the parties so discriminated are both servants of the Lord Jesus?1 (l.) This accounts for the exhortation. The servants of the Saviour will be dealt with as they are watchful or unwatchful. Both then are disciples of Jesus. But the ground of their different lot is, that the one is watchful the other [Page 89] unwatchful. Here therefore, servants of the Lord, is your lesson! Take heed that you be found expectant: else yours will be the shame of being left when your fellow is taken to glory. (2.) It is not that of the two one is holy and the other wicked. Else the exhortation has no hold. ‘Be converted therefore had then been the appropriate admonition. But ‘watch’ is the Saviour’s injunction. Now watchfulness is something which would inappropriately be pressed upon the ungodly. They must be renewed, ere they can see the kingdom of God. And Jesus dissuades the unconverted Pharisees from looking out and watching for the kingdom. In them it was vain: it would not come to them with watching: they must first have the kingdom within. As therefore these are commanded to watch, they are those who have the kingdom within already. The parties set before our view, as they are alike in outside attitude, so are they alike inwardly, in all but this. The one is a watchful saint, the other an unwatchful one; and that difference in the condition of their souls is exhibited as the first cause of the difference of result.

 

1 Two comings are supposed here. “The flood came.” “Your Lord is coming.” The one then has reference to the destruction of the world, and the escape of Noah. The other to the different lot of Noah and Enoch, or Enoch and Elijah.

 

 

(3.) Only on this supposition do the Parables which follow carry out the text, and the exhortations which follow only thus agree with the scene which serves as their starting point and foundation.

 

 

To conclude: How has the real doctrine of the Presence of Jesus been falsified by Rome’s fancy of the Real Presence in the Lord’s Supper! Its ‘real Presence’ is slain and offered again for the dead and living. The true scripture Presence is Jesus risen and returning, gathering his saints, both the dead and living, to his side.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 90]

CHAPTER 5

 

THE THREE COMPANIONSHIPS

 

 

IT has been observed before, that the word translated “taking”1 occurs in three very remarkable and leading passages of the gospel history. On these occasions the Lord Jesus singled out three of the principal of his apostles, and presented to their eyes some wonderful scenes, two of which were to be kept as secrets. They are all related by the three first Gospels, and therefore constitute essential features of that history in the mind of God. I take leave to call these acts of honourable discrimination on the part of our Lord - “CONPANIONSHIPS

 

1 1st occasion: Mark 5: 37, 40. 2nd occasion: Matt. 17: 1, Luke 9: 28. 3rd occasion: Matt. 26: 37.

 

 

I. The FIRST of these is at the raising of the daughter of Jairus.2 Of the three Mark and Luke are the fullest: but the connexion is more clear to my eye in Matthew than in the others.

 

2 Narrated, Matt 9: 18-26; Mark 5: 22-43; Luke 8: 41-56.

 

 

In the commencement of the ninth of Matthew, Jesus discloses his power to forgive sins, and by way of proof gives the removal of bodily ills as connected with sin.

 

[Page 91]

But Israel is ignorant of these truths, and the learned religionists of Judaea murmur at them and at grace, as the principle on which the Lord can associate with sinners. And as they understand not justification by faith, and the Lord’s association with sinners founded thereon, so neither do they believe in that other closely-connected truth - the resurrection of the dead. These were the truths in which Abraham the father of the faithful believed, and was justified. The Lord would now try the sons of Abraham, to see if they were his children by faith. Their father saw Christ’s day and was glad. But, as we shall see, they recognize not Jesus as the Messiah, they behold not in him God’s centre of faith, propounded alike as God’s Agent in the removal of bodily ailment, the pardon of sin, and the rising from the dead.

 

 

Jesus is addressed by Jairus, a ruler of the synagogue, requesting him to come and heal his daughter, who was at the point of death. His was a little faith. He believed that Jesus could heal, but not, as the centurion, that he could heal at a distance. “Come, and lay thine hands upon her, and she shall live

 

 

On his way thither, the woman with the issue of blood steals a cure, but is detected, and the Saviour’s knowledge is proved, while she is dismissed in peace.

 

 

Have we not here the Jew unclean - through his vain attempt to establish his own righteousness - at length cleansed by faith in the righteousness of the Son of God? To point out the proofs would detain me too long.

 

 

Jesus’ delay on the road had given time for death to seize the daughter of Jairus, and now certain messengers come from the ruler’s house. - “Thy daughter is dead: trouble not the teacher Their unbelief is manifest.

 

[Page 92]

They recognize in Jesus the Teacher only, and consider death as beyond his power. The Saviour therefore sustains by a word of comfort the fainting faith of Jairus, “Fear not, believe only, and she shall be made whole

 

 

But since such unbelief had been manifested in the crowd outside, he suffers them not to enter. “So we see they could not enter in, because of unbelief Only Peter, James,1 and John are taken within.

 

1 Do we not sometimes miss connections with the Old Testament history by translating [… see Greek] Jacob by James, and Judah by Judas? Gen. 37: 26, 27.

 

 

But there were those within the ruler’s house: what was to be done with them? They were weeping and wailing, as those who had no hope. The Lord puts them also to the test. Could they own him as the Son of Man, possessing the power of resurrection in himself? “Why make ye this ado and weep? The maid is not dead but sleepeth.” “And they laughed him to scorn (Matthew, Mark, Luke.) They were not the sons of Abraham then: they believe not in a God that raises the dead. He puts them all out. They shall not see this great sight. Only Peter, James, and John, and the father and mother of the damsel shall be in the Presence of the Prince of Life when he recalls the sleeper. Talitha koumi, “Damsel, I say unto thee, arise She arises! Even they are greatly astonished. They are then commanded to keep the thing a secret. “He charged them straitly (strictly) that no one should know it What means that? Is it not that unbelievers shall not be aware of the resurrection of the just, even after it has taken place?

 

 

The first resurrection of those asleep in Jesus shall have taken place long ere it be known to those without. [Page 93] It is a secret for the saint to enjoy by himself, till he and they appear together in the glory. The dead and living believers shall be in the Lord’s Presence together, and they alone. Those in possession of the house are not only no better, but worse than those outside. Utters not that a prophetic warning that in the last days, the main body of professors, shall give up faith in [‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’ and in a select] resurrection, and furnish out of their own number the scoffers, who jest at the idea of any violation of the laws of nature? These, as useless salt, are cast out.

 

 

After so great an exhibition of power, the twelve are sent forth. The kingdom may indeed be proclaimed as near. The dead are [yet to be] raised!

 

 

In the incidents that occur between this and the next companionship, there is much instruction. But I hasten to the next act, and will only touch on its more immediate introduction.

 

 

II. The circuit of the twelve through Galilee, according to the Saviour’s commission, having brought them into close contact with their countrymen, Jesus would draw from them the thoughts that were entertained concerning himself. (It is observable that he inquires the ideas which “men” held of his person.) The replies of the disciples discovered that men beheld in him no more than one of the more remarkable servants of God that had appeared in former times, or than John the Baptist, the messenger that was to precede the Lord.

 

 

Such being the views of the “multitudes,” Jesus would call forth the higher faith of his true disciples. “Whom did they say that he was?” Peter makes answer, that he was “the Messiah, the Son of the living God The first word of the confession did not advance beyond [Page 94] the proper Jewish expectation: but the concluding part does. That Jesus was “the Son of the living God,” was somewhat for which the Jews in general were unprepared. They did not believe then, and do not now, that the Messiah is to be anything more than a man, though the greatest of men.1 But Peter’s confession acknowledged him as a Divine Person.

 

1 The discovery that the Christians regarded Jesus as more than man, and worshipped him, appears to have been the stimulating motive of zeal which led on Paul against them. And when he is converted, his first discourse to the Jews is to prove that Messiah is a divine Person: Acts 9: 20.

 

 

His acknowledgment Jesus takes up, and commends as the proof of a higher revelation than any discovery which the natural sense of man could have made. Jesus then expounds the consequences of that confession. As Son of God he would be manifested to be so by his power of rising from the dead; and not only so, but he would raise his sleeping saints, so that the gates of Hades should not prevail against them. On himself as the Son of God risen [out] from the dead, and therefore an immovable rock, the church should be built, and to Peter should be given the power, not only of preaching the gospel of the kingdom, but of excluding from millennial glory, in the way of discipline.

 

 

On this lofty discovery, therefore, of the glory of Messiah’s nature, a more exalted body than the Jewish nation was to be erected, and an answerably loftier glory in the [coming] kingdom was to be granted. Hereupon the Lord’s title of Messiah was to be dropped. Israel had refused him in that character.

 

 

And as rejected in that character, his lot thenceforth [Page 95] was to experience suffering and death. “From that time began Jesus to show unto his disciples that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and raised again the third day.” But Peter perceives not the consequences of his confession. The idea of Messiah rejected and slain offends his Jewish expectations: and he rebukes his Master, and is rebuked in turn for his fleshly thoughts and inclinations.

 

 

The lot of the Teacher was to be the lot of the disciple also; not only in the way of rejection, but even to the surrender of life. But such temporary loss would be more than requited when the Son of Man (the title of Messiah being now dropped) should come in his Father’s glory.

 

 

Hereupon follows the promise specially connected with the subject before us, that some of those standing there among the living should not taste of death, till they saw “the Son of Man coming in his kingdom;” or, as Mark and Luke express it, “the kingdom of God coming in power

 

 

No one, it appears, asked the Lord to be partaker of the promise; but grace selects those to whom this discovery should be made. Messiah chooses his companions. “And after six days, JESUS TAKETH Peter and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart Thus the three who see the glory of the transfiguration before death are types of those favoured saints, who, without tasting death, shall ascend to the presence of the Lord. Thus, too, we have a type of the [select] rapture as well as of the [subsequent select] resurrection, and of the union of the saints of the church with those of [Page 96] the Old Testament in the [millennial] glory. Moses and Elias are there; 1 but flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. The disciples were first heavy with sleep, and, on awaking, their speech foolish. Peter was for consolidating things on the mount, when those possessed of the mind of God were speaking of the Lord’s exodus out of Jerusalem, instead of his entrance into it. 2 Peter would make Jesus only equal to these servants, by giving to them a tabernacle as well as to him. Thus he twice unsays, in effect, the confession for which Jesus commended him. First, when the Saviour explained that his superior glory as the Son of God would entail on him degradation and death; and now when he equals the divine Son of God to those former servants, above whom he had before exalted him. That error of his the Father’s voice rectifies. Jesus was the “Son

 

1 These great saints were watchers: for forty days had each been sustained of God, and taken to his peculiar presence-chamber. “Show me thy glory,” was Moses’ petition. Ages pass, and now Moses looks on the face of the Son of God in his glory, and is not consumed.

 

2 At the western side of Jerusalem, Jesus is humiliated: at its eastern he ascends. Thus Jesus’ exodus at Jerusalem is two-fold, (1) death, and (2) ascension.

 

 

Moses and Elias [i.e., Elijah] return in the cloud whence the Father’s voice proceeds. They are sons seated in the chariot of heaven, partakers of the [future] glory. For the present it returns without Jesus, for his humiliation was not yet accomplished; and the three favoured ones are sore afraid, both at the glory and the voice; for as yet they knew not the Father’s voice, and flesh and blood may not hear it unmoved.

 

[Page 97]

The state of things which they find on descending from the mount is also typical. The disciples fail to eject an evil spirit through want of faith and prayer, and the scribes seem to have taken advantage of it to enter into unfriendly discussion with them - types of the mockers of the last days. Jesus descends with a severe rebuke in his mouth against the unbelieving generation, but he comes also with triumphant power over the evil spirit. “I say unto thee, come out of him and enter no more into him where the “I” is emphatic.

 

 

The scene, too, of the glory was to be a secret. “And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of Man be risen [out] from the dead The [select] resurrection of the dead then, and especially of Jesus, is the key to the matter. Only thus will the living and the dead be united in the [coming millennial] kingdom.

 

 

III. I would now first sketch the general scheme of the intermediate events ere the THIRD COMPANIONSHIP.

 

 

After the glory of the mount, comes the second notice of Jesus’ death: 17: 22. He waives his right of exemption in regard to the tribute-money; though possessed of the heavenly glory, he bows to his present apparent place. The right of retaining offences is shown to be unsuited to the heavenly standing of the sons of God, inheritors by grace of the heavenly kingdom: 18. The law of marriage now is not to admit of the fleshly licentiousness of the Jew, but there was a surrender of even marriage, in hope of the better blessings of the kingdom: 19. The self-denial of exchanging present riches for the better wealth of the kingdom to come, would meet its sure reward. Yet, even in the [Page 98] distribution of reward according to works, the sovereignty of God would find room for its display: 20. For the third time, Jesus foretells his betrayal and violent death, 17. There are degrees of glory in the coming kingdom; but they are to be obtained, not by the arts of ambition and intrigue, but by lowly service to the saints, and proportionate suffering for Christ. 20.

 

 

At this point we are conducted again to Jewish ground. During the intermediate period we have scarcely a note of the places where the Lord’s words of wisdom were uttered. But now, Jesus having passed through the eastern region of the Holy Land, or the parts beyond Jordan, he is found passing out of Jericho, and is there addressed by his proper Jewish title, as son of David. Once beyond the city of the curse, (Deut. 30: 1, 10,) Jesus enters the strict land of the promise, prepared to approach the city of the Great King in his royal style, as foretold by the prophets.1 There was a spark of faith in the blind men of Jericho, and he meets it. Jericho was the first city taken by faith. Had Israel followed the ark of the covenant, and the new Joshua, (now both united in his one person,) the curse had been over, the blessing had come. But at the next city which they reach, the old generation mans the walls. Jebusites in spirit hold out against the new David, and refuse to admit him.

 

1 Answerably to this, the Mount of Transfiguration is un-named and unknown; but the mount where Israel’s blessing is in question, is named. “They were come unto the Mount of Olives 21: 21.

 

 

The entry into Jerusalem takes place in public. It was the foretold glory of her king, into which the [Page 99] daughter of Zion should have publicly entered. It was thrown open to all, that the unbelief of Israel as to the person of Messiah and the earthly kingdom might be displayed. That on the Mount of Transfiguration was a secret and unforetold glory, for a body unknown (almost) to the Prophets. As Messiah, Jesus purges the temple a second time. But he is resisted, for the enemy is there. The final wrath must come (Ezek. 24: 13, 14.) As a type of Israel’s hypocritical fruitlessness, the fig tree is cursed. The cavil against the Saviour’s right to do these things, is refuted. The sin of Israel, and the rise of another dispensation during their unbelief, are predicted. The heart of the people, rebellious against earthly authority, and refusing to admit the authority and power of God, is seen in the questions of the Pharisees and Sadducees. The Saviour exhibits the hypocrisy of the rulers, as the great sign of the coming judgments. With all pretended respect for God, they would slay his servants, and their last plea of difference between themselves and their murderous forefathers being proved false, the long-threatened vengeance of “the day of the Lord” would come. Thenceforth, all hope of the blessing for Israel was past away. It could not come until they recognized as Messiah, him whom they now rejected.

 

 

The Lord then foretells to the disciples apart, the sad scenes which were to fill up the time of his absence. Then, immediately after the narrative of Jesus’ rejection by Jerusalem, and of his desertion of Jerusalem and its temple, comes the sad story of Messiah’s humiliation even unto death, wherein present hopes were blighted, but higher ones opened. The betrayer is ready. The [Page 100] last passover is spread. The Lord gives the testimony and token of the new covenant begun, in a better blood than that of bullocks and goats. On the Mount of Olives (the moral opposite of the Transfiguration) is given the prophecy of the flight of the disciples, and of Jesus re-appearance in Gallilee. To that solemn warning, self-confidence replies. The spirit of Israel as manifested at the giving of the old covenant had not departed: Ex. 19: 8; 24: 7.

 

 

Gethsemane is entered. That is the spot of the THIRD COMPANIONSHIP. “And he TOOK WITH HIM Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy37. But it was now a companionship of trial and peril, and the warning is uttered, “Watch with me.” But they obey not. The Saviour having departed from them a little space, returns and finds them asleep. He gently rebukes, and again warns them more explicitly, “Watch and pray not to enter into temptation.” He departs again, and prays. “And he came and found them asleep again, for their eyes were heavy The result of the sleep after the second warning, is typical. “And HE LEFT THEM AND WENT AWAY AGAIN43, 44. Can we not see in this mirror, of what nature the Saviour’s “leaving” is, when he comes and finds the disciples unready for his Presence, after his repeated commands to watch? Having been warned and left, they enter, as the unwatchful and unprayerful, into the hour of darkness and temptation. The betrayer comes, and he exercises the power of Caesar, with his consent.1 The [Page 101] disciples first resist in the spirit, and with the weapons, of the world, and then take to flight. Again, we have a glimpse of that time when resistance by the sword is not only hopeless, but forbidden: Rev. 13: 10; 14: 12. The widow’s cry is the only weapon allowed in that hour of darkness.

 

1 This gives us a hint who the False Prophet is to be: Rev. 13: 11, 12; of which I may say more on another occasion, the Lord willing.

 

 

Whence I gather, that the parable of the Householder expresses the result of the Saviour’s secret coming to the unwatchful and unprayerful. They are left on earth - when the watchful are rapt on high - left, to pass through the hour of “the falling away,” and the sore time of temptation. But the scene in the garden was not a perfect specimen of that day, for none were found watchful, and none therefore escaped the sifting time permitted to Satan. But then, some will be taken on high, and those left behind will be almost immediately in the very whirlpool of that day of trouble.

 

 

The companionship in Gethsemane comes after that on the Mount of Transfiguration; for the watchful enter the [heavenly] glory, and thus escape the tribulation: Rev. 3: 10.

 

 

How dark that day will be, we may read in the typical samples of it before us. Satan’s whole power is put forth. Satan has obtained permission to sift,1 and the world’s power seconds him. With a hypocritical kiss, Judas, moved by avarice [greed for money], betrays.2 Jesus is numbered with the robbers. False witnesses rise up against him. An unjust sentence goes forth from him who should be holy to the Lord. But, while he rends his garment, (a [Page 102] thing forbidden to the High Priest,) the Lord rends away the priesthood from him, (Matt. 26: 65; 1 Sam. 15: 27,) and gives it to a neighbour of his better than himself. The very servants then proceed to treat the Lord with scorn. The disciples flee; Peter denies, and though the predicted signs occur, he notices them not, till Jesus’ look recalls him to repentance. Judas despairs, and hangs himself. The prophecies are fulfilled, which foretell Israel’s sale of Messiah. Pilate enacts over again the injustice of Caiaphas, and the Gentile soldiers, with another form of mockery, ridicule the Saviour’s kingly character. It was man’s hour to commit injustice unchecked; and the power of darkness, wherein Satan deceived and intoxicated Jew and Gentile alike. The mercy of God however kept back wrath. There were darkness and earthquake indeed; but unlike the darkness and the earthquakes foretold in Revelation, they are not accompanied with the pains of the misdoers, nor the destruction of guilty cities and their inhabitants. (Rev. 16: 10, 11, 18, 19; 11: 13.)

 

1 Not simply “desired to have you[the Greek word …] means “has begged till he has obtained

 

2 Judas is but the Judah of the Old Testament, and thus appears to be typical of the two tribes.

 

 

But after this apparent victory on the part of man and Satan, God’s triumph begins.

 

 

On the third morning, the sentence of death against Jesus is repealed by God in [His] resurrection: and the vain attempt of man to hinder, is scattered by a single angel. There is much stir and inquiry about the opened and empty tomb. But both the world and the disciples join to refuse, as an idle tale, the true explanation.

 

 

i. There are then two meetings with Jesus risen. First, the watchful women who went early to the sepulchre, (I am now following Matthew’s account, 28: 9,) hold him by the feet and worship him. This was an [Page 103] unexpected and unforetold meeting. Then, unbelief on the part of the Jewish ecclesiastics and Roman governor, puts forth its foolish and wicked theory of the resurrection, and is believed. Finally there is a foretold second meeting, with Jesus at “the mountain 1 which Jesus had appointed them.” This was probably the spot where five hundred brethren at once saw Jesus. The elect are safely gathered at last to THE PRESENCE, and worship. With instructions issued thence, the gospel closes.2

 

1 To opos. Was it not that of the Transfiguration?

 

2 “They worshipped him, but some doubted The doubt refers I believe to the lawfulness of worshipping Jesus. This was not on the part of the twelve, but of the others.

 

 

Similarly when Lazarus is raised, there are two meetings with Jesus. First Martha approaches, and then Mary and those who had abode with her in the house; Jesus being all the while, as we are told, in the same place: John 11.

 

 

In spite of Satan’s power and man’s devices, the disciples - the day of temptation over - meet in the Saviour’s Presence. How appropriate a close of the gospels! “So shall we be ever with the Lord The Lord hasten it!

 

 

The three companionships then discover to us Jesus taking his people to see his glory and his sufferings. The Presence after the resurrection offers to us Jesus’ glory as the risen. In the chamber of Jairus we see the “power” of Jesus; on the Mount of Transfiguration we have the “Presence.” Peter puts the two together. “We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known to you the power and Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ2 Pet. 1: 16. The first was his power as Messiah: the second his greater glory as the [Page 104] Son of Man but his Presence after the resurrection discovered him as the Son of God: Rom. 1: 4. The two companionships of glory are in Galilee: the sad one beside Jerusalem: the appointed meeting with Jesus after the resurrection was again in Galilee: for thus had the prophet foretold, that it should be the scene of great light from the midst of the shadow of death.

 

 

The Saviour on the Mount of Transfiguration was rather in company with Moses and Elias, than with the three apostles. But after the resurrection he has the fullest intercourse with them. He is alone with them, while the world believes not. In Jairus’ chamber another is raised: in the upper room, Jesus’ risen self is there. He ascends the mount naturally; then glory for an hour bursts forth from him. He enters the upper room supernaturally, and though no brightness flashes from him, yet this his prerogative he thenceforth always exerts, and ends his earthly companionship by the power of ascension. The glory of transfiguration is on the mount by night, seen by few: the glory at the entry into Jerusalem comes from the east, by day, at the descent of the mount. We have first the raising from the dead in secret: then the rapture in secret also; but then we behold the assembly into which resurrection and the rapture introduce. There are two glories on the mount: one within the cloud, one without it. There are also two other positions. The elect saints on the hill-top; the repentant and believing ones at the foot. In the raising of Jairus’ daughter, many are hindered and shut out. In the glory on the mount, some are only left behind. The first case supposed entire unfitness; the second only unfitness of degree.

 

[Page 105]

The same parties are found at the transfiguration, and amidst the garden of Gethsemane, and asleep in both eases. Against the first sleep no word of warning is uttered previously, and no word of rebuke subsequently. But, on the second occasion, sleep is a subject of caution, and the disciples are blamed for indulging it. Thus we have both the kinds of sleep which occur in the Lord’s prophecy on Olivet. The resurrection of the daughter of Jairus occurs before the transfiguration and the entry of the disciples upon that scene of glory, because “the dead in Christ shall first rise, then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up Lastly, we have the day of temptation. Had the glory on the mount continued, the three had been above that scene of trial. Thus the resurrection of the just, the rapture to the Presence, and the day of temptation to those left on earth, all occur during the Saviour’s life, in the order they will occupy in the future.

 

 

A distinct and succinct account of some of the diversities with which the four Evangelists relate the post-resurrection Presence, may lead others to examine the question further. i. I have spoken before of Matthew’s narrative. ii. Mark exhibits the witness of angels to the resurrection, the testimonies of Mary, and of the two from Emmaus. Yet in spite of all, they disbelieve. Then comes Jesus, and rebukes these his disciples for their unbelief. He gives them the promise of miracles as the signs of the coming [millennial] age of glory. Is it any marvel, then, if these gifts come into question again at Jesus’ returned Presence? Rebuke of disciples is once, and again apart of the business of the Presence. Brethren, watch!

 

 

iii. Luke narrates the angels’ recalling a prophecy of [Page 106] Jesus to the memories of the women; and the Lord’s intercourse with the two going to Emmaus, in which he reproves them for believing a part only of the Old Testament prophecy. Thus the especial usefulness of prophecy, both of the Old and New Covenants, is commended to our notice. This topic Peter touches. The two are rebuked as fools. Yet they are disciples. Behold then a proof that even [regenerate] believers may be fools, if they receive not the whole of God’s testimony. Then the five foolish virgins may still be [regenerate] believers. As of old the prophets seemed to contradict themselves, affirming both the humiliation and exaltation of Messiah; so now the secret and the open coming of the Lord - the coming with signs, and without - appear contradictory testimonies. But faith receives both.

 

 

The two disciples press him to stay. He goes in and sups with them, according to the promise to the church at Laodicea. They believe and recognize him. But they are both rebuked as unbelieving, and are left. The feast, begun at Emmaus, is ended at Jerusalem. The sudden disappearing from the two confirms our idea as to the nature of the mysterious sign in the previous parable.

 

 

iv. John tells us of the unbeliever absent when the Saviour first appeared, but of his subsequent conviction, and of his partaking the joy of the Presence. Peter’s denials are remembered and gently reproved. The Lord then exhibits the two great classes in reference to his return - the sleepers, and those tarrying till then. But he will not say in which class any shall be found.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 107]

CHAPTER 5

 

THE HOUSEHOLDER AND THIEF

 

B. 3.

 

 

“But that ye know, that if the master of the house had known at what watch the thief is coming, he would have watched and would not have suffered his house to be broken through. Wherefore do you too be ready; for in the hour that ye think not, the Son of Man is coming

 

 

THE taking and the leaving is the sign of the Presence. Now a sign was something miraculous. If this be the rapture, this issue is in accordance with the expectation and the desire of the parties asking it. It is suitable, that the sign of a supernatural event or period like the Presence, should have a supernatural sign as its proof. The more removed from the common order of things the better is the sign, because less liable to be mistaken.

 

 

As we have come to the conclusion that both the taken and the left are believers of the church, we see how appropriately the rapture of the watchful believer becomes the door into those parables which apply to the church. Jesus having presented this GREAT FACT, now proceeds to expatiate on its significance. Though the sign of the Presence be given to the Jew, yet most appropriately are the scenes, both outside of this door and within it, set before the apostles. Though at the time the Saviour addressed them, they believed neither the death nor [Page 108] resurrection of their Lord, (on which great doctrines the Church of Christ is founded,) they were yet, in a brief space of time to receive these fundamental truths, and to pass from their standing as Jews waiting on Messiah in the flesh, to that of Christians waiting for the Son of God from heaven.

 

 

The application of this parable and of the three which immediately follow it, the Steward, Virgins, and Talents, is directly to the church. I call them, as has been before noted, ‘the Presence parables The first of them is manifestly in closest connexion with the taking and leaving.

 

 

“Two women shall be grinding at the mill; one is taken, and one is left. Watch, therefore, for ye know not in what kind of season (hour) your Lord is coming As if the Saviour had said - ‘The mysterious sign I have exhibited to your notice has especial reference to those who own me as their Lord. Do you ask, why this difference of treatment in two cases so nearly resembling each other? I answer, the difference hinges on the different spiritual state of the two. The watchful one is caught up to me and my glory; the unwatchful is left to earth at its highest tide of sins and sorrows, temptations and judgments. As then you would not lose the first entrance into the glory, as you would escape the surges of that day of peril, watch

 

 

This is its evident and intelligible connexion with the preceding mysterious disappearance. We have then another proof that the taking is the rapture of the [watchful and obedient (Psa. 51: 11. Cf. Acts 5: 32, R.V.)] saint.

 

 

But another point is added; the suddenness and unexpectedness of the event. At what season it shall be, whether of the day, month, or year, you are ignorant. Be always watchful, therefore: let the uncertainty keep [Page 109] you ever vigilant. “Watch, therefore, for ye know not when the master of the house is coming: at even, or at midnight, or at the cock-crowing, or in the morning: lest coming suddenly, he find you sleeping:” Mark 13: 35, 36.

 

 

The Lord is arguing upon the well understood and admitted principles of human nature. Though ignorant of the time of your Lord’s return, yet that you acknowledge, 1 that in case intelligence were brought to a householder that on a certain night, a thief, (not many thieves, for he might dread them and call in aid,) would attempt to break into his house; his immediate question would be - ‘At what hour may I expect him?’ But suppose the reply to be: ‘At what hour he will come I cannot tell; but it will be sometime in the midnight watch The Lord Jesus supposes, that in such a case, a man through the desire of saving his property, would be content to spend the three hours of that watch on the alert, though he might find it too long to attempt to sit up all night. By such a measure of self-denial, he would escape loss. The thief, finding the master stirring, either would not make the attempt to enter, or would be baffled at finding his coming expected.

 

1 [The Greek words …] Wrongly translated in the imperative, ‘But know this.’ Its force is thereby lost. Nor is the word, …but …

 

 

But I proceed to discuss the parable more methodically, by considering its material ground-work in four points of view.

 

 

1. What is the house?

 

 

2. Who is the householder?

 

 

3. Who is the thief?

 

 

4. What is the theft?

 

[Page 110]

1. The house here, is I believe the faith of the Christian. It does not describe in this place the collective oneness of the church, which is sometimes represented as a house: (Mark 13.; Heb. 3: 6.) It is taken in an individual sense, as at the close of the sermon on the mount; where Jesus compares two disciples to two builders of a house. The faith of each is, spiritually considered, the house in which he dwells. His adding to the truths already known by him is his edifying in the faith. Hence the house of some is more spacious and orderly than that of others. But every [regenerate] believer is a householder. Only there is this difference between the present case and that of the sermon on the mount, that there the question is of the building’s fall or stedfastness here the damage is only that of a breach in the wall or door, sufficient for the thief’s entrance.

 

 

2. But if the house be faith, the householder can be none other than the child of faith, who dwells beneath its shelter, whose promises are the staff of his life, and whose hope constitutes his treasure within. Then both the householders implied in the parable are believers. Their difference of destiny springs from difference of watchfulness: in other points they stand on the same footing. “The two” are before us still; the Lord is leading us to contemplate the principles, involved. The reason assigned for watchfulness is the Master’s coming. The taking and the leaving, are the results of that, coming to the watchful and unwatchful respectively. The time is uncertain. This appears in the position occupied by “the two.” They are caught amidst their ordinary occupations. Would this be the case had notice beforehand been given?

 

[Page 111]

3. But who is the thief? Evidently the Lord Jesus. The comer is the Lord. “Ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.” “In such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man is coming.” “Had he known in what watch the thief is coming, he would have watched It is the Presence of Jesus that is in question. The taking is by him and to him. More than once he testified to his thief-like approach. “If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief Rev. 3: 3. “Behold, I come as a thief, Blessed is he that watcheth and keep­eth his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shameRev. 16: 15. Is now the thief the Lord Jesus? Then the taking is his proper act in that capacity; an act of favour and companionship. As seen from  earth, Jesus is the thief, stealing away whom he will. As seen from on high, he is Messiah calling to him his chief and choice companions for the [promised inheritance (Ps. 2: 8) and manifested] glory.

 

 

(1.) His Presence is thief-like from its concealment. He is near to the spot whence he steals, but he does not leave his thicket of ambush. He is hidden, both when his hand is put forth to take, and when it is withdrawn from earth.

 

 

(2.) It is thief-like in its intent. Jesus means secretly to remove from earth the jewels of heaven. And, as Bacon says, ‘there is no secrecy like celerity: like the motion of a bullet in the air, which speeds so fast that it outruns the eye

 

 

(3.) It is so in its result - ‘But a few minutes ago, a purse of gold was lying on yonder table; now it is gone!’ How it was borne away, or who did it, may be a mystery, but that some hand was laid on it I am confident. That the purse was, and is not, is proof sufficient. So [Page 112] in the case given above. yonder are two men at work! Now, (or my senses deceive me,) there is but one! O then some wondrous thief has been at work! The theft is the proof of the thief.

 

 

4 It is thief-like in the intelligent estimation of the two. If before an adept thief were set two candlesticks of like pattern, but the one plated and the other silver, I should infer, if he left one, when he might have taken both, that the one taken was the silver one. The leaving would then be the proof of the comparative disregard of the article left. This has been already noticed, but it has its place here also.

 

 

5. The act is thief-like also in the loss inflicted by his visit. One of the householders is robbed. His house is broken into, himself is left to mourn. In the disappearance of the one, and the damage to the other, the action resembles that of a thief.

 

 

Noiselessness, invisibility, rapidity, amplitude of booty taken, constitute together the boast of the thief. All these are in perfection exhibited here.

 

 

But there axe peculiarities about this thief. (1.) Other thieves steal what is not theirs, this thief takes his own. (2.) Other thieves steal goods, this thief steals men, yet is blameless. (3.) Other thieves come to kill and destroy; but this one steals that the stolen one may have life more abundantly. (4.) Human thieves come without notice of their intention given. Jesus first gives the householder notice of his design. (5.) Human thieves purloin earthly things on earth, this thief steals heavenly things from earth to set them in heaven. (6.) The human thief prefers the night, the heavenly one steals in broad noon. (7.) Thieves in general avoid the [Page 113] presence of witnesses as fatal to their design; the thief from heaven bears away his prey before witnesses, and is not seen. (8.) For this thief is invisible, and makes his booty invisible too. No sooner is his hand laid on it, than it is out of sight! (9.) Nor is the abode to which he takes his captive a robber’s den, but the Presence of [heavenly] glory and of God! May we be so stolen from earth! To the robbed one something is not. His position then is described by that word which (as regards the Presence) is negative. He “is left

 

 

But if watchful, would not both parties be left? In human similar circumstances, this would be the case. The thieves of earth carry of goods, not their masters. But here the theft is a person, the thief removes the one he values.

 

 

4. But what is the theft, or thing stolen? (1.) The watchful saint. It is felt as a theft by the one left behind. The one taken forgets, in the Presence of his Lord and the glory, earth and its cares. The one left is the robbed. He has lost his fellow and his friend. He cannot but feel his loss. Did not Elisha mourn when Elijah was taken? “My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof!” But the left one here feels his loss more deeply, because his own negligence and fault are the cause of the separation. His friend is now in [God’s heavenly] glory. But for his sinful cleaving to earth, he too now might have been there. On high fall unbroken the sunshine and warmth of summer, while around his head the clouds gather, the bleak winds whistle, the snows of winter are falling. (2.) He has lost too the glory of being set at the first rapture before the Son of Man. This is the moral robbery; [Page 114] while we may call the loss of his friend the material robbery. His hope* of escaping the Tribulation and Hour of temptation is cut off.

 

[* Beware of those who give the Lord’s redeemed people a false ‘hope’ - by neglecting His warnings and conditional truths!]

 

 

“Be ye also ready.” Readiness is always readiness to be taken, not to be left. The unready are left behind, as the foolish virgins, and the unwatchful steward.*

 

[* Keep in mind: “It is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful” (1 Cor. 4: 2, R.V.).]

 

 

The command to watch itself supposes the truth of our interpretation. For watchfulness is no security against a robber, or an army, or the wrath of God. To have seen the first drop of the rain of the flood, or the first flake of brimstone descend on Sodom, would have been no security against the destruction in each case. Watching is security against secret abstraction, not against the forceful displays of God’s wrath, as seen in the armies besieging Jerusalem. The issue to the unwatchful is put in the shape of damage to the house. Now if the point in question were the master’s captivity or death, the state of the house would signify little.

 

 

The parable then, it appears, is so constructed as especially to apply to the case of the one left behind. Jesus supposes before him a house broken into by a thief at night, and valuable goods carried off. Before us is the master, who as soon as he rises in the morning discovers his loss. He traces the way by which the thief entered, he notes sorrowfully his valuables no longer in their places. But the thief is gone! We pity the poor man. It was no fault of his that thus he suffered. But suppose now, that the day before the robbery, notice was given him of the thief’s design. Suppose further, that in spite of this intelligence he took no precaution, but went to bed as usual, and slept as soundly and as long. [Page 115] Then our pity would cease. “It was his own fault that he was thus robbed

 

 

The application of the parable is now easy. ‘Since such a measure of warning as I have supposed would be sufficient in things of this world to keep a householder in a state of vigilance during the time when his earthly interests were threatened, so the same measure of intelligence afforded to you concerning my secret coming entitles me to require of you a like vigilance. As the householder would receive, not pity, but blame, who, under the circumstances in question should neglect to watch, so with yourselves. I have described to you the watch, though I cannot define at what hour of it I may come. Be you then as ready as the warned householder, for the same motives apply to you. You know that I shall come as the thief; you are taught too that my secret coming will be with loss to you, if you are unwatchful and unready. You have the same partial knowledge, the same partial ignorance with the householder. The thief, you know, is coming. Be watchful! The thief is coming, you know not when. You must supply then, by watchfulness, the deficiency in the intelligence granted. The special time is purposely withheld from you, that you may be kept always on your watch-tower

 

 

‘But (the Lord Jesus goes on to imply,) though have I given this warning, and disclosed the loss to be endured by the unwatchful, half of my church will be asleep, and will incur the damage foretold. I ask of believers, no more than prudence would both demand and receive from a worldly man; yet earthly hopes and fears keep awake the householder of the world, but heavenly hopes and [Page 116] fears will not suffice, with many of the saints, to keep them spiritually awake!’ Yet will all such be inexcusable to every eye.

 

 

Thus the [select] rapture has two aspects. (1.) To the Jew it is the sign of the Presence. (2.) To the unwatchful saint it is the sign of the Hour of Temptation, and a theft inflicted on him in consequence of his spiritual slumber. 1

 

1 In Mark 13 the porter is commanded to watch in a house not his own. The Householder is thrown upon watching in his own house by a sense of his own interest. In the one case the danger is lest the Master find him asleep. In the other, the thief departs, the only trace being the loss sustained.

 

 

The sleep in this parable is moral sleep, and hence loss or reward turns upon it. But even spiritual slumber has two faces. Here the sleep is imprudent, as interfering with a man’s own interests. At the close of the prophecy in Mark 13 the sleep is sinful, as being contrary to the master’s command, and the servant’s duty. Thus it stands distinguished from the virgins’ sleep, which is (1) alike participated by all, (2) was not the subject of any command, and (3) inflicts no loss on any.

 

 

In the literal part, the householder is on the housetop by day. He is not to seek to save his goods within the house but, leaving them, to flee before the advancing foe for his life. In the parable, it is night, and the Master within the house is to seek to save his house and his goods, by remaining within, from the secret coming of the thief.

 

 

In the literal, both the house and the field appear, but the parties in them are individuals only and the warning is to earnest effort; the prohibition, dissuades [Page 117] them from doing that which naturally they would be disposed to do. To enter the house or carry off the articles of dress of which they were disencumbered while working would be the natural course. In the parable there is no room for effort; if the preparation have not been previously made, the case is hopeless; instantly, “in the twinkling of an eye,” the separation is effected, and the hope gone.

 

 

To whom is the sign given? To the Church, or to the Jew? Not to the Jew; for the Lord’s coming to the Jew is not secret. For them to expect Messiah’s Secret Presence is the very basis on which the false Christs rest their lever of deceit. To the Jew Jesus preaches only the manifestation of his Presence, the lightning flash which suddenly illuminates the whole heaven and enchains every eye. To expect him thus is their safeguard against the delusions of the Time of Great Tribulation.

 

 

To know the rapture as the sign of the Presence, one must be left on earth. The Presence itself is intended for the Church, and not therefore the mere token that it is already begun. And therefore the rapture, which introduces to the Presence, is the thing for the Church. Signs are given throughout the first part to the Jew; they are the steps which mount up to the visible coming of the Lord. But in the parable which now engages us there is the absence of signs, and these lead to the secret Presence. Watchfulness without signs is the attitude of the church. There are then two different parties, one to whom a series of signals is proposed, which end in the revelation of Jesus in the clouds of heaven to the inhabitants of earth. To the other party [Page 118] signs are not given, but they are taken to the secret audience-chamber of the Lord on high.

 

 

The Householder and the parables which follow are given that the church, forewarned of her position, may not be in the position of those to whom the Presence is known only by their being left behind.

 

 

To the Church the Presence is the “coming” of the Lord. But it is not so to the Jew. For the Lord’s descent is first into the air, there the church meets him; there the Presence-court is held. But he has to move from the air to the earth ere he is seen coming to the Jew. Thus this parable is the true point of separation between Israel and the Church. The rapture is the meeting point, its signal being for the Jew; its internal significance for the Church of Christ. To be left up to the Presence is mercy, to be left during it, is to their loss.

 

 

This explains why the [first and selective] rapture is so mixed up with Jewish circumstances, as we find it here and in Luke 17. and 21. The Church not being then formed, it appears only as the subject of the sign given to Israel; or the rapture enters the scene as an event of the End of the Age, or a sign of the coining [millennial] kingdom of God, and of the Presence [and righteous rule] of the Son of Man.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 119]

CHAPTER 6

 

THE STEWARD

B. 4.

 

 

“Who then is the faithful and prudent servant whom his lord appointed over his household, to give them food in season? Blessed shall be that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, that he will appoint him over all his goods

 

 

“But if that evil (vicious) servant say in his heart, ‘My lord delayeth to come and shall begin to beat his fellow-servants, but 1 shall eat and drink with the drunken, the lord of that servant shall arrive 2 in a day in which he looks not for him, and in an hour which he recognizes not, and shall cut him in two, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

 

[1 & see Greek

 

2 [See Greek …] A different, and more definite sense than […]

 

 

OF the connexion of this with the foregoing I do not feel certain. Yet there must be some. “Who then is the faithful and prudent servantHis character is twofold, suited to his station - faithfulness stands first, as the prime quality. “It is required in stewards that a man be found faithful But as entrusted with so high a post, sustaining his master’s place in some degree, till his return, he is possessed of intelligence also.

 

 

His post of honour is assigned him by Christ himself.

 

 

“His lord set him over his household.” This then is [Page 120] no human appointment, no ecclesiastical ordination. It supposes the person a [regenerate] believer; for how can there be faithfulness without faith?

 

 

I gather, too, from this passage, that apostles will be found at the close, as they were at the beginning. For these were especially appointed of the Lord, with [divine] power to appoint others subordinately under themselves. Without immediate communication with the Lord, they could not be apostles. 1 Cor. 9: 1. And apostles are one of the members of the body appointed to gather and cherish it till it should attain its perfect measure: Eph. 4. Moreover, this parable was pointedly addressed to the twelve on a former occasion. The Lord Jesus having bid his disciples be like servants waiting for an absent master, who would return at some unknown time, Peter inquired, if the parable applied to the disciples in general, or to the twelve apostles in particular? Whereupon Jesus replied - “Who then is the faithful and wise steward whom his lord shall appoint over his household to give them their portion of meat in due season?”: (Luke 12: 41, 42.) That is, the parable I first spoke applies to you only as included among the servants generally, but if you wish for one specially picturing your position - “Who then is the steward?” Only the tense of the verb is altered. In Luke we have, “whom his lord shall appoint In Matthew, “whom his lord appointed

 

 

From the parable then I infer, that, at the close, apostles will be raised again, appointed by Jesus with the powers of old, not indeed to restore the broken dispensation, but to rally and fit the disciples for the harvest.

 

 

As Jesus supposes in the Jewish part of the prophecy the [Jews] temple to be standing at the close, and therefore we [Page 121] must believe it will be rebuilt: so he implies also, that apostles will be on earth at the time of his advent, and therefore that they will be restored.

 

 

The Steward is appointed to rule the church, and to feed it with the truths specially suited to the circumstances of the time. His reward is made to turn on his actual position at the Lord’s descent. His attitude then will be the guarantee that it was so constantly. The position contemplated by the parables is the spiritual one, not the physical, the grinding flour, or working in the field; as in the sign of the Presence. He is dealing now with another class, to whom spiritual truths directly belong. If found faithful, his reward will be further extension of his authority. From being ruler of his lord’s servants, he will become ruler of all his possessions.

 

 

But there is a darker side to the picture. This confidential servant thus appointed to so high a post might be found unfaithful. Of deep import is it to observe that his wanderings from the right path are traced to his Secret misgivings as to his lord’s return - his putting it off at least to an indefinite period. He does not go so far as to assert his unbelief openly, but it is the hidden worm of unbelief eating the bud of his former devotion to his master and his work. The consequence of the admission of this traitorous thought into his heart is a change of conduct. He begins to use the power, which was given him to feed his fellow-servants, to beat them. He once was separate from an evil world: he now begins to mingle with the revelries of the worldly. Thus his attitude both towards the world and the church is changed. This is more forcibly stated in the original [Page 122] than in our translation. “He shall begin to beat his fellow-servants, but shall eat and drink with the drunken the disciples he treats as malefactors, the worldly as his guests.

 

 

On such a servant the Lord will come unexpectedly, and appoint him a severe recompense. He will come in a day which, like the ungodly world, he does not expect. Is not that “the Day of the Lord?” He will arrive in an hour which he does not recognize.

 

 

This, I believe, is the hour of the saint’s rapture. The scoffers of that day single out the doctrine of the Lord’s Presence for the shafts of their ridicule. “What is become of the promised Presence Beneath that unbelief his own faith totters; he ceases to recognize the doctrine: perhaps his persecution of the saints is for the maintenance of this very belief.

 

 

The difference between him and the watchful saint is sharply defined. The hour he ‘recognizes not.’ He does not admit it into his creed. It does not therefore influence his life. Neither does the world. “They recognized not till the flood came, and took them all away.” But the just recognizes that hour, even although he knows not its period; and therefore it is said of the just, even “Ye know not at what hour your Lord is coming.” “In an hour when ye are not thinking of it ([… Greek]) your Lord is coming

 

[Page 123]

Being found in a posture so flagrantly at variance with the trust bestowed on him, his life is violently taken away. He is cut in sunder. As he smote the saints, he is himself smitten. His divided heart is visited with a severed body. His feasts with the drunkard are now requited by a place with them in their eternal [aionios]  torments. As he joined in their merriment, he partakes of their weeping and gnashing of teeth.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 124]

CHAPTER 6

 

THE TEN VIRGINS

 

B 5

 

 

1. THE GOING FORTH

 

 

“Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, who took their torches, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

 

 

2. TWO PARTIES OF THEM

 

 

But five of them were prudent, and five foolish. They who were foolish took their torches [lamps], and took not oil with themselves; but the prudent took oil in their vessels with their torches.

 

 

3. THEIR HISTORY AND POSITION

 

 

Now while the bridegroom tarried, all became drowsy and were asleep. But at midnight a cry arose - ‘Behold the bridegroom is coming, go ye out to meet him Then all those virgins arose and trimmed their torches.

 

 

4. THE LACK OF THE FOOLISH DISCOVERED

 

 

Now the foolish said unto the prudent, give us some of your oil, for our torches are going out, (margin.) But the prudent answered, saying - (Not so,) lest there be not enough for us and you; go rather to them that sell and buy for yourselves.

 

 

5. THE SEPARATION

 

 

Now while they were going off to buy, the bridegroom came, and the ready ones went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was shut.

 

 

6. THE REQUEST OF THE FOOLISH

 

 

But afterward came also the remaining virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I do not know you.

 

[Page 125]

 

 

7. THE LESSON

 

 

Watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour. [wherein the Son of Man is coming.”] 1

 

1 The words between brackets are omitted by several critical editions.

 

 

To the views of this parable expressed in my former work, I still adhere with increasing assurance. Conviction has deepened with increasing light, with the perception that no new theory has been brought forward which can explain the text, and from the power to answer the objections brought against the former interpretation.

 

 

Let me then just bring under review the general state of the case, before proceeding to a more minute reconsideration of the text.

 

 

One point is agreed on by all the interpreters of the parable, that difference of destiny will be finally adjudged according to difference of character. But the usual interpretation assumes, that the answer given to the foolish virgins is the final sentence proper to the lost. Thence it argues back to their character, and infers that they are hypocrites. It is my aim, on the contrary, to prove first, from the parable itself, that they are [regenerate] believers, as it regards character; and, therefore, that the words of the bridegroom do not imply the final sentence on the [eternally] lost. To this I am entitled by virtue of the preceding proof. The ordinary interpretation is entitled to neither, for it proves not its first assumption. But I am able to show besides, from analogy, that the destiny supposed is not final, and does not imply exclusion from the [eternal] kingdom.

 

[Page 126]

The ordinary theory then supposes the foolish virgins to be hypocrites. “They had not a vital principle of religion - a spiritual life imparted by the Holy Spirit; a germ of grace budding into fruitfulness and ripening into glory

 

 

This is one of the two pillars on which the whole house is built. That ruined, the temple falls. Now against such an assumption the whole structure of the parable stands in opposition. I will briefly suggest a series of proofs which arise from a consideration of it.

 

 

1. They are virgins, not merely pretenders to virginity. The right to the name supposes the possession of the reality. It is not THEY who call themselves so: it is the Lord who does. Their virginity is never questioned, even when their request for entrance is denied.

 

 

2. They have lighted torches [oil-lamps]:1 and the lit torch is a profession supported by good works, which give light to [Page 127] all around. The torch unlit may be profession only: the lighted torch is profession and reality.

 

1 “LAMPS.” - Calmet. Matt. 25 - “The lamps of Gideon’s soldiers, Judg. 7: 16, and those of the foolish and wise virgins, Matt. 25: 1, 2, &c., were of another sort. They were a kind of torches made of iron or earthenware, wrapped about with old linen, moistened from time to time with oil. M. Bernier says, (Letter to M. de Merville, p. 34) that in India they still use lamps of this kind. They are, he says, of iron, let into sticks, the ends whereof are wound about with old rags, which from time to time are moistened with oil out of a vessel of brass or tin with a long neck, which he who carries the lamp carries also in his hand. Gallonius (De cruciat Martyr, cap. vi,) says that some of these ancient lamps are found in the ruins of Rome; made of iron or potters’ earth, large, with orifices on the top about four inches wide, or something more, ending in a point below, to be inserted into a piece of wood as a handle. Into these vessels they put oil or other combustible matter to maintain the light

 

 

3. They go forth with desire to meet Jesus. Then they take that position of separation from an evil world, and of waiting for the Saviour, which none but a truly converted heart can take. And instead of being overwhelmed with dread at the cry - ‘The bridegroom is coming! go ye forth to meet him they shrink not from the summons, but prepare to obey it.

 

 

4. Their torches burn some hours, and so have the oil of grace nor are they ever quenched so far as we read.1 There are persons able to sell even then, and they are able to buy.

 

1 “Our lamps are gone out” is a mistranslation. The margin gives the true.

 

 

5. They are accounted worthy to attain the first resurrection, the resurrection from among the dead,* and are therefore the children of God.

 

[* Note: Robert Govett, surprisingly, did not believe in a select resurrection ‘from among the dead’! He believed God’s Judgment of a regenerate believer’s works, will take place after resurrection in heaven; and if not ‘accounted worthy’ he / she will return into ‘Sheol’/ ‘Hades’ - the place of all the dead before ‘the first resurrection’!

 

See John 3: 13; 14: 2, 3; Acts 2: 34, ff. 2 Tim. 2: 18f.; Rev. 6: 9-11. Cf. Heb. 9: 27: Acts 7: 4-5, R.V. with Num. 14: 11, 12, 20-23; 16: 30-35; 1 Cor. 10: 1-10; Heb. 10: 35b, R.V. etc. Also Mr. G. H. Lang’s “First Fruits and Harvest.”]

 

 

6. They sleep with the wise, with the wise they awake. Now, if the sleep be spiritual sloth, then those only can fall into it who are possessed of spiritual life. And if they rouse themselves at last from even spiritual sloth, they must then be not merely nominal, but hearty, zealous Christians. The wise and foolish together rise, but are not rapt together. The question then as it regards them lies beyond the resurrection, in which all, both foolish and wise, partake; and centres in the rapture, that is, in the Presence of the Lord Jesus. The manifestation of wisdom or folly is reserved for the Presence. Is that true of any but saints?

 

 

7. They were quite ready to enter in, had the bridegroom come early instead of late; that is, before the [Page 123] sleep. Now, as the ungodly never are ready, come Jesus when he may, these cannot be ungodly.

 

 

8. They have, even at last, virginity, the deep internal qualification for the wedding-supper: they are deficient only in the circumstantial and secondary fitness - the want of the second supply of oil. But every - [unregenerate and nominal Christian] - unbeliever is inwardly unfit as well as outwardly unready.

 

 

These considerations drawn from the parable itself prove to my mind beyond a question, that the virgins, though some were foolish, were yet all of them pure in God’s sight.

 

 

Compare with the parable before us that of the Wedding Garment. In that, (it is acknowledged by both,) the false professor, or essentially unfit person, is exhibited. He comes in his own righteousness, having refused, or being ignorant of, the righteousness provided for him by God. Now mark the differences. (Matt. 22.) That parable was spoken to both the disciples and the multitude: This to the disciples alone. The ill-clothed guest is cast out by the king, ere the king’s son has come into the feast. He is bound hand and foot, and cast into outer darkness amidst weeping and of teeth. He is guilty against warning, and speechless. These have no warning and have a plea both before their fellows and before the bridegroom. The king looks upon the ill-clothed one as a man, not as a servant, and addresses him by the lowest title he could use; “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment; and he saith unto him, “Comrade,1 how [Page 129] camest thou in hither?” But the virgins are virgins to the close, and even the rejected one of the Talents is acknowledged as a [regenerate] servant. The intruder does not attempt to remedy his misconduct and disrespect to the king, even when it is pointed out. The foolish, though guilty of no crime against the bridegroom, but simply of folly against their own interests, seek to remedy their error at once. Hence, also, the infliction of pain which is exhibited in ‘The Wedding Garment’ comes from one possessed of the supreme authority, a king; whereas a private person such as the bridegroom is only permitted to shut out others from certain enjoyments which are in his own hand and keeping.

 

1 [See Greek word …] Wrongly translated “friend.” Used by the Lord Jesus even to his betrayer, Matt. 26: 50; (11: 16; 20: 13, are the only other instances of its use.)

 

 

I believe, then, that the parable is intended to teach us that those who have neglected to apply for the gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are promised to believers of this dispensation, and which we are taught to covet and pray for, will be excluded from a peculiar occasion of festivity and joy, just before the Saviour appears, an occasion which is described as the Wedding Supper. The parable before us, however, does not take in the consideration of the whole Church of Christ, but only of [regenerate] believers who have fallen asleep, or who shall fall asleep, ere Jesus appears.

 

 

Thus an objection frequently made to the present view is easily answered. - ‘This cannot be true: for you make a part of the bride to be absent from the supper, by supposing that the five foolish virgins constitute a portion of the church, and yet are shut out.’ The reply is obvious; the parable does not exhibit the whole church; it takes up only the case of those departed in the faith. And the bride here is not the church, but the city of God: [Page 130] Rev. 20: 2, 9, 10. Where a part of the church is represented by bridesmaids, the whole church cannot be represented by the bride. Again, if the bridesmaids be only the sleepers in Christ, (and “we shall not all sleep while all the virgins did,) then the virgins cannot be the church, nor can Jerusalem be the bride, as one has suggested.

 

 

At this point comes in the value of perceiving the number used by our Lord, in his wisdom, to designate the virgins. Why are they ten in number? Because they form but a part of the great whole; they signify but the sleeping portion of the Church of Christ.

 

 

For twelve is the complete and permanent number, occurring in those parts of God’s arrangements which are designed to last for ever. Hence it occurs so very freely in the description of the glorious city prepared for the saints by God: (Rev. 21. [&] 22.) Twelve is the number of the tribes of that nation that is to abide for ever before God. Twelve is the number of the hours of the complete day: John 11: 2. Twelve, the loaves on the holy table. Twelve, the stones on the high-priest’s breast-plate.

 

 

So in the Gospel. “When he had called to him his twelve disciples” - [‘Judas,’ who betrayed Him, also selected and included but afterwards replaced], “he gave them power against unclean spirits to cast them out.” “Now the names of the twelve apostles are theseMatt. 10: 1, 2; 11: 1. This number is to abide in the kingdom. “Ye which have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of IsraelMatt. 19: 28.

 

 

Now Jesus had before dealt with the “two.” Here he takes up the “ten which added together give us [Page 131] the complete number twelve. He treats first of the two who are alive. And it is interesting to observe that this division of twelve into ten and two is that which obtains both in Hebrew and Greek. Twelve in Hebrew is ‘two-ten,’ and in Greek the same. In both these cases the two precedes the ten. Thus Jesus first presents the two ere the ten.

 

 

The two represents the remnant, when any loss or misfortune had by death or otherwise befallen the twelve. Ten of Jacob’s sons go down into Egypt, when Joseph was sold, and Benjamin was too much prized by his father to be sent forth. “Joseph’s ten brethren went down into Egypt. But Benjamin, Joseph’s brother, Jacob sent not with his brethrenGen. 42: 3, 4. Twelve spies are sent out, but the ten are cut off in one day, and only the two, Caleb, and Joshua, survive.

 

 

(2.) Ten and two was the division of the tribes. “When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way, and he had clad himself with a new garment, and they two were alone in the field. And Ahijah caught the new garment that was upon him, and rent it in twelve pieces. And he said to Jeroboam, take thee ten pieces, for thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee1 Kings, 11: 29, 31.

 

 

(3.) This is the division again, when the question of distinguishing places in the kingdom comes into notice. “Jesus going up into Jerusalem took the twelve disciples [Page 132] apart in the way and disclosed to them his approaching sufferings. Immediately thereon James and John with their mother beg for the chief places in the kingdom, to sit on the right and left of the Son of Man. The Saviour answers them, and then we read, “When the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethrenMatt. 20: 17-24.

 

 

ii. But if two be the remnant, ten is the imperfect number, not unfrequently coupled with words which bespeak its imperfection, as a part only of a larger number. “The servant took ten camels of the camels of his master, and departedGen. 24: 10. “Then Gideon took ten men of his servants, and did as the Lord had said unto himJudges 6: 27. “And he took ten men of the elders of his city Ruth 4: 2. “And he called ten of his own servants (Greek) Luke 19: 13. Ten thousand troops is the imperfect and insufficient number for war, twelve legions of angels the perfect number, fully sufficient to rid Messiah of his enemies: Luke 14: 31; Matt. 26: 53. Ten horns marks the imperfect number of the Princes of Antichrist; twelve thrones is the sufficient number of thrones for the Princes of Christ’s [millennial (Luke 22: 29, 30)] kingdom.

 

 

The ten and the two then represent the church complete; the greater number represents, as was to be expected, the dead in Christ; the smaller number, the living saints. The living are the remnant, “we who are alive and remain unto the Presence of the Lord It gives also, one may believe, the proportion subsisting between the two parties at the advent of the Lord. But if so, then all the twelve are [regenerate] believers. The Church is not complete without every one of them. Exclude the [Page 133] unwatchful householder and the foolish virgins from the kingdom, and the number of the saved is represented by six, a number characteristic rather of Antichrist than of Christ.

 

 

The sign of the Presence turns on the two who are found living on earth at the time, and who might be, of course, the subjects of any sign the Lord might be pleased to grant.

 

 

Observe again, in confirmation of this view, that no number is given in the case of the servants, in the parable of the Talents. The reason of which is exactly in accordance with the argument here stated. The Talents are not engaged with either the dead or the living as such,  but with the gifted, whether living or dead. All are within the Presence-chamber, ere the question as to their use of the gifts bestowed comes into investigation, and therefore the way by which they arrived at the Presence, is of no importance as to the matter then in hand.

 

 

But we have not noticed the force of the word with which the Virgins begins. “Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened.” To what period does the word refer? One naturally looks back to that which immediately precedes, and that is, the time of the untrusty - [i.e., undependable and easily bribed] - steward’s being cast amidst weeping and gnashing of teeth. But such period were too late, if, as I believe, that open vengeance cannot take place till the Lord displays himself openly to the world. It seems far more suitable to refer it back to that most wondrous time which is now the subject of the Lord’s discourse, - the time of his Presence - and to the sign of his Presence - the rapture of the ready saint. If we turn back to that point at which Jesus commences the subject, we shall find him [Page 134] attracting notice to it as a point of time by the same word. “Then shall two be in the field.” Therein is exhibited to us as we have seen, the case of [the minority of] the raptured living. The “then” repeated may fitly, therefore, recall our thoughts to the same period of the ascent of living saints, and usher in the parable which displays the answering destiny of the raptured [and resurrected] dead. Once more the word occurs in the parable itself, and leads our eyes to the same period of the Presence. “Then all those virgins arose Thus too we shall find a perfect harmony between the words of Paul, asserting the identity of the time at which the living and the dead saints will ascend to the Presence. “The dead in Christ shall first rise, then we the living who remain shall be caught up together with them in clouds to meet the Lord

 

 

The parable now before us is a similitude of “the kingdom of heaven.” Of the full import of the phrase I do not feel sure. However the commencing expression allies it with several other parables which treat of that solemn juncture, when the passage from the kingdom in mystery into the kingdom in its glorious manifestation occurs. Thus it stands in near connection with the wedding garment. That parable describes first, the process of judgment on the Jews of that day, for their killing the Son of God. Secondly, the taking away of “the kingdom of God,” (not “the kingdom of heaven,” - mark the difference of expression) from them, and its opening to the Gentiles. In the second part of that parable we have the ejection of one from the ante-chamber of the feast, who is found unclothed in the imputed righteousness of Christ.

 

[Page 135]

Somewhat farther back, the same phrase introduces “the Labourers in the Vineyard,” the purport of which parable is to shew the order of reward which closes the present dispensation, and introduces the one to come.

 

 

Similar then, I believe, is the meaning in this instance also. The case of the living, and the scrutiny to be enacted on them had been put forth in several parables before, (as to take another instance, in the Wheat and Taxes) but none ere this had entered into the test to be applied to the dead in Christ, ere their admission to the glory. Hence, if I mistake not, the phrase precedes this, and none but this, of the seven parables of the Prophecy on the Mount. It gives us the new feature introduced by the long delayed return of the Lord; a delay which occasions the great majority of his saints to fall asleep ere his advent. Hence, the force of the present expression may, I believe, be given thus - At the time of my Presence and of the rapture of the saints, (the critical time of the cessation of the kingdom in mystery, and the commencement of the kingdom in power,) the holy dead may be compared to ten virgins found asleep.

 

 

I shall now suppose the reader satisfied that the virgins are all believers.1 All alike possess the torch of profession. All alike have them lighted, and burning, from sunset, the time of expecting the bridegroom, till past midnight.

 

1 If any desire further proof on this point, I would refer them back to the treatises in the Prophecy on Olivet.

 

 

The oil in the torch is grace in its general sense, or grace sanctifying, which is absolutely necessary for any to enter the kingdom at all.

 

[Page 136]

The second supply of oil, the presence or want of which characterizes the two parties, as either wise or foolish, is, I am persuaded, grace in its special sense - the gifts of the Holy Ghost - or grace miraculous and inspired.

 

 

A difference may well be noticed here between the two and the ten. The two are objects of natural sight, presented in their ordinary physical employments, and thus constituting an appropriate sign to the people of the letter, - Israel after the flesh. But the ten appear in their spiritual and moral position. The two are to all appearance equal, simply men and women, their character not discriminated save by the result. This makes the sign the more mysterious. In the present case, however, the parties are described by their interior quality, as virgins, and are from the first characterized as wise or foolish. Why this difference? Because in the present instance, not Israel, but the Church, the people of the spirit are addressed. So in the Householder. He is not a householder literally, and his sleep is spiritual slumber.

 

 

That [regenerate] believers may be foolish is proved by several texts, but one of especial force may be given. Jesus in his Presence after the resurrection, accuses two of his disciples of this very failing, a failing which he traces to the very fault of the foolish here - ignorance or refusal to credit prophecy, or at least all that the prophets have said. “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spokenLuke 24: 25.

 

 

These, observe, are foolish in relation to the Presence, not in relation to the kingdom. To enter the kingdom regeneration and [believers] baptism are enough: (John 3: 5.) to enter the bridal banquet more is demanded.

 

[Page 137]

The second oil is taken as a voluntary act. That is, the gifts of the Holy Ghost are no virtual thing, received even ignorantly, the moment a man attains to faith in Christ. This truth shines out conspicuously in the history of the Samaritan believers; (Acts 8.) and in the history of John’s twelve disciples at Ephesus: (Acts 19.) Against this truth the views of ‘the Plymouth Brethren’ offend. The oil in the vessel is wholly distinct from that in the torch. None of old had the second supply of oil without seeking and attaining it in some sensible manner; except in the two illapses of the Holy Ghost, (1.) at Pentecost, and (2.) on Cornelius and his friends. And even in these, the possession was sensibly attained, and evident to friends, to foes, and to the saints who possessed them. The oil is taken at the first, ere the wise virgins start on their procession. So the communication of the [Holy] Spirit’s gifts took place at once after baptism.

 

 

I have observed elsewhere, that there would appear to be a significance in the order in which the prudent and foolish virgins are placed. The wise begin, the foolish occupy the centre, the wise close the procession. (See verses 2, 3, 4.) If so, the [miraculous] gifts of the first ages must be restored. The oil must be within reach ere the bridegroom comes. Else there would be only foolish virgins at last, and these would not be sent for oil, or would be sent in vain. Again, it seems clear, that not one half of the dead in Christ, as they now stand, have received the gift of the Holy Ghost. Hence it must be restored, in order that the numbers may be as evenly balanced as in the parable, the five against the five. When the gifts shall return, though many might fall asleep even then, ere [Page 138] the Lord should take away his servants, the wise virgins would have reappeared on the scene, and the end be (visibly) so much the nearer.

 

 

We may gather, I think, from various hints, that all the saints living at Christ’s Presence are possessed of gifts, and therefore that does not constitute the test for the living but only for the departed. Hints having this tendency may be seen in the fact, that Elisha was a prophet as well as Elijah, and so were the sons of the prophets who looked on. Lamech prophesied as well as Enoch. The prudent suppose oil still to be had, and the silence of the parable at its conclusion permits us to believe that even the foolish returned not empty. Elijah, at his return, is to restore all things, and therefore prophecy and miracle, even to the Jew; and the “gospel of the kingdom” is to be preached; which, as the Gospels shew, was always done before with concurrent signs.

 

 

The doctrine of the gifts of the [Holy] Spirit is one of the fundamentals of Christianity, (Rev. 6: 1-5,) and the neglect of this doctrine produces errors of interpretation, or darkness as to the meaning of many passages of the New Testament. The non-possession of them as a fact, causes many difficulties and impediments in practice.

 

 

It is suitable that the new age, the new Jerusalem, is the Lamb’s Bride, and Jesus, the obtainer of the gifts, should be greeted by those “powers of the New Age” at his first appearing. Hence they are noticed in the Psalmist’s picture of the glory. “God, (even) thy God,1 hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Both agencies of the Holy Spirit join to prepare [Page 139] companions for Messiah. Without regeneration, the believer would not possess the inward fitness for the kingdom; without the supernatural anointing, that familiar acquaintance with the bridegroom which the parable teaches, could not be attained.

 

1 Better still, “Therefore, O God, thy God hath anointed thee

 

 

Comparing the present parable with the next, we see, that where the responsibility of attaining this blessing is laid on man, it is represented by oil, which the virgins have opportunity to procure, and a price in their hand enabling them to purchase. Where it is exhibited as a bounty from Christ, it is represented by money bestowed by a master on a servant.

 

 

But after the inward difference between the two classes, and its manifestation has been declared, we are informed, that “they all became drowsy and were sleeping.” From the use of the two words, I suppose the Saviour to describe their death, not as the sudden death of persecution, but the death which is preceded by the usual precursive illness. The symptoms of approaching dissolution are the becoming drowsy; the actual departure answers to sleep. In violent deaths, as for instance, beheading - these preparatory indications are not found. Hence the Saviour indicates a case like that of Dorcas. “It came to pass in those days, that she was sick and died (Acts 9: 37:) where the sickness answers to the drowsiness, and the departure to the final state of sleep, in which the virgins are found. So Paul says of the Corinthians - “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep

 

 

The sleep continues unbroken, as that of death does, up to the time of the cry; which answers to the “shout” of Christ, “the voice of the archangel, and the trump of [Page 140] God wherewith the resurrection of the sleeping saints is ushered in: 1 Thess. 4. To the living Jesus comes as the thief, without noise: to the sleepers, as the bridegroom, with a sound, because they must be first waked. But if so, both the wise and the foolish are believers sleeping in Jesus.

 

 

Why the universality of the sleep here, if spiritual sloth be meant? It is sometimes said, that certain parts of a parable are necessary as “drapery.” But such a detail was not necessary to the story here. Part might have kept awake, as well as part have slept. It would seem to be most probable that some would have been able to keep off slumber. If the sleep were moral or sinful, some manifest difference would have been introduced into it, either as to the degree or duration of it, in order to keep up the broad demarcation between believer and unbeliever. But there is none. This point then has its full significance, if we suppose that Jesus designed to draw attention to it, because he would treat distinctly of the destiny of the dead of the church; nothing comes of it, save that it prevents the foolish from supplying their lack of oil till too late. Its use then is to distinguish the ten, or the departed in Christ, from the two, or the living believers.

 

 

It has indeed been observed, that the sleep lasts only till the cry, not till the bridegroom has actually arrived. And this is true; but the distinction can make no difference in interpretation, for those not ready before the cry cannot get ready before the bridegroom has arrived, and the door is shut. Hence the cry must be much nearer to the Lord’s advent than any preaching of the coming of Jesus can be.

 

[Page 141]

The cry awakens at once the whole. Hence it is no rousing of Christians to neglected principles. For that takes place gradually and imperfectly. One rouses another, some refuse to be awakened. There, a power from without, finding all asleep, bids all arise. The power of principle proceeds from the virgins themselves, and is transmitted from one to the other. If the sleep be physical, so must the cry be.

 

 

An important enquiry has room here. What procession is this? (1.) Of the bridegroom going to fetch his bride from her father’s house? (2.) Or is it the passage of the bride and bridegroom united to the house of the bridegroom? To this we may reply - clearly, it is the procession from the house of the bride’s father to the bridegroom’s own house.

 

 

1. First, from internal considerations. The bridegroom would go to fetch his bride much earlier than midnight, though through unforeseen hindrances, he might be thus late in returning home.

 

 

2. Had it been merely a preparatory tarrying, after which the bride was to come forth, and to be escorted home, the case of the virgins would not be hopeless, but only demanding patience. 3. The bridegroom is evidently in his own house, the feast is begun, he (and not the bride’s father) answers when excluding the foolish.

 

 

4. The authority of classic and Jewish custom so decides it. Hear Lightfoot. “After the betrothing the bridegroom might not be with the bride in his father-in-law’s house, before he had brought her to his own. That bringing of her was the consummation of the marriage. This parable supposes that the bride was thus fetched to the house of her husband, and that the virgins [Page 142] were ready against her coming, who yet, being either fetched a great way, or some accident happening to her, did not come till midnightLightfoot, Works, vol. ii. 246.

 

 

Again, “It appears, that not only among the Jews but also among the Greeks and Romans it was the custom, that the bridegroom, after espousal, and before the consummation, should, late in the evening, (and therefore by the light of lamps) with pomp, rejoicing, and feasting, bring the bride to his house Bloomfield’s Recensio, vol. i, p. 406.

 

 

The following account of a wedding in Greece is taken from the latest writer on the subject.

 

 

“The bride, accompanied by her paranymph, or bridesmaid, was led forth into the street, by the bridegroom and one of his most intimate friends, who placed her between them in an open carriage.” Certain ceremonies were then performed in one of the temples. “The rites thus completed, the virgin’s father, placing the hand of the bridegroom in that of the bride, said, ‘I bestow on thee my daughter, that thine eyes may be gladdened by legitimate offspring.’ The oath of inviolable fidelity was now taken by both, and the ceremony concluded with fresh sacrifices.”

 

 

“The performance of rites so numerous generally continued the whole day, so that the shades of evening were falling before the bride could be conducted to her future home. And now commenced the secular portion of the ceremony. Numerous attendants, bearing lighted torches, ran in front of the procession. … Similar in this respect was the practice throughout Greece, even so early as the time of Homer, who thus in his description [Page 143] of ‘the Shield’ calls up before our imagination the lively picture of a heroic nuptial procession.

 

 

“Here sacred pomp and genial feasts delight,

And solemn dance and hymeneal rite,

Along the streets the new-made brides are led

With torches flaming, to the nuptial bed

 

 

“The house of the bridegroom diligently prepared for their reception was decorated profusely with garlands, and brilliantly lighted up. When, among the Boeotians, the lady, accompanied by her husband, had descended from the Carriage, its axletree was burnt, to intimate that having found a home she would have no further use for it.” - St. John’s Manners of Ancient Greece, vol. ii, 14-18.

 

 

So in the nuptials of the Romans. “These ceremonies being ended, towards night the woman was brought home to her husband’s house with five torches, signifying thereby the need which married persons have of five gods or goddesses.” - Godtoyn’s Anthologia, p. 73.

 

 

“Now torches were used, either in honour of Ceres, (as Festus says,) or because the bride was not led home to the house of her husband till it had become dark, (as Servius following Varro and Plutarch asserts.) The same Plutarch, (in his Roman Questions, Quest. 2,) writes, that but five torches or wax-lights, and neither more nor fewer, were accustomed to be lit at weddings, and inquiring the causes of that custom says … because that number seemed better and more perfect than any other. These torches are often called by the poets, ‘nuptial torches,’ ‘customary torches,’ ‘genial,’ and ‘festive torches’”. - Dempster de Antiquitatibus Romanis, p. 960

 

[Page 144]

The form of lamps [torches] is described by Rambam and R. Solomon, whom see, (Kelim. chap. ii, hal. 8.) These things are also mentioned by R. Solomon. “It is the fashion in the country of the Ishmaelites [Arabians] to carry the bride from the house of her father to the house of the bridegroom before she is put to bed, and to carry before her ten wooden staves, having each of them on the top a vessel like a dish, in which there is a piece of cloth with oil and pitch. These being lighted, they carry before her for torches The same things saith the Aruch in … Lightfoot, Works, vol. ii, 247.

 

 

“In those countries, it seems, the bridegroom commonly brought home his bride in the evening. And that she might be received at his house in a suitable manner, his female friends of the younger sort were invited to wait with lamps, till some of his retinue, despatched before the rest, brought word he was at hand. On this they went forth with their lamps trimmed to welcome him, and conduct him with his bride into the house. And for this service they had the honour of being guests at the marriage feast - Macknight.

 

 

Similarly Adams, Rom. Antiquities, p. 465, and Potter, vol. ii, p. 286.

 

 

The foolish now, discovering their waning lights, petition for oil.1 They are prudently requested to procure some for themselves, and accordingly set out in quest of it. Now neither the hypocrite nor the true believer could fall into error so gross as is supposed, if we make the oil to signify the converting grace of God. Who knows not, that his fellow cannot grant it? Who of the lost, [Page 145] will not awake to the full conviction that his opportunity is gone for ever, when once he arises from the dead? And that it is no mere rising from sloth is clear, because there is no possibility of recovering the ground lost before the sleep.

 

1 “They who complain that their lamps are going out, manifest that they are still partially alight.” - Jerome.

 

 

Again, if one of the virgins had possessed oil enough for herself and a friend, and had been willing to share it, what would have been the result? Must not both have entered the feast? Assuredly. But has any one of the saved power to impart to another what shall suffice to attain eternal life? It is supposed possible here, that one or all might have had more than sufficient oil for their own purposes.

 

 

While the foolish are occupied in supplying their want of the additional oil, the bridegroom comes, the          procession enters the house of the bridegroom, the wise enter, the door is shut. We have in the present case the bridegroom’s descent, the virgins’ ascent “to meet him,” (as in 1 Thess. 4.) Only, as the nature of the parable required, the movement is spoken of as voluntary on their part.

 

 

The wise enter simply as “the ready,” not as the true virgins, while the others were only professedly so; not as having lit torches, while the others’ lights were extinguished; but as the ready differ from the imprudent and unready. They enter the king’s house by ascension, after the resurrection which they enjoy in common with the foolish. They enter with the bridegroom. - “They that were ready went in with him to the marriage-feast.” Theirs is the joy of companionship. This shows again our meaning of the taking to be correct. Both the living householder and the raised wise virgins ascend together.

 

[Page 146]

What mean then the words which follow? “Afterward came also the foolish virgins If the first approach signify a rapture from earth to heaven, so must the second. Not only do they both rise at the first resurrection; they both ascend to glory, though not at the same moment. The foolish arrive at the spot where the wise entered the house. There are two raptures then for the saints. They are acknowledged as virgins still. “Afterward came also the other virgins They plead for entrance, ere yet the feast is over, but are refused. They return having doubtless obtained the oil, else their lamps would be extinguished. This is very important. The wise take it for granted, as it were, that this second oil not only is capable of being procured, but that it must be obtained, even at last, by all of the dispensation, even though too late for its blessing.

 

 

On the reply given by the bridegroom rests the whole amount of force in the objections brought against the present view. But repeated examination has convinced me, that these words are fully reconcilable with the interpretation given. (1.) First, if the foolish be believers, which the whole tenor of the parable proves, the certainty of the doctrine of the final perseverance of the saints would supply enough to convince those persuaded of it that the exclusion, and the words in which that exclusion is sustained, must import something short of final condemnation.

 

 

(2.) Next, they are refused admission as unready. Now let us take a similar case among men, and see how far it stands from implying final rejection. ‘My dears,’ says a father to his young children, ‘I am going for a drive to-day. Would you like to go?’ ‘O yes, father[Page 147] is the eager unanimous reply. ‘Well then, it will be some time after twelve o’clock; how soon or how late after, I cannot tell. Those only who are ready the instant the chaise drives up to the door, will go with me. I cannot stay a moment

 

 

The notice is given. The children engage themselves in their various sports or lessons. Some are deeply interested in them, and when the hour of twelve strikes, they are still at play, thinking there will be plenty of time yet. The prudent go up to dress ere twelve struck, and ere the last stroke of the clock was dying are fully prepared. At length the sound of wheels rapidly approaching is heard - the chaise - [i.e., ‘a light or open carriage for one or more persons’] - is at the door. The father’s voice calls; the ready fly out to him; they are safely seated: off flies the carriage. But all were not there - the chaise came ere they expected: they flew upstairs as soon as the wheels were heard, and with panting haste sought to dress. But too late - the chaise has started, while they are in their rooms. One indeed, the nearest drest of the three left behind, rushes in eager haste after the rapid carriage, and asks to be taken in. ‘No,’ is the father’s reply; ‘I cannot take you.’ The three are too late for that enjoyment, and sadness and tears evince their disappointment. The father’s reply is as absolute as the bridegroom’s. But what then? Are they no longer children? Will the father punish them on his return? Will they be disinherited as rebellious? Who would dream it? Their loss is Punishment sufficient. They are not rebellious, but simply imprudent. They have broken no command, but simply been inattentive to their own enjoyment.

 

 

Or shall we take another illustration? The marriage [Page 148] of Queen Victoria was a special festivity not necessary to her kingdom, but only a peculiar and brief, though splendid, ceremony in it. It was not thrown open to all her subjects; but only for certain of her nobility and gentry. If her majesty had ordered, that all who would be guests at the banquet should enter the palace gates before eleven, in order to be present at the marriage service preceding it, after which time the gates would be shut, and every one arriving, of whatever rank, would be excluded - we should get an image resembling that offered by our Lord. Some unpunctual ones arrive after the castle clock has struck. They knock, but are refused entrance by order of the queen. What then? Will they be punished? be hung, drawn, and quartered as traitors? No. they have punished themselves: a scene of peculiar splendour is lost to them for ever. But their rank as nobles or officers of the kingdom does not cease. The wedding feast is an episode, not the ordinary style of the kingdom: it is a special glory prepared for special guests, ere the majesty of the kingdom, as stretching over heaven and earth, appears.

 

 

Viewed in this light, the words, “Verily I say unto you, I know you not carry no sentence of final exclusion. They import solely - ‘You are no acquaintance of mine.’ Now this might be, and is, accounted for on the supposition that there is an internal connexion between the torch and the person. The lighted torch in the hand corresponds with the virginity of the person. It was for virgins only to attend the nuptial feast with torches. The lighted torch and the virgins going out to meet the bridegroom are corresponding touches. The torch is the outward symbol, the virginity the [Page 149] inward reality constituting the apparent passport to the feast.

 

 

But beside this there is a second sympathy. The additional oil in the vessel runs parallel with the acquaintance with the bridegroom, and consequent admittance to the banquet.

 

 

The wise enter on two grounds, (1.) as ready, manifestly because of their burning torch; and (2.) as acquaintances of the bridegroom. These two things are connected and not accidental. All who have the vessel of oil are acquainted with him; none who have it not, are so. They are guests then, not simply as virgins, but as virgin-acquaintances, and that acquaintanceship is discriminated from the ignorance of the foolish, by the oil-vessel, and its counterpart - the brightly burning torch. The others are refused, not, as not virgins, but as deficient in intimacy with the bridegroom. Had the torches of the foolish gone out, the correspondence between the lighted torch and their virginity had been lost: but as admission to the feast turns, not on virginity, but virgin acquaintanceship on the one hand, or the readiness of the torch on the other, so the two indications are in harmony to the close; and the question as to whether they were able to procure oil or not, is left in silence.

 

 

Again, all the torches are burning equally low at the awakening; but all are equally alight. By the same principle then of the correspondence of the external and internal, we gather, that the qualification which then comes into notice is something more than what is required merely in order simply to enter the kingdom. It is some special quality, not answering to simple grace, or the virginity of the person, but one having relation [Page 150] to the special glory of the bridal banquet. This demand the one party can meet, the other cannot. The second brightness of the torch, after its trimming on awaking, answers to a second inward qualification of the prudent, till now concealed - their acquaintance with the bridegroom. This is again accounted for by the second and equally special meaning of oil. Oil in its general meaning is grace; and imports, ordinarily, grace sanctifying. But oil, in its inner and special meaning, intends miraculous grace; or the [miraculous] gifts of the Holy Ghost. For that which comes into view in the present discourse, is not the [coming] kingdom, but the glory of the secret Presence, which precedes it.

 

 

The view which had been given in a former tract of the difference between the two Greek words which are used in this prophecy to express knowledge, appears to me, on going over the ground again, to be quite sound. One [Greek] word, and that the one employed by the Saviour on the present occasion, imports the direct knowledge obtained from the senses. By that expression then the bridegroom declares, that the parties shut out are not his acquaintance. But the other [Greek] word signifies conclusions drawn from signs, and admitted by the mind. Examples of this are the following. “The tree is known (recognized) by its fruit.” “Ye see and know (by the budding of the trees,) that summer is now nigh at hand This is our inference from signs. “This ye know (you recognize and admit,) that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come."

 

 

Hence the two words, as has been noticed above, are differently applied to the day of the Lord’s advent.

 

[Page 151]

Had then the Saviour affirmed of the foolish virgins that he knew them not, as not recognizing them, they had indeed perished among the reprobate. This is the word he uses of the finally lost, (and in this same gospel of Matthew,) “I never knew (recognized) you; depart from me, ye that work iniquityMatt. 7: 23.

 

 

Some have thought the exclusion too severe on the principle now indicated. To me it does not. Simply to behold the kingdom, it is enough to be born again: John 3: 3; but to have part in its especial glories, do we wonder, if especial qualifications are required. Any man may wear what dress he pleases in his ordinary civil calling: but if he go to court, and would see the presence of majesty, a peculiar dress is required. Is it any marvel then, that the Lord Jesus asks of those who would attain to a part in the highest glory of the age to come, that they should have sought and obtained the peculiar promise of the present dispensation? The possession of gift entailed of old, and would again entail, peculiar trials in virtue of its possession. Do you wonder, if, in consequence, peculiar glory is annexed to it in the life to come? Are not the gifts of the Spirit God’s promise in Christ by the gospel? Eph. 3: 6. And shall the want of them below draw after it no loss on high? If they were matters of sovereignty, there would be no difference of reward dependent on them. But consider the want of gift as the disregard of a privilege thrown open to all believers, as the failure to obey a command, (1 Cor. 12: 31; 14: 1,) can it fail to issue in loss? To despise the blood of the covenant is to perish for ever. To despise the seal of God, shall it be no detriment to us?

 

[Page 152]

The gifts of miracle and inspiration may seem to you now of no importance: the omission of the foolish is not brought into view till the [select rapture and] resurrection come. But they stand related to privilege hereafter, as well as to present responsibility when possessed. The simple possession of them brings privilege, as is here manifested; their right use entails permanent power; as ‘the Talents’ proves. They stand connected also with the kingdom of glory in a two-fold manner. In its present state of mystery, they were designed to be witnesses of the coming [millennial] kingdom, and a powerful testimony of its reality; since it will be by power from that same source, and of a like kind, that the kingdom will finally be established. They were tokens to the believer himself, also, that he was to be an heir of that kingdom; and the superiority or inferiority of these gifts discovered the different ranks in the present church, and in the future kingdom. In the ordinary Christian, they were the red cross, marking him one of the army of God; in the apostle, they were the officer’s epaulettes. This then is, I believe, one of the prominent reasons why they come into notice in connexion with the kingdom of heaven. John Baptist first preaches the kingdom, (Matt. 3: 3,) then the baptism of water, the confession of sin, an answering life of holiness, and then as a preparative for that kingdom, the baptism of the Holy Ghost, or the miraculous gifts, 5: 11. The foolish then have the essentials of the kingdom, but lack its seal. To the substance of the kingdom then they shall enter. But what shall be the result of the loss of the seal? With men, strict justice would say, the entire loss of it. But mercy does not exact that, only the loss of a peculiar glory.

 

[Page 153]

Finally, it has occurred to me to sum up the exposition, by a brief review of the possible suppositions which (within certain limits) may be made.

 

 

The great cardinal points are, (1.) the virginity; (2.) the torch; (3.) the oil; (4.) the sleep. Now of these four the torch is agreed on by both, as signifying profession; and it is worthy of remark, as seeming to prove the personal character of that symbol, that there is no proposal to change torches: as if that were unthought of, or impossible.

 

 

But the exposition runs on two different lines, according as we embrace the idea that the foolish virgins are hypocrites - or that they are believers. But either way the conditions of the parable carry with them the appropriate correction. Are they unbelievers? How then are they virgins? Say they are professors. How then is their torch lighted? Again, the oil! Is that grace? Then are the foolish believers, contrary to the first supposition. Do you deny them any oil? How then do their torches burn so many hours? Next the sleep. What is that? Such as the sleep is, such are the cry, and the awakening. If then the sleep be moral, so are the cry, and the awaking. But if it be spiritual, then again the foolish are believers, and the starting point is once more proved unsound.

 

 

Say, that the sleep is death; then, since all awake together, all, as partakers of the first resurrection, are children of God. Here then I see no escape! Whether the sleep be moral or physical, the foolish, both as virgins, and as rising either from spiritual sloth or from the dead at the Lord’s Presence, must be believers. The relation of these parables then to the Presence of the [Page 154] Lord, carries with it the refutation of any theory which would make part of the virgins unbelievers or hypocrites.

 

 

The supposed moral of the parable too, on the usual theory, bears on its front its own refutation. If the foolish be hypocrites then the practical conclusion of the whole is - ‘Be a believer, and however much you sleep, it shall not signify: you will be quite ready for the feast

 

 

On the other hand if the foolish be believers, (and foolishness is not inconsistent with faith, for Jesus declares all his saints comparatively foolish, Luke 16: 8): then grace does not fail, and the exclusion of the five is not final, nor exclusion from the kingdom of God, but only from the especial festivity of the supper.

 

 

The desire to get rid of so severe and searching a truth in that here propounded, must raise a great obstacle to its reception. It is I acknowledge a startling discovery and most unwelcome in the present [apostate] day. It shows a defect in thousands of the most excellent of Christ’s saints that have fallen asleep. It exhibits such a present lack and future loss in many whom we love and venerate of the saints now, that I wonder not if the exposition be denied. Let those who are able, expose the fallacies. Or let them confess its truth. I commit it to God and to his church, assured of its being of the Lord, and confident that it cannot be overthrown. Christians try to make the distinction of character between the wise and foolish, the essential one that exists between believer and unbeliever. If both be [regenerate] believers, then something more than simple faith is required for the peculiar blessing of the Marriage Supper. If the difference of destiny be final and essential, the difference of character [Page 155] must be made out somehow. But if the difference of character and of actions be no greater than Jesus has said, the difference of destiny cannot be final and essential.

 

 

‘But, (some one may say, who is satisfied of the argument here propounded,) what if I fall asleep after praying for the gifts, without obtaining one?’ The answer is easy. Then the responsibility rests not with you, but with God. You are a wise virgin: you have done what you could to procure the oil. Be assured the Lord will remember you.

 

 

A tract lately published upon the parable has given me additional confidence. The worthy writer assumes, as usual, that the wise are believers, the foolish unbelievers. What then does he consider the general teaching of the parable? “It cries to thoughtless sinners, ‘Awake It cries to true servants of Christ, ‘Watch!”

 

 

This is the genuine result of such an assumption. If the parties belong to two such different classes as believers and unbelievers, the coming of Christ cannot have the same aspect to both. The exhortations must be of just that different character: for the command to watch spiritually supposes spiritual life. But Jesus gives no exhortation to awake, but only the one to watch. Whence it follows evidently, if Jesus be the best judge of the meaning and lesson of his own parable, that but one class is treated of throughout it, and that the class of [regenerate] believers, already possessed of spiritual life. It is therefore by no means unprofitable, but in the highest degree necessary to settle who are the parties designed, lest we wrest the meaning of our Saviour’s instructions.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 156]

CHAPTER 9

 

THE TALENTS

 

 

I. THE MASTER PRESENT

 

 

“Watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day, nor the hour. For as a man going to a foreign country he called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

 

 

II. HIS DEPARTURE

 

 

And to one indeed he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his several ability; and straightway went to the foreign country.

 

 

III. HIS ABSENCE

 

 

Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with them, and made other five talents. In like manner he also (that received) the two, he also gained other two. But he that received the one (talent) went off and digged in the earth, and hid away the money of his lord.

 

 

IV. HIS RETURN

 

 

Now after a long time, the lord of those servants (slaves) cometh, and entereth into a reckoning with them.

 

 

V. THE FIVE TALENTS ACCOUNTED FOR

 

 

And he that received the five talents came up and brought other five talents, saying, ‘Lord, thou deliveredst to me five talents; behold I have gained other five talents beside them His lord said unto him - ‘Well done, good and faithful servant, thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will appoint thee over many things enter into the joy of thy lord

 

[Page 157]

VI. THE TWO TALENTS ACCOUNTED FOR

 

 

He too that received the two talents came up, and said: ‘Lord, thou deliveredst to me two talents: behold I have gathered two other talents beside them His lord said unto him - ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things: over many will I appoint thee: enter into the joy of thy lord

 

 

VII. THE ONE TALENT ACCOUNTED FOR

 

 

But he too that had received the one talent came up, and said - ‘Lord, I knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou sowedst not, and gathering together whence thou strewedst not. And I was afraid, and went off, and hid thy talent in the earth: behold thou hast that which is thine But his lord answered and said - ‘Malicious and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather together whence I strewed not; thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the bankers, and when I came I should have received mine own with interest. Take therefore from him the talent, and give it to him that hath ten talents. For to every one that hath shall be given, and he shall abound; but from him that hath not, even that which he hath, shall be taken from him. And cast out the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

 

 

We may offer a brief comparison of this with the similar parable of the Pounds in Luke. There we find the servants constituting quite another class from the foes of the nobleman, and receiving a different judgment. In Luke the slothful servant is not said to be cast out into the outer darkness. But the same desire to shelter himself by accusing his master, is apparent. False views of his lord’s character engender a spirit of bondage and indolence.

 

 

Are not the unfaithful steward and he moral opposites? The steward counts that his master will not fulfil his word, because he has so long delayed it; [Page 158] the other, that he will be severer than he has spoken. Thus the one overlooks the justice, the other the mercy of God. The one will not work at all, the other will do as he pleases. The one is hampered by the spirit of fear, the other gives way to licence, the offspring of unbelief.

 

 

The parable of the Talents is intimately connected with that of the Virgins. The oil of the one answers to the talents of the other. “The Virgins” is intended to shew the discrimination which will take place between the sleepers in Christ, according as they are gifted or not. But the possession of gift is not enough. It might be abused in a variety of ways. Accordingly the Talents follows, to discover the responsibility which must attach to the miraculous gifts, considered as a deposit bestowed by Christ, to be used for him, and to be accounted for in his Presence: 1 Tim. 6: 20. The Virgins shewed the future utility of gift at the Lord’s appearing to his saints. The Talents exhibits its present responsibility. But while the primary force of the parable is to be steadily held, of course it applies, in principle, to any power or ability bestowed of God.

 

 

The Saviour in this figurative history traces the bestowal of gift upon his servants, (not on the worldly.) The grant is made in unequal measure, according to diversity of natural ability; he then represents the servants’ employment during the time of his absence, and finally, the reckoning which is called for at his return.

 

 

The two first servants pass their accounts with credit, and are rewarded; the last is guilty of a double offence, (which will be considered more distinctly presently,) and receives in recompence of it a two-fold punishment.

 

 

It is divided, like the other larger parables, into seven parts, and those again into four and three; the four first comprising the time of probation, the three last, the time and manner of award.

 

 

                Verses   Div.       The Master.            The Servants.                      The Goods.

                                                                                                                        Characteristic Words

 

 

                    14       1             Presence               Delivery of goods.                      “Goods.” - Probation

 

 

                    15       2             Departure             Distribution.                               “Talents.” - Probation

 

 

                  16-18    3             Absence                Employment.                              “Talents.” - Probation

 

 

                    19       4              Return                 Account demanded.                     “Account.” - Account

 

 

                 20-21     5             Reward                  Five Talents Account given.       “Talents.” - Judgment

 

 

                22-23     6             Reward                  Two Talents Ditto.                        “Talents.” - Judgment

 

 

                 24-30    7            Punishment            One Talent Ditto.                          “Talents.” - Judgment

 

 

I propose to append to this chapter the consideration of two general questions.

 

 

I THE CONNEXION OF THE FOUR PRESENCE PARABLES WITH EACH OHER,

AND WITH THE DAYS OF NOAH, (OR THE SIGN OF THE PRESENCE.)

 

 

II. TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE THAT THE FOUR TREAT

OF RECOMPENCE TO BELIEVERS ONLY.

 

 

Ist. The mysterious disappearance exhibited in ‘the Days of Noah’ is, I now take for granted, the rapture of [Page 160] the watchful saint. Only on that supposition can it receive a full, or even an intelligible meaning. Only thus can it be the sign of the Presence. But this granted, the connexion with what follows is immediate and strong. ‘The Householder and Thief’ takes up the case of the saint left behind, and explains to us how the loss he sustains is due to his own neglect. No force or ingenuity can tear away this from intimate connexion with the rapture. But if the Householder belong to the church, so do the Virgins. Both are connected together by the question of readiness, which is the basis of both. In the one case, readiness for the thief, in order to escape damage; in the other, readiness for the bridegroom, in order to prevent the disappointment of being excluded. “Therefore, be ye also ready” is the warning in the Householder. “They that were ready went in with him to the marriage is the crisis in the Virgins. In both it is a question of their own interests, and of prudence or folly in relation thereto. In both half are taken, half left: and the left in both are the unhappy and unwatchful. But the Householder again is connected with the Steward, as containing another aspect of the judgment on the living, and of the Saviour’s dealing with those found alive according to their state then before him.

 

 

The Steward and the Talents are connected as both containing instances of persons put in trust with an other’s interests, and treated according to their faithfulness or unfaithfulness to those. The Steward discovers to us faithfulness or the reverse, in the official Christian; the Talents exhibits fidelity in its personal and private aspect.

 

[Page 161]

Again, the Virgins and the Talents embrace the case of the dead in Christ, (though the Talents does not exclude the living,) just as the Householder and the Steward are engaged with the living remnant.

 

 

The following table will give at a glance some of the more prominent of these relations.

 

 

DIRECT.

 

1. Householder. Living. Moral state

2. Steward. Living. Moral state

 

3. Virgins. Dead. Gifts

4. Talents. Dead & living. Gifts

 

 

INDIRECT.

 

1. Ready. Own interests.

2. Faithful. Another’s.

3. Ready. Own interests.

4. Faithful. Another’s.

 

 

Thus the rapture is the GREAT FACT on which they all hang. The Householder cannot be severed from the Steward, for the Householder is joined to the ‘Days of Noah’ and to the Steward too.

 

 

Again, these four parables take the place of parenthesis, between Israel and the nations, which is just the place of the church: Eph. 3. 1 They occupy the time of the secret Presence, which is also that of the church: 1 Thess. 4; 1 Cor. 15. The Fig Tree gives the time of the Presence near; the Days of Noah the secret Presence come; these four, the secret judgment within it; but the end of the prophecy, or the Sheep and Goats is the Presence manifested - the throne set on earth - the nations judged - the kingdom begun.

 

1 Paul’s account of the mystery, or the union on equal terms of Jew and Gentile in the Church of Christ, is one long parenthesis, which begins at the beginning of Eph. 3, and ends at the beginning of chap. 4.

 

 

II. I now proceed to the other point, the evidence that the Presence-parables are occupied about believers only.

 

[Page 162]

Perhaps it will be best in treating this subject, to consider, first, the special proofs arising from each of the four parables; and secondly to exhibit the general principles which bind the whole together.

 

 

1. THE HOUSEHOLDER.

 

 

This parable is an application of the previous sign - the two. The taken and the left, are the watchful and the sleeping householders respectively. This appears from the intimate connexion which the Lord makes between them. “Then shall two be in the field: the one is taken and the other is left.” “Watch, therefore; for ye know not at what hour your Lord is coming The person addressed is a [regenerate] believer, for his house is faith. But he may be either watchful or asleep. This must be admitted to be consistent with faith, by all who hold that the sleep in the Virgins is spiritual sloth, yet that it is consistent with the wise virgins being believers. Here the sleep is spiritual slumber, and this can affect only those alive in spirit. All others are dead in trespasses and sins. The sleepy householder then who is robbed, is a [regenerate] believer. The watchful one is so, of course. That is, the two, the taken and the left, are both saints: and the meaning of the parable is to trace their difference of destiny, to difference of obedience in regard to the Lord’s injunction of watchfulness. Watchfulness is the remedy against loss, where Jesus appears as the thief: against blame, when he is set forth as the Master. If found not watching, the coming is to him that of the thief: if watchful, it will be in result, the master honouring the obedient servant: Luke 12.

 

 

They are called to be “ready;” and that too is an address, strictly speaking, to a [regenerate] believer. Readiness is, as has [Page 163] been before said, circumstantial fitness; and the call to circumstantial fitness, supposes that the real and internal preparation has been already attained.

 

 

The leaving then is not desertion for ever.

 

 

2. THE STEWARD.

 

 

The proof here is perhaps the most difficult of all. Nor is it wonderful; for the sentence is so justly severe. The severity hinges upon the trespass being committed against the highest possible responsibility. This servant has been appointed by his Lord to take his place of rule and beneficial oversight during his absence. The acquitting himself well of that commission is requited by the most enlarged glory and trust at the Lord’s advent. “Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all his goods

 

 

But, as the glory and advancement are great, if the confidence reposed be duly answered; so in like manner great must be the indignation of the master, if the powers entrusted be abused.

 

 

I would show then that even the evil steward is a [regenerate] believer. (1.) Would Jesus appoint any but a [regenerate] believer to rule and feed his flock? Ought the servants to acknowledge any but a [regenerate] believer? If the words be taken in their fullest sense, he is an apostle. (2.) The same kind of person is supposed throughout. “If that evil servant say in his heart.” Do not Rom. 16: 18 and Phil. 3: 19, refer also to [regenerate] believers? (3.) He is a “servant” even to the close. He has real faith; he begins well; but when unbelief regarding the Lord’s near advent creeps in, he falls. He begins, after feeding the servants, to beat them, and is found acting thus. But [Page 164] even then he does not deny his lord. (4.) He is not a hypocrite. We are introduced to his very heart; and all it whispers is, ‘My master is long in coming.’ Even in his heart then he calls Jesus his Lord. He does not scoff as the ungodly - “Where is the promise of his coming?” nor ‘like the fool does he say in his heart, ‘There is no GodNor does he stand in the place of the hypocrites, whom the Lord rebuked in the previous chapter. They “kill and crucify” the Lord’s apostles and scribes. He neither kills nor is drunk. Are not many Christians, and even many ministers, saying, not only with their heart, but with their lips also, that Christ is not to be expected for hundreds of years? Are there not many high-churchmen, who would assuredly, though believers, smite their fellow-servants, under the influence of the semi-puseyite notions which have crept into evangelical churchmanship? Now as the degree of unbelief might possibly be found in a believer, so may the effects of it be found in his consequent conduct?

 

 

Is the unfaithful steward’s sin incapable of being committed by a [regenerate] believer? I think not. But if capable of being committed, may not Christ find him engaged in its perpetration? If so, then this is his portion. But if he be a believer, will the award be final? If a mere professing hierarch, would not his unbelief and crimes be more marked?

 

 

The conduct supposed, is very far short of that manifested by the Popes. ‘What a gainful fable is this Christianity!’ said one of the Popes. And another declared that he believed in Mary no more than in an ass, nor in her Son, than in the foal of an ass! So much as to the difference in point of faith. And then as to [page 167] conduct both towards the world and the church. The popes have wallowed in adultery, murder, witchcraft, sodomy, and every abomination that man can be guilty of. They have sought to exterminate the saints, and have slaughtered many. They shut up the word of God. But this is conduct such as may be exhibited by a [regenerate] believer, such as actually has been in various instances. One very striking case occurs in the history of the Puritans, where the passage now before us was quoted against one of the bishops, who in Elizabeth’s day enforced the laws against dissenters.

 

 

In the year 1567 several Christians met at Plummer’s Hall. Some of them were taken, examined, and thrown into prison by Bishop Grindal. From prison, one of them, named William. White, wrote thus to his lordship.

 

 

“I desire you, in the bowels of Christ, to consider your own case, who by your own confession was once a persecutor, and have since been persecuted, whether displacing, banishing, or imprisoning God’s children more straitly than felons, heretics, or traitors, be persecuting again or no? They that make the best of it, say, you buffet your brethren: which if the Master of the house find you so doing, you know your reward - History of the Puritans in England, p. 149.

 

 

5. He is appointed by Christ to this high post. We have not then the case of an ungodly clergyman of a parish; for there the appointment is not by Christ: nor are the servants bound to obey. Such a one is a stranger from whom the sheep are to flee, refusing to listen to the voice of strangers: John 10. They are “blind leaders of the blind And the result is “both falling into [Page 166] the pit Here the servants escape. The servants surely are [regenerate] believers; believers suffering unjustly. But they are his “fellow-servants.” Whence I conclude that he is a [regenerate] believer as well as they.

 

 

6. But probably it will be thought, that the punishment he receives is a sufficient proof of his final perdition, and so, by inference, of his never having been a [regenerate] believer. In such an idea I do not participate. Let us consider what infliction falls upon him. His natural life is violently taken away. I need not say that such infliction is no proof. “For this cause (a far less one) many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep

 

 

But it is said further. “He shall appoint him his portion with the hypocrites, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth But this, though the strongest part of the argument, does not seem to me to carry the conclusion. I have shown that he is no hypocrite. From the very words then of the sentence I gather proof of his being still a [regenerate] believer, and therefore finally saved. ‘The Lord shall appoint his portion with the hypocrites;’ then it would not in the usual current of judgment have befallen him. He did not belong to the class of hypocrites on earth; he would not therefore, under ordinary circumstances, have been found amidst that class in their woe. It is an act of infliction then, out of the judge’s usual course. It is condign punishment suited to a peculiar case of guilt. He resembles the hypocrites or the ungodly in two points. (1.) He is found like them, troubling the servants of Christ. Righteous therefore is it in God to trouble him. As having beaten them, himself is cut asunder. (2.) He is [Page 167] caught holding fellowship with an evil world. Righteously, therefore, is his portion in sorrow appointed with those in whose worldly pleasures and unrighteous deeds he took part. Let us compare the Lord’s words with a similar case among men. We are looking over a man-of-war’s book. There we find the following entry, - “James Johnson, for disobeying orders, disrated and sent before the mast What should we gather from it? That the party specified was an officer, and that his usual place was not before the mast, as also that it would be possible for him to be restored to his former rank. Take another instance. You overhear the Governor of a jail saying to a prisoner, “Do that again, and I will lock you up among the felons What would you infer from it? First, that the felons had a peculiarly dismal locality in the prison; and secondly, that the person so threatened was not a felon, and would not, except for some special trespass, be found among them. While then his companions are hypocrites, and his lot is among them, in “the judgment of Gehenna,” his portion there is, I believe, not for ever; in consequence of his not being, as they are, hypocrites. For the time of the thousand years I suppose him there shut up [in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’]. Even Satan is set free at the end of the thousand years. The “spirits in prison” are set free at the great day. Those who in the days of Noah were disobedient, after two or three thousand years of punishment. Two of the servants of Pharaoh incur his displeasure and are put for a season in ward: but one of them is restored again to his post.

 

 

Will any say that this is Universalism? It can only be for want of discrimination, that any can so imagine. [Page 168] Universalism, asserts that all, whether converted or unconverted, whether believers or not, will finally be saved. No such doctrine is supposed here.

 

 

How solemn the lesson, and how little believed, that none can rightly rule or feed the Church of Christ, who put off his coming! This evidently appears as one of the main doctrines of the parable.

 

 

3. THE VIRGINS.

 

 

To what has been said above on this point, little need be added.1 Their case will present no difficulty, if the punished steward be admitted to be a believer. Their penalty is slight indeed, compared with his. But then again there is such a measure of correspondence between the two, that, if their severe disappointment be not too great a chastisement for their folly, then, for the steward’s secret and partial unbelief developed in open misdeeds, the recompence which he receives is not too great.

 

1 I have found that the view which makes all the virgins believers, had approved itself to some both in ancient and modern times. Thus Augustine, “We must understand that those of whom Christ treats are accounted Christians; for they who are not Christians, cannot go forth to meet the Bridegroom.” Tom. iv, col. 561. Ed. Basil, 1569.

 

“For the foolish virgins had oil, but not in abundance.” “On this account he calls them foolish, because after enduring the greater trouble, for want of the smaller they lost the whole.” - Chrysostom.

 

“It is manifest that Christ is speaking of those who all took their lamps, which as I shall afterwards show is done by none but believers. For the lamp is faith.” - Maldonati.

 

 

4. THE TALENTS.

 

 

The next most difficult case to that of the unfaithful steward, is that of the unprofitable servant. But all that   [Page 169] is told us concerning him is reconcilable with the supposition of his being a [regenerate] believer. For -

 

 

1. He is acknowledged as a servant even when his sentence is passed. “Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness

 

 

2. He has a gift of the Holy Spirit committed to him, a portion of the goods peculiar to Christ, and only entrusted to his servants. “He hid his lord’s money.” Do any persons now possess spiritual gifts, (I address myself to those who think them possessed in the present day,) who are unconverted? If any such exist, are they called on to use such spiritual gifts?

 

 

3. This is a judgment in the Presence of Christ Himself - [after death (Heb. 9: 27) in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’], ere yet he is manifest to the world. All the other questions are tried outside; the right and title to enter the Presence are the points at issue there. This one enters the Presence by the rapture, yet is cast out of it afterwards as unworthy. [!!!*] Will any mere professors be caught up on high? Is not their case settled in the previous parable of the Wedding Garment?

 

[* NOTE: To assume the judgment of a Christian’s works, after his/her regeneration, takes place in Heaven; and therefore before the time of Resurrection or Rapture, is contrary to the teaching of our Lord and His prophets and apostles! See Psa. 16; 10; Acts 2: 27, 34; Luke 16: 23, 30, 31; Acts 7: 5. Cf.  Heb. 11: 13-16; Gen. 13: 14; 2 Tim. 2: 18; Rev. 6: 9-11. See also: Luke 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11, 12; Rev. 3: 10; 20: 4-6; John 3: 13; 14: 3 R.V.]

 

 

4. The sin he commits is not that of which the ungodly world would naturally and most suitably be accused. He is not arraigned as having squandered the talent, or used it as his own, denying the right of any to interfere with it. Such are the ordinary, if not the universal positions of the ungodly with regard to the powers they inherit at birth, or acquired by industry. He is not brought up as a culprit in custody, but voluntarily comes forward, like the other two.

 

 

What then is his offence? It has two aspects.

 

 

1. He is guilty of slothfulness first. 2. In order to hide it, he lays the blame of his inactivity on the [Page 170] extreme severity of the master. He was afraid to attempt to gain, lest he should be unfortunate, and incur the deep displeasure of his covetous master by the loss.

 

 

Now these two points are internally connected. His false views of his master lead to sloth; his sloth in return nourishes false views of his lord’s character. When brought into the master’s presence he first insists on his view of his lord’s character, and then the result appears in the unused talent. (1.) Slander therefore, first discovers itself, and then the effect of his false views upon his own character and conduct. His lord takes up these offences in the order of their manifestation: first pronouncing him “malicious [See Greek] and then “slothful” He represents to him how he ought to have acted, if he would have escaped blame; even supposing that his idea of his master’s qualities were correct. He then settles the disposal of the misused trust; and the principle regulating the same. Thus too it is proved by fact, that his master is not, as he asserts, covetous and griping; for he permits the holders of the talents to keep them still; and not only so, but he gives the forfeited talent to the most worthy servant; rightly judging him not fit to be trusted by his master, who will not trust his master. Then comes the personal infliction on the profitless servant. He is cast into the outer darkness, where are weeping and gnashing of teeth.

 

 

Thus his double offence has an answering double punishment. 1. For not using his talent, it is taken from him, according to the principle which the Lord announces. He is not trusty; he shall not be trusted. 2. But for slandering the Lord to his very face, in a vain [Page 171] attempt to screen himself, he is cast out of the brightness and glory of the Presence. Simple sloth had deprived him of his trust. With confession of his fault he might have still been, perhaps, permitted to enter the kingdom. But slander thrust him out. 1 His “hard speeches” against the Lord, so nearly resembling those of the ungodly world, call for a lot like theirs. His sloth is based upon false views of Christ, and these being cherished through life, at length appear in his vindication of himself before the master. The rewarded servants are possessed of the opposite excellencies. They are praised as “good;” that is, well-disposed towards their master’s person; and “faithful,” in the use of their trust. As faithful, they are to be made rulers over much; as having cherished love to their master, they are called to enter into the “joy of their lord Here ‘the Talents’ discovers its connexion with the former parable. ‘The Virgins’ shows the guests to have entered the house of the bridegroom. The servants now tried and found worthy are permitted to enter the bridal feast; and to have part in the nuptial and personal rejoicing of the master: Cant. 3, 3. Thus an omission is supplied. It would seem from the parable of the Virgins, as if only the gifted dead would enter the bridal banquet. But this teaches, that others besides the sleepers may have part therein. It discloses, too, the important lesson, that [Page 172] beside the question of simple possession of gift, or the contrary, Jesus will inquire, whether the gift has been employed for the purposes for which it was bestowed.

 

1 I would not however overlook that he is cast out as the now manifestly “unprofitable servant.” The union of two qualities, intelligence and right dispositions, constitute the worthy servant. “Good (well-disposed) and faithful.” But the one who is profitless altogether, is the one whose sloth is based on wrong dispositions towards his master - or both ‘malicious and unfaithful

 

 

On comparing the Talents with the like parable of the Pounds, a further argument arises. In the Pounds, the Lord, as speaking to the ungodly multitude, presents his dealing with his foes, as well as with his servants. But in Matt. 24, when addressing disciples alone, he omits all notice of the foes.

 

 

Are there not, alas! many saints who occupy this very position? who have such evil thoughts of the severity of Jesus, that they look on every effort of others for him with apprehension, and dare not attempt any thing for him themselves? But will everlasting perdition be the consequence of neglecting to use a spiritual gift?

 

 

Let us, in concluding this part, consider the general principles offered to our notice in the Presence-parables.

 

 

1. Those in the Virgins and Talents partake of the first resurrection, and in the raptures to the secret Presence. Now no mere [unregenerate] professor will partake of either of these. The question of reality or nullity of the profession made, is settled by the king ere [i.e., before] the king’s son arrives. There the distinction is drawn between the invited and the elect; the unsuitably apparelled one being invited, but not elect. But after ‘the Days of Noah’ the lesson is concerning watchfulness or unprofitableness. Are not many real believers both unwatchful and unprofitable?

 

 

The evil steward alone seems to be left on earth till the Lord’s appearing.

 

 

2. The two first parables discover the Lord’s dealings with those alive at his coming, or “the two.” The [Page 173] Virgins give his actings towards those who have departed. But the two and the ten make up the full number of the saved of this dispensation; and if the two be believers, as I have proved, so are the ten; and if the ten, so are the two.

 

 

3. The sins which come to light are not those of the openly vicious: neither drunkenness, fornication, nor theft come into view. The offences adjudged are sins against the dispensation only. They are not sins previous to conversion, but subsequent to it only. If then the final salvation of all believers be a certain truth, we must suppose the disappointments and punishments here exhibited to be temporary only. Answerably whereto eternity is not mentioned in any one of the four Presence-parables, though it does occur in the sentence on the Goats, in the very next succeeding one. Why is this? but because there the point of decision is between the changed and the unchanged, the seed of the woman, and the seed of the serpent; while in the preceding ones, all are servants of Christ. Universalism has its truth, the possibility of punishment being inflicted for a time, and remedially. Its falsehood is, that punishment will act as a remedy to those unchanged by grace. As believers, these are not set on trial for [eternal] life or death, but their position in regard to the [millennial and messianic] kingdom of God is the point in agitation.1 Hence it happens that as their faults incur more or less of penalty, and resemble more or less those of unbelievers, we are the more likely to confound the persons guilty of them with the unregenerate. [Page 174] In point of fact are there not flagrant cases, both of ministers and private [regenerate] christians abusing their trusts, and acting in defiance of light? Are there not those who through their whole life are concealing their belief of Jesus, and refuse to confess him? Are there not believers squandering money on themselves, lavishing their wealth on every vanity of time? Are not many cut off in these offences? Will they escape shame, deprival of trust, rebuke?

 

1 Tried by the test applied in the Sheep and Goats of having unconsciously done good to some of the Lord’s people, both the unprofitable servant and the steward might be saved.

 

 

The Lord Jesus is the Brother, Head, Bridegroom of the church: but no less is he the Master, and they his slaves, as far as a right to absolute disposal of them, and the requirement of obedience are concerned. The slave that acts against the known will of his Master, is to be beaten with many stripes: Luke 12: 47.

 

 

If mixed with errors, the work even of the believer and of the fundamentally-true teacher will be burnt, and he will suffer loss, escaping with a bare salvation: 1 Cor. 3. If then for simply erroneous doctrines such a result will follow, what for conduct like that of the unfaithful steward? The Presence-parables thus exhibit those, who for various offences, suffer loss, but are finally saved.

 

 

It is observable that those addressed in the first part of the prophecy are not called servants: only in the Presence-parables are any so denominated.

 

 

Four different grounds of trial are set up in these parables. Some pass them, and enter, not into bare life, but into the feast, the master’s joy, the dignities of the kingdom. Will such varied tests be presented to the. ungodly? But one is applied in the Sheep and Goats; and the issue is eternal life, or eternal death.

 

 

These answer rather to the different sins of Israel, and [Page 175] the diverse inflictions laid on them in the wilderness: 1 Cor. 10: 11. “The sins of some men are open beforehand, going before unto judgment; but in the case of some they also follow after. Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand, and the (works) that are of another character cannot be hid1 Tim. 5: 24, 25.

 

 

Whatever fault is found in that day, is in private, during the Secret Presence. There are no spectators but angels; and these execute also the sentences awarded. The church when exhibited to the world is all glory. So, while Jehovah rebukes and punishes Israel in the wilderness, when the camp stretches before Balaam’s eye, the testimony is - “He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel, the Lord his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among themNumb. 23: 21.

 

 

In the parables before us the church is taken to pieces and severed into classes; the Great Husbandman is thoroughly purging his floor. The being rejected, ([see Greek …]) and accounted unworthy of the crown, is true of those only who run in the race, not of those who never enter the lists.1

 

1 This expounds Paul’s fear, lest having proclaimed the race to others, he should, be judged unworthy, not of everlasting life; (that depended on the rejection of the gospel altogether: Acts 13: 46;) but of the prizes of the kingdom of Messiah, or the thousand years. This also explains another word of the apostle on the same subject. “Now even if a man wrestle, yet he is not crowned except he wrestle according to the laws (of the games:”) 2 Tim. 2: 5. That is, the Gnostics, though they used the most rigorous self-maceration, would gain no glory, as refusing the doctrine and principles of Christ.

 

 

Are the rewards to victory glorious? So the rebukes [Page 176] to the slothful must carry disgrace. Are the soldiers of Christ to be called before their general, and their acts of bravery to be noted? So also must the turning back in the day of battle be signalized with shame. We have not, however, any where, traitors judged in the parables before us: though the false steward occupies in some measure the place of a deserter, and is amenable to punishment in consequence.

 

 

As there are different grounds of trial, so of rejection, as well as of entrance. Hence Paul’s not unfrequent caution to endeavour to be blameless. So Peter and John take up the same subject.

 

 

If these views be correct, (and friendly hands are requested to point out where they are wrong,) then the Presence-parables, can only be properly understood on the admission of the following principles:-

 

 

1. That all four refer to the time of the Presence, and to the time of the rapture, as the period of judgment’s beginning at the house of God.

 

 

2. That two relate to the judgment on the living remnant; one refers to the departed; one to the case of both the living and dead.

 

 

3. That the parties tried are believers only: and the “two” are both believers. Without this, neither the taking nor the leaving can be comprehended; nor the connexion of the sign with the parables which follow.

 

 

4. That the reward is not eternal life, nor the rejection eternal death; but only glory or disgrace in Messiah’s kingdom.

 

 

5. Through them all runs the great master-principle of “REWARD ACCORDING TO WORKS” If “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each may receive the things done in the body, according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad:” (2 Cor. 5: 10:) must not there be reward for the good deed, rebuke for the evil? Will not the believer, who, in the most deliberate choice of life, offended by marrying an unbeliever, receive shame from the Lord? When Paul tells us how lightly he regarded the estimation of his fellow-believers, and that his own judgment of himself and the decision of his conscience were not final, he adds, that when the Lord shall come the hidden things of darkness, and the counsels of the heart will be made manifested: 1 Cor. 4. Thus the Lord will render to each praise or blame righteously. Many [regenerate] believers die with sins unrepented of; many sacrifice their eternal [i.e., aionios] interests, in important points, to their apparent or worldly profit. These things must one day be [judged and] weighed. Death fastens these things on the departed in Christ; and the Lord’s coming, more sudden and more secret than that, cuts short the time of the living, and fixes them in the attitude they occupy in that hour.

 

 

If the questions in the Presence-parables be only between the believer and the unbeliever, and none are shut out into the outer darkness but the unconverted, then the warnings of preparation are not to us. This is to my mind proof the most convincing, that the parables exhibit the Lord judging his people only. Will any one suppose, that none will be ashamed before the Lord at his Presence? Do all abide in him? 1 John 2: 28; Heb. 10: 30. The Lord was speaking to disciples only, as he sat upon the mount.

 

 

If the principle of reward according to works be true, [Page 178] then every degree of disgrace and punishment short of eternal woe, may take effect in the kingdom. For it is matter of sad observation, that every species and degree of crime is committed, and has been committed, by [regenerate] believers after their conversion. So that there may be positive and entire forfeiture of the [millennial] kingdom; and only the lowest position in eternal life after it. Sovereignty guarantees indeed, that the elect shall not be lost for ever: but the sin of man enables us to suppose any thing short of this. Look at Aaron, Lot, Solomon. The land of promise must be given to the sons of Abraham. Sovereign mercy had pledged it. But any thing short of that might take place. All but Moses might have been cut off, and he might have been made a great nation. In point of fact, all that generation which came out of Egypt, save Caleb and Joshua, were so cut off. The idea that simple faith is all that is needed for the full glory of the kingdom, and that the condition of all believers there will be equal, must ever shut up the comprehension of these parables.

 

 

But when we see that there is a peculiar readiness for the kingdom, as distinct from the conditions that simply admit to eternal life; and that there is a readiness for the Presence, which is over and above the readiness for death, with which many seek to confound it, the way to move through the encompassing difficulties, is open.

 

 

The bearing of each parable on believers of our day, is then most energetic and practical. Hence we are able to apprehend, why with each of the Presence-parables exhortation is connected. But there is no exhortation preceding the Sheep and Goats, or following it. Why? [Page 179] Because it has not to do with believers in Christ at all, much less with believers of the church.1

 

1 This is the reason why it is not commented upon in this place; the explanation of it will be found in ‘The Prophecy on Olivet.’

 

 

The points tried in all the four parables are the responsibilities of those who are Messiah’s: not the question - Are they friends or foes? nor even, Are they hypocrites or true men? None but believers in Jesus are looking for the return of Messiah.

 

 

Hence the parable of the Talents is to the church.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 180]

CHAPTER 10

 

LUKE 17.

 

 

Much additional light is reflected upon the present inquiry, by the comparison of the prophecy on Olivet with the parallel place in Luke.

 

 

i. The Pharisees, dissatisfied with long delay, and perhaps with something of reproach, inquired of our Lord - ‘When the kingdom of God is coming

 

 

I. THE KINGDOM WITHIN.

 

 

“He answered them, and said, the kingdom of God is not coming1 with waiting, neither shall (men) say, ‘Lo hereor ‘Lo therefor behold the kingdom of God is within you

 

1 The translating the two occurrences of [the Greek word …], (ver. 20,) in two different ways has thrown a false colouring over the passage. ‘The kingdom of God should come.’ ‘The kingdom of God cometh In each it should be ‘is coming,’ both having the same future sense. The rendering ‘cometh,’ leads to the idea that something habitual is designed. This was probably intended by the translators; but it is not correct.

 

 

The Saviour’s words are designedly obscure. The Pharisees’ question was another form of asking for a sign, which was not to be given to the evil generation. He would give them no information concerning that aspect of the kingdom. But he commends to their notice a primary truth, which they had wilfully overlooked ever [Page 181] since its first promulgation by John the Baptist - that the kingdom was not for the Jew because he was a Jew, but for those prepared in heart.

 

 

The kingdom of God may be considered in two lights: either in its preparatory work in the soul of man, fitting him for the enjoyment of the day of glory; or as an outward and visible dispensation of God, taking effect on the times and persons, places and circumstances around us.

 

 

To the Pharisees, who were utterly unprepared in spirit for the [coming and manifested] kingdom, the Lord would present only the inward preparation. To what purpose did they inquire about the future kingdom who would have no part in it? Let them first receive the truth in the love of it; and then they might inquire. In short, the Lord Jesus exhibits the kingdom of God in the same point of view as the apostle, when he says, “The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and joy, and peace in the Holy Ghost

 

 

Considered from this point then, the kingdom of God is a something inward, not to be watched for as coming from without, nor capable of being pointed out to us as lying in some spot near or far off from us; but an inward state of the renewed affections. “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God How then could the deniers of the Son of God, and the blasphemers of the Holy Spirit, see that kingdom which none shall enter save as believers in the Son of God, and born again of the [Holy] Spirit?

 

 

The rendering in the margin, which substitutes ‘outward show’ for ‘observation,’ is not correct in translation, nor agreeable to prophecy. The kingdom is coming [Page 182] with ‘outward show What is the lightning appearance of Jesus, the attendance of angels and saints, but ‘outward pomp?’ But further, the Greek word never has that meaning. It always signifies “watching,” and looking out for something expected. It has generally, if not always, a bad sense; and marks the close observation of enemies, intent to take advantage; either to gainsay in word, or to destroy by force. Thus it is said of Jesus - “And the Scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the Sabbath day; that they might find an accusation against him2 Luke 6: 7; 14: 1; 20: 20.

 

2 In this sense the word is used in the story of Susannah and the Elders: 12: 15,16. So Dan. 6: 11; Psa. 36: 12, in the LXX.

 

 

The watching of the unbeliever is only the close observation of an enemy, desirous of proving the falsehood of the expectation. Such watchers become the scoffers of the last day, when the expectation of the coming [messianic and millennial] kingdom is entirely given up by them [i.e., like all Anti-millennial believers today], as surely never to come.

 

 

To the Pharisees then Jesus presents the necessity of that inward preparation for the kingdom, without which there will be no partaking of its glories. He may also have had in view that long interval of time - the present dispensation - during which there would be no evidence of the coming of the kingdom, no perceptible onward movement of the signs of prophecy; and the only aspect of the kingdom would be the preaching of the grace of God to the Gentile. For waiting supposes separation both of time and of place from the object waited for; but both points Jesus denies. In the sense he would have [Page 183] them regard the kingdom, it was already come, and was not a something without, but in the mouth and heart.

 

 

As the kingdom of God has two aspects - a future and visible one, such as the Jews expected; and a present and gospel sense, which they believed not; Jesus to them takes the latter, as being the only important one to them. And thus he escapes the giving any signs to these unbelieving ones, maintaining his former attitude of refusal to grant them any but his resurrection.

 

 

But the Lord’s answer is not intended to deny that the kingdom is outward, visible, and future, as the succeeding words prove.

 

 

II. THE KINGDOM WITHOUT.

 

 

“But he said to the disciples - Days will come, when ye will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and ye will not see it. And men will say unto you, ‘Lo here or ‘Lo there go not after them, nor follow. For as the lightning that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven shineth unto the other part under heaven, so shall the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things, and be rejected by this generation

 

 

It is evident, that these words describe the [Millennial / Messianic] kingdom of God as about to come visibly, and with splendour. What more bright and illustriously visible throughout the sky than the lightning? Such will the Saviour be at “his appearing and his kingdom He comes “in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Is this to affirm that his kingdom will have ‘no outward show, as other kingdoms have

 

 

While then its present and internal aspect is presented to the Pharisees, or men of unbelief; and their watching, for it as external, is reproved as foolish; to those who had already the kingdom within, it is exhibited as an outward [Page 184] reality; for which they did right to watch. Jesus now offers to their notice the future aspect of the kingdom. But he lowers the tone of the question. The Pharisees asked concerning the coming of “the kingdom of God?” Jesus descants - [meaning to ‘discourse at length; to comment’ (Dict. def.)] - on the Presence of the Son of Man, which was more nearly connected with the Jewish disciple.

 

 

22. The declaration that they would desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man and would not see it, refers to that period of persecution, of which his Jewish disciples are forewarned in several places. As for instance in Matt. 10 and 24 - in the fifth seal (Rev. 6,) - and in the parable of the - Unjust Judge - which closes this discourse of the Saviour. Luke 21: 12-19; is the fullest comment upon the present passage; it describes the persecution to be endured by the [Lord’s] disciple before the wars, pestilences, famines, and earthquakes, which, as the beginning of sorrows, are to signalize the Lord’s [soon] return.

 

 

Under these inflictions from men, they would be hoping for the advent of Messiah to put a stop to their sufferings. But the expression used by the Saviour is studiedly obscure. They would desire to see “one of the days of the Son of Man.” They would desire the vengeance which he has promised to come and inflict, both on their oppressors of the Gentiles, and in the persecutors of their own nation. Their feelings, in short, are such as are described in the following passage of Isaiah: “Look down from heaven and behold the habitation of thy holiness and glory!” “Return for thy servants’ sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.” “Our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.” “O that thou wouldst rend the heavens, that thou wouldst come down, that the mountains might flow down at thy Prsence [Page 185] “Make thy name known to thine adverwries, that the nations may tremble at thy Prdsence Isa. 63: 15, 18; 64: 1, 2.

 

 

But this desire that vengeance may terminate the sin and unbelief of man, would long be maintained in vain. The persecution would begin before the day of the Lord, the exterminating wrath [of God] would come only [before and] at the time of the end. “Ye will not see it

 

 

But at the time of great tribulation, there would come a seeming response to their desires. Men would arise, affirming their ability to point out to them the long-expected Messiah, the Son of Man, to whom, as Daniel had foretold, the kingdom was to be given. Some would describe him as near - ‘Lo here!’ some, as at a distance - ‘Lo there!’ But in neither case were these indicators of Messiah’s [manifested] Presence to be believed. “Go not away” with those who affirm him near, in the secret chambers of the temple. “Pursue not” after those who assert him afar off in the wilderness.

 

 

The present view is fully borne out by the answering passage in Matt. 24: 23-28, which proves that Jesus is referring to that future time of great tribulation, in which Jewish hopes will be kindled to their height, by signs and wonders of false Christs, while their adherents would be on the alert to point out to any whom they might be able to deceive, the place of abode of the false Christ to whom they had attached themselves. The same safeguard against this delusion is given by our Lord on both occasions. His Presence should not be of such a kind as to be pointed out by any man on earth, and as filling but a single spot of earth; it would be like the lightning coming forth from the secret chambers of the sky, and, before it can be spoken of, filling at once the [Page 186] whole expanse of the heaven. He will be seen, not by a few of his Jewish disciples first on earth, but by all men at once, riding on the clouds of the sky: Matt. 25: 30.

 

 

Thus the parallelism of the Saviour’s expression to the Pharisees and to the disciples is seen. To the Pharisees it was said:-

 

 

1. “The kingdom is not coming with watching.

 

 

2. Neither shall men say, Lo here! or Lo there!

 

 

3. For behold, the kingdom of God is within you

 

 

To the disciples it is said,

 

 

1. “Ye will desire to see a day of the Son of Man, and not see it.

 

 

2. And they will say, Lo here ! or Lo there! But believe not.

 

 

3. For as the lightning, shall the Presence of the Son of Man be

 

 

We give thus the same signification to the expression ‘Lo here!’ or ‘Lo there!’ in both. In the first case, the expression would not be used. In the second it would be used; but the disciples were not to believe the testimony; not indeed for the reason assigned before, (because the kingdom of God is only internal, and never [now] to be outwardly displayed,) but because the advent of Jesus to earth will be so sudden, that in an instant his hosts of angels and saints - [who were previously raptured to heaven, because judged by our Lord Jesus as ‘accounted worthy to escape’ Luke 21: 35; Rev. 3: 10) Antichrist’s persecutions]* - and himself will be conspicuous in the heaven.

 

[* NOTE: There must also be a number of surviving overcomers, -“left unto the coming of our Lord” (1 Thess. 4: 15a, R.V.). These tribulation saints of God, will also be raptured at the time of His return, together with the resurrection of the ‘Holy’ dead Rev. 20: 4-6. from ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’ (Psa. 139: 8; Ps. 16: 10. Cf. Matt. Acts. 2: 34; 7: 5; Luke 16: 23, R.V.).

 

It is important to notice that at the time of the first and select rapture of living saints, a changed from mortality to immortality will take place: and this did not happen to Elijah! (see Rev. 11: 7 cf. Num. 16: 30): but must occur before anyone can appear in God’s presence in heaven! See also  Mr. G. H. Lang’s ‘Firstfruits and Harvest”.]

 

 

The nature then of that appearing of the Son of Man, on which the hopes of his persecuted Jewish disciples were to rest, is pointed out; first, the erroneous ideas entertained of it by the unbelieving Jews, given up to delusion from God are exhibited, and then the true view [Page 187] of it set before them by Jesus himself, which was to be their safeguard against such Jewish misapprehensions. The object offered to the disciples shows the nature of their desire. They are looking for Messiah’s Presence; and that the agents of the false Christs undertake to discover to them.

 

 

The lightning- appearing of the Son of Man is to be “in his day Their desire is to be to see “one of his days Thus the Presence of the Son of Man is to extend over some considerable period of time, as will appear more fully afterwards. His open revelation on the clouds will be the conclusion of that period of his Presence.

 

 

Ver. 25. But, before the manifestation of Messiah in glory, his humiliation must come. Thus the personal sufferings of Messiah at the hands of the evil generation, which consists both of Jew and Gentile, and his present and future rejection by them both, stands as the sign interposed between the two assertions of our Lord.

 

 

1. Before his personal sufferings, there was to be no pointing out of the kingdom, or of Messiah’s Presence as in a certain spot. After them, there would be; and this received its fulfilment at the time of Jerusalem’s overthrow by the Romans.

 

 

2. But the Saviour has yet to be rejected by the Gentiles, and, as before their rejection, Messiah would not be pointed out as on the earth, so after that, he would.

 

 

When Israel rejected the true Messiah, false Messiahs arose who deceived Israel. When both Israel and the Gentiles refuse the true Messiah, false Messiahs will rise who will deceive both Jews and Gentiles. The Jews held fast their hope of the kingdom even after they had [Page 188] disbelieved and set aside the true principles of it. Then arose false prophets, who deceived many. The Gentiles now have their hopes of a millennium founded on the powers of man: when they have fully rejected the true promises as delineated in the word of God, false prophets holding out delusive and impious ideas of a kingdom to come, will arise and deceive many.

 

 

The sentiment that Christ must be rejected ere “his day,” answers to that of the apostle in 2 Thess. 2, where he declares, that “the day of the Lord” will not come till the apostacy and the revelation of the Man of Sin. It corresponds also with what we read in the parable of the Pounds. The citizens hate the nobleman, and send a message after him - “We will not have this man to reign over us.” Then he returns, and issues his command to bring his enemies and slay them before him.

 

 

We come now to the third division of the prophecy.

 

 

III. DAYS OF NOAH AND LOT

 

 

“And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating, were drinking, were marrying, were giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all

 

 

“In like manner also as it was in the days of Lot: They were eating, were drinking, were buying, were selling, were planting, were building; but on the day in which Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all; even thus shall it be in the day wherein the Son of Man is revealed

 

 

By “the days of the Son of Man,” the same period is intended which Matthew describes as “the Presence of the Son of Man.” This will be evident on comparing two parallel passages.

 

 

1. “As the lightning - so shall also the Presence of the Son of Man beMatt. 24: 27.

 

 

2. “As the lightning - so shall also the Son of Man be in his dayLuke 17: 24.

 

 

1. “As the days of Noah - so shall also the Presence of the Son of Man beMatt. 24: 37.

 

 

2. “As in the days of Noah - so also in the days of the Son of ManLuke 17: 26.

 

 

“The days of the Son of Man or the Presence, include all that interval which elapses between the descent of the Lord from the heaven into the air, till his manifestation of himself with his assembled saints in the clouds.

 

 

The days of Noah and Lot are described as consisting of three characteristic divisions; first, that before the judgment; secondly, that of the escape of the favoured ones: and thirdly, that of the destruction of the ungodly. The time before the judgment was spent by men in a state of unbelief, in the pursuit of the usual occupations of the world, with the full persuasion that the course of things was about to continue as it ever had done. The time of escape was brief, the favoured were few. Then came tremendous judgment, utterly unlike former experience, and left none of the unbelievers alive.

 

 

In this point the divine judgments will be unlike those usually coming upon men. Before war there is often consternation, and stagnation of business, while the ill results are frequently not such as were expected, and not destruction, but victory, has fallen to the lot of the terrified nation.

 

 

But such will be the course of things in the great day of wrath, as in the days of Noah and Lot: as great a [Page 190] previous unbelief, as hasty an escape of the elect, as sweeping a vengeance on the sinners of that day.

 

 

1. Thus far both cases agree. But the two cases have also their peculiar bearing. Noah’s history presents the great destruction as affecting the wide world. The escape into the ark, answers to the escape of the Jewish elect into the mountains and desert. The flood was a long period of wrath - the waters were a long while rising, a long while at their height, a long while subsiding. This time answers then to the secret Presence of the Son of Man, whence he pours forth the vials of his indignation.

 

 

2. But the day of wrath on Sodom was but a sudden, brief blow. The Lord does not appear in the judgment of the flood. But in the execution of his vengeance on Sodom, we read, “Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrha brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heavenGen. 19: 24. Thus the latter instance refers especially to the conclusion of the time of the Presence by the Lord’s revealing himself “in flaming fire taking vengeance

 

 

In Noah’s case the point of comparison is the ark, or the point to which escape is to be directed: in that of Lot, the point whence the escape is to begin, is the object designed. “Noah entered into the ark.” “Lot went out of SodomAnd as we know that Jerusalem is spiritually called Sodom, the stroke of the Great Tribulation on that guilty city, and its persecutors, is specially illustrated in the exhibition of the history of Lot.

 

 

In the second division we had both “the days of the Son of Man and “his day Answerably whereto, in this third section, we have “the days of the Son of Man,” exhibited in the history of the times of [Page 191] Noah, and “the day” of the revelation of the Son of Man, answering to “the day” of vengeance on Sodom. The days of Noah answer to Matt. 24: 15-28, (or A 5, 6.) the days of Lot correspond to Matt. 24: 29, 30, (or A 7.) The period of the Presence consists, as already noticed, of two parts, the time of secrecy, and the time of manifestation. The latter is especially signified by the history of Lot.

 

 

The Son of Man is “revealed” to the inhabitants of the earth at the close. He is present and manifested to his saints long before, but hidden from the world under a veil of clouds and thick darkness; but when the iniquity of the earth and of Jerusalem is come to the full, the veil of cloud is suddenly rent aside, and Jesus and the hosts of heaven stand disclosed in all their majesty and power, to an unbelieving world. It is then like the bird taken in the snare ere it is aware.

 

 

We come then next to the conduct befitting the terrible crisis.

 

 

IV. THE JEWISH ESCAPE

 

 

“In that day, he who shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff (goods) in the house, let him not come down to take it away; and he that is in the field, in like manner let not him return back Remember Lot's wife

 

 

The preceding portion had described the general unbelief, together with the escape of some, represented by Noah’s entrance into his place of refuge, the ark; and Lot’s escape from Sodom. The Lord now practically applies this [partial escape] to his Jewish disciples. ‘In order to get clear of the tremendous destruction that follows the brief interval allowed for safety, flee headlong! Nothing is to delay your flight for an instant.’ The disastrous [Page 192] consequences of a single look behind are exhibited in the case of Lot’s wife, who escaped indeed beyond the city gates, but was cut off by the Lord.

 

 

The present passage then tallies with the more distinct directions given in Matt. 25. There an idol’s being lifted into, or upon the Temple, is made the signal for flight. In Luke 21, the sign given is the compassing of Jerusalem with armies. “Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains.” “For these be the days of vengeance Luke 21: 20, 21.

 

 

The next section relates to something, I apprehend, quite distinct.

 

 

V. THE DISCRIMINATING RAPTURE

 

 

“Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it, and whosoever shall lose it, shall get it restored. I tell you, this 1 night two (men) shall be on one bed: one shall be taken and the other left. Two (women) shall be grinding together, the one shall be taken and the other left2

 

1 [See Greek …]  No reason can be given why it should be rendered “that night:” See Matthew 26: 31, 31, &c.

 

 

2 The 36th verse is omitted by both MSS. and Editors, as not genuine.

 

 

It seems apparent to me, on re-consideration, that the first of these verses must belong to the present section: for the Jew in the former is directed to use his most energetic efforts to save his life, and he is promised in another part, that by patience he shall win it: Luke 21: 19.

 

 

But this sentiment refers to the surrender of life for Jesus’ sake, and appears connected with the previous hint, that the disciples of the Lord would be under persecution, and so in danger of complying with the temptations to sin. We have therefore a promise that life so [Page 193] surrendered shall be restored. They will by God be adjudged worthy of his kingdom who suffer for it: 2 Thess. 1.

 

 

The present sentiment is first propounded by our Lord on that memorable occasion, when, having drawn from his apostles’ lips the proof of Jewish unbelief concerning himself, he obtains from Peter the confession that he was the Son of the Living God, which Jesus interprets to signify his having life in himself, or the power of resurrection: in consequence of which he promises to build on himself his church, and to raise it, from the gates of the place of the dead Hades’.) Jesus then foretells his own rejection and sufferings, and declares that those who would follow him must tread in his steps, disregarding this present life, in order to assume it again in resurrection. Then follows the promise of some beholding the kingdom without dying, which was fulfilled in the three who witnessed the Transfiguration.1

 

1 A confirmatory result would be obtained from considering John 14: 25.

 

 

The above sketch will introduce us to the meaning of this passage. It is a promise of resurrection life, and so is not for the Jew, who is to live in the flesh during the Messiah’s kingdom, but for those - [both Jew and Gentile] - raised [out from the among dead] at Christ’s Presence. It strikes a new chord then, foretelling the resurrection of bliss for the sleeping saint, preparatory to foretelling the rapture for those who shall enter the kingdom without seeing death. But the sentiment that the loser of life for Christ’s sake shall find it, though it has its fullest expression in the martyr who yields up life in the service of the Lord, has, I suppose, reference to the self-denial of the saints of God in general, in their [Page 194] being ready to submit to any sacrifice at the call of Christ. This then will be the ground of distinction intimated between the taken and the left. The taken is the self-denying believer, the left, the self-indulgent one. For watchfulness or self-denial are different aspects of the same state of the christian; as self-indulgence, or the being overcharged with the cares and pleasures of the world, are on the other hand convertible views of the same character. Thus we see the harmony of the two conditions given by Matthew and Luke respectively.

 

 

The expression, “I tell you,” has its own force. (1) It frequently takes up the last sentiment uttered, and gives the practical result of it. “Thou shalt be cast into prison.” “I tell thee, thou shall not depart thence12: 59; 11: 8, 9; 18: 14. (2) It is the assertion of Jesus’ authority, in opposition generally to the opposite thoughts of his hearers, or the world at large. Were the slain Galileans worse than the rest of the Jews? “I tell you, Nay Am I, think you, come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay Luke 13: 3, 5; 11: 51.

 

 

“I tell you,” my disciples, for the disclosure I am about to make concerns you, not the unbelievers. Then follows the hint of the mode in which the self-denying believer shall preserve his life, namely, by [a select] rapture to the Presence of the Lord. The startling announcement then, which required the Saviour’s full authority to back it was, “This night one shall be taken, and one left

 

 

“This night” must of course precede “that day It is a portion of the present evil age. “This night,” I suppose, ends in “the great and terrible day of the [Page 195] Lord which is emphatically called “that day” in the Old Testament. Thus only would the rapt ones escape the things coming to pass. The flight is to take place, in “that day” in “which the Son of Man is revealed or “reveals himself.” “This night then is a portion of that period when the Lord Jesus is present, but conceals himself.

 

 

The taken and the left here are, as in Matthew, both [regenerate] believers; the taken one is borne aloft to the Presence of the Lord, and the other - [not ‘accounted worthy to escape’ (see Luke 21: 34-36; Rev. 3: 10)] -left to the perils below. But the distinction between the two parties of the elect, as the Jewish elect, or the Christian elect, is more evident here than in Matthew. In Matthew 24: 37, 41, the earthly escape of the Jew is very briefly marked. “The day that Noah entered into the ark, the flood came Here we have, first, the days of Noah in the unbelief of the worldly, Noah escapes, and the vengeance that followed, with the similar circumstances in the history of Lot. But now the Saviour returns over the ground again, and gives us the earthly deliverance, backed by a lesson from the history of Lot, then the Enoch rapture, accompanied by - [his walk ‘with God’ (Gen. 4: 24)] - a note of time - [and selection] - which shews that it precedes the earthly escape.

 

 

The two parties in Luke are more separated, first in the arrangements of our Lord’s words; and secondly, in point of the time, the taken and the left belonging to “this night,” the fugitives belonging to “that day.”

 

 

The instance peculiar to Luke of the discrimination to be exercised between two in exactly similar circumstances, proves more decisively, if possible, than that in Matthew, that the taking and leaving are supernatural; and therefore, that the taking is the Lord’ [Page 196] removal of his saint to glory. Two are in bed, the house locked, the chamber door bolted, both perhaps asleep. Ere the house could be broken into, or the chamber door forced, or even the sleepers awakened, one is taken, and one is left. There is no hint of either rising to flee, or of any entering to carry them out. The human friend who comes at midnight must tarry outside the barred entrance. The robber must dig his way in by force. But this heavenly hand takes his own when and where he wills.

 

 

The women both grinding together are introduced as in Matthew. Does this scene point to the same hour of the day? It may. The grinding is generally in the early morn. “Sir John Chardin informs us (says Harmer) that in the east they grind their corn at break of day; and that when one goes out in a morning, one hears everywhere the noise of the mill, and that it is often the noise that awakens people

 

 

“It has been commonly known, that they bake every day, and that they usually grind their corn as they want it.” Vol. i, 250, (See also Robinson, Vol. ii, 181, 471.)

 

 

It is evident, that both these postures are unfit for instant flight, and that the decision is represented as having taken place, while they are passive.

 

 

The rapture enters the Saviour’s discourse here, as a sign of the coming [millennial] kingdom of God to the Jewish disciple. The kingdom cannot come till his saints are gathered to the Lord; this act then of gathering them, is to be a sign to the Jewish disciple of the presence of the Son of Man, and of the Presence as a proof of the kingdom at hand.

 

[Page 197]

VI. THE EAGLES AND CARCASE

 

 

“And they answered and said unto him, Where Lord? But he said unto them, Where the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together

 

 

The startling announcement of the Lord that that night the sudden change of the destiny of many would take place, aroused the disciples’ curiosity. When would the taking and the leaving take place? They evidently understood the note of time literally. Jesus by his obscure reply hints, that the night was to be taken metaphorically. The carcase was not a literal nor entirely a local thing; so neither were the eagles. It was a moral question which he was laying before them, rather than a physical: a question of diverse natures attaining their respective awards - a moral scene - a matter of spiritual death* and life, and the issues of both. From his answer, confessedly obscure as it is, we may collect, I believe, additional evidence that the preceding announcement is that of the saints’ rapture to glory.

 

[* See Rev. 3: 1b-3, R.V., - “I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and THOU ART DEAD, [2] Be thou watchful and establish the things that remain, which were ready to die: for I have found no WORKS of thine fulfilled before my God. [3] Remember therefore how thou hast received and didst hear; and keep it, and REPENT. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee]

 

 

By the corpse we are to understand the world after its rejection of Jesus; by the eagles, I am apt to think,1 the saints of God. When sin has come to its height below, glory on high attains its height also. The eagles gather when the beast is dead. The eagles rise to their height of life and light, when the beast totters and falls to the earth in death. The eagles’ place is in the clouds, whence the lightning comes. In the body or carcase we have, I suppose, a reference to Daniel. “I beheld then because of the voice of the great words [Page 198] which the horn spake, I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.” “I saw in the night visions, and behold one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven Dan. 7: 11, 13. The eagles in the clouds then, are the saints - [i.e., the ‘holy ones’] - and the avenging angels that come with Christ. And the word used of the gathering of the eagles, is the very one used of the assembly of the saints to Christ by their ascension into heaven: 2 Thess. 2: 1.

 

1 I do not feel certain about this application, and therefore append a note of warning, that it may be tried by each.

 

 

Jesus’ words imply, that the messengers of judgment would collect where sin had reached its consummation on the earth. Now the left one is left where the body is.

 

 

Thus then, if the eagles signify the heavenly elect soaring to their promised heaven, while persecution and unbelieving feasting and rejection of Jesus below betoken the evil - [and apostate Christian] - generation arrived at its carcase-state, then the interpretation of the taking as referring to the saints’ rapture, as well harmonizes with the context of Luke as with that of Matthew.

 

 

VII. THE UNJUST JUDGE

 

 

“Moreover he spake a parable to them on the duty of praying always and not fainting, saying, There was a certain judge in a certain city who feared not God, and regarded not man. Now there was a widow in that city, and she used to come to him, saying, ‘Avenge me of my adversary And he was unwilling for a while; but after this, he said in himself - ‘Though I fear not God, and regard not man, yet because this widow causeth me annoyance, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.’”

 

 

But the Lord said, hear what the judge of injustice saith. Now shall not God avenge his own elect, who cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man cometh shall he then find” - [“the” - a definite article before the word] - “faith on the earth

 

 

It is an error to separate the present parable from the former parts, of which it is the close. By making it the beginning of another chapter, and putting in the word “men,” where there is nothing to answer to it in the original, our translators have severed it from the context to which it belongs.

 

 

The parable of the Unjust Judge is the Saviour’s exhortation of his Jewish disciples to the conduct befitting them under that time of persecution and trouble which he had foretold in the preceding part. He had given us to understand, that his disciples would be longing for his presence, and that for a tedious period their hopes would be withheld, while the storm of persecution would beat upon them with a fury, hitherto unparalleled. What was to be done under such critical circumstances? Resistance - [by physical force] - is forbid: Rev. 13: 10; 14: 12. Here is disclosed therefore the only, yet the all-sufficient remedy for their perplexity and trial. It is constant - [faithfulness to God’s commands and conditions. 5: 20; Rom 8: 17b; 1Cor. 3: 10b-15; Eph. 5: 5, 6. Cf. “For I, Jehovah, change not…” (Malachi 3: 6); “For he that doeth wrong shall receive again for the wrong that he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.” (Col. 3: 25, R.V.)

 

 

The effect of that potent weapon is exhibited in a case where success would seem almost hopeless. A widow without friends, and apparently without money, appeals to a judge to have her cause righted; a judge on whose character, as neither caring for the opinions of men about his deeds, nor regarding the terrors of the future judgment of God, it must seem almost useless to try to make any impression.

 

 

Accordingly, the Saviour informs us, that her plea was at first apparently in vain. He was indeed a [righteous] “judge whose office and duty it was to avenge the oppressed. But that motive had no effect. For a time her suit was without any apparent result. But soon it became evident [Page 200] that the visit’s of the widow and her claims had a cumulative effect, which though small at the first, yet their burden, like the increasing weight of the snow in a storm, after a time became intolerable.

 

 

As a matter of his own personal interest, he felt at length compelled to take up and avenge her cause. Her visits were a constant annoyance, and to get rid of them and live in quiet, he would be glad to do any thing.

 

 

Now, says the Lord Jesus, if constant importunity availed in so apparently hopeless a case, what must it not effect in yours? (1.) That judge was unjust; but the God to whom you appeal is the God of perfect justice, who is fully alive to every claim made on him; yea, feels it before the claim is made. (2.) The widow had no claim of relationship upon the judge: but you, as God’s own elect, are especially loved by him, and affection prompts him to lend you an ear. (3.) The widow could only visit her judge by day, and perhaps but once or twice a day; but God’s elect assail him with their petitions night and day. (4.) The widow was but one: they are many, and their united supplications will [eventually] draw down a speedy reply.

 

 

Yet such will be the terrors of the time, such the apparent evidence in favour of iniquity, that the [regenerate and repentant] believers of that day will be all but ready to throw up their faith, when the manifested vengeance of God [suddenly and without delay] lights upon the persecutors, and the Son of Man makes his appearance in the clouds.

 

 

Of that future, state of things the Acts give us a forcible type. Herod, the persecuting king, reigns supreme. He slays James the brother of John with the sword. He takes Peter too, and shuts him up with the utmost [Page 201] care in a prison, whence escape seemed impossible. But prayer, fervent and unceasing, is made by the church at Jerusalem to God for him. At length it prevails. Just when hope, as it seemed, must give up the ghost [animating ‘spirit’], when Peter himself is asleep, and the morning of the threatened execution was ready to dawn, the angel is sent to deliver. Peter himself has given up hope: when awaked, the steps of his escape seem like a dream; and when, at length, he arrives at the full consciousness of his deliverance, the saints that are met to petition for it will not believe that they can have received the answer. Rhoda “ran in and told how Peter stood before the gate. And they said unto her, THOU ART MADO ye Of little faith!

 

 

We come now to inquire concerning the bearing of this on the preceding part. What are the parties who are thus instructed to petition God for vengeance?

 

 

1. It would seem evident, that it must be the Jewish disciples of the Lord Jesus. But the question arises - In what state are they supposed to be? At what time will their cry thus be raised? First, before the day of flight. Even those who escape from Jerusalem will be driven out from their families and homes, the enemy trampling down their city and the house of their God. Their cry for vengeance under these circumstances, we read more than once in the Psalms and Prophets. And if even these are stimulated to pray for vengeance, how much more those who are taken and imprisoned, in hourly peril of death! Psa. 79: 11.

 

 

2. But it may be asked - Can the prayer for vengeance belong to the Church of Christ? Are they permitted to appeal to the justice of God against their persecutors? [Page 202] And the reply is easy - No! The church is, in general, taught to “PRAY FOR them which despitefully use and persecute them, that they may be the children of their Father in heavenMatt. 5: 44, 45. They are the witnesses of God’s mercy, not permitted to cry for justice, seeing that they stand on mercy themselves.

 

 

It seems then that those exhorted to pray to the God of justice for vengeance, and to whom vengeance is promised as the result of their supplications, are not primarily the Church of Christ. Yet one point of peculiarity attaches to those times.

 

 

The apostates [from within the Church] of the last days occupy ground more awful far than the merely worldly of the present day. God sends on them strong delusion, that they who refused his truth may believe the devil’s counterfeit. And we are informed that the damnation of those who, in token of their belief in the false Christ, stamp their persons with his sacramental mark, is infallible: Rev. 14: 9-11. There is no room then to hope for their recovery and salvation, and so no power to pray for it.*

 

[* See Jeremiah Ch. 7; cf. Ezekiel Ch. 38.]

 

 

Thus the nature of the prayer put into the lips of these disciples is an intimation that the rapture of those in the former part, belongs to (a part of) the church. To the Jewish disciple instructed to flee for his life, vengeance is the very prayer taught in the Psalms. The first rapture of the church is promised to be before the hour of sore temptation coming on the world. But the time of the present prayer is evidently at that period, when the heaviest blasts of persecution assail the believers in Jesus’ Messiahship: a time just preceding his advent.

 

 

Before closing these observations, let us take a general review of the teaching of the passage.

 

[Page 203]

The question started by the Pharisees, was - ‘When the kingdom of God is coming

 

 

i. Jesus refuses to give them any light upon the subject of the kingdom considered as a thing distant in time and place, and commends to their regard its aspect as something already before them, and a question of the state of the heart.

 

 

ii. But to the disciples, Jesus exhibits the kingdom in that point of view in which the Pharisees desired him to regard it. The general results of the Lord’s prophecy concerning it then is, that the kingdom of God will come -

 

 

1. When the evil world, both Jew and Gentile, have rejected his faith and name.

 

 

2. When in consequence, his disciples sigh and groan under persecution; and ‘sore troubles’ sent of God smite the earth.

 

 

3. It will come, when false Christs, working great signs and wonders, arise, and their adherents profess to be able to introduce the inquirer to the Presence of the long-promised Messiah.

 

 

4. It will come, when the world is sunk in unbelief, though judgment is at the door, and wrath’s sword is drawn.

 

 

5. Then will take place the earthly or Jewish escape, obtainable only by the most urgent flight in the direction pointed out by the Saviour.

 

 

6. But before it, will come the mysterious or heavenly escape obtained by being rapt to the true Presence of Messiah.

 

 

7. Then, when sin is at the height, vengeance will overtake the fallen carcase of the world: its open [Page 204] rejection of Jesus, is its last gasp, after which it is fully ripe for judgment.

 

 

The following scheme will also discover another view of its structure.

 

 

The two great subjects which Jesus treats of in secret, are (1.) Jerusalem, and (2.) the evil generation, in its two great divisions of Jew and Gentile.

 

 

In No. ii. then, (for No. i. declines to consider the question in that light,) we have Jerusalem tacitly intended, in the false pretensions of the deceivers who take the name of Christ; and then the state of the generation generally in its rejection of him.

 

 

In No. iii. we have first, the days of Noah, or the state of the world in general: then Lot and Sodom, or the local case of Jerusalem, the Jewish centre. This is an example therefore of indirect (or, as it has been called, introverted) parallelism. The case of Lot and the lesson from his wife’s destruction are not found in the answering passage of Matthew. The reason is, that Matthew deals with the world in general only, the local question concerning Jerusalem having been fully discussed in the first, or literal portion of the prophecy. And beside Lot’s case offers no example of the rapture, which was to be the especial sign in Matthew. These two histories also allude to the two great aspects of the Presence of the Son of Man; its secrecy first, and then its manifestation.

 

 

In No. iv, the order is indirect again, and flight from Jerusalem, now become the Sodom of prophecy, is enforced.

 

 

Then (No. v.) the rapture of the saint, or the heavenly and answering escape is mysteriously given; and its connexion with the Saviour’s secret Presence is hinted.

 

[Page 205]

The question of the disciples (in No. vi.) brings Jesus back again to the earth and the local question, and Jerusalem is distantly and indirectly glanced at. The parable which follows discovers to the Jewish believer the only conduct beseeming a crisis so awful. In Matthew, after the notice of the rapture, Jesus rises at once to the heavenly level, or the position of the church; and gives instruction to it. In Luke, on the contrary, after the same notice of the rapture, he descends to the lower or earthly ground, and instructs the Jewish disciple.

 

 

The following will give a brief tabular view of these conclusions: -

 

 

No. i. The Kingdom within.

 

 

No. ii. The kingdom without. Jerusalem. False Christs. The generation. Jesus rejected.

 

 

No. iii. Noah. The generation. Flood. Lot. Jerusalem. Fire.

 

 

No. iv. Jerusalem. Flight. Lot. His wife.

 

 

No. v. The generation. Rapture. Noah. Enoch.

 

 

No. vi. Jerusalem and the generation.

 

 

No. vii. Jerusalem and the generation.

 

 

The “kingdom of God the subject of which the Saviour is treating, has two aspects, the earthly or Jewish, having its subjects in the flesh: and the heavenly or Christian, whose subjects must partake of incorruption, ere they enter on its loftier regions: 1 Cor. 15: 50. The earthly and heavenly escape then fitly come in to this discourse of the Saviour, disclosing to us the different levels of these two component portions of the kingdom.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 206]

CHAPTER 11

 

THE EPISTLES TO

THE THESSALONIANS I

 

 

IT is familiarly known to students of prophecy, that the two Epistles to the Thessalonians treat more fully of the second coming of the Lord Jesus than any other of Paul’s writings. They were his earliest productions, and they shew his mind still filled with the teaching of the Old Testament scriptures. In them he is seen as the householder bringing forth out of his treasury the old things of the Law and the Prophets combined with the new discoveries of the gospel.

 

 

In treating of this portion of the subject, I propose to adopt a two-fold division, presenting

 

 

1. THE EXPOSITION OF SOME OF THEIR PRINCIPAL PROPHETIC PORTIONS.

 

 

2. THEIR BEARING UPON THE DISCLOSURES MADE BY OUR LORD

IN THE PROPHECY ON OLIVET.

 

 

1. The main portions then which will call for exposition are, in the first Epistle, a portion of chapters 4 and 5; and in the second Epistle parts of chapters 1 and 2.

 

 

1. First then chapters 4 and 5.

 

 

[1 Thess. 4: 13]: “But I would not have you to be ignorant brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as the rest which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, [Page 207] even so them also which are put to sleep by Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the Presence of the Lord shall not precede them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall first rise: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in clouds, to meet the Lord, into air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

 

 

[1 Thess. 5: 1] “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in the darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. But let us who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ. Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him

 

 

From this passage it would appear, that the Thessalonian Christians entertained the idea, that those believers alone who were found alive on earth at the time of the Lord’s coming would partake in the kingdom. Hence they mourned over the saints who had departed, not only with the sorrow of nature, but with a new one, imparted by their misapprehension of the christian hope. To remove this, the apostle wrote.

 

 

If Jesus’ death, he says, were no barrier to his resurrection and ascension, neither would it be to “those put [Page 208] to sleep by Jesus.” Such would God bring with Jesus. But this expression carries with it a difficulty which must be spread before the reader. To whom does the word “bring” refer? By that expression we understand, that the dead are in some distant locality, away from the living, but that they and Jesus are to be united in one company at his coming. When Jesus says, “Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied and a colt with her: loose them and bring them to me:” (Matt. 21: 2.) we understand, that the ass and the colt were in some locality at a distance, but that the disciples were to traverse the interval between their position then, and the place of the ass and its colt, and were to return to that where the Saviour was. Does then this bringing refer to the place of the living saints? Does not it suppose, that the dead are already in the glory of heaven: and that when the kingdom comes, Jesus will bring them with himself? But this is contrary, both to other scriptures, and to the one now before us. For Paul assures us, that the dead in Christ shall first rise, and then both the living and dead conjointly be carried to the Lord in the air. This would suppose then, that the dead saints are in heaven as bodiless beings, that they descend as unclothed spirits with Christ, that they leave him in mid-air, and come down to earth to take up their bodies, and return with the living. Thus the departed would have had long the start of the living, and this would have been the natural topic of comfort to the survivors. - “Do you mourn the departed? They are already in the presence of Christ in heaven.” But Paul’s consolation is the hope of resurrection [from the dead], as embracing in its [Page 209] wide arms both the sleeping and the waking saints. 2. We have supposed in the former case, that the bringing relates to the place of the living saints, and that it means that they will return to earth with Jesus. But there is another point of view from which the bringing may be regarded. It may be referred to the position of God. And this, I believe, is the true point of view. “Them that are put to sleep by Jesus shall God bring with him.” (Jesus.) So that the apostle’s teaching is, that - [when Christ returns (see John 14: 2, 3)] - both the living and the sleeping [dead] saints shall by God be taken to himself in heaven.

 

 

Thus when Paul says, “Take Mark and bring him with thee, for he is profitable to me for service we understand that Paul would be stationary, and that the bringing refers to Paul’s position. There is a passage which seems to confirm this view: “It became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things in bringing many sons into glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferingsHeb. 2: 10.

 

 

Have we not too, in Moses dying on Mount Nebo and buried by the Lord, but brought by him to the Mount of Transfiguration a type of those put to sleep by Jesus, but brought by God?

 

 

The answer to the fears of the Thessalonians then is - So far from death hindering the entrance to the Presence of Christ and the kingdom of God, the sleep of the departed [dead saints] shall first be broken, ere any transforming hand is put forth on the living saints, and then - [at the end of the Great Tribulation, when our Lord Jesus returns to earth] - both together will - [become immortal, and] - ascend to the Presence of the Lord. The signal of this rapture is to be “the trump of God Now this is either the seventh and last trumpet, or a previous one. If it be the sixth trumpet, or a still earlier one, then the [Page 210] dead will be raised from their graves for a long period ere they ascend. For they are not to mount to meet Jesus till the living go with them. But the time of the change - [from mortality to immortality] - that is to pass upon the bodies of the living saints - a change necessary to fit them for the kingdom of God, is “in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump.” A difficulty of great magnitude arises from this. It will be considered hereafter.

 

 

The next chapter presents us with the effect of “the DAY of the Lord” on the world. It would be to the worldly - swift, inevitable, sudden destruction. But the watchful saint would not be in it.

 

[Page 211]

CHAPTER 11

 

SECTION II.

 

2 THESSALONIANS I

 

 

[2 Thess. 1: 4-10]: “So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience in faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure. Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer; Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God; and on them that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the Presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day

 

 

The patience of the Thessalonians under persecutions called forth the apostle’s praise. He speaks of persecutions and afflictions. ‘Persecutions’ seem to mean the acts whereby christians were harassed; either in courts of justice, or when their steps were followed with intent to do them mischief. ‘Afflictions’ seem the results of such pursuit of the ungodly, as prisons, scourgings, fines, and death. Their suffering for well doing was an intimation that God would one day take the cause into his own hand. As he must love holiness, and hate injustice, [Page 212] he cannot always permit the persecutors to triumph. He must, as the just God, render finally, to each according to his works. Could God suffer his saints, who witness to the coming of his promised kingdom, to endure trouble for the truth’s sake, and make them no requital? By no means. They might then assure themselves that they would be counted worthy to enter the coming [Millennial and Messianic] kingdom.

 

 

The expression “accounted worthy” startles some. But it is the word of God, and is not to be explained away. It is no mistake. The same expression occurs in three other passages. “We pray always for you, that God would count you worthy of this calling5: 11. “They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage, neither can they die any more, for they are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrectionLuke 20: 35, 36. “Watch therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that are about to come to pass, and to be set before the Son of Man1 21: 36.

 

1 This is another notice of the [select] rapture.

 

 

Now it is observable in all these passages, that the judgment of worthiness relates to the millennial glory. It could not have been said of eternal life, for that is freely bestowed. “The gift of God is eternal life But the kingdom of God, or the thousand years, is the time of especial reward, and some will be saved finally who will be accounted unworthy to enter it; as for instance, those who die under the just excommunication of a church.

 

 

If then, even those who believe in the kingdom of God shall enter it, how much more those who suffer for it?

 

[Page 213]

As then it was just, that the sufferers should be rewarded, so was it that the persecutors should be recompensed with evil. “With the same measure that ye mete withal, it shall be measured to you again Then the power of the persecutor would cease, and the persecuted would enjoy repose, together with the three apostles who head the Epistle; who no less than themselves, were continually enduring the enmity of men.

 

 

The time of this recompense is then mentioned, as taking effect “at the unveiling (apocalypse) of Jesus Christ from heaven with the angels of his powerJesus will be in heaven with the hosts of angels, but veiled there in clouds and thick darkness, for a considerable period, ere he discloses himself in wrath to the persecutors of his saints. It is evident from what follows, that the subject that was especially before the apostle’s mind was the wrath on the troublers of Christ’s flock. That will take place when the clouds which have so long concealed him roll away, and the Saviour and his angels of power appear.

 

 

Thus “the kingdom of God” is connected with “the unveiling of Jesus Christ,” as it is also in Luke 17: 20, 30. The recompence to the saint is the kingdom of God. But that begins in heaven earlier than it does on earth. There are voices of joy on high when Satan is cast out, saying, “Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ” - while yet the cry concerning the earth is, “Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and the sea, for the devil is come down to you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time12: 10, 12. [Page 214] I suppose then, that this is the solution of the difficulty. God the Father is here represented as making the award to the two parties. Now the repose of the saint comes before the apocalypse of Jesus, but the eternal tribulation of the troubler does not. The last then of the two periods, when both awards are complete, is given. And perhaps the “relief” of the troubled can scarcely be said to be complete, till, as in the case of Pharaoh and his Egyptians, the enemies and persecutors are destroyed.

 

 

There is a revealing in heaven to the saints: but this is a revealing of Jesus from heaven, attended with those angels by whose might the power of the adversaries is overwhelmed. He will be manifested “in flames of fire.” Jesus compares his revelation to the flames and brimstone that destroyed Sodom: Luke 17: 29. And Paul speaks of the “fiery indignation” which shall consume the opposers: Heb. 10: 27. Allusion is probably made in this place to two passages of the Old Testament. “Thou (Jerusalem) shalt be visited of the Lord of Hosts with thunder and with earthquake and great noise, with storm and tempest and the flame of devouring fireIsa. 29: 6. The next verse shows that that terrific manifestation of the Lord is to the Gentile armies that are oppressing her. But another passage is still more to the purpose - “Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word: your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified! but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.” “For behold the Lord shall come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. [Page 215] For by fire and by his sword will the Lord plead with all flesh, and the slain of the Lord shall be manyIsa. 66: 5, 15, 16.

 

 

The parties who suffer the vengeance of the Lord Jesus are distributed into two classes - “those that know not God, and those l that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ (1.) Ignorance of God is the characteristic of idolatrous Gentiles. “Then when ye knew not God, ye did service to them that by nature are no godsGal. 4: 8. And in the former epistle still more directly. “Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God1 Thess. 4: 5; Psa. 79: 6.

 

1 Tois, omitted in our translation before the second class.

 

 

(2.) But “those who obey not the gospel” are another class; who have heard the truth of God and refuse it, loving darkness rather than light; who are also especially set forth in the next chapter. A reference to the history in the Acts will enable us to see that these two great parties united in persecuting the believers of Thessalonica; (1.) the Jews, who refused the gospel which they had heard from Paul’s lips; and (2.) the Gentiles, who were urged on by Jewish intrigues and false reports to persecute the brethren. The Jews “professed that they knew God even when in works they denied him: Titus 1: 10, 11, 16. They are described therefore as “not pleasing God1 Thess. 3, in opposition to those who (like Enoch) please him: Heb. 11.

 

 

There was then a difference of guilt in these two parties; and I think we may trace a correspondent difference in their doom, or rather, in the execution of the vengeance on them.

 

 

Their general destiny is, that they shall suffer [Page 216] “everlasting destruction,” or, as it is called in Matt. 25 “everlasting punishment.” But a question may arise as to the next sentiment. This destruction is “from the face of the Lord.” To that expression two senses may be attached. Does it signify, (1.) Banishment from his Presence? or (2.) Destruction proceeding from his face?

 

 

The latter is the correct meaning; as I am persuaded from consideration of the cases where the same phrase occurs.

 

 

It should be, destruction “from the face of the Lord,” for we have taken the word “Presence” to answer to the Greek “Parousia,” and this is another word, signifying his manifested Presence. The phrase in other places signifies, the personal appearing of him of whom the expression is used. “I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled awayRev. 20: 11.

 

 

Fire from the face of the Lord consumed the burnt offering: Lev. 9: 24. Fire from the face of the Lord consumed Nadab and Abihu: Lev. 10: 2.

 

 

The force of the expression here is the same. There it is written. - “There went out fire from before the Lord and devoured them. Here it is “destruction going forth from the face of the Lord.” And several passages containing a like construction can be produced. “The day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the AlmightyIsa. 13: 6; Joel. 1: 15. “There came out a fire from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incenseNum. 16: 35.

 

[Page 217]

The destruction also proceeds “from the glory of his power.” Power and splendour are united in the Saviour’s appearance. The angels of his might execute the tasks required by power. And glory belongs to those who shine with him like the sun - that is, the risen believers. Fire proceeds from the Presence of the Lord, and the angels are despatched thence on those missions which require strength.

 

 

If I rightly understand the connexion, the succeeding verse, “when he shall come to be glorified in his saints … in that day has a backward reference, to the time of rest to the troubled. The intervening verses, 8 and 9, are a continuous description of the surrounding circumstances when Jesus takes vengeance on the troublers: that which follows is, I believe the aspect of the coming of the Lord to the troubled. So that the construction in brief would stand thus. ‘It is righteous in God to recompense tribulation to your persecutors, when the Lord Jesus appears in fire; and to you the troubled rest, when he comes to be admired in believers.’ Paul had two great thoughts in his mind: (1.) the justice of God as manifested towards the two opposite classes of troublers and troubled; the results of that judgment he states first; then, beside that, his eye was upon (2.) the terrible destruction of the persecutor; on this he dwells, till we almost lose sight of the time of recompense to the other class.

 

 

But another question suggests itself as to the interpretation of those words - “when he shall come to be glorified in his saints.” (1.) Does that intend, (I refer to the word in the original,) that Jesus is to be glorified as the source of the power and glory of his companions and [Page 218] hosts? This is the idea which our translators appear to have had. (2.) Or does it mean “to be glorified by his saints?” Either gives a favourable sense. I am not satisfied which is the true; but rather think that the first is so. “The Lord hath redeemed Jacob; and glorified himself in Israel Isa. 44: 23. “Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified:” Isa. 49: 3. “I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorifiedLev. 10: 3.

 

 

As the foes of Christ are of two classes, so are the friends with whom he comes. Verse the seventh had described them as the angels of his power, and those who were reposing after their persecution. The same distinction, I believe, obtains here. The expression “The saints” in these two first Epistles of Paul has the Old Testament signification of angels.

 

 

Thus, “I heard one saint speaking and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrificeDan. 8: 13. “What is man, that he should be clean? And he that is born of a woman that he should be righteous. Behold he putteth no trust in his saints, yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man Job 14: 16. “The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them;1 he shined forth from Mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints Deut. 33: 2. So Jude: “Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints to execute judgment upon allJude, 14. But the passage especially [Page 219] in the Apostle’s mind was, as I believe, “The Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with theeZech. 14: 5.

 

1 Should be “to his people [See Hebrew …] No parties are spoken of previously, therefore the relative cannot be used.

 

 

It is the passage also especially referred to in the former epistle, and there also the word “saints” takes the signification of angels. “To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God even our Father, in the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints3: 13.1

 

 

 

Jesus will be glorified by his angels in a two-fold manner: in their clearing his kingdom of the ungodly, and the instruments of sin; and also in their worshipping himself, according to the declaration of the apostle, “When he a second time bringeth in the first-begotten into the habitable earth, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship himHeb. 1: 6.

 

 

But he is to be admired in all them that believe, for the testimony of the three apostles who head the epistle had not been in vain at Thessalonica. How appropriately then are believers called on to live according to so glorious a hope and calling, honouring the Lord Jesus now by patience, as then they will be glorified with him!

 

1 The word [see Greek …] as referring to christian brethren does not occur in these two epistles. In the first Epistle, 5: 27, the critical editions omit … [this word].

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page  220]

CHAPTER 11

 

SECTION II.

 

2 THESSALONIANS II

 

 

[2 Thess. 2: 1-12]Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by calculation, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of the Lord is begun. Let none deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come the falling away first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he 1 sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

 

1 [See Greek …] omitted by the critical editions.

 

 

Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you those things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now withholdeth will withhold, until he be come out of the midst. And then shall the Lawless One be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the manifestation of his Presence; Even him, whose Presence is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and wonders of falsehood, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them an energy of delusion, that they should believe the lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness

 

 

IN the former epistle Paul had to remove the believers’ sorrow for their departed friends and relatives. In the second chapter of this epistle he has to combat the [Page 221] Thessalonians’ fears for themselves. By appropriate revelations concerning that central and brilliant object of faith, - THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST - he dissipates them both.

 

 

It is evident from a perusal of the second epistle, that great terror had seized on the minds of many of the Thessalonian believers, through the belief that they were then living on earth during that “great and terrible day of the Lord.” The idea had been fastened upon them, it would appear, by a three-fold cord of error. (1). First, “by a spirit.” Some false prophet inspired by an evil spirit, probably in the midst of one of their assemblies, had asserted it. (2.) Secondly “by calculation1 How much calculations, put forth with more or less ingenuity, have power to trouble the mind, we have seen in our times. (3.) By a forged letter - “letter as from us.” An epistle purporting to come from Paul, Silas, and Timotheus had asserted it. It is not impossible too, that one or two expressions in the former epistle had been forced to bear upon this point. Thus it was said, that “the wrath to the end,” or the final wrath, was already upon the Jews. 2 And the fifth chapter had represented the day of the Lord as sudden destruction without escape. Knowing then that “the Day of the Lord”3 is represented in the Old Testament as a fearful era, in which the wrath of God is poured forth upon a guilty world, they were terrified to think that that day was begun.4

 

1 [see Greek …].   2 [See Greek …] not “wrath to the uttermost   3 [See Greek …] is the true reading. See the Critical Editions.   4 [See Greek …] not “is at hand,” but “is present.” So it means in other instances: Rom. 8: 38; 1 Cor. 3: 22, 7: 26, &c.

 

[Page 222]

Take a passage or two, asserting such views of that great day. “Behold the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the earth (not “land”) desolate, and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir! Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger Is. 13: 9-13.

 

 

Again, “The great day of the Lord is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the Lord; the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness. A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers. And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the Lord; and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as dung. Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the Lord's wrath; but the whole earth shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he will make even a speedy riddance of them that dwell in the earthZeph. 1: 14-18. “The day of the Lord” then is an [Page 223] expression equivalent to “the day of his wrath and no marvel that believers were disturbed to find themselves (as they supposed) upon the earth when it was beginning to be visited with those sore plagues by which sinners are to be destroyed out of it. Through not discerning this point - that “the coming (Presence) of the Lord and “the day of the Lordare two quite different things - the one, the joyful expectation of the church, the other, the terrible day of wrath for the world; many who have expounded this chapter have asserted, that the Thessalonian Christians were terrified at the expectation of Jesus’ advent and appearing as close at hand, and that Paul to allay their fears assures them, that certain events must previously come to pass. Now such is not the case. The Presence of Jesus was the comfort which Paul set before them in the previous epistle. And he is far from laying down any events as necessarily to occur before the advent of the Lord Jesus. He does indeed describe events previously to arise ere the day of the Lord could fall in its just vengeance on the world; but even in this place he presents the Presence of the Lord Jesus as the saints’ comfort. Now the Presence of the Lord Jesus would not be consolation sufficient against that “terrible” day, unless it should precede the day. However near the day might be, the Presence was nearer still. Before the day of wrath come, certain signs of wickedness must arise. But before the removal of the saints to the Lord’s Presence, no event is necessarily to precede.

 

 

What mean those opening words - “Now we beseech you brethren, by the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be [Page 224] not soon shaken in mind,1 or be troubled but this - ‘Let not the thought of the day of the Lord terrify you - the Presence of the Lord Jesus will precede it, and we shall be gathered together to him, ere that awful tempest bursts on the world.’ The Presence of the Lord, and the saints assembling to him, were to be their shield against the anticipated terrors of the day of the Lord. The consolation is not, that the joys of the Presence will requite them for the patient endurance of the terrors of that day; but their eye is fixed on the preceding Presence. The day is for the few and the Temple, and the rejectors of the truth: on these ‘the final wrath’ of that awful period heavily falls. They would be, as one has observed, like Enoch, above the clouds, and far above the earth, whereon the waters of the deluge were to exert their awful might of death. Else the Man of Sin’s wickedness, the power of Satan, the delusion sent of God, would have been exceedingly dreadful. May not the uninjured escape of Paul and Silas from Thessalonica be intended as a hint of the watchful believer’s refuge from the gathering storm which bursts below? “They sought to bring them (Paul and Silas) out unto the people.” “They found them not So Jesus at Nazareth escaped through the midst of the multitude intent on his destruction.

 

1 [See Greek…] “From your understanding

 

 

In the same order were these two things presented in the former epistle. 1 Thess. 4, gave us ‘the Presence of the Lord;’ and the gathering of the saints both living and dead to it: while the next chapter disclosed ‘the Day of the Lord’ coming like a thief in the night upon the world.

 

[Page 225]

Similarly, in Peter’s second Epistle; in the first chap, “the Presence of the Lord” is presented as the church’s sure hope: ver. 16. In the third chapter “the Day of the Lord” is taught as the terror of the scoffer, “the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men7, 10, 12.

 

 

No variety of means then, whether singly or combined, were to lead them into mistake on this point. For certain signs were to precede that day. “The day of wrath” could not come until the guilt of man had fully provoked it. First the apostacy was to arise, which is described in 1 Tim. 4, as being an abandonment of Christianity, owing to the teaching of certain persons inspired by evil spirits. These, under pretence of introducing something purer than Christianity, will denounce the partaking of animal food and the state of marriage as defiling and unlawful to all men. On such principles Christianity cannot be held, nor Judaism either; and these are therefore, strictly speaking, the germ of “the apostacy.” They are principles which on being received by any will necessitate their relinquishment of the main doctrines both of the Old Testament and of the New. These are already in the field in our day. Apostacy is a personal thing, the abandoning for one’s self of truth formerly held. But as Romanists in general profess the same views from childhood to death, they are not apostates.

 

 

Out of the apostates springs “the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition These false principles are the lie which speedily is sustained by Satan’s wonders on its behalf; and the False Christ, making his appearance as the great head of the apostates, the destruction of the [Page 226] deceived one is complete. This answers to what Jesus had said in Luke 17, that he must be rejected by the generation ere he should appear as the lightning. “The apostacy” is the rejection of Jesus by the generation, and no mere failure in seeing certain dispensational truths.

 

 

This deceiver has two names. (1.) The first springs from his character - He is “the Man of Sin,” the most awful specimen of iniquity: as Jesus was “the Just One the perfect pattern of holiness. (2.) He is next called, “the Son of Perdition for he is worthy of wrath. He comes up from the bottomless pit, the place of lost souls, where he now is: Rev. 9: 11; 11: 7; 17: 8-11. As Jesus came down from heaven, the place of the Father’s presence, to possess the kingdom so his antagonist comes up from the regions of the damned, that he may hold the reins of Satan’s empire. One other person is thus denominated : Jesus so calls Judas; and he, as I doubt not, and may perhaps show elsewhere, is the False Prophet: (Rev. 13: 11.) He too comes up from beneath.

 

 

His character is further developed in the words which follow, “who opposeth himself and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is an object of worship.” He is the most extravagant self-exalter that the world has seen or ever will see. He will not be content till he has put beneath his feet every god, whether the true God, or those worshipped by the heathen. He opposes himself to every claim of worship made by another. He himself is to be worshipped, and he alone. Hence we are able to meet what is sometimes urged in favour of the Pope’s being the Antichrist. It is said, that [Page 227] Antichrist does not signify opposition to Christ, but only his being the exact counterpart of the Christ or Messiah. This is partly true: but of the Antichrist it is also said, “who opposeth himself to (and exalteth himself above) all that is called God or that is worshipped.” He must then oppose himself to the Christ: for Christ is both called God, and is worshipped. As the oppositionist to the pretensions of every other object of worship he is the chief of persecutors: putting to death all who refuse to allow his claims: Rev. 13: 7, 8, 15-17. Hence the Apocalypse of Christ presented in the former chapter has especial reference to him as the prince of persecutors. As the greatest of boasters, he is also the chief of scoffers and blasphemers: Rev. 13: 5, 6. In this point of view also he is destined for destruction by the Lord Jesus: Dan. 7: 11. In both these aspects, too, he is the great contrast to Jesus. Jesus bore not witness to himself, but allowed his works silently to speak for him. He humbled himself instead of exalting himself Phil. 2. Therefore, as the principle of the kingdom is, He that exalteth himself shall be abased, but he that humbleth himself shall be exalted, this truth will receive its fullest and most striking confirmation by the opposite destinies of the Lord of Glory and the Son of Perdition. Jesus, too, opposed not his Father’s claims, but in all things maintained them; and vainly did Satan strive to make him forsake the path of obedience.

 

 

Perhaps at this point it may be well to display the unsatisfactoriness of the arguments which would interpret the present prophecy of the succession of popes.

 

 

1. The text speaks of but a single individual; “the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition This title, ‘The Man [Page 228] of Sin’ indicates his concentrated wickedness. Now, while some of the bishops of Rome have been monsters of wickedness, some have been holy men. How then do you sever between these? You say the Man of Sin is the succession of the popes: then the first Bishop of Rome was a limb of this Man of Sin, as well as the present pope. Is the present pope, too, a man of enormous wickedness?

 

 

2. But the point in which ‘the protestant interpretation’ (as it is called) fails most signally to establish its conclusion, is on the Pope’s exalting himself above every god, and every object of worship. A recent very popular comment on the Apocalypse quotes the confession of the Catholic faith made binding in Hungary on new converts. “We confess and are certain (says that document) that the Pope of Rome is Vicar of Christ.” Now words cannot more completely overthrow the charge against the Popes. The Pope does, by his assuming that title, confess his power to be subordinate, and derived from one above him - the Son of God. Thereby he confesses, that the Father, Son, and Spirit are to be worshipped, not only equally with himself, (which alone were a refutation of the charge,) but beyond and above himself. And although he dispenses with and alters the commands of God, he does so by virtue of assumed vicarious power, or authority derived from .another. Be it so then, that he claims power to forgive sins, to dispense with oaths, to depose kings, to make new commands. He claims and exercises these powers, on the ground of being authorised to do so by Jesus Christ. Against this charge the eleventh Article of the Creed of Pope Pius the IV., (which is the distinctive short creed [Page 229] of Romanism) ought to be, yea must be for ever a perpetual confutation. “I do promise and swear true obedience to the bishop of Rome, THE SUCCESSOR OF SAINT PETER, - the Prince of the Apostles - and VICAR OF JESUS CHRIST.” As successor of St. Peter he confesses himself inferior to St. Peter; as vicar of Jesus Christ, he confesses that he has no power but what belongs to Jesus; and that he possesses all that he has by virtue of the authority committed to Peter by Christ Jesus. The Popes occasionally by canonization set up new objects of worship. Nothing then but the extravagance of controversy could have applied to the Pope of Rome a prophecy which affirms that the Man of Sin shall reject the claim of every object of worship but himself. Does the Pope claim to be the object of worship of every Roman Catholic? He would make St. Peter and the Virgin so; but where is the prayer to himself? where are his images set up in churches? The Virgin’s abound. The Pope himself worships them.

 

 

The citations then that are made containing blasphemous titles of the Pope - as, “Thou art our Shepherd, our Physician, in short, a second God upon earth,” are utterly worthless as proofs of the point required. The Man of sin will not allow of “a second God” either in heaven or earth, much less will he take the second place. He claims to be the first God, the only God. And secondly, the quotations consist of what others say of the Pope, not what the Pope says of hinself. Take that which comes nearest to the proof demanded. “The Pope (said Pope Nicholas, addressing the Emperor Michael) who is called God by Constantine, can never be bound or released by man, for God cannot be judged by man

 

Page 230]

Now in this case also, though it be a Pope who is speaking, he builds his argument on what another had asserted concerning him. Constantine, not his own ipse dixit, is the basis of his proof.

 

 

But the blasphemous audacity of the Man of Sin is further exhibited when at its highest tide. “So that he sits in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God

 

 

The temple of God has four different senses in the New Testament. It signifies -

 

 

1. The Saviour’s body: John 2: 19, 21.

 

 

2. The [regenerate and obedient (Acts 5: 32. cf. 1 John 3: 24, R.V.)] - believer’s body: 1 Cor. 6: 19.

 

 

3. The Church - [Gk. (ekklesia) = ‘out-calling’] - of Christ: 2 Cor. 6: 16.

 

 

4. The temple at Jerusalem. “This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three daysMatt. 26: 61.

 

 

Now the two first of these senses are evidently excluded. That the Pope does not sit in the church of Christ is manifest, for that rejects him: nor can the body over which he presides be at once “the apostasy” and “the temple of God

 

 

It remains then, that the temple at Jerusalem, which must one day be rebuilt, is the temple in question. How would the Jews of Thessalonica understand the phrase, but of the temple at Jerusalem still standing? Did they not know, that their prophets had described God’s great antagonist as brought into contact with the temple? Dan. 8: 11, 12; 9: 26, 27; 11: 45; Is. 14: 13, 14; Psa. 74: 3.

 

 

Thus, again, we obtain the fitting contrast between Satan’s Christ and “the Lord’s Christ.” Jesus was [Page 231] accused falsely of destroying the temple of God. The false Christ will actually destroy it, and be blameless in the eyes of men: (Ps. 74.) Jesus appeared in the temple of God, doing miracles there and cleansing it; but the Jews refused him, and checked the words of homage which were rendered him: Matt. 21. The false Christ will defile the temple by the introduction into it of the “abomination of desolation” his own idol-statue; and all the world will wonder at the speaking and breathing image, and will worship. The attempt to set up a statue or image of himself in the temple of God was made by the Roman Emperor Caligula, who was worshipped, under “names of blasphemy,” as God. He was cut off by the sword.1 Another Emperor, (Nero,) gave order for the destruction of Jerusalem, but died by his own hand ere his order was executed. Thus the chapter before us is in harmony with the twenty-fourth of Matthew. “The day of the Lord” here, answers to the “Great Tribulation such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” The signs and wonders of this Man of Sin identify him with the chief of those false Christs whom the Saviour foretold as about to rise, doing “great signs and wonders, insomuch that if it were possible, they would deceive the very elect How clearly does this correspond to that “energy of delusion that they should believe the lie,” which God will send on all but the elect!

 

1 This gives us to understand the force of that expression in Rev. 17: “The five are fallen,” intimating that they all died by violent deaths.

 

 

At this point a break ensues, and Paul notices that these declarations were but repetitions of what he had [Page 232] told them before. He proceeds to observe, that as there were events which must precede the Day of the Lord, - (the Apostacy namely, and the rise of its great Head, the Man of Sin) - so there was also a hindrance to the appearing of the Man of Sin. What that obstacle was, they would now be aware. From which it appears, as if the apostle was persuaded, that something he had just written would bring to their remembrance what the obstacle was. The idea may help us to discover what the hindrance is.

 

 

1. First, however, let us notice what it is not. I think we may say assuredly, that it is nothing physical, nothing political; and if so, we must dismiss the idea entertained by the Fathers, that it was the unbroken state of the Roman Empire. Surely that hindered not a spiritual decline and fall, like that of the apostacy.

 

 

But if Paul had already hinted what the hindrance was (I am not denying his having told them plainly what it was when he was with them at first,) a consideration of the previous context may, with the blessing of the Holy Spirit, lead us to the discovery.

 

 

2. I believe then, that it is the presence of the watchful saints of the Church. For Paul in 1 Thess. 4. had spoken of the rapture of the saints before he had touched upon the unbelief and destruction of the world. (Ch. 5.) In the present chapter also the apostle first exhibits the gathering of the saints to Christ ere he speaks of the apostacy. It is then as though he said, - ‘Having in my two epistles presented the apostacy and the vengeance of the Day of the Lord, after the rapture of the saints, you will now catch my meaning.’ If we suppose this, we give great significance to his previous [Page 233] appeal. ‘The day of the Lord, you are saying, is already begun, and we are involved in its visitations of indignation.’ Not so: for then the apostasy and the Man of Sin would be developed and come to their height in spite of that hindrance to their revelation which God has in mercy set. Now if that obstacle be the Presence of the watchful saints themselves, then would he give them a most comforting assurance, that the Day of the Lord would be no terror to them.

 

 

The hindrance lay upon the Man of Sin (like the stone of lead on the mouth of the ephah: Zech. 5.) to prevent his manifestation till the fitting season. But for that, the plans of Satan would have come to a head long, ago; and the wickedness of man have discovered itself before the time. The world’s fermenting mass had long become putrid, but for the salt from time to time scattered.

 

 

Can we not lay our finger on one remarkable instance? The Antichrist is to be an emperor of Rome: Rev. 17: 7, 10, 11. Now there was a time, when an emperor of Rome after professing Christianity abandoned it, and apostatized to heathenism, endeavouring to subvert christianity. He called in the Jews to his aid, and would fain have restored “the temple of God” at Jerusalem. But globes of flame bursting from the foundations burned and killed the workmen engaged in it, and the attempt was abandoned. The stage might not be cleared for Antichrist, for the apostacy had not yet come, nor were the elect of God all called. He was not the man, and that was not God’s appointed time. When the wickedness of the world has come to its height, there will be no hindrance to the temple’s rebuilding: though many [Page 234] may imagine, that its erection then proves that it could have been built before.

 

 

Even in Paul’s day “the mystery of lawlessness” was at work. Principles subversive of all control and order began to shew themselves so early as the apostles’ day; but a gracious hand prevented the young hemlock plants from running too quickly to seed. “The mystery of lawlessness” again is the contrast to “the mystery of godliness1 Tim. 3: 16. True piety rests on the manifestation of God in the flesh; the most flagrant defiance of all law will turn on the manifestation of an incarnate fiend. Jesus is in mystery in heaven, and descends in order to his manifestation. Antichrist is in [‘Sheol’ / Gk. ‘Hades’] mystery below, and ascends in order to his revelation.

 

 

On this point again it is easy to see that Romanism does not tally with the prophecy. Romanism, overwhelms the soul with many laws, and a heavy burden of the traditions of men; it does not set the man free to move at his own wild will. It is the soul subjected to the tyrannous chains of the confessional; not licensed to despise all laws, divine and human. Romanism, in its essence, tends to Phariseeism - the increase of laws, and abounding of sins. The sin of which the apostle is speaking, is, in its essence, Sadduceeism - the flinging down of all regard to law or opinion - the assertion that nothing is sinful, and that every thing is lawful, which the inbred passions of man may rush after.

 

 

The Romanism neither (1.) in its system, nor (2.) in its chief - the Pope - is lawlessness. In many respects, evil as it is, it is not only opposed to, but contrasted with lawlessness.

 

 

There are two tendencies of the human mind, [Page 235] intellectually, morally, politically, religiously opposed. 1. The one is that confidence in the individual’s own power, which leads him to consider himself competent to decide any question by his unaided REASON; and which rejects with boldness, and even with scorn, whatever appears opposed to it. The other is, that tendency to self-distrust, which is found in the majority of minds, which dislikes to encounter difficulty, loves to follow in the train of a leader, and to submit itself without examination to the judgment of those of former days, or to those deemed wiser than itself.

 

 

Now on which of these tendencies does Romanism found itself? On REASON, or on AUTHORITY? Which would be its favoured specimen of humanity? - the Irish cottager, receiving with un-enquiring simplicity every assertion of his priest - the organ of an infallible church? or the man of science, who scoffs at transubstantiation, as a disgrace to the reason, and who finds in scripture itself many things, which, as contrary to the prevailing schemes of science he rejects as absurd? Which of these two again, furnishes the nearest approach to lawlessness?

 

 

(2.) In every religion, there are two tendencies either on the one hand to reduce every thing to rite and ceremony; or on the other to sublime everything away into certain airy fancies and metaphysical principles. Of these two tendencies the latter is the lawless one. Having gained, as it confidently supposes, by a profound analysis, the real spirit of the Christian faith, it despises forms, and would demolish them, as savouring only of the sensual and earthly. Of these two tendencies which is the Romish? Is her tendency to abrogate, or to [Page 236] multiply rites? The question need but once be asked. The just accusation against her is, that she smothers the spirit of christianity beneath a heavy load of self-devised rites and forms. Of the two opposed principles - FORM and SPIRIT- then, she has again chosen that which is the most opposed to lawlessness.

 

 

(3.) Her tendency is ever to add what is useless or noxious; as the lawless tendency is ever to cut off what is healthful and necessary. Rome exalts human wisdom to an equality with divine. Lawlessness depresses divine wisdom to a level with human. Romanism is ever prone to exhibit the errors of the human reason, and to hold up to scorn the absurdities of the fanatic. Rationalism points to ‘the Dark Ages,’ and justly exclaims against the dead and dry level at which Rome would ever retain the human mind. It ever boasts of the power of the understanding to educe brilliant and glorious results; and blazons with the highest eulogiums the grand discoveries of ancient, and especially of modern times. Romanism seeks to bind down the will to unreasoning obedience, and to subject even the testimony of the senses to the decrees of the church. Rationalism scouts the devices of priest-craft, and the subjection of the understanding and the will to the council, the priest, the pope. The Romanist would shut up the bible. The Rationalist chips and carves it at his pleasure. Mystery he abhors; unity and simplicity are his delight; to obtain them he tears down every principle which he cannot reconcile to his system. In its higher stages, becoming blank infidelity, it denies the necessity of revelation; and asserts the sufficient illumination of the human intellect.

 

 

(4.) The Romanist finds his home and resting-place [Page 237] in the cloisters of the PAST. The Rationalist is in his element in the lecture-room of science, and in the prognostics of the glorious FUTURE. He chants continually the glories of the PROGRESS OF THE AGE. The Romanist’s theme is the wisdom of the fathers: and his motto is, ALWAYS THE SAME.

 

 

(5.) The cry of Rationalism is, ‘LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY The tendency of Rome is to multiply ranks, and to preach subordination, especially subjection to the priest. The Rationalist’s war cry is, the rights of man - the natural equality of all. The counter-cry of Rome is, the rights of the church, the supremacy of the clergy. In all these points it is manifest, that the tendency to lawlessness lies with Rationalism, not with Romanism.

 

 

(6.) How can that system be characterized as lawless, which rests upon and enforces a continually accumulating mass of law? Fathers, councils, bulls, indexes, congregations, orders military and orders spiritual, breviaries, rubries, pontificals, compose some of the elements of the vast heap of laws and regulations which give it shape. Law is its very essence. The voice, the gesture, the posture, the words, all are to be regulated by print. Not a book may appear even on subjects apparently the farthest from religion, without ‘the permission of the superiors

 

 

But to Rationalism this is hateful; in no measured terms it denounces the servility of such prostration to a mechanical routine. The grandeur of originality fascinates it - it has positive delight in detecting the absurdities of authority, and the heartlessness of ceremony dictated by law.

 

 

(7.) Look again at the political tendencies of the two. [Page 238] Romanism coalesces most aptly with an absolute monarchy. With the rise of infidelity fell popery in France. In our own day, as soon as the pope gave way, though but a little, to the innovating tendencies of the age, the lawlessness that lay slumbering at Rome, bestirred itself, girded on its weapons, drove away the pope himself, and set itself to pour forth its torrent of accusations against his government and person. France is the most lawless country in Europe. - What flourishes most there? the papal doctrines, or those of infidelity? The indignant remonstrances of Rouge, against the superstitions of Rome - whither did they land him? Not in Luther’s humble submission to the word of God; but in the rationalistic reliance on reason. These surely are the manifestations of self-will and lawlessness: but they belong not to Romanism, but to her antagonists.

 

 

Can we doubt then a moment to which of these tendencies we must look for the full development of lawlessness? Lawlessness is the determinate resistance to all authority. For a moment then review the two systems from this point.

 

 

Does not Rome set up clerical authority? Does it not arrange within itself a compact hierarchy, whose degrees are rigorously kept? Does it not naturally lean to, and rest upon monarchies? Is not its tendency to form compacts between the civil and ecclesiastical? The Revelation would lead us to believe it. One of the great crimes of Babylon is her fornicating with kings. Hers are the arts by which those who have power seek to keep it. Her tendency is slowly to add to law, and to form an immense concrete. She loves not motion, but conservation: she dreads physical science and its career of [Page 239] discovery: she would, if possible, reinstate logic, Aristotle, and the schoolmen.

 

 

In all these points Rationalism is the reverse. Clerical authority it inveighs against as priestcraft: kingly authority it speaks against as tyranny. When it has reached its full height, it defies heaven as well as the potentates of earth. Witness the French Revolution of 1790.

 

 

Romanism is the petrifying spring incrusting both the true and the false; Rationalism is the concentrated acid, eating through wood and iron alike. Her tool is the pickaxe; her favourite expedients the mine and gunpowder. The spirit of Rome is that of indiscriminate reverence, worshipping even the wicked and absurd. The spirit of Rationalism is indiscriminate irreverence, refusing to bow before the word of God. Rome finds daily miracles; and props herself up thus in the minds of her votaries, by adding spurious wonders to the real ones of Scripture. Rationalism derides those of Rome and of Holy Writ together, and jests at the idea of the supernatural returning to our mechanic world. “Where is the promise of his coming?” From whose lips will this first spring? From the philosophers’? Or from the monks’? Rome esteems the many to be ignorant, needing leaders, and decisions which are to be obeyed. She depresses as far as possible the individual will, intellect, and conscience. But the other system erects individuals into judges on all points; and would make the intellect and the will of each independent of every other. In the eve of Rome, all but the clergy are ever children in the things of God. In the eye of the Rationalist the child is capable of deciding all questions; his opinions [Page 240] are to be respected, his fancies are not to be interfered with by discipline. The Romish system tends to bondage, mental decrepitude, and the most iron tyranny over both body and soul. Continually do even those who proclaim it the foretold apostacy of lawlessness, complain of its yoke. But the opposite scheme tends as openly to the wildest democracy and anarchy. Has not the past a lesson for us? What overthrew the long established monarchy of France? What blasphemed the true God and the faith of Jesus Christ? Not the French monarchy, but the French democracy. Not the Romanism of France, but the Rationalism of the Encyclopedists developed to the full. Whence came the ancient Quakers with their blasphemy of the Scriptures, their denial of the Trinity, the resurrection, and other essentials of the Christian faith? Not from the royalist party, whose tendencies were towards Rome: but from the antagonist party, at a time when anarchy had come in.

 

 

Rome acknowledges the mystery of the Godhead: but tends to bring in idolatry. Rationalism derides the folly and superstition of idolatry, but at the same time denies the Trinity. It cannot reconcile a Trinity in unity to the demands of self-sufficient reason. Rome runs on to polytheism: the Rationalist as surely to pantheism or atheism. Rome’s disorders are atrophy, paralysis, coma. The diseases of Rationalism, are fever, inflammation, the mania of pride.

 

 

Shall we look at it in another direction? The False Christ, who embodies the lawlessness of the world, is in league with THE JEW. Can we not detect then these two tendencies in that nation? Yes - there is Talmudism, [Page 241] patronized by the Rabbins, an enormous concrete of the traditions of the (so called) wise men. To this many bow down with misdirected reverence. Its portentous, black, arid, rugged, granite mass hides from Israel the mount of God. But against this pile of absurd and wicked fables and precepts, which make void the word of God, many of the Jews have risen up. Whither now do these tend? Here is the antagonist force. Which is its pole?

 

 

Does it vibrate towards Rome, after emancipating itself from its own Rabbinic fetters? Nay, but its course is manifestly towards rationalistic infidelity. It has exploded the mountain of its wise men’s absurdities: but it has with the same charge blown away the hope of Messiah - the one vital principle of Judaism.

 

 

Again, as the Jew tends not to Rome; does Rome tend towards the Jew? Nay: from age to age it has persecuted, oppressed, slain that once beloved race. But Rationalism takes up the Jew; thus showing itself superior to popular prejudice. Julian and Napoleon address and caress them.

 

 

Finally, these two tendencies exist in every religion. Mahommedanism has its Sonnites, who add the traditions of the wise to the precepts of the Koran: and its Shiites, who deny aught but the original documents. Brahminism has its Buddhism.

 

 

In concluding this subject, be it observed, that Romanism has, and always must have, an element deeply offensive to Rationalism and lawlessness. It stands committed to the power of the priest, both for instruction, and for the performance of rites acceptable to God. But Rationalism and lawlessness abhor both pretensions. [Page 241] ‘Man needs not instruction from a superior: rites and temples are mere formality: the open heaven, and the beauties of nature constitute the true temple!’ Hence the first revolutionists assailed alike both priest and king; and one of their fearful stanzas embodies the wish to “strangle the last of the kings with the bowels of the last of the priests Condoreet said, “Kings persecute persons; priests, opinions. Without kings, men must be safe; and without priests minds must be free

 

 

So says Quinet also, the present popular writer of the College of France. “Whenever a priest can say to a whole nation; ‘Give me thy mind without examination;’ the prince, by an infallible logic, chimes in­ - ‘Give me thy liberty without control.’” “Catholicism having for its principle ever to see right in fact, the spirit in the sign, the gospel in the priest, and legitimacy in the prince - considers that to interrupt the order of dynasties, would be equal to molesting the interior order of God himself

 

 

To his eye the revolutionary spirit of France is the true gospel of modern times. “The ideal of the revo­lution is, in many respects, much nearer than the church is to Christianity!” “The people of France raging in a moment of fury against the visible church, but distributing themselves as one may say, over all the earth, and saying to the other nations, in diffusing their spirit, ‘This is my body, and this is my blood’ - that nation was, amidst its blasphemy, more Christian than that which it overthrew.”

 

 

Let me give a quotation from another modem writer, commenting on the last French Revolution. “Let us never forget the impulsive adoration with [Page 243] which the armed people, who had just dethroned kingcraft, bowed before the image of Christ - the King of kings and Lord of lords! ‘Friends, salute Christ! he is the Master of us all.’” “The revolution is rightly religious. But religion is an impulse, superstition a system. The salute of Christ was spontaneous, impulsive.” The scene was transferred to paper by two different artists: one of revolutionary tendencies, one of priestly. Against the latter the writer turns in rebuke. “The first was the work of an artist, the child of a religious impulse; the second, the work of a priest, the creature of a system.” “The system of priestcraft is the foe of religious impulse, and would insiduously subvert it to old formality. Let this fact be a warning.” “France must have the worship of the worthiest - not with fixed form, but with frank freedom

 

 

What shall we say then? That Romanism is built upon the blind spirit of veneration, that it depresses the individual, and seeks to repress the spirit of reason and the desire for evidence, and that it naturally allies itself with absolute power in civil things. But Rationalism exalts the individual into a judge on all points, refuses to venerate any thing but reason, rejoices in destruction, is furious at any control either spiritual or civil. Rationalism then, not Romanism, is the lawless spirit destructive of Christianity, of which the apostle here warns us.

 

 

Satan, while from on high he rules and deceives the world (Eph. 6.) has used the one tendency of man to produce a false worship, and his master-piece for the time of human ignorance has been Romanism. But the race has awakened, and is awakening still, to knowledge [Page 244] and to its attendant pride and self-reliance. He will use the other tendency of man, specially when he is cast down from above, to teach him to blaspheme the Creator, and to worship himself alone. That, his last scheme, will be the master-piece. In Romanism it is possible for a few to escape perdition; but in the coming scheme of Satan, to believe is to perish inevitably.

 

 

Or let us regard the subject again in the light of scriptural history. True Christianity had two great antagonists in the times of the apostles, Judaism on the one hand, and Philosophy or Gnosticism on the other.

 

 

Now these are the very same two opposed tendencies of the human mind which have just passed in review before us. Gnosticism chipped and hewed away doctrine after doctrine of Christianity, according as it seemed opposed to its darling theories. This surely was lawlessness. Judaism sought by degrees to bring in laws and ceremonies, and the value of human works in the matter of [initial and eternal] salvation, with submission to the traditions of the elders.

 

 

The spirit of lawlessness is already at work, says Paul; and as it wrought without, so doubtless within the church. Now can we not trace some hints of this tendency in the Epistles to Thessalonica? There seems to have been a disposition to call in question even the character of the apostle: 1 Thess. 2. He is obliged to caution them against uncleanness, even in its most awful form, (ch. 4.) and then to add, in expectation of some scorning his admonition (for uncleanness and lawlessness are closely allied) that to despise it, was to make light of the word of God himself. May we not gather from the fifth chapter, a tendency to despise those [Page 245] who taught them, and a light value set on prophecy? 1 From the second epistle can we not see, that some were unjust, intermeddlers, refusing to support themselves by work? Nay, the apostle supposes that some would resist his apostolic authority, and gives directions how such a one is to be treated. It is easy to observe how greatly this state of things accords with like indications (only more marked) at Corinth. But this will suffice. Of what class now are these tendencies - Judaical? or Rationalistic? Rationalistic assuredly, and not Judaical at all. But what is the strain of the Epistle to the Romans? There, it is manifest, the tendency was to make much of works, and of the law, and of the sacraments. There the apostle had to caution against the tyranny which lords it over the conscience of others: ch. 14, 15. But this is the abuse, not of reason, but of authority. The tendencies of Rome, therefore, were not then, any more than they are now, Rationalistic, but Judaizing.

 

1 Which party now scorns prophecy most?

 

 

The connection of Judaism with Christianity is the seed of Romanism. Hence that corruption of the faith makes Christianity a law, by obedience to which we are to be saved: hence its ritual, its priesthood, its pomp, and its hankering after the power of the world.

 

 

2. But Gnosticism was the other element which was to corrupt Christianity. It was chiefly to be feared in Greece, where cultivation of the intellect reigned. Hence this is the corruption against which Paul contends in his epistles to the Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, Thessalonians. Romanism, it is true, has adopted some of the dogmas of the self-styled [Page 246] ‘illuminated’ philosophers of old. It is on these shreds of Gnosticism that Protestants have fixed their charge. Romanism is the religion of power as divided between priest and king, controlling the masses. Gnosticism is the element of resistance to all authority, resting on assumed intelligence, scoffing at pomp, and extolling the spirit above the form. From this last the apostacy arises.

 

 

Would I apologize for papal errors? God forbid. She has well nigh choked up with rubbish and filth the channel of divine truth. But let us remember that there are diversities of error, and that her errors are not of the class described by Paul to the Thessalonians.

 

 

Look at history. Is it not seen, that from Rome’s prostrating the human reason to absurdity the most gross, springs, first secret, then open infidelity: an infidelity that nauseates the truths of Christianity along with the formalities and falsehoods introduced by the priest. And what is the issue? Is it not that the altars of Romanism are swept away by that long pent-up flood? What but this picture do we see presented in Revelation? The Wild Beast first carries the woman on his back, then he and his upstart ten kings - flung up as burning islands from the revolutionary submarine volcano - burn the once cherished harlot with fire.

 

 

Again, the characteristics of the Popes are not those of the Man of Sin.

 

 

If the Man of Sin be a succession, then in each link of that succession the characteristics of the Man of Sin must display themselves. Each must be a son of perdition himself, and all his followers condemned everlastingly. Each must have supernatural power, derived from Satan. Each must, by his own lips, assert himself [Page 247] to be God. Nor were even that enough, impossible as it has been found to prove it even of any one individual Pope. For the godhead claimed by others for the Pope, and more or less tacitly admitted by himself, is a secondary and subordinate godhead. But the Great Usurper painted by Paul is consistent. He opposes himself to the godhead of any but himself; he exalts himself above every object of worship, true or false, Pagan, Jewish, or Christian. His tone is that of the true God. “Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God. I know not any.” This is the one article of the creed which he enforces, under penalty of death, upon the sons of men. But in the Pope’s creed, the doctrine of the godhead of the successive, or of the reigning Popes does not appear. Nay, on the contrary, it does not only permit, it enjoins on every disciple of Rome the worship of the saints reigning with Christ, the images of the Virgin, and of other saints. The worship of the Virgin, is an incessant, and justly indignant cry of Protestantism against Rome. But if this be supported by the Popes - if the blasphemies of Bonaventura and Liguori are sanctioned by Papal authority - if Pope Gregory the XVI. (so late as the year 1833) in his evangelical letter, declared that the Virgin was “the entire ground of his hope how can the Pope be the Man of Sin, who acknowledges no object of worship but himself? How can he be the person who is to bolster up his pretensions to undivided and unapproachable Godhead, by miraculous power - when not one of all the Popes ever even pretended to work a miracle? The Popes admit miraculous power in others, and require it in order to canonization, but do not pretend to it themselves.

 

[Page 248]

With apology for this long, but I trust not unprofitable dissertation on a subject intimately connected with the interpretation of the passage, I now return again to the text.

 

 

The obstacles to Christ’s appearing may be called two. God is keeping Jesus back till his people are in a fit state: the wheat is not ripe yet. Satan is kept back also, and his antagonist king and kingdom for a like reason. Iniquity is not come to the full: the tares are not ripe yet.

 

 

Paul had spoken of a hindrance to the appearance of the Man of Sin. That hindrance would subsist as long as the Hinderer remained in the midst. “Only there is the hinderer, until he be come out of the midst I give this as the more literal version of a difficult passage. The obstacle is spoken of as both a thing, and a person; it has both a neuter and a masculine form. It is something good, for it hinders the development of evil. The restraining thing and the restraining Person are distinct, yet intimately related. It seems probable, that they are, the church - and the Holy Spirit; and we know how intimate the relation of these two is. The restraining thing opposes the appearance of the Man of Sin. The restraining Person resists, (what man could not resist) the mystery of lawlessness. There are two weights then that repress the development of evil. One prevents the mystery of lawlessness from too early passing into the apostacy. The other opposes the appearance of the Man of Sin.

 

 

“The mystery of the kingdom of heaven” (Mark 4: 11,) answers to and is opposed to “the mystery of lawlessness:” and the saints as heirs of the kingdom of God cannot but resist the extension of the kingdom of Satan. [Page 249] The Spirit of God, as the life of the kingdom in mystery, opposes the spirit of antichrist (1 John 4: 1, 3,) and the kingdom of the wicked one. When the Jews blasphemed the Holy Ghost, by whom Satan’s subject spirits were cast out, Jesus shuts them out of the kingdom of heaven. They belonged to that impenitent crew, who, in the world’s last age, will be pervaded by the seven-fold power of Satan: Matt. 12.

 

 

The Hinderer then, strictly speaking, is I suppose the Holy Spirit abiding with the Church of Christ. The rapture of the watchful saints, and the descent of the Son of God would doubtless affect the position of the Holy Ghost: to the extent, I suppose, that is indicated by the words “until he be come out of the midst

 

 

The [Holy Spirit filled] saints are the salt of the earth, the light of the world. And what must be the result of the removal of salt, but the putrefaction of the carrion? and what the withdrawal of the light and truth, but darkness and delusion? Christians are those “under law ([see Greek …]) to Christ 1 Cor. 9: 21. When the removal of these has been effected, what will result but the full outflow of lawlessness?

 

 

And not only so: not only do true Christians stem by their example, and by the [scriptural] truths they hold, the tide of men’s sin, but they answerably delay and keep back the invasion of God’s judgments. “I will keep thee out of the hour of temptation, (says Jesus to his patiently watching saints,) which is about to come on all the world to try them that dwell upon the earthThe presence of such therefore upon earth is the sufficient proof that the day of the Lord is not begun.

 

 

1. Thus the presence of ten righteous ones, in [Page 250] addition to the prayer of Abraham, would have put off the destroying day from Sodom; nor could the Lord begin to bring the vengeance on that polluted city, till Lot was removed.

 

 

2. Thus the presence and prayers of Moses and Aaron hindered the destruction of the congregation of Israel: Numb. 16: 21, 45.

 

 

3. Thus the Kenites must be removed, ere the sword of destruction falls on Amalek: 1 Sam. 15: 6.

 

 

4. The converse of this is seen, where the body is supposed holy; there the wicked are to be taken out of the midst, lest blessing should be hindered. Israel was assumed to be the holy body. “Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you; every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death; for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people Exod. 31: 14; Deut, 23: 14; 17: 7; Josh. 7: 12.

 

 

The destruction of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram is a remarkable case in point. “They, and all that appertained unto them, went down alive into Hades, and the earth closed upon them; and they perished from the midst of the congregationNumb. 16: 33. The removal of the wicked to the infernal regions from the midst of a holy body, answers to the removal of the holy to the celestial regions from the midst of an unholy world.

 

 

That portion of chap. 2 with which we are engaged, is divided into two great parts, the first ending at verse 4, the second with verse 12. In the former part we have, first, the gathering of the saints to Christ; and then, the apostacy with its great development - the Man of Sin.

 

[Page 251]

In part the second, the apostle goes over the ground again; but he omits to notice directly the gathering of the saints to the Presence of Christ. Instead of that, he says, ‘Now you know what the hindrance is Does not this hint that the presence of the saints on earth, and their being not gathered as yet to Christ, is the hindrance?

 

 

In the first part, he speaks specially of the blasphemous pretensions of the Man of Sin; in the other part he dwells upon the dangers of that day, arising partly out of the power of Satan, whereby those pretensions will be sustained, and partly from the wrath of God, who will, in just indignation for the hatred of the truth, invest falsehood with prevailing plausibility and power.

 

 

In Paul’s saying, that while he was yet with them he told them of these things, and then proceeding to remark on the perils of that day - is there not a hint of the ignorant and unwatchful being left, amidst the trials of that hour?

 

 

As soon as the hindrance is removed “the Lawless One shall be revealed.” As Jesus, the Obedient One, has his Presence and his revelation; so has the False Christ also his Presence and revelation. His revelation appears to take place at the time of his taking his seat in the Jewish temple. Can lawless defiance of God mount higher than to demand, on the very spot he has chosen for his own worship, the adoration of both Jew and Gentile? As he springs out of the mystery of lawlessness, he is appropriately “the Lawless One.” He falls in with men’s views; he embodies and carries to its full height the dread enmity against God and his laws, which lies concealed in the heart of man. [Page 252] ‘Worship me, and live as you list!’ will be his concise scheme of legislation.

 

 

His revelation is the same thing nearly with his Presence; and his Presence is displayed in the temple at Jerusalem. He continues to reign for his brief three years and a half, till the patience of the Most High is exhausted. Then “the Lord shall consume him by the breath of his mouth, and strike him powerless by the manifestation of his Presence.” The Saviour’s acts in the destruction of his foe seem to be two-fold. His power is first taken away by the sudden manifestation of the Lord and his glorious host, seen like the lightning filling in an instant the sky. At that sight the Usurper’s power fails. The glory and power there manifested, though at a distance, deprive him of strength to resist. But then the Saviour descends, and the breath of his mouth consumes the Pretender, as saith Isaiah: “He shall smite the earth with the rod (blast) of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the Wicked One Isa. 11: 4. And again, “Behold the name of the Lord cometh from far, burning with his anger, and the burden thereof is heavy: his lips are full of indignation, and his tongue as a devouring fire.” “For Tophet is ordained of old; yea for the King it is prepared: he hath made it deep and large; the pile thereof is fire and much wood, the breath of the Lord like a stream of brimstone doth kindle it Isa. 30: 27, 33.

 

 

As in the destruction of Pharaoh and his host there were two stages; first, “the Lord looked into the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians,” and then came the waters upon the host of the enemy - so it will be here.

 

[Page 253]

Thus it appears that the first named of the two effects is in reality the last in order of time; and the last named, in point of fact will come first. The reason of this disturbance of the natural order I believe to be, that Paul might bring into the closest contrast the two manifestations, or Presences, of the true Christ, and of the False. Jesus shall “strike powerless, with the manifestation of his Presence, him whose Presence is according to the energy of Satan with all power and signs and wonders of falsehood

 

 

The Presence of the False Christ is surrounded with the various forms of natural and supernatural power. It is by means of these that he sustains his pretensions to be God, and thus does he impose on his votaries. This is that seventh head of the wild beast, to which on its recovery, Satan gives “his power and throne and great authority.” The power of Satan to produce supernatural effects, is seen in his treatment of Job’s family and property; and in the miracles of Pharaoh’s magicians.

 

 

He will support his chosen vessel of deceit with power political and supernatural. The miracles of Jesus and of Paul are designated by nearly the same terms as here employed. “Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by himActs 2: 22. “Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds 2 Cor. 12: 12. Only the prodigies wrought by the False Christ, (who, as Jesus foretells, will show “great signs and wonders,”) will be “wonders of falsehood.” Not that these words [Page 254] mean mere pretences to miracle, but real miracles wrought on behalf of falsehood.

 

 

How incapable is this feature of being found in the Popes! Is their Presence with all power and signs and wonders? Has the Pope all political power? Was there ever any Pope that wrought a miracle? Was there, amidst the whole series of Popes, one that even pretended to have wrought one? If there be one such case, did it ever prevail on any individual to turn Romanist?

 

 

God has mercifully in our day, disjoined supernatural power from evil principles. But when the time of long-suffering is past, power of miracle will attach itself to the dread lie of Satan. Here we are introduced to the two great and fully sufficient principles, on which the kingdom of Satan is to be founded. On the one side all power of Satan, on the other all inclination and predisposition to fall in with, and to love the lie. For it will present itself “with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.” The evil heart of man will find this deadly poison so sweet and strong, that it will gladly drink to the dregs the gaily-gilded cup of enchantment. God’s truth is not to human taste. Though set forth in its full purity, and with all fulness of power and miracle, but few believe. Men love darkness rather than light. But let falsehood come, attired in the same regal robe, and followed by the same mighty body-guard, and the world will fall down and worship. The people of Satan and of his false Christ will be willing (no less than the people of the true Christ,) “in the day of his power[Page 255] These two great centres, the Christ of God, and the Christ of Satan, will in that day attract to themselves their respective followers. To the Presence of Jesus the saints will be caught up by the power of God: to the Presence of Antichrist they will flock, drawn by admiration and astonishment: Rev. 13: 3; 17: 18.

 

 

Loud will be the blasphemy of the true God; loud the worship of the Great Destroyer. Bright will be the banquet of the second Belshazzar, numerous his guests, and dread the profanation of the truths of God; till the glory will fade, and the tongues be dumb before the dazzling glory that tells the day of patience to be past.

 

 

“In the same night was Belshazzar the king of Babylon slain

 

 

Lest we should doubt whether any form of deceit would avail to attract around it and enchain all mankind, we are farther informed, that “God will send on them an energy of delusion, that they may believe the lie Events shall fall out to confirm apparently the claims of the Great Usurper. As one evil spirit sent from God to punish wicked Ahab sufficed to produce perfect unity among the four hundred false prophets, so may perfect unity characterize that damning lie of Satan. As a mighty energy of the Holy Spirit attended the day of Pentecost and the first steps of the Gospel, so will it be with this master-piece of Satan’s power and deceit.

 

 

But lest we should sympathize with the dupes of Satan and of the false Christ, as those who were unwillingly led astray, and innocently perished, we are, introduced to the great reason of that final scene of horror. Those who will perish in this wide haul of the great and wily fisherman will be men who have heard [Page 256] the truth and refused it, but who rush with their whole souls into the falsehood of Satan, in spite of most awful warning; because it accords with their enmity against the true God, and their love of unrighteousness.

 

 

The serpent’s seed and the woman’s seed are first gathered to their respective centres, and then comes the suited recompense to each. To the one magnet are attracted the lovers of truth, the patient, the persecuted, the holy; these by secret miracle are caught up to the Presence of the true Christ on high. To the other are borne the persecutors, the haters of truth, the unholy, who lie beneath the full wrath of God. These collect around Satan’s false Christ, led by a spirit of delusion, and captivated by strong power of miracle to embrace “the lie

 

 

Thus - 1. The first chapter of the epistle is occupied in giving us the relation of the persecutors and the presented to the manifested Presence, and the coming of Christ.

 

 

2. The second chapter gives us the relation of the Church and the Apostacy (together with its head the Man of Sin) to the Presence of Christ and the Day of the Lord. Hence we have the Presence twice spoken of: first at the commencement of the chapter, as the secret point to which the watchful - [and “accounted worthy to escape” (Luke 21: 36. Cf. Rev. 3: 10.)] - are caught up, and their hiding-place from the terrors of the Day of the Lord. In the second place occurs the manifestation of his Presence, when lawlessness is at its height, and the snares of Satan have encircled to their destruction all the haters of the truth. The Presence, therefore, appears here as the great centre of the wrath of God on his foes, as before the centre of mercy of God to his friends.

 

[Page 257]

In concluding this portion I would just sum up the proofs derivable from the present chapter that the succession of Popes is not the Man of Sin. It appears, that the apostle’s consolation to those troubled concerning “the terrible Day of the Lord” was, that the saints would be caught away to the Presence, ere the day began.

 

 

1. But if the Bishops of Rome be the Man of Sin, the saints have not been caught up, though the Man of Sin has been revealed, and 1260 years of his reign are nearly if not entirely run out. 2. It appears, too, that iniquity having been fully developed, and he having been seated 1260 years in the temple of God, the Day of the Lord must now be verging to a close. The saints are in it, yet the “terrible” day is not terrible, and they are neither molested by the Man of Sin, nor terrified by the Day of the Lord. Nay some are even doubting whether the millennium be not already begun!

 

 

3. The Pope does not oppose every god and every object of worship. He does not set himself up above every object of worship. As witness these articles of Pope Pius’s creed. “I profess” - “that in the most holy sacrifice of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood, together with the soul and DIVINITY of our Lord Jesus Christ Art. 5. “Likewise that the saints reigning together with Christ are to be venerated and invoked Art. 7. “I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, of the Mother of God, ever virgin, and also of other saints may be had and retained, and that due honour and veneration is to be given them Art. 8. The Pope neither opposes himself to the worship of Christ nor of St. Peter, nor does he exalt [Page 258] himself above them: but he confesses himself the Vicar of the one, the successor of the other. 4. The sitting in the temple of God is spoken of as a literal sitting in a literal temple. But St. Peter’s is not the temple of God; nor does the Pope sit spiritually in the Church of Christ. Do you mean by the Church of Christ the Church of Rome? If so, then it is not the apostacy. And if it be not the apostacy, neither is its head the Man of Sin; for the Man of Sin takes his rise from and heads the apostacy. If by the Church of Christ be meant Protestant churches, and above all the churches of believers, he sits not there; for they do not recognize but reject him.

 

 

5. No Pope has ever “shown himself that he is God.” Though others may have given him the title of God, he has never claimed it on his own merits, much less has he asserted that claim to exclusive Godhead, which the apostle supposes. 6. Having never even pretended to work a miracle, he cannot be the Man of Sin, sustained by “all power and signs7. Not all the ungodly are caught by his delusion, nor are all Romanists damned. But all the parties here described are irrecoverably lost, as haters of the truth, believers of Satan’s deadly lie, and loving unrighteousness. They are the same parties spoken of as irremediably ruined in Rev. 14: 9-11.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 259]

CHAPTER 12

 

COMPARISON OF THE EPISTLES TO

THE THESSALONIANS, WITH THE

PROPHECY ON OLIVET.

 

 

THE Epistles to the Thessalonians pass over most of the ground trodden by the Lord in the Prophecy on the Mount of Olivet, but with most instructive variations and omissions. Some of the most striking of these it is proposed now to offer to the reader’s consideration.

 

 

First let us notice the correspondences.

 

 

1. The Saviour, in taking leave of his nation, and their leaders, thus addresses them. “Ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers! Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, and some of them ye shall kill and crucify, and some of them ye shall scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them front city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.” The [Page 260] generation is morally spoken of and abides to the present day: Matt. 23: 31-36.

 

 

And what says Paul?

 

 

“Ye, brethren, became imitators of the Churches of God who are in Judaea in Christ Jesus, for ye also have suffered the same thing of your own countrymen, even as they (the churches in Judaea) have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and have persecuted us, 1 and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they should be saved, so as to fill up their sins alway, (this last clause is spoken of the Jews,) but the final wrath is already come upon them

 

1. “Have driven us out of Judaea

 

 

While then Jesus is the deliverer of his people from the coming wrath, it is lying already upon the Jews; and is soon to issue in its highest flood, the Great Tribulation. The final wrath is that spoken of by Daniel. “The people of the Prince that shall come, [the Romans, the nation over whom Antichrist will reign] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; [as they did A.D. 70] and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.” “And he [the Prince that shall come] shall confirm a covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and on the battlements shall be the abomination of desolation, even until the consummation, and that determined be poured out on the desolatorDan. 9: 26, 27. (See margin.)

 

[Page 261]

The Prophecy on Olivet deals with the Presence of Messiah, the Temple, the False Christ, the Apostacy, and the gathering to Christ of his saints. Now these are all more or less treated of in the two epistles to Thessalonica. But the especial point of contact is the Presence. In the Saviour’s prophecy it is exhibited (1.) in its secrecy to the saint, (2.) in its manifested glory and terror to the world. In both these aspects is it set forth in the epistle.

 

 

1 Thess. 4: 5, or the rapture of the living and the dead, is chiefly in correspondence with the second parable - the Days of Noah. (B. 2.)

 

 

2 Thess. 2, or the Man of Sin, partly touches on that parable, but is especially parallel with (1) the Abomination of Desolation lifted up in the temple, (2) the signs of the false Christ, and (3) the appearing of the true Messiah. (A 5, A 6, A 7.)

 

 

The first Epistle to the Thessalonians exhibits two kinds of sleep; first, the blameless one of death, (4: 13, 14,) which, as the apostle teaches, will be no obstacle to entrance into the kingdom; the living themselves having no advantage of priority in the rapture. This answers to the parable of the Ten Virgins; where we find a sleep which calls forth no blame from the bridegroom, and which is dissipated at his coming offering no obstacle to the entrance even into the marriage-supper; and much less into the kingdom.

 

 

The fifth chapter, however, presents a blame-worthy sleep - the love of the world and its pleasures, (ver. 6, 7.) Answerably whereto, we have one of the parables discovering to us the loss that will ensue to the householder, if after warning given of the thief’s approach, he be found sleeping. So also Mark 13: 34-37.

 

[Page 262]

The exhortations of the Epistle agree also closely with those offered at that time by the Lord Jesus. “But [see Greek …] take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and DRUNKENNSS and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. WATCH Ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to be set before the Son of Man Luke 21: 34-36.

 

 

But what saith the Epistle?

 

 

“The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape.” “Therefore let us not sleep, as do others: but let us WATCH and BE SOBER 5:  2, 3, 6.

 

 

2. Having noticed the principal accordance’s, let us now proceed to the still more remarkable differences.

 

 

The great point of contact between the two prophecies, as already noticed, is the period of the Presence.

 

 

Let us now analyze and set side by side those two portions of each which treat most of the Presence. They are (Matt. 24: 36-4l.) “the Days of Noah (or B 2.) and 1 Thess. 4: 13-18; 5: 1-9. Analysed, they present the following aspect.

 

 

                       B 2.                                                                                      1 Thess. 4, 5.

 

 

1. Day unknown.                                                                           1. Rapture of living and dead.

 

2. Eating, drinking. Security.                                                        2. No need of times & seasons.

 

3. Entry into the Ark.                                                                    3. World’s security.

 

4. Flood. Destruction.                                                                   4. Destruction.

 

5. Rapture of living.                                                                      5. Watch.

 

6. Watch!

 

 

[Page 263]

In Matthew, the rapture comes last of the events: in Thessalonians, it is set first. In Matthew it is stated ambiguously; in the Epistle it is clearly described. In Matthew it is given as “the sign of the Presence.” In the Epistle it is no sign of something future, but the hope of it is the present comfort of the church; and it will be the instant joy of the watchful believer whenever it occurs. In the prophecy on Olivet, its outside is presented to the Jewish disciple: by Paul it is exhibited in its interior; for the thing signified belongs to the church.

 

 

In the Epistle there is no visible sign preceding the saints’ ascent, only there is a sound, “a shout, the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God In Luke 12, the signal to the expectant disciple is also a sound: an opaque barrier intervenes, and this is removed suddenly, in order to the meeting of himself and his lord. “Ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord ... that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open to him immediatelyLuke 12: 36.

 

 

The interior of the Presence is continually set before the eye of the saint. In B 2, we have the sign only - a mysterious disappearance - such as it appears to an inhabitant of earth, or some invisible hand withdrawing the saint. But in the Epistle, we have two corresponding movements; the Lord’s invisible descent from heaven, as well as the saints’ visible ascent from earth to meet him. (1.) Thus the passivity of the “taken” one is accounted for. “We that are alive and remain shall be caught up (2.) Hereby we learn also why the taken so suddenly disappears. We shall be caught up “in clouds.” (3.) We are made acquainted with the intent of the mysterious disappearance; it is “to meet the Lord From which [Page 264] it would appear, that ere Jesus’ motion of descent has ceased, the upward motion of the saints’ ascent begins. Compare the saints of Rome coming out to meet Paul as far as Appii Forum.

 

 

The interior of the Presence furnishes the great practical exhortations of the Epistle.

 

 

1. Paul’s crown of rejoicing was to be the converts whom he should present before the Lord Jesus at his Presence: 2: 19, 20. He was fearful, therefore, lest persecutions should cause their faith to fail: 3: 3, 4, 7, 8.

 

 

2. He desires them to abound in love, that they might be blameless at the Lord’s Presence: 3: 12, 13. Thereupon he exhorts them, in the next chapter, to keep the commands in general, which he had given; especially to beware of sins of uncleanness, for the Lord Jesus would avenge himself on such; and some might even be found despisers of God. He urges them also to quietness, and to labour with their hands.

 

 

3. In the same way, after describing the terrors of the day of the Lord, he warns the saint to be unlike those on whom that day would come: 5: 6-8. And he winds up the epistle with a prayer, that they might be found blameless in body. soul, and spirit, in the Presence of Jesus: ver. 23.

 

 

These exhortations and intimations, then, coincide to a considerable extent with the teaching of the Presence-parables, and prove that there will be both praise and blame, or even punishment for the disobedient in the time of the Lord’s Presence.

 

 

The limits during which the saint is to be found on earth are the same as supposed by Matthew. The rapture is “the sign of the Presence.” The apostle says, [Page 265] similarly - “We that are alive and remain unto the Presence which also supposes, that the majority would have died off by that time, so that the sleepers would be fairly represented by the number “ten” in the Virgins - the living saints by the “two” in the field. In the view of the rapture as given in Matthew, the two precede, and occupy three parables before the sleepers come into view: from which it might have been inferred that the living would be first in the rapture. But that erroneous idea is corrected by Paul. The dead and living will together ascend.

 

 

But a point of much moment in confirming the interpretation of the Days of Noah, must be adduced. In the Epistle there is no part answering to the entry of Noah into the ark. That was expounded as signifying the Jewish or earthly escape. Now we have the security of the world in both passages, and its sudden destruction consequent upon its unbelief; but no hint of any escape save the passive one, occurs in Paul. This then confirms the belief, that the taking is the rapture of the Christian; and the entry into the ark represents the active escape of the Jew, which it does not fall to Paul’s lot to notice. The reason is plain. The apostle has set before us the Jews, as wholly and incurably wicked. It was beside the scope of the Holy Spirit in the Epistle to notice the elect Jews, who in the crisis of the end are to be raised up. Of those Jesus had treated, and the warning and destiny of these he carefully bears in mind.

 

 

But the point may be made yet more striking. Paul, in the second Epistle, treads the very ground occupied by the Lord in the first part of the prophecy on Olivet. He speaks of the apostacy and of the blasphemous [Page 266] pretensions of the Man of Sin, and of the signs whereby those pretensions will gain credit. Now on that occasion the Lord Jesus at once gives his most earnest command of instant and headlong flight. In Paul’s letter there is no trace of it. On two occasions then the Saviour commands or exhibits flight; on the two corresponding occasions Paul omits all notice of flight, but has instead tidings of the rapture and of the Lord’s Presence. The omission is at once accounted for, if the flight be the earthly escape of the Jewish elect.

 

 

Similarly we have not the series of signs given by the Lord in the first part of his prophecy. It is not “nation shall rise against nation nor “they shall deliver you up to affliction but you are already in the midst of persecution, and it may abide till the Lord come. And as to times and seasons, “ye have no need that I write unto you.” Nor is there any part of the Epistle resembling the sign of “the Fig tree:” for Paul does not touch upon the End of the Age, nor the raising up of the Jewish elect, to which that has reference.

 

 

Jesus exhibits the rapture as discriminating: and the cases of the living and the dead appear separately, and as turning on the state of the saint before God as watchful or the reverse. Paul represents it in its united bearing, as combining the living and the dead. He gives the physical obstacles broken through by God: Jesus puts prominently forward the moral responsibilities of the saint. In the case of the Thessalonians all were watchful: but they needed comfort; in the other it suited the Saviour’s wisdom to rouse the disciples by earnest admonition to spiritual vigilance. The apostle too has nothing strictly answering to the parables of the [Page 267] Householder, Steward, Virgins, or Talents. The nearest approach to them is his prayers and exhortations that they might stand blameless at the Lord’s appearing. He does not deal more directly with these, because the discrimination of the rapture, (which is omitted by him,) is their real basis.

 

 

The [watchful and Spirit-filled] believers of the church meet the Lord in the air ascending “in clouds,” and they are with him during the time of his secret Presence: the earthly disciples behold Jesus and his fellows on the clouds descending to the earth.

 

 

THE MAN OF SIN

 

 

The second chapter of the second Epistle which gives an account of the Man of Sin, corresponds in more points than one with a portion of the prophecy on Olivet; as the following analysis will prove.

 

 

MATT. 24: 15-28.                                                                   2 THESS. 2.

 

 

               (A 5.)                                                               The Presence antidote to fear.

 

 

When ye see Abomination                                             Let none deceive you.

in the temple-flee!                                                         The apostasy first;

 

 

Woe to the pregnant.                                                     Then revelation of Man of Sin.

 

 

Pray against the winter and Sabbath.                             His self-exaltation, and

                                                                                       session in the temple of God.

 

 

The Great Tribulation.                                                    The hindrance to his revelation.

 

 

For elects’ sake the days shortened.                             Revelation of the Lawless One.

                                                                                       Destruction by the Presence.

                                                                                        His power and signs.

 

              (A 6)

 

Believe not assertions of deceit.                                      The wickedness of men

False Christs. Real wonders.                                          gives them their force.

 

 

The Presence as the lightning.                                        God sends strong delusion.

and eagles.

 

 

First then, let us notice the points of agreement.

 

 

(1.) The great usurper of Paul exhibits himself in the same spot where the abomination of desolation is to be set up. “The holy place” of the one, is “the temple [Page 268] of God,” of the other. (2.) Both the False Christ and the Man of Sin are to be set up by supernatural wonders wrought by Satan. (3.) The Great Tribulation of Matthew, answers to the Day of the Lord in Paul. (4.) The resistance to truth which the apostle supposes, finds a resemblance in ‘the gospel of the kingdom’ preached to all the Gentiles, while they who believe it are hated by them all. (5.) Thereupon says Jesus, the end is to ensue. And thus the Epistle represents the matter.

 

 

But the differences are very instructive.

 

 

In Matthew, Daniel - the prophet of the Old Testament - is the authority to be appealed to. In Thessalonians, Paul refers to his former unwritten communications. In Matthew it is men and women physically taken; in Thessalonians it is the race morally considered, as loving or resisting the [prophetic] truth. In Matthew, the prayer is that their flight might not be in the winter, or on the Sabbath. In Thessalonians, the prayers commended to the church are, that God would count them worthy of this calling, and fulfil the work of faith with power, (2 Thess. 1: 11,) as also that the word of the Lord might have free course and be glorified. In Matthew the elect need instruction as to the place of Christ’s presence: in Thessalonians they wait for the Son of God from heaven. In Matthew after the sign of the Son of Man the tribes of the land mourn: in Thessalonians there is joy in the Presence of the Lord Jesus.

 

 

In the apostle’s picture, the Presence of the Saviour and the assemblage of believers to it, is the first object and the great antidote to dread. The Presence of Jesus cannot arrive, without the corresponding assembly of the saints to it. Now in order that the saints may [Page 269] not be troubled, they must be out of the onset of the Day of the Lord. Therefore they must be removed ere the manifestation of the Man of Sin. For it is his revelation, assumption of divine attributes, and worship in the temple at Jerusalem, which draw down the wrath of God. The Lord Jesus then must be present in secret ere the Man of Sin be revealed. Hence the abiding of the watchful - [repentant and obedient] - saints on the earth is the proof of the Presence not begun, and of the non-revelation of the Man of Sin. But the Jewish disciples will be upon earth, and the sign of Antichrist’s manifestation is to be seen by them, and to serve them as the signal for flight.

 

 

The Presence of the Lord in its time of secrecy is a thing for the church. It contains its hope, its salvation, its escape from the hour of temptation coming on all the earth. The Day of the Lord on the other hand, is that “terrible” period to the persecuting world, to the apostate faction, and to the Jews in especial, when God shall shower down in rapid succession his most dread judgments, destroying sinners out of the earth. The manifestation (epiphany) of the Presence, which occurs at the close of the Day of the Lord, is the point of the Presence which chiefly concerns the world. This is the chief point of contact between the chapter before us and the prophecy of our Lord. The manifestation of Jesus’ Presence - [at the end of the Great Tribulation] - in striking powerless and consuming the Man of Sin, answers to that view which Jesus gives to the Jewish disciple, when he compares his Presence to the lightning for its sudden flash, and to the descent of the eagle for its swift and close destruction. But the Church is “caught up in clouds to meet the Lord in [Page 270] the airThey - [together with those who are “left unto the coming of our Lord” (1 Thess. 4: 17b. Cf. Luke 21: 34-36; Rev. 3: 10, R.V.) - after the select pre-tribulation rapture] - are concealed as well as their Master, till the crisis to the world - [the evil and apostate ‘Age’] - is come.

 

 

Paul gives two signs that must precede the Day of the Lord; but none that must Precede the Presence of the Lord. Jesus gives his Jewish followers not only the signal for flight, but the sign of the Son of Man’s manifestation from heaven; while they themselves are to give the answering signal from below; for, till they welcome his appearing, he will not be seen by them. The idol of the False Christ in the temple is the sign for flight to the Jewish disciple: then must he flee. Not a word of this is dropped to the saint: he is already (if watchful [and judged by Christ as morally worthy of escape]) beyond the reach of the Destroyer. The Presence of the Lord Jesus is to calm the Christian’s heart against the fear of the Day of the Lord. Not that it will not be terrible: but that the Presence will precede the Day. The Day bears terror: the Presence ministers comfort.

 

 

The two classes of the elect, the Jewish and the Christian, both exercise their effect upon the state of things. The elect of the church keep off the time of the [Christian]* apostacy and the revelation of the Man of Sin; the elect of the Jewish nation are God’s reason for shortening the time of Great Tribulation, when it is come.

 

[* See Num. 14: 20-23. Cf. 1 Cor. 10: 5-11, R.V.]

 

 

There are attempts to deceive both; but the deceits are of different kinds. (l.) The Thessalonian believers were assaulted by false fears, that the terrors of the Lord were let loose upon them. That deceit the apostle scatters with the words of comfort.1 (2.) The Jewish [Page 271] disciple would be in danger from false hopes of the Presence of Messiah on earth. Against that Jesus guards beforehand, by appropriate warning. There would be first, false Christs deceiving 2 many; (2 Thess. 2: 4. 5.) then false prophets, also deceiving many. (ver. 11) In the Great Tribulation there would be both false Christs and false prophets, and then they would be possessed of miraculous powers, which did not belong to the former two classes. Matt. 24: 24. To disbelieve the heavenly Presence of Messiah is the part of the scoffer: 2 Pet. 3. To believe the secret earthly Presence of Messiah is the part of the non-elect and wicked Jews. The Church - [who ‘escape’ before Antichrist’s persecutions begin] - goes to the Lord in air: the Son of Man comes down - [at the end of the Great Tribulation] - to the Jew on earth. Believers are brought by God with Christ, not gathered, as the Jewish elect, after his appearing. In the assembly of the saints of the Church there is no question of place, but only the universal conditions of life and death.

 

1 It is worthy of notice, that the Mormonites promise safety on earth from the terrors of the Great Day, and they rest their hopes, too, on false Scripture, as of old the deceivers - “by letter as from us

 

2 There are two words for deceiving. In Matthew 24, [see Greek…], in 2 Thess. 2, [See Greek…]

 

 

The Jews are in danger, as we have seen, from wrong ideas of the Presence; and from false Christs and their adherents acting on those misapprehensions. They expect scenes like that of Jonathan’s secret meeting with David in the wood. The Jew is looking for the Son of David on earth. The church is “waiting for the Son of God from Heaven 1 Thess. 1: 10.

 

 

Jesus was first pointed out to Israel on earth: by the angels to the shepherds; by Simeon and Anna to those looking for redemption in Jerusalem; by John the Baptist to his disciples, and when he asserted to the deputation from the Sanhedrim, and to the [Page 272] multitudes, that the Messiah was already in their midst. But the Jews failing to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah on such testimony, the Presence is transferred from Palestine, Jerusalem, and the temple, to heaven. Thence the Church looks for him, for it recognises his former and his present place.

 

 

The prayers of the two classes are also very distinct and characteristic. The Jewish disciple is to pray for a favourable opportunity for flight, and is warned to use his utmost energies at the critical moment. The christian is bid to pray that he may escape the day altogether, and be passively set in the Presence of Jesus. Physical burthens might hinder physical exertion. But nothing save spiritual drowsiness would be any obstacle to the ascent to the Lord. Winter and the Sabbath are no hindrances to the rapture of the saints. That hope is as near to the saint at Thessalonica, as in Judaea or Jerusalem. The previous moral condition of the Jew is nothing, if he will but flee in the direction pointed out at the instant required. The previous moral condition [for escape] is every thing to the saint of the Church.

 

 

The Man of Sin in the epistle occurs as the head of the apostacy, the champion of the lawless and blaspheming haters of the truth. The temple is presented only as giving edge to his blasphemous self-exaltation. In Matthew, the Great Usurper is the False Christ, the Destroyer of the temple, the Great Agent of wrath on the Jews, taking up his post on the scene where God’s name is especially recorded. The temple and the abomination of desolation are the turning-points of “the end,” and the basis of the exhortation in Matthew. The temple and the Man of Sin occur only in the second Epistle [Page 273] of Paul, and then only when he is shewing the believer’s security against that dread day.

 

 

The false miracles are local in Matthew: in Paul they affect the haters of the truth everywhere. The true Christ and the false each has his secret Presence and his revelation, and separates to opposite poles the two great moral classes of mankind.

 

 

Out of the apostacy spring the Man of Sin, the defilement of the temple, the Great Tribulation, and the full power of Satan. The testimony of the Lord is again denied - “Ye shall not surely die” - and the serpent and his dupes are called up anew, and finally judged. Out of the repentance of Israel (B. 1) spring the Holy One, the cleansing of the temple, the restoration of Israel, the times of refreshing, the full power of God.

 

 

Three more questions remain to be treated.

 

 

I. Why were these disclosures concerning the Man of Sin made to the saints of Thessalonica, rather than to those of Rome?

 

 

The principal reason I suppose to be, that the circumstances at that city drew out especially that course of teaching.

 

 

The Jews appear prominently in the brief history of that church: Acts 17: 1-9. Paul begins his appeals at the synagogue. The points especially insisted on were, 1. That the Messiah must suffer death and rise again.

 

 

2. That Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.

 

 

Some of the Jews, and a multitude of the Gentiles, believe. But the unbelievers both Jews, and Gentiles, unite to accuse the Christians -

 

 

1. Of creating a disturbance.

 

 

2. Of acting contrary to Caesar’s decrees.

 

[Page 274]

3. Of setting up a foreign sovereign, a Jew named Jesus.

 

 

Now that was, in spirit and in principle, a type of the great apostacy and of the lawlessness of man. Caesar is set up against God’s king, and above him. Caesar’s partizans exalt him above Jesus to whom God has given all power. Behold their lawlessness in mystery! When Caesar himself shall come in the fulness of time, he shall, in like manner, oppose himself to Jesus, and set himself up above him; and it will be sufficient matter of accusation, that any refuse to keep his commands, however contrary to those of God.

 

 

Nor should it be passed in silence, that the most celebrated false Messiah, who appeared in modern times (A.D. 1666) first presented himself in one of the seven churches of Asia,- Smyrna; and there declaring himself the Son of David, fled to Thessalonica. History of the Jews: vol. 3: 381. (Family Library.) Add to this that the Scotch Mission to the Jews tells us that many believers in him are still found in that city. 1

 

1 Vol. 2: 109.

 

 

II. The sign of the End of the Age (B 1) may be compared with the signs of the Day of the Lord as in this Epistle given. The sign of the End of the Age is in one point of view the sign of harvest; for “the harvest is the End of the Age,” and the signs of harvest are in one point of view the signs of summer. The Saviour gives then the state, not the crop in the corn-field, but the budding of the fig tree.

 

 

The sign of the Presence betokens an advance thereon. It is the harvest ready, the ripe grain cut.

 

 

The signs of the Day of the Lord are the apostacy; and the Man of Sin, its great head.

 

[Page 275]

Thus the sign of the Day of the Lord is exactly contrasted with the sign of the End of the Age. The sign of the Old Age passing away is the repentance of Israel; the signal of the advent of the Day of Terror is the rebellion of the apostates, both of Jew and Gentile. On the one follows the secret Presence of the true Christ, and the gathering to him; while, as its counterpart, the false Christ is developed, and to his centre at Jerusalem the apostates are assembled. Thus the same End of the Age witnesses the ripening both of the wheat for the garner, and of the tares for the burning.

 

 

The sign of the End of the Age, being a Jewish season, is not noticed by Paul. He gives - not the repentance of Israel, as the indication of the advent of summer to the world; but the impenitence of Israel, as the proof of the church dispensation. The gospel sent to the Gentiles, but hindered by the Jews, is the full proof of Israel’s unbelief.

 

 

III. There is one inquiry of importance remaining to be treated of, ere this part of the subject is completed. It will be observed, that Paul is silent as to the two-fold rapture, or the discriminating of the saints. Can such omission then be accounted for, or does not Paul’s omission throw discredit upon the doctrine.

 

 

To which it must be replied - First, that if a doctrine be once made out from Scripture, the silence of the other sacred writers does not in the least weaken it.

 

 

Secondly, we may discern why the apostle omitted to notice it. For the questions treated of by him are mainly two, and they are consolations addressed to quiet certain vain fears. (1.) The first of these was, a fear lest the dead saints should have no part in the kingdom.

 

[Page 276]

(2.) The second was a fear, that the living saints were already in the day of the Lord and would have to make their way through the tempest.

 

 

(1.) Now in order to answer the first, it was enough to reply, that, as death did not hinder Jesus, the head of the coming kingdom, from entering upon it, so neither would it prevent the saints, who were one with Jesus, from entering it also. He appends also further intelligence respecting the mode of the resurrection; which proves that the living, far from being alone in the kingdom, would not be even first in it.

 

 

Such a mode of reply then did not require, and could hardly admit, any notice of the distinguishing rapture. Whether the rapture takes place at thrice or at once, the same assertion holds good, that the living and dead will be jointly partakers of the ascent.

 

 

(2.) But with regard to the other fear, the case was different. The apostle might have treated the question so as to bring the discrimination into view. He might have said - ‘The watchful saint will escape that day of terrors; the unwatchful will have to pass through it.’ But then it must be remembered, that he had to meet the alarm of saints, who were persuaded that, though they were watchful, the day of dread had come upon them. To tell them then, that some of the saints would have to endure the perils and sorrows of that day, would hardly have tended to allay their fears. All at Thessalonica were not only watchful, but in full expectation; and therefore the cautionary view would manifestly be less needed, than where the saints were ignorant or asleep on this momentous topic.

 

[Page 277]

Again, it was not proposed to Paul, as an inquiry, whether any of the Church of Christ would have to pass through that period of darkness. Then the two-foldness of the rapture must have come into view. But when it was asserted, that the day was already begun, while not one of the watchful saints was caught up - the apostle hints, that this could not be the case, and that the presence of the church, or of its watchful part (represented by the Thessalonian brethren) was in fact the hindrance to the coming of the day; because it was a hindrance to that apostacy, of which Antichrist is the chief.

 

 

Even the unruly of the Thessalonians were still watchful, and would be partakers of the first [and select] rapture, though, if they continued in their unruliness, they would be subject to rebuke after their ascent. For every distinct offence of the saints has its answering and distinct recompense.

 

 

The main subject of Paul is the Presence, and this is but one, however many the saints’ entrances into it may be. He takes up the raptures only as relating to, and introducing to, the Presence; and he treats of the Presence only as referring to the life or death of the saints, (1 Thess. 4,) or as taking the watchful saint out of the Day of the Lord.

 

 

Thus we may see the reasons why our Lord brings it forward; and why his apostle does not. Paul viewed only the physical difficulties; and thence gives the rapture only as seen from the point of God’s power to surmount them. These difficulties abide the same, however often the rapture may be repeated. But Jesus presents the moral aspect of the rapture, or God’s requirements [Page 278] from man. Jesus puts forth warning to the careless; Paul, comfort to the terrified. Thus the one wisely omits what the other had as wisely disclosed.

 

 

Paul’s omission on this point is parallel by another omission of a like kind. Jesus views both the church and the Jews as of two classes: and presents the escape of the one, the trials and woe of the other. Paul recognises but one class of the Jews, and but one of the church. The Jews with him are wholly impenitent; the church wholly watchful.

 

 

Yet, in spite of the acknowledged omission, an attentive eye, may, I believe, gather hints confirmatory of the doctrine even from the Epistles before us.

 

 

For what says the fifth chapter of the first Epistle? The apostle there is setting forth at one view the contrasted positions of the church and the world. The church is awake and sober, the world is sleeping and drunken; and answerably thereto, the one is seized on by the Day as by a thief, the other escapes. But would it not follow from such a principle, that if the [regenerate] believer have left the characteristic and holy position of safety in which the church is to stand, that he also might be overtaken by that day as a thief? Suppose a converted man to fall back towards the world in all those hateful and punishable aspects which the two Epistles offer to our notice - suppose him to become secure, unbelieving as to the Lord’s coming, a resister of the truth, a persecutor of the Lord’s saints, asleep in the arms of the world’s pleasures and cares, would it be any marvel, if, as having deserted the post of the church, he should be dealt with as a deserter? Is not this the lesson [Page 279] intended to reach us from the parable of the Steward? Was it not thus with Peter? He twice resists the truth; even rebuking his Lord for giving utterance to the doctrine of his sufferings and death; (Matt. 16.) then, (in chap. 26,) when warned of the approaching hour of trial, he again opposes the truth, and having sighted the warning, and been thrice found asleep by the Lord, he enters into the thickest of the temptation, and falls foully, even though afterwards restored.*

 

[* See Col. 3:23-25. Cf.  Heb. 10: 22-30, R.V.]

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 280] CHAPTER 13

 

THE HEBREWS

 

 

We have also some intimations of the same truths in the Hebrews. Paul assures us that the “rest” promised in the ninety-fifth Psalm, has not yet been fulfilled, and that it applies to believers of the present dispensation. He then warns us against being shut out of it, as most of the Israelites were excluded from Canaan, though they had come out of Egypt. “With many of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wildernessHe then adds, “Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of itHeb. 4: 1. Is not this a hint to those left behind? Are they not seemingly excluded from the rest into which the others - [after ‘the first resurrection’ (Rev. 20: 20: 6, R.V.), will then] - have entered?

 

 

It is worthy of notice that Moses and Aaron, God’s witnesses before Pharaoh, are superseded by Joshua and Caleb, another pair. And these two former witnesses both ascend, before their death, in the sight of all Israel, and at two different times.

 

 

But the passage seemingly most to our purpose is the first portion of the eleventh of Hebrews. Seven worthies are offered to our notice; after which there is a break. [Page 281] Abel, Enoch, and Noah; Abraham with his descendants, Isaac and Jacob; and lastly Sarah. The last confessed themselves strangers and pilgrims; as strangers desiring a better country; as pilgrims desiring a settled home or city. God has provided both these for them.

 

 

1. Abel is the first martyr, the witness of the sacrifice by which sinners draw near to God. 2. Enoch is the believer of God, who by his [walk and] translation escaped death, and was no longer found on earth, because of God’s removal of him from thence. The reason of his translation was, because he pleased God. He is the contrast then to those who pleased him not, or to the murmurers who fall in the wilderness. These two describe the two states of the peculiarly privileged in our dispensation; as either suffering for Christ unto death, or suddenly and noiselessly removed from earth, because well-pleasing to God. Thus Paul’s lesson is enforced positively and negatively. Be not like Israel in the wilderness, lest ye seem to come short of the rest. Be like Enoch: that you, as pleasers of God, be translated into his rest, without seeing death. Enoch’s faith rested on God’s existence, and on his ability to reward his diligent seekers. This also is the aspect of the translation of the living saints, a reward to the diligent seeking of him.

 

 

3. The two former cases have presented passive faith. But Noah’s case is that of active faith, providing a refuge for himself, and for others his household. Abel and Enoch stand alone; and as individuals are slain or caught up. Noah is brought into contact with the world, condemns it, and is made heir of the righteousness of faith. This answers to the earthly active escape of the Jewish disciples into the ark of the wilderness. [Page 282] They also are warned beforehand of things not yet seen: things which the world, intent on marrying and giving in marriage, on eating and drinking, refuses to believe.

 

 

4. Abraham, as the father of the faithful is next seen, combining in himself the two classes of the people of God; - the earthly and the heavenly inheritances both meeting in him. The earthly inheritance is exhibited in those words, “By faith Abraham when he was called to go out into the place 1 which he was about to receive as an inheritance, obeyed His descendants, in like obedience leave the land which they are about to receive as an inheritance; and fly like himself, not knowing whither they go, but still unto a “place prepared of God, where they are to be fed a thousand two hundred and three score daysRev. 12. Here is Noah’s active escape again.

 

 

But Abraham is also the stranger and pilgrim, looking for a heavenly country, and for the city whose architect and fashioner is God: 5, 6. In the same position of faith’s expectancy, Isaac and Jacob are found with him.

 

 

7. Lastly, Sarah, the type of the better covenant and of the heavenly Jerusalem, appears with her children, Isaac and Jacob, who in the enumeration precede her. She is as yet the desolate and barren that bears not; yet she is to rejoice in faith because of her promised innumerable offspring. We have then, at the close, a view of the results of Abraham’s faith, a two-fold seed. He believed in God as the raiser [out] of the dead. Therefore from his body “as good as dead,” sprang a great nation: from his faith, which trusted a God able to raise the [Page 283] dead, after his body had been for ages committed to the dust, sprang a posterity who trust in God’s ability to raise the dead. These are the heavenly seed, united with the individual Seed of Abraham, which is Christ. Thus, therefore, we have Abraham as the father of a two-fold seed - “as the stars of the heaven for multitude” - the heavenly partakers of resurrection, and of the city above; “and as the sand which is by the sea-shore - innumerable,” - the earthly seed to whom belong the earthly country, and the holy city of earth.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 284]

CHAPTER 14

 

SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER

 

 

THE foregoing views derive very strong confirmation from the second Epistle of Peter. The following is a sketch of the general strain of the first chapter, interspersed with remarks.

 

 

The Epistle is addressed to those who have obtained faith in the righteousness (see Gr.) of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Hence these take a sure standing for salvation: they are not on the ground occupied by the intruder in the parable of the Wedding Garment.

 

 

To such believers very great promises are granted. Peter mentions afterwards two: (1.) that of the Saviour’s Presence, and (2.) the new heavens and earth: 3: 4, 9, 13. ‘Being made partakers of the divine nature, you have escaped the world’s corruption. But, he says, be not content with this; add to faith its sister graces. Thus you will be neither idle nor unfaithfulBut there are those who neither have, nor seek to have these added graces; these are unable to discern any thing in the horizon, and they have forgotten even the blest truth that the sins of their life ere they believed had been forgiven. Behold then, again, the two classes of [regenerate] believers which have been before pointed out!

 

[Page 285]

The reasons of the apostle’s exhortation to such diligence next appear. Thus they would make their calling and election sure: and not stumble. Thus the entrance 1 into the Saviour’s kingdom would be richly granted them.

 

1 The article is in the original.

 

 

Both the election and the joyous entrance into the [coming millennial] kingdom, I am persuaded, refer, not to eternal salvation, but to the rapture - the first rapture of the saints. A difficulty has been always felt in the attempt to apply these words to the sovereign election of God before the ages were. The reference really is to the history of the transfiguration, and to the Saviour’s promise which preceded it. The transfiguration was a specimen of the kingdom, and all the disciples saw it not; but only an election out of them. The Saviour’s taking them to his Presence was also the type of the abundant entrance into the kingdom. This view accounts for the election and entrance being a matter of responsibility and a promise to be fulfilled to the zealous and diligent saints; while, on the other hand, - [if repentance and restoration is not forthcoming] - the blind and unwatchful will lose this choice of the Saviour; and will stumble like Peter in the day of temptation.

 

 

Next occurs a slight digression relating to Peter’s own case. This was a subject worthy of being often impressed on their minds; though they acknowledged and were persuaded of it. But Peter knew that the [select] rapture without seeing death, would not be granted to himself. The Lord showed him, (John 21,) that he must die a violent death.2 He was to belong to the Abel class, not [Page 286] to the Enoch class. But though aware of his own removal ere that day, he desired that the other hope should ever remain before the mind of the church.

 

2 It should be “showed me,” not “hath showed me.” The last supposes some later revelation. The fault lies in translating a first aorist as a perfect.

 

 

The [first or select] rapture then, without seeing death, is the true hope of the church. But two misapprehensions might destroy its force; and each of these he proceeds to combat in turn.

 

 

1. The first is, that this promise was a clever fable imposed on Peter by deeper wits than his own. 2. The second, that the promise of rapture to the Presence without tasting death, had no reference to any but the [selected] three apostles who were present at the transfiguration.

 

 

1. Against the first suggestion of unbelief he brings his personal testimony as an eye witness. He had spoken to them of two points - (1.) the power and (2.) the - Presence of the Lord Jesus. (1.) He had seen the power of Jesus, when he was with his two companions at the raising of the dead in the house of the ruler of the synagogue. (2.) He had beheld also the majesty of the Saviour’s Presence 1 in his Second Companionship on the holy mount. The transfiguration is a lesson to the church. Peter speaks of it, not as the glory of “the Son of Man,” but “the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The voice he heard he describes as that of “God the Father That was a specimen of the future companionship, to which the rapture introduces. “This voice we heard when we were with him on the holy mount

 

1 [See Greek …] I translate it, ‘the majesty of that’ - ‘Presence’ understood. “His majesty,” would be [see Greek…]

 

 

2. But he had a second proof, which he esteemed still more secure 1 - the prophetic word. The reference here is, I believe, specially to those passages which speak of the rapture; though without denying a more general statement of the utility of prophecy and its promises to the Christian. “Verily I say unto you, there are some standing here, which shall not taste of death till they have seen the kingdom of God come with powerMark 9: 1; Matt. 16: 28; Luke 9: 27. “Then shall two be in the field: the one shall be taken, and the other left

 

1 I translate ver. 19, “And we esteem still more sure the prophetic word.” To the same effect, Green on the Grammar of the New Testament.

 

 

But the immediate objection to such a passage, of course would be, that it had been fulfilled once and for ever, when the three apostles had ascended the mount of transfiguration. Peter, therefore, addresses himself to remove the objection. Such a view would rest upon the narrow idea, that the words of God had no fuller or wider meaning than the words of man; that they died a natural death when the occasion in reference to which they were first uttered, had gone by.

 

 

But not so: no prophecy of Scripture is to be considered as having reference to that special case only at which it first was uttered; for it is dictated not by man’s finite capacity, but by the Holy Spirit, the searcher of the deep things of God. Not only then do those words of Christ apply to it, but the histories of Enoch and Elijah, and some passages of the prophets. An exemplification of the apostle’s mode of applying the Old Testament speedily follows.

 

[Page 288]

CHAP. 2. While true prophecy and its promises are thus useful, there would be also false prophecy, with its false doctrines and awful practices. God’s [righteous] justice would be disbelieved; and Jesus himself denied, as once he was by the apostle himself.

 

 

Peter therefore cites, as proofs of God’s justice, (1.) the imprisonment of the angels who fell in the days of Noah; (“the Sons of God,” - [a reference to fallen angels] - of Gen. 6: 11)* (2.) The destruction of the world by the flood, and Noah’s escape. (3.) The destruction of Sodom, (intended as an example to the godless of future ages,) and the deliverance of Lot. From these examples he draws the conclusion, that God is able to punish the unjust and to save the godly out of temptation. We have now reached a lower level. We are supposed to be among the sleepy saints who together with the faithful of the law are left to abide the “day of temptation For the two examples of Noah and Lot are the very ones which Jesus cites in his prophecy of Luke 17. Those examples are there shown to refer to the Jewish or earthly escape; as Enoch and Abraham are examples in their day, either of the heavenly rapture or of its companionship. In Peter’s Epistle the rapture comes first: we have the Presence of Jesus and his saints on high [first] - then the place of the ungodly and the earthly elect last - [at the foot of the mountain]; for we are now viewing the matter from the standing point of the church. Jesus on the other hand, regards the question from the standing point of the elect remnant of Israel.

 

1 For a full discussion of the usual theory, see a tract, ‘The Spirits in Prison Campbell, Holborn.

 

[* See also Christ, after His death, when He descended into ‘Sheol’ = Gk. ‘Hades’ - “…and preached to the spirits in prison” (1 Pet. 3: 19, R.V.). Could the apostle Peter’s use of the word ‘spirits’ above, have any reference to the ‘Nephilim’ - the half human/angelic offspring of women? This event brought about a world-wide corruption of mankind; and brought about God’s judgment upon the whole world during the Noachian flood. “As is was in the days of Noah,” said our Lord Jesus at His first Advent, “so it shall be at the coming of the Son of Man” - at the time of His second Advent!]

 

 

The third chapter gives the scoffing that will then arise against the doctrine of the Presence and its [select] rapture: [Page 289] scoffs based on the uninterrupted course of nature, ever since the death of the fathers. Whether by “the fathers” we are to understand the Jewish or the Christian fathers does not seem clear. The words, however, admit the miracles of the Old Testament, or of the New, or of both. - ‘How absurd to expect a rapture without death! when for so many centuries the holiest have all quietly breathed their last!’ Against such scoffers Peter testifies of “the Day of the Lord The Presence is the testimony to the believer: he who refuses to acknowledge that and its miraculous [select] translation of the living saint, will be left to the terrors of the day of temptation.

 

 

Peter was present in the two first companionships as an honoured servant of the Lord; but in the third, he was found sleepy and prayerless; and, entering into temptation, was led even to deny his Master. He is made the appropriate witness of the two destinies of the two classes of - ‘saints1 May his exhortations and warnings, beloved, find a deep and lasting echo in our hearts!

 

1 He notices the third companionship and his part in it, but in the first Epistle, and in quite another connexion: 1 Pet. 5: 1.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 290]

CHAPTER 15

 

MUST ANY EVENTS PRECEDE

THE FIRST RAPTURE?

 

 

THE subject at which we have arrived is one on which I am far from being certain; owing to the seeming contradictoriness of the statements of Scripture on this head. The apparent contradictions spring, doubtless, from differences of time, or of persons, or of both. By means of this assumption, (for the word of God cannot really contradict itself,) we shall, through grace, arrive at the true and reconciling conclusion at length. In the meantime, the best mode of studying the question is to present the evidence for both sides. We inquire then - Are there any events which must precede the rapture of the church ?

 

 

I. To this we should answer, looking at one class of passages - Assuredly not!

 

 

1. No previous sign is given to the two in the field. They are found at their daily labour: Matt. 24; Luke 17. The Presence of the Son of Man is thief-like, and therefore without previous signal given.

 

 

2. In 2 Thess. 2, while signs are given of the coming of the great and terrible day, there are none of the Presence of the Lord Jesus.

 

[Page 291]

3. In the second Epistle of Peter, the first chapter, there are no previous signs; indeed the absurdity of the saint’s hope is derided, because there are no visible signs: (2 Pet. 3.) But does not that suppose, that the foretold scoffers of the last days must first arise?

 

 

4. In the history of Enoch, the rapture was sudden, and without any precedent notice. Similarly is the subject presented where the apostle notices the rapture of that worthy: Heb. 11.

 

 

5. In Revelation the Saviour’s coming is spoken of, more or less distinctly, in all the epistles to the churches. But no where are any signs specified, as necessarily to precede his coming to the saint.

 

 

II. But now turn we to the apparently conflicting evidence.

 

 

1. Signs are given of the Saviour’s appearing in Matt. 24, especially the sign from heaven; after which and the great tribulation, the Lord appears. But these things are easily reconciled with the foregoing view: for they are signs of the appearing to Israel, not of the rapture to the church.

 

 

2. But there are found two series of events in the prophetic part of Revelation: the first extending from chap. 4 - 11, the second from 12 - 14. I assume, for the present,1 that the woman in heaven is Jerusalem in the latter day - that her pregnancy and throes answer to the fig tree’s tenderness: and her flight, to the flight of the disciples as commanded in Matt. 24. I assume too, that the harvest in Rev. 14, is the general rapture [Page 292] of the church of Christ. If so, then the rapture occurs as a portion of a series in a certain order. There is also the hint of a rapture occurring about the same time: in the command to be ready because the Saviour is coming as a thief: (16: 15.)

 

1 Should the Lord spare me, I hope to return to this subject. In the meantime, proofs are given, in “Babylon Literal and Mystical

 

 

3. In the parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard, the fifth call, an hour before sunset, supposes the raising up of a body not hitherto known; and something, I believe, distinct from the church, and therefore rewarded before it. For the master’s command is, in paying the hire, to begin from the last, and to ascend to the first.

 

 

The remnant on earth, both the watchful and the unwatchful saints, are, I believe, possessed of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. For they are made the test of the dead only, and not of the living. But if the living saint had been unpossessed of gift, he could not have been caught up at the first rapture, because he would be in the condition of the foolish virgins. He is rejected then on other grounds: that is, he is pogsessed of gift. Thus, too, Enoch and Elijah were both prophets, while only one ascended. Jesus alone was caught up, while his disciples also had been possessed of supernatural endowments. Must not the “sons of the prophets” be raised up ere Elijah be taken away?

 

 

The rapture is an event in the End of the Age, Matt. 13: 39. Then it would appear that the End of the Age has begun ere the Presence takes place. That is, that the tenderness of the Jewish fig tree will precede the Saviour’s descent. He is not near till the remnant softens towards him. The Presence, that is in its time of secrecy, is of shorter duration than the End of the Age; for the judgment of the Gentiles, presented in the [Page 293] Sheep and the Goats and the Drag-net, occurs after the Saviour’s manifestation. But the judgment of the Gentiles, too, is an event in the End of the Age: Matt. 13: 49.

 

 

4. But the most stubborn passage is found in 1 Cor. 15: 50-53. “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,1 neither doth corruption inherit incorruption The cases of the dead and living saints are both considered together: the living are called “flesh and blood,” the dead, “corruption.” On both of these a change - [from mortality into immortality] - must pass to fit them for the heavenly kingdom of God. “Behold I tell you a mystery, (secret,) we shall not all be asleep, but we shall all be changed in a moment, [referring to the dead] in the twinkling of an eye [referring to the Change of the living] at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead [saints] shall be raised incorruptible, and we [the living saints] shall be changed: for this corruptible [the case of the dead saints] must put on incorruption, and this mortal [the condition of the living saints] must put on immortality.” Two difficulties at once start from this passage. It appears hostile, at once, to the doctrine that (l.) there are no events necessarily preceding the resurrection and change of the living saints; and (2.) to the idea of there being more raptures than one.

 

1 It is observable, as confirmatory of the views previously given that the distinction of sleepers and living occurs as soon as “the kingdom of God” is named. Hence the Virgins stand connected with the same expression.

 

 

I will first then produce the proofs of there being more raptures than one; and then suggest how it seems possible to reconcile this with the other passages.

 

[Page 294]

1. First, the time of the resurrection and rapture of the church is fixed to the time of Jesus’ Presence. (1.) “In Christ shall all be made alive; but each in his own rank; Christ the first-fruits; then, they that are Christ’s at his Presence.” (2.) “For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye before our Lord Jesus Christ at his Presence This is the time then of the presentation of converts, now immortal, before Christ. So also 1 Thess. 3: 13; 5: 23; 1 John 2: 28. (3.) “We who are alive and remain unto the Presence of the Lord shall not get the start of those that are asleep; … the dead in Christ shall first rise, then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in clouds to meet the Lord in the air (4.) “Be patient, brethren, unto the Presence of the LordJames 5: 7. (5.) “We beseech you, brethren, by the Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind2 Thess. 2: 1.

 

 

The latter passage, especially when taken in connexion with the promise to Philadelphia hereafter to be considered, supposes that the Lord’s Presence begins before the Man of Sin’s revelation; and consequently before “the day of temptation,” and its accompanying great tribulation.

 

 

But the great tribulation and the day of temptation do not begin till Satan is cast down from heaven, and when, being enraged because his time is short, he sets up his false Christ. But he is cast out of heaven before the first woe trumpet - the fifth in the series. Hence, those who are (according to the promise to Philadelphia) to escape the hour of temptation coming on all the earth, must be on high before the fifth trumpet sounds. Either [Page 295] then the Presence has already begun, and Jesus has left the throne of God for the air; or there is a rapture, (in which some of the church are included,) which precedes the Presence. This seems to be the case with the child of the woman in heaven: (Rev. 12.) It is caught up to God and to his throne ere Satan is cast down, and seemingly before the descent of the Lord Jesus: for it is rapt, not into air, but to the throne of God.

 

 

We may reconcile, therefore, the difficulty as to there being previous events, by a reference to distinct raptures. There may be a rapture - the rapture of especial reward, promised to Philadelphia - which takes place before the main one destined for the watchful church - and lastly, a third for those who have to pass through the great tribulation. Both the latter occur during the time of the Presence: and the hint of Paul, “Each in his own rank,” may lead us to believe, that there is more than one rank among those that are Christ’s.

 

 

That there must be more than one rapture seems clear from several passages.

 

 

1. If it has been proved that the two in the field and at the mill are both [regenerate] believers, and that the taking is the rapture of the watchful - [and obedient (Acts 5: 32; 1 John 3: 24, R.V.)] - one, then if the unwatchful [“…that are alive, that are left…” (1 Thess. 4: 15, R.V.)] - is also to be with Christ in the kingdom, there must be a second rapture embracing him.

 

 

2. This is confirmed by the parable of the Virgins. The foolish ascend to the chamber-door, after the wise have entered.

 

 

3. In the book of Revelation, there are several rap­tures. (1.) That of the Man‑child, answering appa­rently to the promise to Philadelphia. (2.) That of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, who are before [Page 296] the throne, and redeemed from the earth. This is a distinct rapture, unless it be a part of those represented by the Man-child. (3.) The harvest: Rev. 12 - 14.

 

 

Beside these, we have the great multitude on high, and the ascent of the two martyred prophets: (Chapters 7, 11.)

 

 

In the history of Jesus’ life we have three scenes of similar import, (1.) the secret raising of the daughter of Jairus, (2.) the transfiguration, (3.) and the general assembly of the [selected] disciples around Jesus after his resurrection.

 

 

May it not be then, that it is with the raptures, as with the [select] resurrections, that they are in some places massed together, when there was no occasion to separate them; while, in other places, principles are asserted, which compel us to recognise a distinction of times and persons with regard to them also?

 

 

A remarkable exemplification of such a view occurs in the gospel history. Discrepancies arise in the statements of the Evangelists so serious, that harmonists have been greatly perplexed to make them accord. Matthew records the healing two blind men at Jericho. Mark asserts the healing of one blind man named Bartimaeus, as Jesus was going out of Jericho. Luke describes the cure of one blind man as they were entering Jericho: (Matt. 20: 29; Luke 18: 35-43; Mark 10: 46.) How shall we reconcile these? By pointing out, as Greswell does, that Matthew brings together the two cases, while Luke records the one that took place on Jesus’ entering the city, Mark the one that took place on leaving it. Thus the first Evangelist gives the points of narrative that were common to the two cases, while each of the [Page 297] others gives the special characteristics of each case respectively.

 

 

But how can it be true that there are no previous events to take place ere the saints’ resurrection and the rapture of the just, if the resurrection and rapture are not to occur till the last trump? For if it be the last trump, it must (as we find by a reference to the Revelation) be the seventh trump. And if the seventh trump, then the seals and the six previous trumpets must precede it.

 

 

Again, How can there be two or more raptures, if all these things are to be at the last trump?

 

 

These are the difficulties. I will now throw out the ideas which seem to me most likely to furnish a reconciliation.

 

 

1. First, the passage does not deny that there may be more than one rapture. It speaks of change, not rapture. It binds that change to the last trump. But may there not be a change of the saints without their ascent? Or again, (which seems to me more probable), an ascent without change of body? There may then be saints rapt on high, without the glorious [immortal and] resurrection-body, of which Paul is speaking. Enoch and Elijah ascended with their mortal bodies. Jesus rose from the dead, his body seemingly unaltered to sight and touch, though he was able to enter the room through bolted doors. But it was not a glorified body. If we suppose then, that the bodies in which the dead rise are incorruptible, but that the glory is not put on till the seventh trump, we shall be far on our way to understand the passage in Corinthians in harmony with those before adduced.

 

 

2. The last trump seems to occupy some considerable [Page 298] space of time. The expression used of it is singular. - “In the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall be about to sound, the mystery of God shall be finishedThen the mystery of which Paul speaks here will be finished, and not till then.1

 

1 Can “the last trump” mean a special trumpet, not a special blast of a trumpet? If so, it might be sounded more than once. The attempts to disconnect the last trump of Corinthians from those of Revelation seem to me valueless.

 

 

While then there may be raptures without previous signs, the change of all the saints to their bodies of glory will be instantaneous for all, and at a certain fixed moment, after previous signs. In Matthew 24 we have the instantaneous rapture, in Corinthians the instantaneous change. It is quite indifferent to the question of which the Holy Spirit is treating, whether there be one or many raptures. For the point discussed is, How the dead are raised? that is, the physical question is the one in hand. And this is the same in the case of the watchful and of the unwatchful saint. The mode of passing from mortality and corruption to the body of [immortality and] glory will be instantaneous in every instance.

 

 

The Lord’s descent from on high with “the trump of God” can after this create no difficulty. It is not said to be sounded at the moment of descent, and therefore does not embarrass the question regarding the moment of the commencement of the Presence. But the expression “the trump of God as though it alone were so, does seem to indicate that it is peculiar, and that it will differ in itself, as well as in him who sounds it, from the preceding ones.

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 299]

CHAPTER 16

 

THE PRESENCE IN REVELATION

 

 

SECTION I. - THE EPISTLE TO PHILADELPHIA.

 

 

To this church the Saviour takes three titles; as he also finds in it three subjects of praise.

 

 

“To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: These things saith (1.) he that is holy, (2.) he that is true, (3.) he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and one shall shut, that shutteth and none openeth; I know thy works; Behold I have set before thee an open door, which none can shut: for thou (l.) hast a little strength, and (2.) hast kept my word, and (1) hast not denied my name

 

 

Jesus is the holy, loving holiness, and requiring it in [all] his saints. He is the true, fulfilling his promises, and specially in this case, his promise of the saints’ ascent to himself. The last of the three titles is the most remarkable and characteristic. There is but one passage where the phrase ‘the key of David’ occurs, (Isa. 22: 12-25.)

 

 

That chapter begins by describing Jerusalem in “the day of trouble,” when its people are on the housetops, and the city is besieged, and its desolation is nigh. Yet within the city, instead of fasting and prayer, there is the jollity of unbelief, which ensues upon the denial of resurrection. “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we [Page 300] die1 Cor. 15: 32. Against sin so flagrant the Lord lifts up his voice in indignation. “Surely this iniquity shall not be purged from you till ye die, saith the Lord God of HostsIsa. 22: 14.

 

 

But such as the people, so are the rulers. Therefor, the prophet is instructed thus to address one of the chief functionaries of state.

 

 

“Thus saith the Lord God of Hosts - Go, get thee unto this treasurer, even unto Shebna, which is over the house, and say, What hast thou here? and whom hast thou here, that thou hast hewed thee out a sepulchre here, as he that heweth him out a sepulchre on high, and that graveth a habitation for himself in a rock? Behold the Lord will carry thee away with a mighty captivity, and will surely cover thee … And I will drive thee from thy station, and from thy state shall he pull thee down. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder, so he shall open and none shall shut, and he shall shut and none shall open

 

 

The treasurer of state had confidently expected a continuance of his glory; and a quiet decease in his own land, carefully providing for himself a magnificent sepulchre, with much cost hewn out of the rock. This discovered his forgetfulness of the hope of the resurrection. David did not build himself a magnificent sepulchre; for he did not believe that that would be his last house, [Page 301] but expected a resurrection [out] from the dead. The promises to him, [upon this earth] as he saw, could only be fulfilled in resurrection. It was not fit, therefore, that one, should preside over David’s house, and wear his key of office, who had lost the real key to David’s house and hopes - the assured hope of resurrection. For the Lord’s promise respected David’s house, as well as his own person. “Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever:” (2 Sam. 7: 16.) How was this possible save in resurrection? It was not successionally fulfilled: for the family of David soon left the throne empty. Resurrection therefore was the key to the hopes and promises of David, no less than of Abraham. Therefore the Lord would treat Shebna according to his unbelief. He should not even die quietly in the land of promise; but be led captive, and his sepulchre be for another. Also he should lose his station; another should be installed into his post, who should both in name and in reality bear the key of David. Eliakim the son of Hilkiah was to succeed this Shebna. Shebna signifies, “Repent now.” But the call to repentance was in vain. God then would bring forward Eliakim, which signifies, “God shall raise up and he was the son of Hilkiah, which signifies “the portion of Jehovah.” Thence we obtain the mystic lesson, that resurrection is the portion which the Lord has provided for his servants; while those who refuse to believe it, shall have no part in “the sure mercies of David Jesus then takes to himself the promise. He is the Lord of David’s house, in possession of the key that opens all the promises. He is the one raised up [out] from the dead; he has himself, too, “the keys of Hades and of Death.” The sepulchre then is not the glory of the believer, but [Page 302] the resurrection from it; the gates of Hades shall at length no more prevail against him. As saith Paul, “We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second Psalm - ‘Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee And as concerning that he raised him [out] from the dead, no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise - ‘I will give you the sure mercies of David.’ … “For David after he had served his own generation by the will of God fell asleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption. But he whom God raised again saw no corruption

 

 

The key of David then is the key that unlocks the sepulchre. When Jesus opens the gates of Hades none shall keep his saints enclosed: and when he closes them upon the ungodly, none shall open them. In the bottomless pit will Satan and his angels be locked a thousand years, unable to come forth.

 

 

But there is yet another door to be opened, ere the saints, both the living and the dead, can obtain their full glory. And is not this the open door which Christ presents to the living saints of Philadelphia - the door into heaven? Of it John says - “I looked, and behold a door was opened in heaven whereupon he receives the invitation to ascend. “Come up hither.” The former door opens for the dead a return to earth; and to David an entrance to the promises which respect the earth and his throne at Jerusalem: but the other opens an entrance for the saint to his portion in the heaven.

 

 

The opening of a door indeed sometimes signifies a [Page 303] large opportunity to preach the gospel: (1 Cor. 16: 9; Col. 4: 3.) That door man might have some power to shut: but none is able to detain the saint from his ascent to glory. This is not the “door of utterance,” to one about to commence or continue his career of evangelizing, but is put forth as the promise attendant on past and well-nigh completed service to the Lord. What then can it be, but the door of entrance to the glory on high?

 

 

As the Philadelphian saints had manifested a little strength for Jesus, he would manifest his power on their behalf. He would open doors that none could shut. May we not in the praise, which (without a word of blame) is bestowed upon this church, coupled with a consideration of its name, (Philadelphia, which signifies ‘brotherly love,’) behold the chief requisite to that ripeness for glory which the Lord is expecting in his wheat-field? The word before us is used by Peter to describe almost the last addition that can be made to faith. He exhorts the saints to add to faith virtue, (courage,) knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, (philadelphia,) and love. With these he connects the hope of the especial rapture, or the abundant entrance into the kingdom.

 

 

Have not the three excellencies of the church before us a reference to Jesus’ three titles? Is not their “strength” that of holiness, answering to Jesus’ title - “he that is holy?” Is not their ‘keeping his word’ in correspondence with his being “true,” And has not their not denying his name, a reference to his title as the Son of David having David’s key?

 

 

The last title of Jesus seems to be taken up immediately after in the first promise which follows. Of the [Page 304] church of Pergamos it is said - that it “held fast Christ’s name, and denied not his faith The Saviour’s name then is not a word to be taken loosely as signifying in general the doctrine of Jesus; but rather the confession of all the titles of Christ; his earthly glory as Son of Man, and Son of David, as well as his heavenly glory as Son of God. Herein, methinks, is an indication of the Lord’s foresight, that one portion of his glory would fade away from the eyes of his saints, and even be denied by his churches.

 

 

While all who call themselves Christians would confess in word Jesus’ name as Son of David; there are yet thousands - [upon thousands of Anti-millennialist Christians] - who deny that he will sit as king on the throne of David his father.

 

 

The two first praises of the church seem to refer to its witness against the world; the latter to its maintaining the title of Jesus to be governor of the houses of Israel and Judah, against Jewish unbelief. Thus the third praise of the church refers to Jesus’ third title. And as the maintenance of this dignity of the Lord Jesus brought them into contact with the Jew, therefore the promise that follows is a grant of honour not only to be received from Jesus, but to be acknowledged by the Jews who once refused it.

 

 

To deny that title was a proof that they were not real Jews; not Jews inwardly, but only professing Jews. They were followers of the rejected Saul, not the willing subjects of God’s anointed David. Their assemblies were not owned of God, they were the synagogue of Satan. In another of the addresses to the churches they are found blaspheming and persecuting: 2: 9. But at the present crisis the saints are all but delivered out of [Page 305] their hands. The Saviour promises that the false Jews shall fall down at the feet of the believers whom he is commending, and acknowledge Christ’s love to them.

 

 

If these words refer to what I suppose is the great subject of the epistle - the rapture of the watchful saint without death - how significant the promise becomes! The loftiest lot bestowed on the most favoured of God’s saints under the old covenant was the ascent to heaven - a lot of which Enoch and Elijah were the only partakers. How startling then to the Jew to learn, that those whom he accounted mad fanatics, and the followers of a cursed deceiver, were by God accounted worthy to be caught up to glory without tasting death! These will be more favoured than even those holy servants of God. For those two prophets have yet to return and suffer death, as this book discovers. (Ch. 11.) These on the contrary, will enter into immortality and bliss, never to suffer death. If the Jew confess the privilege of Enoch and Elijah to be great, how much more that of the holy ones thus honoured?

 

 

Of the promise made by Christ have we not a type in the history of David? In the day of his humiliation before his son Absalom, Shimei comes forth and curses, and throws stones and dust. David does not resent it, but in patience (the very spirit of the Church of Christ) endures the hostile treatment. Shimei thus conducts himself as the son of Saul, the enemy of God’s king. But when that day of suffering is past, and David returns in power and glory, Shimei appears with humble confession at David’s feet. “Shimei the son of Gera fell down before the king, as he was come over Jordan, and said unto the king, Let not my lord impute iniquity to [Page 306] me, neither do thou remember that which thy servant did perversely the day that my lord the king went out of Jerusalem, that the king should take it to his heart. For thy servant doth know that I have sinned: therefore, behold I am come the first this day of all the house of Joseph to go down to meet my lord the king2 Sam. 19: 18-20.

 

 

May we not also see a confirmation of the view previously given? The spectators of the rapture, to whom it is granted as a sign, are real Jews; these are some who refuse to acknowledge God’s mercy towards the disciples then, but they are compelled to do so afterwards.

 

 

But a third and equally blessed promise follows. “Because thou has kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee out of the hour of the temptation that is about to come upon the whole habitable earth, to try the dwellers upon the earth.1 I am coming quickly; hold fast that thou hast, that none take thy crown

 

1 ‘Behold’ is omitted by the Critical Editions.

 

 

The present privilege turns upon special service - the keeping the word of Christ’s patience. The expression is rather a difficult one. Two different meanings may be assigned to it. It may signify either -

 

 

1. ‘The doctrine of my prolonged stay,’ (the genitive of subject.) Or,

 

 

2. ‘The doctrine of the Christian’s patiently waiting for me.’ (‘genitive of object.)

 

 

The last seems certainly the true meaning.

 

 

The word “patience” takes that sense in the two epistles which are most engaged with the doctrine of the [Page 307] Lord’s second advent. Thus we read, “Remembering without ceasing your work of faith and labour of love, and patience of the hope of our Lord Jesus Christ1 Here it is equivalent to ‘the patient expectation of the return of the Lord Jesus.’ Again, “The Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the patient waiting for Christ2 Thess. 3: 5. Again, “I John who am also your brother, and companion in the tribulation, and kingdom, and patience of Jesus Christ (Rev. 1: 9.) where the patience of Jesus Christ signifies the patient waiting for his advent.

 

1. [See Greek at the foot of this page; and keep in mind that Robert Govett was gifted in translating Hebrew and Greek writings.]

 

 

The previous expression, “thou hast kept my word is now enlarged into “keeping the word of my patienceTo the maintenance of the doctrine of Christ’s second advent, and the saints’ continued attitude of watchfulness, the present promise stands annexed. Let then those ignorant of the Scriptures exclaim against the study of prophecy as foolish; beside its great practical blessings realized already, enlarging as it does the knowledge of our present position, there belongs to it also the abundant entrance to the kingdom, and the escape of a season of fearful trial yet to be endured - [by those who will be “left”] - ere the glory comes.

 

 

When is that hour of temptation? It is not difficult to answer. It begins when Satan is cast out of heaven; when, enraged because his time is short, he gives to his great vice-gerent his throne and power and great authority. That hour is to come “upon all the habitable earth, to try all the dwellers upon the earth Now the dominion of Satan’s lieutenant extends over the whole habitable earth, but its especial power is exerted [Page 308] upon “the dwellers upon the earth;” by which I understand ‘the Roman earth,’ as it is called; or that portion of the globe which encompasses the Mediterranean sea. For thus we read of that period, “And it was given him to make war on the saints, and to overcome them: and authority was given him over every tribe, and people,1 and tongue, and nation. And all the dwellers upon the earth shall worship him, whose names were not written (in the book of the Lamb that was slain) from the foundation of the world13: 7, 8. “The earth on the one hand, and “the nations, tribes, languages, and peoples” on the other, together make up “the habitable earth.” But the chief scene of Antichrist’s delusion is “the earth,” and its inhabitants are all, save the Lamb’s elect, deceived by him.

 

1 [See Greek …] the Critical Editions add.

 

 

In what the temptation, when arrived at its height, consists, the same chapter informs us. One who sits on Satan’s throne blasphemes God, and requires to be worshipped. The power of the world and the power of Satan sustain him. Human force and miraculous power combine to enforce his pretensions. His false prophet establishes idolatry, and requires each to stamp himself with a peculiar mark, without which none may buy or sell. To refuse these requirements is to give oneself up for slaughter. “Here are the patience and faith of the saints

 

 

But some privileged ones (not the church as a body) are kept out of the hour of temptation. How is that effected? It is not by providing some secure retreat on earth; for the temptation is to assail “the whole habitable earth.” It is not that Philadelphia would be the [Page 309] spot miraculously defended from the onset of the great usurper. Philadelphia was one of the seven churches of Asia, and Asia was a province of the Roman “earth.” The temptation then was to attack “all the inhabitants of the earth The saints therefore to whom the promise applies are out of the earth; kept both from the time and the place of the temptation. They are on high. Of such an escape we have a view in the preceding chapter. The woman’s son, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, is caught up to the throne of God, in spite, it would appear, of Satan’s hindrance. Satan would shut the open door, but cannot. He attempts to devour the child as soon as born. Failing in that, he attempts to prevent its ascension on high. But the angels and their Great Leader resist him, and he is cast out. His viceroy remembers with impotent hatred that some [but not all] of the Lamb’s people have escaped his hands, and while he blasphemes God, he blasphemes also “them that tabernacle in the heaven Some of the saints then keep “the word of Christ’s patience;” and such escape the fiery trial.

 

 

Some have to endure - [See 2 Tim. 2: 12, R.V.] -  in patience, and without resistance, (which is forbidden,) the full brunt of the adversary’s attack on earth.

 

 

The present view is exactly coincident with the exhortation, and implied promise in Luke 21: 36. “Watch therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape the things that are about to come to pass, and to be set before the Son of Man.”

 

 

The manner of the escape is also significantly hinted in the words which follow. “I am coming quickly To the Thessalonian believers, terrified at the day of the Lord, Paul (as we have seen) presents his coming as [Page 310] their hope. In the gathering to him lay their glorious deliverance.

 

 

“The hour of temptation” specially begins with the apostacy, - [of those within the Church (Num. 14: 22; cf. 1 Cor. 10: 1-6, R.V.)] - and attains its full tide under the Man of Sin. The present [select] rapture must therefore be before his revelation. It is a promise, not to all the church, but to a certain clearly-defined portion of it - those who keep the doctrine of Christ’s second advent, and its hope of - [a promised pre-tribulation] - rapture.

 

 

The maintaining Christ’s title as Son of David is closely connected with “keeping the word of his patienceBoth refer generally to the millennial glory, and to watchfulness - [repentance, restoration, and obedience] - as the saint’s preparation for it. He who holds the one, will perceive the other also. They have indeed different aspects. The one testimony is the church’s witness to the Jew. Hence ensues thereon a promise concerning the Jew. The other regards especially the world. Hence there follows a promise of the escape of evil that will fall heavily upon the world.

 

 

It is hinted by the apostle also, that those who do not keep so important a portion of the Saviour’s doctrine, and refuse that title, will be left to the hour of temptation, and will find this door (for awhile at least) shut. How solemn and searching the thought! May it duly affect the reader!

 

 

May we give heed to the exhortation which succeeds, “Hold fast that which thou hast, that none take thy crownWhat does that imply? Clearly, that it is possible to have known and admitted this truth, and still to let it slip. With such desertion of [prophetic] truth is connected deterioration of character, and loss of reward. “Look to yourselves, that we lose not the things that [Page 311] we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward2 John 8. The crown of which the Lord speaks is doubtless “the crown of righteousnessprepared for those who have fought the good fight and proved victorious; for those who have kept the faith, and loved the Lord’s appearing.

 

 

Lastly, we have the promise to the victor.

 

 

“Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall no more go out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and I will write upon him my new name

 

 

In the church itself there are two divisions; (1.) the victors in the strife with our spiritual foes, and (2.) those who are more or less conquered by the world, or by the flesh. The division thus introduced answers to that adopted by the Saviour in Matt. 25, where his saints are represented as either watchful or sleeping; the sleepers being those overcome by the cares of the world or the deceitfulness of riches.

 

 

To David’s Son it was promised that he should build a house for the Lord. In the lower sense, Solomon fulfilled it. In the higher, it has yet to be accomplished by Jesus himself;* and Paul quotes a portion of the passage as applying to our Lord: Heb. 1: 5. But if so, then the context applies also. “I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever2 Sam. 7: 12, 13.

 

[* See also Zech. 6: 12: … Thus  speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH; and He shall grow [or ‘sprout’] up out of His place, and HE SHALL BUILD THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD. [13] AND SHALL SIT AND RULE UPON HIS THRONE; and He shall be a priest upon his throne...”]

 

 

In the temple as built by Solomon, were two great pillars, entitled Jachin and Boaz: (1 Kings 7: 15, 22.) [Page 312] remarkable ornaments of that wondrous building. But the loftier Son of David is building a more glorious spiritual temple; and in it the conquerors shall be everlasting monuments. The earthly pillars were first stripped of their gold, then removed from their bases, and finally broken in pieces and carried to Babylon: 2 Kings 18: 16; 25: 13, 16. But these pillars shall abide for ever.

 

 

Again, as pillars are wont to be inscribed with the memorials of victories, so these trophies of Christ’s conquest, yet themselves conquerors also, are to have three names engraven on them.

 

 

1. “The name of my God

 

 

The conquerors had not denied Christ’s name; they shall now bear for ever the name of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

 

2. “The name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem

 

 

David took the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and God chose it as his own, the place of his temple and of his name. The Son of David takes a better city from the hands of a greater foe. And as Joab by his victory on that occasion won himself a name and a title, so shall these conquerors.

 

 

3. “And my new name

 

 

The conqueror bears a better title of Christ than that of “Son of David.” He denied not Christ’s name on earth; he is inscribed with three names on high. The conqueror wins glory from the God whom he served, from the metropolis of which he is a freeman, and from the Captain under whose conduct he came off victorious.

 

 

We are thus also advertised whither the conqueror [Page 313] will be taken. The old Jerusalem is the centre of the machinations and power of the enemy; its temple will be given up to the false Christ. But the temple above, and the city which God has prepared for them that love him, are beyond the reach of the adversary. Those who are overcome will wear the name and mark of the enemy.

 

 

-------

 

SECTION II - CHAPTERS 10 AND 11

 

 

In these two chapters we have the Presence first, and then a [select] rapture; but it is not the rapture of the [whole] church. The Lord Jesus appears here as “the angel of the Lord” in connexion with Israel. He is clothed with a cloud, and therefore is unseen by the world and by Israel. He is come down to Sodom. and Egypt, to see if they have done altogether according to the cry of it. He has heard of the oppression of his people, and is come down to deliver them. He comes especially for the deliverance of his two martyr prophets.*

 

[* Believed by Mr. Govett to be ‘Elijah’ and ‘Enoch’. But many Christians today, believe ‘Moses’ will accompany ‘Elijah’ because of his appearance with him on the Mount of Transfiguration; and also because God choose him to deliver His people from their slavery under Pharaoh in Egypt. (See Exodus ch. 3; cf. Rev. 11: 3-6.]

 

 

He is “the angel of the covenant,” as shewn by the rainbow about his head, and his having in his hand the book of the covenant,1 while its ark is seen on high, and its seals are now broken. His feet on earth and sea appear to claim them both for the Creator against the vain pretensions of Antichrist.

 

1 Or is this something distinct? The first roll is called a book, this a little book.

 

 

His two prophets witness for him, but after defending themselves for 1260 days, by miracle, from the enemies among whom they live, after the time of their testimony [Page 314] is ended, they fall [i.e., are slain] before the power of the false Christ, and are crucified - [i.e., put to death (see Rev. 11: 7, 8, R.V.)] - like their Lord, at Jerusalem. Of so brilliant a triumph, the nations who have come up to make war against Jerusalem, are permitted to see the evidence. Their dead bodies for three days and a half - [the precise time our Lord Jesus, as a disembodied soul, (Acts 2: 31) remained in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Gk. ‘Hades’ (Matt. 12: 40) amongst all the dead.] - lie unburied in the streets of Jerusalem. But after that time they arise - [i.e. resurrected]; the angel calls them on high to himself, and they ascend to heaven in the cloud with him. Here then we have the Presence, and rapture [resurrection] of saints, but only its aspect towards Israel. His [two] witnesses are not preserved now, as Moses and Aaron were, when they stood before Pharaoh; nor as Caleb, and Joshua when the Lord appeared in his glory, as Israel was about to stone them with stones. He allows them to be slain, only that they may be raised with immortal glory.* He determines that their resurrection and ascent - unlike the resurrection and ascension of those of the church - shall be in the very presence and sight of their adversaries, to the great dismay of the beholders.

 

[* NOTE: This fact proves to us that at the time of the two raptures into heaven (by Enoch and Elijah, Gen. 5: 23; 2 Kings 2: 11, R.V.) that they did not enter into the presence of God where Christ now is - seated at His Father’s right hand! The reason being, God will not allow any mortal man to enter His presence! A good example of this truth is made known by the special clothing which the High Priest of the Jews was commanded to put on before entering the ‘holy of holies’ where God’s ‘presence’ was. That is, in that in that part of Temple which Solomon was instructed to build in the city of David.

 

Furthermore, we know of a very rare and unusual occurrence which God allowed to happen! It is described in Num. 16: 30, R.V. as: “…a new thing …” when [31] “… the ground clave asunder that was under them”: [32] “and the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up …” [33] “So that they and all that appertained to them, went down alive unto Sheol.” This event was ‘new’ because ‘Sheol’ is in “the heart of the earth” Matt. 12: 40; and is the place where our Lord Jesus descended immediately after the time of His Death (Matt. 12: 40; cf. Acts 2: 31). It is the place ‘in the heart of the earth’, where all disembodied souls of the dead are waiting for their Resurrection. (Luke 16: 23; Acts 2: 24; cf. Rev. 6: 9-11, R.V.).

 

The LORD’S holy anger and righteous judgment fell upon all of these apostates: and the people, who were told to “Depart from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs, lest ye be consumed in all their sins” (Num 16: 26, R.V.). “… for there is WRATH *gone out from the LORD:* the plague is begun:” (verse 46, R.V.).

 

* See also in Jeremiah Ch. 7. of the translators’ use of the word “wrath” [Verse16, RSV]: “Therefore pray not for this people, neither lift up cry or prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.” … [Verse 27] “And thou shalt speak all these words unto them - [i.e., the apostates]; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee. And thou shalt say unto them, This is the nation that hath not hearkened to the voice of the LORD their God, nor received instruction: truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth[Verse 29]: “…the LORD has rejected and forsaken the generation of his WRATH

 

 

Now we are not told in Scripture where Enoch and Elijah went to after their rapture into ‘heaven’ - and we dare not go beyond what is written in Holy Scripture - but we do know what is written in the apostle John’s gospel (John 3: 13; cf. 14: 2, 3. R.V.); and what the apostle Peter preached on Pentecost - 10 days after Christ’s Ascension into heaven in Acts 2: 27, 34; and what the Apostle Paul said many years after Peter’s statement in 2 Tim. 2: 17b, 18, R.V.); and also the Writer (i.e. the Holy Spirit) of Hebrews has recorded in Heb. 10: 13ff.! Therefore we believe, and are confident in our rejection of all other theories to the contrary; and our disagreement with all those who maintain the the ‘spirit’ which Christ surrendered at the time of His Death, is supposedly the time when we can appear in the presence of God in heaven - without an immortal body!

 

 

Therefore, the select pre-tribulation rapture of those “accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (Luke 21: 36, A.V.), will not include all who are regenerate - but only those who are judged by Christ to have fulfilled His  conditions! See also Rev. 3: 10: “Because thou hast kept the word of my PATINT ENDURANCE - (Lit. Gk. “the word of the patience of me”.) - I also will keep thee from THAT HOUR of TRIAL, which is ABOUT to come on the whole HABITABLE, to try THOSE who DWELL on the EARTH.” These words are written to “the CHURCH in Sardis” (Rev. 3: 1, R.V.); and therefore it applies to both regenerate Jews and regenerate Gentiles living today. ALL PAST RESURRECTIONS and RAPUURES were of individuals who were not at that time ‘changed’ from being MORTALITY into IMMORTALITY.

 

It is also interesting to note the request which Jesus said was made to Abraham - to send Lazarus to his ‘father’s house’ (see Luke 16: 23, 27, R.V.). This was not an unreasonable request to make; or one which was impossible for God to grant because Solomon had said: “All go unto one place…” (Eccl. 3: 20, R.V.)! See Num. 16: 30, 33; 1 Samuel 28; 14-19; Psalm 139: 8b. Cf. Matthew 17: 3; Mark 8: 4; Rev. 1: 18; 6: 9-11; 11: 3, R.V.).

 

Are not these scriptural truths ‘AWSOME’ for ‘disciples,’ ‘Christians,’ (Acts 11: 26) and non-Christians alike, who have never heard or fully understood them?]

-------

 

 

SECTION III - CHAPTIERS 12-14

 

 

Having sketched before my views of the principal points in these chapters which bear on the subject before us, there is the less to say now.

 

 

The woman in heaven adorned with three orders of celestial light, is, as I suppose, Jerusalem invested by God with glory in the three great dispensations of the Patriarchs, the Law, and the Gospel. But who is the child that is caught up to God and to his throne? Upon this most difficult question, I do not feel certain, [Page 315] but believe it to be the company of the victors of the three dispensations who will rise if dead, and be caught up, if alive, before the Great Tribulation has begun. A part of this company is seen I believe, in the souls under the altar; a part in the great palm-bearing multitude around the throne, and a part is taken from the church, according to the promises to the victors in Laodicea, and to those who keep the word of Christ’s patience in Philadelphia [Rev. 3: 10]. The points of correspondence between these different bodies I may notice in another place, if the Lord permit.

 

 

Those seen as the victorious company (in chap. 15.) before the vials are poured out, must not be confounded with them. They ascend, after the Antichrist has arisen, and after they have past through the severe conflict of that day, and come off conquerors. The male child on the contrary escapes that day of temptation.

 

 

A new company of conquerors appears at the commencement of chapter 14: 144,000, taken, not from the tribes of Israel, but “redeemed from among men” in or as it is elsewhere expressed, “redeemed from the earth.” Either they are a part of the male child, ascending with it, as belonging to the class of conquerors in general, though afterwards distinguished from it because of peculiar qualifications; or this is a second rapture. I incline to the first view of the case. They are “redeemed from the earth Now as the redemption out of Egypt supposed the Israelites to have left it, so does the redemption from earth imply that these are beyond its limits:

Deut. 7: 8; 1 Chron. 17: 21. They take more than a Jewish standing: the name of the Father and the Son [Page 316] are on their foreheads. The sound of their praises visits John from heaven, therefore they are in heaven. They sing their special song “before the throne and its living creatures and elders.” Nor do I find that in this book Jesus takes the name of the Lamb any where but in the heaven.

 

 

Lastly, after a call to the saints, who are left on earth during the days of Antichrist, to be patient under their sufferings - there is a declaration of blessedness to be obtained by those who should from that day forward die in the Lord. Immediately afterwards we have the reaping of the harvest of the earth by the crowned harvest-man seated on the clouds. What can this be but the rapture of those of the church who still abide upon the earth [when Christ returns]? As the first-fruits, so the harvest. But the first-fruits are some redeemed from men, whose characteristics stand opposed to those under the law: Gen. 1: 28; Dent. 7: 14.

 

 

Here then we have at least a second rapture; and that, after the appearance of Antichrist in his power, as the former one was before it.

 

 

Finally, these views are commended to the prayerful study of the saints of God. May what they contain of truth find a willing reception! May what is erroneous be exposed and avoided!* And may every fresh truth which we learn, work in us that spiritual profit which was designed, and lead us to that patient preparation for our Lord’s advent, which includes in it every grace which our Master desires to see developed in his disciple!

 

[* There is no mention of a resurrection of the dead at the time of the first rapture of those “accounted worthy to escape” the Great Tribulation!  Only the dead are Resurrected, and the Resurrection begins when Christ returns to earth after the Great Tribulation. ]

 

 

*       *       *

 

[Page 317]

IN REFUTATION OF DR. CUMMING’S TRACT,

ENTITLED “THE POPE THE MAN OF SIN

 

 

2 THESSALONIANS 2

 

 

SINCE the above was written, the Tract by Dr. Cumming, entitled “The Pope the Man of Sin,” fell in my way. This induced me to reconsider the prophecy with a view to answer the arguments. The result will be now laid before the reader. Should he find repetition, let the importance of the subject excuse it. That the Pope is Antichrist, has been asserted by national churches, no less than by very holy men. But while this fact should induce caution in examining the evidence, it is no proof of the truth of the opinion.

 

 

Dr. Cumming’s abilities may assure the reader, that he will have the best arguments that can be mustered in its defence.

 

 

An ‘Ultra-protestant’ may, I hope, assail the theory without suspicion of a design to introduce Popery. He cordially rejoices in the vigorous and sustained exertions against Rome made by the learned Doctor, whom it is his privilege to hail and to know as a christian brother [Page 318] If the theory be false, as false he is well assured it is, then the assertion of it is a hindrance rather than a bulwark to the cause of true Protestantism. The straining of God’s [prophetic] word is no light evil, and overstatements always recoil unfavourably on their [preachers and] author.

 

 

Concerning the nature of the argument, I would observe, that the burden of proof lies on those who hold ‘the Protestant interpretation.’ Opponents are only bound to disprove their arguments. But I am able to go further, and to shew, not only that the Popes as a succession of persons have not fulfilled the prophecy, but that no succession of persons can; and as a consequence, that an individual must accomplish the prediction.

 

 

Next be it noted, that my opponent’s argument is a constructive charge, denied by the Romanists. Do Roman Catholics admit that they worship the Pope as the supreme God, to the denial of every other? They do not. This is a strong presumption then against interpreting 2 Thess. 2. of the Popes.

 

 

I purpose then to consider five especial points.

 

 

I. THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY

AND THE APOSTACY.

 

 

II. HIS THE MAN OF SIN

ONE PERSON OR MANY?

 

 

III. HIS EXALTATION OF HIMSELF

ABOVE EVERY  GOD.

 

 

IV. HIS SITTING IN

THE TEMPLE OF GOD.

 

 

V. HIS WONDERS.

 

 

I. Let us consider Dr. C.’s view of the apostacy. It is contradictory of itself.

 

 

Rome’s name is ‘the mystery of iniquity This cannot be infidelity: infidelity has no mystery at all; whatever be the features of the infidel, he is honest. He says, “The Bible is a lie, there is no God; Jesus is not the Saviour.” That is distinct, [Page 319] unmistakeable, however dreadful it may be. But this system is a “mystery.” p. 19.

 

 

“The next expression by which the Church of Rome is known, is the Apostacy.” p. 22.

 

 

Now these two representations cannot both hold good of the Church of Rome at the same time. It cannot be both “the mystery of iniquity,” and “the apostacy” too. The mystery of iniquity is lawlessness in secret, and under a veil. The apostacy is lawlessness unveiled, and open-mouthed, displaying both by word and deed, its disregard of all law.

 

 

If then it be the open rebel, it is not the secret foe. Nor is one who heads the mystery of iniquity the Man of Sin. There would be but little objection against considering some of the Popes as heads of the mystery of iniquity. But if they were so, they would be thereby proved not to be heads of the apostacy. The Man of Sin takes his rise out of the open lawlessness of the apostacy [by those within the Church], and is its head. Under the mystery there is a veil of apparent obedience; under the apostacy there is no attempt at concealing deadly enmity to God and his law. The mystery of iniquity is a people’s secret dissatisfaction with their sovereign, and covert thwarting of his will, while still professing allegiance. The apostacy is that people’s openly refusing to obey [His commands], and lifting banner and sounding trumpet against their sovereign. The last act of such rebellion is the appointing a leader. Such a leader will the Man of Sin be.

 

 

Even upon Dr. C.’s theory, Romanism in our day cannot be properly regarded as any thing but the apostacy.

 

 

For the mystery of iniquity was to continue till the [Page 320] person who withheld was removed. Now the hinderers were the Roman Emperors. (p. 39.) Therefore after that Rome was deserted by the Emperors, the Church of Rome was no longer the mystery of iniquity; but the apostacy broke forth on its restraint being taken away, and the lawless one was revealed. The mystery cannot continue when both the Apostacy and its Head stand disclosed. But did the Emperors hinder the Popes’ power? Nay verily, but Constantine gave them authority, dignity, wealth. Constantine himself is mentioned, in a passage cited in Dr. C’s very tract, as having given to the Pope the title of God! “It is plainly shewn that the Pope cannot be either bound or loosed by the civil power, who it is certain was called God by the pious Prinee Constantine.” p. 36.1 The date of the Popes’ becoming the Man of Sin is ordinarily fixed, by those who hold “the Protestant interpretation,” to the title given to the Popes by the Roman Emperor Phocas. Hear too the words of the Emperor Justinian.2 “Justinian, pious, fortunate, renowned, triumphant, Emperor, consul, &c., to John the most holy archbishop of our city of Rome and patriarch.” ... “Therefore we have made no delay in subjecting and uniting to your holiness all the priests of the whole east.” “For we cannot suffer that any thing which relates to the state of the church, however manifest and unquestionable, should be moved without the knowledge of your Holiness, who are THE HEAD OF ALL THE HOLY CHURCHES; for in all things, as we have already declared, we are [Page 321] anxious to increase the honour and authority of your apostolic chair.” Was this hindrance of the Popes?

 

1 Why have the words - “by the pious prince” been omitted in Dr. C.’s translation?

 

2 Cited by Croly on the Apocalypse. p. 135.

 

 

But further, omitting the question whether the Roman emperors gave the popes their supremacy and blasphemous titles or not, certain it is, that they did not prevent the appointment and residence of the bishops of Rome in their very capital. As then the bishops were present and visible in Rome before the emperors were removed, either they were not God’s appointed hinderers or the popes are not the Man of Sin.

 

 

We come now to Dr. Cumming’s idea of apostacy.

 

 

“What is the apostacy? Infidelity is not apostacy. An infidel is one who is in no sense or shape a Christian, and whose creed is not necessarily a departure from Christianity; but an apostate is one who has been a Christian, and has lapsed from his Christianity into something counter to it, or something that corrupts it

 

 

“Apostacy is departure from truth, and involves the previous possession of truth:” pp. 21, 22. “Apostacy is that which holds the truth, but falls into something additional to the truth, that destroys, vitiates, or corrupts it

 

 

1. Apostacy is a change from a former and true faith to a new and false one, or to utter unbelief.1 When then Dr. C. says, “Infidelity is not apostacy,” it is only true under certain circumstances. He has omitted the great characteristic of apostacy - the change from good to evil. If there be no change, then, false as the system of belief may be, or utter as the atheism, there is no apostacy. The children of an apostate, if brought up in their father’s false religion, are not apostate. Those Turks who are descended from families once Christian, [Page 322] are not apostate. Roman Catholics of the present generation having experienced no change of belief cannot be called apostates in any legitimate sense.

 

1 “Apostate: one that has forsaken his profession: generally applied to one that has left his religion.” - Dr. Johnson.

 

 

2. But if there have been previous profession of Christianity, then infidelity is apostacy, according to the Doctor’s own definition. “He has been a Christian, and has lapsed from his Christianity into something counter to it

 

 

3. But the adding to truth something that corrupts it is nowhere called, by any set of men, apostacy.

 

 

4. He who adds a corruption to Christianity, does not abandon Christianity. He who falls from Christianity into something counter to it, cannot be a Christian. But the same word cannot designate at once the Christian and the man who has abandoned the Christian faith. The definition then contains within itself inconsistent elements.

 

 

5. Our strict inquiry however is into the meaning of apostacy anciently. What was an apostle’s view of the word? It was apostacy from - “the faith1 Tim. 4: 1, that is, from the whole system of belief in Jesus - the Christian religion, as we now term it. I need not prove at length that this is the force of the words. A few texts will suffice: 1 Tim. 1: 2; 3: 9, 13; 5: 8, &c.

 

 

The addition of falsehood to the truth in a point of importance, was called heresy by the fathers. Nestorius was a heretic. But Julian, who, after professing Christianity, went back to heathenism, has ever been known as Julian the Apostate. He had not been so called, except he had abandoned and denied the truths which he once held as a Christian.

 

 

6. From the general question then of apostacy, let [Page 323] us descend to the special one of apostacy from Christianity. Then we may say, “An apostate is in no sense or shape a Christian, and is one whose creed is necessarily a departure from Christianity The apostate is “one who has been a Christian, and has lapsed from his Christianity into something counter to it.” The truth which he held is destroyed by untruth; he has departed from truth previously possessed. How then can he still “hold the truth?” The text asserts the very contrary: “That they should believe the lie, (see Gr.) that they all might be damned who believed not the truth

 

 

7. A man cannot at the same time be a Christian, and an apostate from Christianity. But this definition supposes that he may. He “holds the truth” - how can you deny him the title of Christian? He has “lapsed from his Christianity into something counter to it How can he be a Christian?

 

 

8. Nor is there apostacy where Dr. C’s conditions are fulfilled.

 

 

“Speaking to Christians, the word apostacy is applicable to that which was once pure, but has got that truth perverted, distorted, and destroyed

 

 

Here is a Baptist, who once held that the immersion of believers is the only true baptism. He, however, in his later days, embraces the idea that the sprinkling of infants, though not the original mode of baptizing, is yet, after all, as good as the immersion of believers. I ask of Baptists - Is such an one an apostate from Christianity? May the term ‘apostate’ be legitimately applied to him with regard even to his notions of baptism? Yet Dr. C’s definition is met by this case. “Apostacy is that which holds the truth” - he still maintains believers’ [Page 324] immersion to be scriptural - “but falls into something additional to the truth that destroys, vitiates, and corrupts it;” for if the immersion of believers be true, the sprinkling of unbelievers is an addition corrupting the true view.

 

 

Would I defend Rome in her sinfulness? God forbid. I only maintain that her iniquity is not of the kind supposed by the term apostacy. Her great sin is the setting up a code of laws of human origin, and enforcing them as if they were Christ’s. These, according to her boast - that she is ever the same - she cannot annul. Say that she is “the mystery of lawlessness1 and I would not deny it. Affirm that she is lawlessness in spirit, and I would confess it; but never can she become lawlessness in form. The Pharisees, as Jesus tells them, were within full of lawlessness: (Matt. 23: 28.) but he never accuses them of apostacy. Their sin was adding to the law of God the decrees of men; they bound “heavy burthens, and grievous to be borne, and laid them on men’s shouldersThey substituted the authority of men for the authority of God; and this marked the lawless spirit that refuses to bow to the Most High. But their system, like that of the Roman Catholic, was any thing but lawlessness in form. Rome cannot become apostate, so long as it holds its creeds: so long as it professes to be christian. In order to become apostate it must cease to be christianity even in semblance. But out of its lawlessness in spirit may spring, as in the French Revolution, lawlessness in form, and out of that a geater than Napoleon, the leader of the Great Rebellion.

 

1 Dr. Cumming rightly translates [see Greek …] “the Lawless One [see Greek…] then is “the mystery of lawlessness

 

[Page325]

II. The next main point in controversy is - Whether “the Man of Sin” be an individual, or a succession of persons. Dr. C. thus states the argument on his side.

 

 

“It has been argued, that a person called “the lawless one,” “the Man of Sin must be an individual, and not a succession of persons. I answer, it is a succession of persons. You ask what authority I have for it? (1.) In Daniel we read of four kings, the heads of four successive empires: that is confessedly a succession of kings. (2.) In Heb. 9: 7, we read, “Into the second went the High Priest alone once every year,” that was not an individual, but an office held by many in succession. So in the Revelation, (3.) the woman treading on the moon, (12: 1,) and (4.) the woman sitting on the living creature, (13) 1 are admitted by all parties to be individuals made the types of successive multitudes. The woman is a type of a society. So the Man of Sin is the head and representative of a society; and just as (5.) “he that letteth” is the Roman Emperors, so “he that sitteth” is the Roman Popes - not one person, but a succession of persons, one wearing a crown, the other a tiara.” P. 39.

 

1 Where is this woman to be found?

 

 

1. Of these five examples I must dismiss the two from Revelation, because we are not agreed on their interpretation, and because they are emblems; the Man of Sin is not an emblem. The last example also has weight only with those who hold the Roman emperors to be the withholding power; it does not touch me. I come then to the two first examples. Without making any special objection to the first, I will only observe that both these possess one feature in common, which enables them to connect and combine in one a number of individuals. Both kings and high priests are offices in which they have predecessors and successors; and thus the whole succession may in the mind’s eye be regarded as one. Shew then in Paul’s prophecy of the Man of Sin, any passage or [Page 326] word that speaks of his office, and you may then claim the argument, but not till then.

 

 

Not one of the three titles given to this terrible being is official. Let us pass them in review.

 

 

1. He is “the Man of Sin.” Is this a name of office  Has either God or man appointed such an office? Nay, it is a description of a son of Adam: giving his moral aspect towards his Maker. It is a description of his personal character in reference to the Law of God; and his title, “Son of Perdition” shews his obnoxiousness to God’s future moral judgment.

 

 

2. But he is also “the Son of Perdition.” Is there any office here? I will not believe, till I see or hear the assertion, that any one will be hardy enough to make it. We agree that it means “doomed to be destroyed.” But it means more. It intends an individual. The only other occasion on which it occurs refers to an individual. “None of them is lost but the Son of Perdition, (Judas) that the scripture might be fulfilled Similar examples lend their light and aid. Barnabas was named, “Son of Consolation Acts 4: 36. Where two or many are meant the plural is used. James and John were “Sons of thunder “The Son of Gehenna (Matt. 23: 15.) signifies not official, but personal and moral qualities. The last especially resembles the phrase of the text.

 

 

3. Lastly, he is “the Lawless One.” Is this official? Manifestly not. It is a description of moral qualities. Not one of the three titles gives the idea of an office.

 

 

4. But even if either or all of these titles implied an office held successively by a series of persons, the circumstances of the case are such as to render it certain [Page 327] that an individual is meant. Let me imitate the two portions of the prophecy. - ‘The times of the first French revolution are not the darkest which that nation has to experience. Worse days are in store, and then shall arise the Bishop of Bourdeaux, the ringleader of the infidels, who, after publishing a book in favour of socialism, shall publicly abjure and blaspheme Christianity, and die in a fit of insanity.’ Here no one will doubt, that though there might have been many bishops of that city, one special one was meant. It is scarcely necessary to imitate the other portion. But if I were io say - ‘Times of trouble are at hand for Scotland, of which the causes are already in operation. And then shall the Duke of Argyle appear, who after lifting his banner against his sovereign, shall be defeated in battle, and be executed in the Grass-market of Edinburgh;’ all would acknowledge, that out of the many dukes of that title, some one future duke was intended. Even then though my opponents could prove, that an office was intended, it would not avail to establish their interpretation. The being predicted must even then be an individual.

 

 

Dr. C. however insists that the Man of Sin is not to be regarded as an individual, but a series of official persons.

 

 

“In speaking of the pope as the Man of Sin, and the head of the apostacy, I do not mean to specify an individual person. It is not, in short, Mastai Feretti that I pronounce the Man of Sin, but Pio Nono, his predecessors and his successors, should he have any; it is not Mastai Feretti the monk that I proclaim to be the Man of Sin, or that I charge with offences, but the official called the Pope of Rome, the head of the Romish hierarchy; and with him in his official character as the head of the apostacy, and in no other I have to do this night.” p. 16.

 

[Page 328]

“It is not however the personal but the official which we are to look at; it is the system not the individual.” p. 27.

 

 

Against this I remark:-

 

 

I. An individual who made such pretensions as the Man of Sin could not receive any office; much less could a succession of persons. Still less could the Man of Sin acknowledge such an office as a Christian bishopric.

 

 

1. He could not receive any office as imparted to him by man. “He shows himself that he is God.” How can creatures communicate office to their Creator? Can office impart the Divine nature?

 

 

2. Much less could the Man of Sin appear as a succession of persons. The successors in every office are manifestly only equal to their predecessor. And how should this square with his demanded supremacy? He “exalteth himself above all that is called God.” He will admit no equal among the gods, how could he acknowledge an equal among his predecessors? Beside which, we have the absurdity of the godhead having divine yet mortal predecessors, and divine yet mortal successors.

 

 

3. The Man of Sin must deny all derivative power. He refuses to acknowledge a distinction of persons in the Godhead;1 therefore none can give him power. The power of God must be underived. This he asserts. Much less could he admit power derived from the God of Christianity, and from one of the subordinates of Christ! What are the powers of an apostle to one who claims the supremacy of the Godhead? 2 To acknowledge Peter’s [Page 329] claims as the ground of his assertions, would make his pretensions to supreme divinity palpably absurd. ‘I am supreme God, because I am the successor of St. Peter!’ A series of supreme gods advanced to the possession of Godhead by the election of men to a subordinate office under Christ, would be too manifest an absurdity to be swallowed by men.

 

1 1 John 2: 22.

 

2 In Jesus we have the true God, in Peter a [… see Greek] or object of worship. To fulfil the prophecy, he must exalt himself above both.

 

 

4. He “opposeth (himself) and exalteth himself above all that is called God No form of Christianity could be professed by one who opposes himself to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and who exalts himself above them. Nor could his adherents profess Christianity, for that would be to deny him to be the only God.

 

 

5. The office which the popes sustain is not evil. To be bishop of the church of Rome is not sinful. It was once of God; it might be exercised for God still. Again, if the Man of Sin be the various bishops who have presided over the church of Rome, then the holy men who in apostles’ days, or immediately after, ruled that church are limbs of that Impious One, and as sons of perdition are already condemned. “The predecessors” of Pius the IXth are rightly included by Dr. C. in his charge.

 

 

6. Lastly, the very official title of the pope may stand as irrefragable evidence that he is not the Man of Sin. “It is not, in short, Mastai Feretti, that I pronounce the Man of Sin, but Pio Mono On that very ground, Dr. Cumming, I challenge you to acquit him! His official name is Pope Pius the Ninth. How then can he who calls himself “pious” be the offender who denies all divinity but his own? Does not one who names himself “pious” acknowledge his duty of subjection as a creature to his God?1 Prove him then, if you can, to be the blaspheming rebel, that exalts himself above every object of worship, and above every being to whom the title of God has ever been given!

 

1 “Pious: 1. Careful of the duties owed by created beings to God.” - Johnson’s Dictionary.

 

 

I press you further with the Creed of Pope Pius IV. That Creed in its tenth article has these words. “I promise and swear true obedience to the Bishop of Rome, SUCCESSOR TO ST. PETER, Prince of the apostles, and VICAR OF JESUS CHRIST.” How can he exalt himself above Peter who owns himself his successor? How can he exalt himself above Jesus who affirms himself only his Vicar?

 

 

II. Again those few words. - “The Man of Sin shall be revealed contain within themselves evidence sufficient to prove that an individual is meant.

 

 

The phrase “a man of sin,” would signify any sinful man, just as “a man of understanding” would mean any man possessing intelligence; or “a man of sorrows,” any one visited with frequent calamities and griefs. But substitute the definite article - “The man of understanding.” Now we have two meanings.

 

 

The phrase must signify either 1. An individual. 2. Or a class.

 

 

By “the man of understanding” may be meant (1.) the class - men of intelligence. This is what is termed the hypothetic use of the definite article. (2.) In some circumstances it might signify an individual.

 

 

Can we then fix the expression to one of these senses ? Are there not some means of discriminating the meaning in which the Holy Ghost used the phrase? There are.

 

[Page 331]

1. Where a class is intended, there, whatever is affirmed of the class, is true of each member of it.

 

 

Take the instance given by Dr. C. “Into the second went the high-priest alone once every year, not without blood This was true of each high priest in the days of Herod, no less than in those of Moses. Had then the Man of Sin been a class, all that is spoken of the class would have been true of each member of that class. Had that class again been the bishops of Rome, the characteristics of the Man of Sin would have been as truly found in the apostle Peter, or the bishop Linus, as in Hildebrand. Each bishop must have denied God and Christ, have sat in his temple affirming his supreme Godhead, and have been possessed of all powers of Satanic miracle. There is no need to prove that this is not true.

 

 

2. The things here asserted of “the Man of Sin” are not true of every sinful man. But they must have been so, if “the Man of Sin” was only a case of the hypothetic use of the article. Thus the sentence - “The just man shall live by faith,” means, that every justified man shall so live. It intends the same thing as the sentence with the indefinite article - ‘A just man shall live by faith.’ By it we design to assert a truth of every justified person. It needs no proof, that the assertions of the apostle in 2 Thess. 2. are not true of every sinful man.

 

 

3. The very fact that “the Man of Sin” had to appear after the apostle’s writing, proves that an individual, and not a class, is meant. (1.) Sinful men as a class had long appeared: the apostle then in prophesying of the Man as about to arise, spoke of an individual. (2.) The Man of Sin shall exalt himself above every [Page 332] God. Every sinful man does not do this. Therefore it is spoken not of the class - sinful men - but of an individual sinner. (3.) The Man of Sin shall display himself in the temple of God, as being the true God. Sinful men as a class do not do this; therefore it is spoken of an individual sinner. (4.) And if I shall prove that “the temple of God means the building at Jerusalem dedicated to Jehovah, then the Man of Sin cannot yet have appeared; for the temple has not been rebuilt since the Roman destruction of Jerusalem.

 

 

No one, in a parallel case, would doubt that an individual is meant. Let us paraphrase the prophecy. “Riches have not yet come to their height: they will not, till, in the latter days, trade shall take a range hitherto unknown. Then the Man of Wealth shall appear - the Son of Profligacy - whose riches shall exceed those of Solomon, of Croesus, and of all that have ever lived, whether private persons or kings

 

 

“In those days of expanded commerce, when the barriers between international communication shall be removed, shall the Extravagant One arise, whose palace shall be built of bricks of gold, and whose furniture shall be of gold and gems; whom nevertheless a popular commotion shall kill, and whose wealth shall be dissipated by the rapacity of armed banditti.” Could any one from such a prediction assert with any hope of success, that a succession of persons was meant? a succession of persons whose houses at first were merely of wood, and their furniture of the coarsest description, while they would gradually grow up to the height of splendour and extravagance here supposed?

 

 

III. The next proof against the theory arises from what [Page 333] is said of the revelation of “the Man of Sin.” This enters deeply into the question; for it is thrice repeated in the brief prediction.

 

 

1. “And now ye know what withholdeth - (in order) that he may be revealed in his time

 

 

2. “For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work, only he who withholdeth will withhold until he be taken out of the way. And then shall the lawless one be revealed

 

 

3. “That day shall not come except there come the falling away first,* and ‘the Man of Sin’ be revealed

 

[* That is, the foretold apostasy which is now taking place within the Church. See Acts 20: 29, 30; cf. 2Tim. 2: 16-18; 2 Pet. 2: 1, 2, R.V.]

 

 

What then is meant by the word reveal? It signifies the removing a veil from a person or thing previously existent, but till then invisible or unknown. But we have here to deal with the case of a person. Of the revelation of a person we have an example in the feat of Jonathan and his armour-bearer. “Behold we will pass over unto these men, and we will discover (reveal; Heb.) ourselves unto them.” “And both of them discovered themselves unto the garrison of the Philistines: and the Philistines said, Behold the Hebrews come forth out of the holes where they had hid themselves1 Sam. 14: 8-11.

 

 

1. The apostle then in speaking of the Man of Sin as about to be revealed, though then kept down till the time appointed of God, implies that he was already in existence when he wrote. What then is the Man of Sin? Dr. Cumming would reply - “Pope Pius the IX. his predecessors and successors.” But Pope Pius IX. his predecessors and successors were not then in existence. The Man of Sin then cannot be a series of persons, some of whom were not to be born for 1700 years after Paul’s death.

 

[Page 334]

2. By the same mode of proof it can be shewn that an individual only is meant. For let it be supposed that many constitute the Man of Sin. Then, as they together existed at the time of Paul’s writing, together will they be present when God’s time comes, together will put forth their pretensions, and together be destroyed. But the pretensions supposed cannot be made harmoniously by many. The Supreme God is not many. The Man of Sin exalts himself against every God. He admits not an equal, visible or invisible. Nor would the wily Satan back the pretensions of more than one. He knows that a divided kingdom must fall. In order then, consistently to challenge to himself the divine nature, and to receive the homage which is its due, he must stand alone. The Man of Sin then, by virtue of his claims, is an individual.

 

 

3. Again, it is taught in the prophecy that there was mercifully a hindrance from God against the appearing of this awful being. Now the bishops of Rome were not prevented from appearing by God; on the contrary, if the Church of Rome had an angel or president like the seven churches of Asia, appointed with God’s recognition, the bishops of Rome were brought into office by God. This is an argument to Episcopalians.

 

 

4. The bishops of Rome come too late or too early for the fulfilment of the prophecy. Too late - for they arose after Paul wrote. Too early - for they appeared before the apostacy - fix the date of that where you will, from A.D. 500 to A.D. 1500. And if the apostacy have not yet come, neither has the Man of Sin appeared.

 

 

IV. But we proceed to another view of the question. Is the Man of Sin’s revelation, the revealing of a person [Page 335] who is absent, or of a character who is present but disguised?

 

 

1. It is properly the revelation of a person who is absent. His presence (or still more strongly his “coming”) and his revelation are put as equivalent. He was not present then on earth, and was therefore invisible to those on earth. When he is present he will be revealed.

 

 

That this is the proper intent of the word ‘revealed’ is evident from the same expression being used of Jesus in this same Epistle. “To you the troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven

 

 

Here it signifies the manifestation of the person of Jesus. But if it be the coming to earth of a person, it must be an individual. This appears from the very expression. But further, whenever he comes, (1.) he must profess to be the supreme God, and usurp his homage. He comes as the scourge of apostacy, as the provocation of the wrath of the Day of the Lord. (2.) He must, in exhibition of his claims, seat himself in the temple of God. (3.) He must be supported in that blasphemous assumption by the full power of Satan. (4.) A delusion from God must blind the eyes, and seal the heart, of the apostates. (5.) He must be received of all the lost, who refuse God’s previously-revealed truth. If all these points do not meet in one person, he is not the Man of Sin. They all flow from, and are essentially connected with the blasphemous pretensions of the Man of Sin. Without those claims he is not the Man of Sin. But where they are found all the rest must follow. Could one man put forth the usurpation of God’s titles - a second possess the miraculous powers - and a fourth, who [Page 336] was guilty in neither of these points, meet the miraculous doom of the Impious One? Absurd! Whenever then the Man of Sin has done his part, God must do his. And what is that? (1.) He must smite the apostates with the plagues of the Day of the Lord. (2.) The Lord Jesus must destroy the usurper by the terrors of his appearing from heaven.

 

 

There is no room then for a series of men here. God could scarcely permit such an one to die a natural death without being dishonoured. At any rate, he declares that he will not permit it. As therefore Jesus has not yet been revealed, the Deceiver has not yet come.

 

 

2. But let us suppose, that the revelation refers to a disclosure of character. Then, as the disclosure proves him to be the Man of Sin, he pretends at first to be better than he really is: that is, he is a hypocrite. He professes, at first, to be a servant of Christ, though afterwards he disowns and defies him.

 

 

Then he must be an [apostate] individual. For hypocrisy cannot belong to any series as a whole. The two conditions necessary to the proof of hypocrisy - (1.) the being seemingly good, and (2.) really evil - must belong to one and the same person. But spread the two conditions over the two ends of series, and absurdity is the immediate result. A. cannot be proved a hypocrite by the open iniquity of Z, his successor in office. Hildebrand’s enormities cannot prove the apostle Peter or Bishop Linus, to be a hypocrite. Besides which, in point of fact, the first popes may be fairly presumed to have been really, and not seemingly, good men.1

 

1 Thus then, if the Man of Sin appears at once in his full impiety, this supposition, which is agreeable to the prophecy, is opposed to the history of the popes. If it be supposed that he will appear first under a disguise; this, which is nearer to the history of the popes, is at variance with the prophecy. None with such pretensions, such powers, and creating such a stir among apostates could long hide himself. But he “shows himself.” His aim is to be known. He is revealed, as the lawless one, as soon as the chain is taken off.

 

 

But was the Man of Sin then present on earth, or afterwards to appear? He was not present, as the prophecy shows. But it may further be made evident. Suppose the Man of Sin to be a person of disguised character then on earth. Then, arguing, from the ordinary length of life, in fifty or sixty years from the time of Paul’s writing, he must have put forth those claims, and been cut off by Christ. But it is granted that no such results have taken place. Therefore he was not on earth.

 

 

But though not then on earth, he is still a man - “the Man of Sin

 

 

Then he must be a wicked man, who has once lived on earth, and is now among the lost, but about to return to earth. That return to earth is his revelation; that is the time of his “presence.” Thus we can account for his enormous blasphemy. His conscience is seared beyond the measure of human hardness in this first stage of existence. Thus too we account for his being kept down in mercy, and for his appearing with supernatural power when he returns.

 

 

Thus are we brought into the utmost harmony with the disclosures of Rev. 17. “The wild beast which thou sawest was” - he once lived as a man - “and is not” - he no longer dwells on earth - “and is about to [Page 338] ascend out of the bottomless pit;” - for as a lost soul he would be placed there, and his ascent would be equivalent to Paul’s ‘revelation.’ He is about also “to go into perdition Thus we have a commentary on the apostle’s word - “Son of Perdition The fiery lake [Rev. 20: 15] is appointed him, after his ascent out of the bottomless pit, and his fresh career of unbounded wickedness on earth. Thus, too, we bring into beautiful harmony Paul’s word and that of Revelation. The earth shall wonder when it beholds the beast, “because it was, and is not, and shall be present1

 

1 [see Greek …], the true reading. Thus too the difficulty about his being at once one of the seven heads, and yet the eighth, is solved.

 

 

Thus, too, we bring Satan’s lie into wondrous approximation to God’s truth concerning Jesus. That there is a great resemblance between the two is hinted in this very prophecy. Both Jesus and the Man of Sin have their “revelation and their “Presence Now we know that Jesus is a man who once lived on earth, is now away from it, and therefore invisible, but about to return to the sight of men with supernatural power. Is then “the Just One” an individual? Why should not the Unjust One be an individual too? The revelation of “the Man of Sorrows” is the revelation of an individual. Show cause then why the revelation of “the Man of Sin” should not be that of an individual also!

 

 

If the foregoing points be really implied in the apostle’s prophecy, it is quite clear, that the Man of Sin is neither any individual pope, nor all of them in succession. They are mere men, who never lived before, and revelation cannot be predicated of them, nor have they ever manifested supernatural power.

 

[Page 339].

III. I come now to the Man of Sin’s exalting himself above every God.

 

 

Dr. Cumming observes -

 

 

“It is said that the pope is not opposed to Christ, and that you cannot, therefore, call him Antichrist. But the word Antichrist does not mean opposed to Christ.” “You recollect reading of the Anti-popes: they were not opposed to the popedom, but were fighting for it, and so anxious were they to get it, that they did all they could to dislodge the person who had possession of it. Antichrist then does not mean one who is opposed to Christ, but one who takes the place of Christ” p. 38.

 

 

1. The instance given overturns the argument. - The anti-pope was opposed to the pope, and sought to dislodge him. The Dr. did not see the opposition of his own example, because he shifts his expression from the personal word ‘pope,’ to the abstract word for the office - ‘popedom.’ But the anti-pope was always, and of necessity, an antagonist to the true pope, and the true pope an antagonist to him.

 

 

Let me give a quotation from one who holds the same ‘protestant interpretation.’ “For the space of fifty years the Romish church had two or three different heads at the same time; each of the contending popes forming plots and thundering out anathemas against his COMPETITORS.” - Croly on the Apocablypse, p. 90. Each anti-pope then not only resembled the true pope, but was opposed to him; which is what we affirm of the Antichrist. They would not have been called ‘anti-popes’ by Englishmen, if they had professed themselves the pope’s vicars. For then they would openly have confessed subjection to the true pope.

 

 

So the Antichrist is an antagonist to the true Christ, while at the same time he will greatly resemble him. [Page 340] He takes the place of the true Christ, and seeks to dislodge him; for the true Christ does not voluntarily give up his place to the usurper. Then they must stand as antagonists of each other.

 

 

2. But the opposition of Antichrist to the true Christ does not rest on the word ‘Antichrist’ alone. It may be proved from the prophecy before us. The Man of Sin “opposeth himself” 1 to “all that is called God, or that is worshipped Then he is opposed to Christ; for Christ is both “called God,” and is “an object of worship

 

1 [The Greek word …] never has the sense given by Dr. C. It occurs eight times in the New Testament, and is generally translated “adversary

 

 

At this point we come upon other statements of Dr. C.

 

 

“There are two explanations of that phrase - [‘all that is called God;’] one is, that it alludes to the consecrated host, which the Roman Catholic calls his God, and above which the pope is enthroned; but my impression is that “gods” alludes to magistrates 31. “The Man of Sin is said again to be exalted ‘above all that is worshipped.’ This does not mean religious worship. The Man of Sin then is ‘exalted above all that is called God’ that is above civil magistrates: and ‘above all that is worshipped,’ that is, all to whom reverence is due.” 33, 34.

 

 

Few could more strongly expose such statements than Dr. C., were he on the other side of the argument.

 

 

Against understanding “all that is called God” of civil magistrates, there rise four fatal objections; (1.) an absurdity, (2.) an insufficiency, (3.) an inconsistency, and (4.) an inconsequence.

 

 

1. First, an absurdity rises to view. If by “all that is called God” civil magistrates alone are meant, then by “the temple of Godthe temple of a civil magistrate or of civil magistrates is meant, and the pope thereby shows himself that he is a civil magistrate!

 

[Page 341]

2. Insufficiency is apparent. Be it granted, (though I do not think it true,) that civil magistrates are called gods. Still, unless you can prove that the title, “God,” is never given to any other than civil magistrates, the point necessary to the proof is not made out. You have only proved that the pope exalts himself above SOME that are called God, not that he exalts himself above ALL.

 

 

3. Inconsistency discloses itself. In one portion of the Doctor’s argument it is maintained, that the pope exalts himself only above civil magistrates; and that when the Man of Sin is said to be exalted “above all that is worshipped,” this does not mean religious worship. Yet a little further on, the Dr. quotes from Roman Catholic writers, with his own approbation, as a true statement of the case - “When placed upon the high altar he is adored by the cardinals.” “Whom they create, they worship.” Which is it then? Is he worshipped as God? Why then confine his self-exaltation above civil magistrates merely? Is he not worshipped as God? Why then allege the adoration in St. Peter’s as proof of his asserting his divinity?

 

 

4. Lastly, an inconsequence is apparent. He “exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, SO THAT he 1 sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God From the above words it is evident, that the act of taking his seat in the temple of God is supposed to be an illustration or proof of his outrageous self-exaltation. But if “all that is called God,” means only civil magistrates, then the session in the temple of God affords neither proof nor illustration of the sin. The sitting in St. Peter’s is no proof of [Page 341] the pope’s exalting himself above all civil magistrates; and if it were, every one who sits down in that cathedral would be equally guilty with himself.

 

1 [See Greek…], omitted by the critical editions.

 

 

1. “Everything that is worshipped.” “This does not mean religious worship A daring denial! And as unfounded as it is daring. We might meet it by the counter-statement, ‘It never means in the New Testament anything but religious worship“As I passed by and beheld your devotions,1 I saw an altar with this inscription - To the unknown God Acts 17: 23. Does not that refer to religious worship? But it were more properly translated in that passage “objects of worship.” This is the only other occurrence of the substantive; but the verb is used in the same meaning, of religious worship. Gentile idolaters “worshipped and served the creature more than the CreatorRom. 1: 25.

 

 

“The emperor, (in Latin, Augustus,) was called […], as a title of high official dignity1 […] The same word as in Thessalonians, and used by the same apostle. It includes then false gods as well as the True. See Wisdom, 19: 20; 15: 17.

 

 

Not so, Dr. C.: he was so called, because he was religiously worshipped: because he was accounted a god, and altars, temples, priests, and sacrifices were dedicated to his godhead. But the above is a tacit confession, that, if the full force of the words be taken, they cannot be made to square with the application of the prophecy to the pope. The Virgin Mary is worshipped; Peter is worshipped; Christ is worshipped; the pope does not oppose these claims to adoration, nor exalt himself above them. Ergo, he is not the Man of [Page 343] Sin. He exalts himself, you admit, “above all to whom reverence is due.” And is not reverence due to God and his Christ?

 

“It is not said, that the pope says he is God, but that he shows himself as if he were God,” p. 35.

 

 

This is not correct. How can any without words exalt himself above every God? How can he without words oppose himself to every God? The cardinals showing him as an object of their worship is not the thing stated in the text. He will “show himself that he is God

 

 

And what mean those words of the Antichrist? - “A mouth speaking great things.” “Because of the voice of the great words which the horn spakeDan. 7: 11. “There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies “And he opened his mouth for blasphemy against God to blaspheme his nameRev. 13.

 

 

1. I observe in several places of Dr. C.’s argument a falling below the terms used, doubtless unconsciously.

 

 

“The Man of Sin is said again to be exalted above all that is worshipped.” “The Man of Sin then is ‘exalted above all that is called God.’”

 

 

The Man of Sin is said to exalt HIMSELF, not “to be exalted much less is “exalted” a part of the text, as would seem from the inverted commas. “Who opposeth (himself) and exalteth, himself,” is the true reading.

 

 

2. Again:-

 

 

“The Man of Sin also “sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself as if he were God.” 34. “This man like a bishop, sits in his cathedral, which is the temple of God, shewing himself, by sitting above the high altar, as if he were actually God himself” 37.

 

[Page 344]

Thrice the text is misquoted: once it is given with inverted commas, as if the exact words of Scripture. But the words really are - “He sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself THAT HE IS GOD.” The latter instance runs thus:-

 

 

“I contend that whoever claims to supersede conscience, and to put his hand in that holy place, assumes the prerogative of God, and shews himself as if he were God.” p. 36.

 

 

But that were not enough. The Man of Sin not only seizes on the prerogative of God and claims equality with God, he denies the pretensions of every other god. The wildest controversialist dares not assert this of the pope. Nay, a passage quoted by Dr. C., as in his favour, smites his interpretation with a deadly blow:

 

 

“The deeds of subjects, says the Canon Law, are judged by us, BUT WE ARE JUDGED BY GOD.” p. 28.

 

 

So then the pope confesses himself subject to the judgment of God, as truly as any one of his creatures! Then he cannot exalt himself above every god, and every object of worship!

 

 

This brings me to another argument. Jesus, finding fault with the Jews for their unbelief, says - “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receiveJohn 5: 43. We are agreed, I suppose, that this refers to the Antichrist. But it cannot apply to the popes. (l.) They stand in the names of Christ and Peter. (2.) The Jews are to receive this Deceiver. They have never received the popes.1 (3.) It is an individual that is [Page 345] foretold. “I,” an individual - am rejected. “Another an individual - will be received. The Man of Sin comes evidently in his own name. Consistently with his awful pretensions he acknowledges no superior who could send him.

 

1 If the popes be the Man of Sin, what shall we say of the position of the English Church? Her calendar dedicates three days to three of the popes as saints. Fabian it commemorates on January 21. December 31st appropriated to Pope Silvester. March the 12th is set apart for Pope Gregory the I. of the 7th century, of whom Mosheim writes. “Doctrines [were] now taught ‘concerning the worship of images and saints, the fire of purgatory, the efficacy of good works,’ i.e. the observance of human rites and institutions, ‘towards the attainment of salvation, the power of relies to heal the diseases of body and mind,’ and such like sordid and miserable fancies, which are inculcated ... particularly in the epistles and other writings of Gregory the Great:” -Mosheim, Cent. vi, ch. iii, 2.

 

 

It is evident then that the words “All that is called God, or that is Worshipped” must be taken in their strict sense. If “the temple of God” mean a building, either literal or spiritual, belonging to the true God, then the exaltation above every being that is called God must include an exaltation above the true God, whoever or whatever else may be signified by the expression. The richness of the phrase is very remarkable, - “above every titled God, or object of worship In most false religions, besides the main objects of worship to whom Godhead is attributed, there are inferior objects, who are adored in conjunction with those of loftier style. In Roman polytheism there were the great gods, Jupiter and Saturn; but there were also the penates or household gods. In Roman Catholicism there is the Supreme Deity, there are also saints and angels. With the claims of neither of these orders does the pope [Page 346] interfere. But the Man of Sin will disown and deny both the principal and the subordinate objects of adoration of every system of religion.

 

 

True views of the claims of the Man of Sin and of the apostacy mutually support each other. Apostacy is to be taken in its strict sense of abandonment of the true religion. Till such abandonment, the claims of the Deceiver described by the apostle could not be recognised. And, on the other hand, the reception of his claims would cause an abandonment of the faith by any who admitted them.

 

 

Not till the desertion of Christianity are men ready for this usurper of the place and honours of the true God. This is the full lawlessness of man, their determination to break off the bonds imposed by a recognition of the Lord and his Christ: Psa. 2. “The truth and its great centre - the true God - being rejected, the nations are ready for the false God and his “lie.” Then the hindrance which had kept under this Destroyer is removed. Iniquity is come to the full; full permission is granted now for him to reveal himself. The assertion of supreme Godhead is the full-blown iniquity of the Usurper. This is the sufficient provocation of the wrath of God. On those who refuse the truth he sends delusion that they may believe the lie. He sends also outward and physical punishment: the plagues of “the great and terrible day of the Lord

 

 

IV. We come to the fourth point - the Usurper’s sitting in the temple of God.

 

 

Let us now consider the proofs brought by Dr. Cumming, that the temple of God mentioned by the apostle is not the temple at Jerusalem. Here are his words:-

 

[Page 347]

1. “The temple of God, it is argued by some, means the temple of Jerusalem. But first, there will be no temple in existence at Jerusalem at the period to which the apostle alludes, as that of the manifestation of the Man of Sin: our Lord’s prediction settled this:” p. 34.

 

 

Our Lord foretold that there would be no temple at Jerusalem, when the Man of Sin was revealed. Where does he say this? I have never seen the passage. He says on one occasion - “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down But he does not say, that the temple shall never be rebuilt. If the Roman destruction of Jerusalem did not fulfil all that he spake of it, the temple must be rebuilt. That the Roman overthrow did not fulfil many points of the Saviour’s prophecy, I have proved in my ‘Revelation Literal,’ pp. 21-32.

 

 

2. “Secondly, the Jewish temple was never called the temple of God after the Jews rejected Christ

 

 

This begs the question. What if we add, that the holy place is not once called even the temple, (Yao;) after the Jews rejected Christ. That is also true; but what does it prove? Only that evangelists and apostles had not occasion to name it afterwards, save in this instance.

 

 

But what is meant by ‘after the Jews rejected Christ?’ Had they not rejected him, when they sent to seize him, after refusing him when he entered Jerusalem as their king? After that time, the holy place is called “the temple of God” - the only other occasion on which it is so called. “This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three daysMatt. 26: 61. But be it supposed, that after the time which our opponents would define as that of the Jews’ rejection of Christ, the phrase is not used. We fall back then on lower [Page 348] ground. We can show that “the temple of God” is used in the New Testament of the temple at Jerusalem. ‘Aye, but (our opponents reply,) not after a particular point.’ Why after that point? Prove that it is necessary to the argument, and then our plea is vain.

 

 

But is this the demand of one who asserts without any scripture proof at all, that the temple of God means St. Peter’s at Rome?

 

 

Are we pressed so narrowly for scripture usage, after a certain point arbitrarily assumed by our antagonist? We can retort with effect.

 

 

“Thus then this man, like a bishop, sits in his cathedral, which is ‘the temple of God.’” p. 37.

 

 

Give us proof from scripture, Dr. C. (we reply,) that any cathedral is called “the temple of God!” Till then, to disprove our view were but of small avail. The refutation of our interpretation were by no means the proof of yours.

 

 

The scripture gives several other senses to the expression, “the temple of God[See …] It means,

 

 

1. The body of Christ: John 2: 19-21.

 

 

2. The body of the [regenerate and ‘Holy Spirit’-filled (Acts 6: 5. cf. 5: 32, R.V.] Christian: 1 Cor. 6: 19.

 

 

3. The Christian Church: Eph. 2: 21.

 

 

4. The temple in heaven: Rev. 3: 12; 11: 19.

 

 

It needs no proof that the pope does not sit in the first, second, or fourth of these. It is certain that he does not sit figuratively in the real Church of Christ, for true believers reject the pope and his authority, as you will most readily admit. There remains then no possible scripture sense in which the words can be fulfilled, but the session of the Man of Sin in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem.

 

[Page 349]

I will put it as a dilemma. “The temple of God” means either (1.) a literal, or (2.) a spiritual building. (1.) If the temple of God in which the Man of Sin sits, is a spiritual building, and is the Church of Rome: the Church of Rome then is not “the apostacy.” And we both agree that the pope rules not in the true Church of Christ. For, since he is the Beast, you hold it damnation to serve him, or to wear his number or mark. (2.) But if it be not a spiritual building, it is a literal one. But no literal building is ever so named, but the temple at Jerusalem. Therefore that is the one in question here.

 

 

3. “Thirdly, by Jews speaking to Jews it was called ‘the temple of God at Jerusalem,’ but by a Christian apostle writing to Gentile Christians, and especially in a prediction of the future, it could never be so called

 

 

If this be true, of course argument is at an end. Only the assertion lacks proof - and so is a begging of the question. But we can advance beyond this refutation. Was not Paul a Jew? Was he not writing to Jewish christians? “They came to Thessalonica, where was the (Greek) synagogue of the Jews “And some of them believed Acts 17: 1-4. Did he not in his former epistle bring to their notice the conduct of the Jews? 1 Thess. 3: 14-16. For any thing that appears then, the Jewish sense of the expression may be intended.

 

 

But I have shewn, and need not further shew, that it must be the one designed.

 

 

4. “Fourthly, the Greek word used is not …, but …, (from which we derive ‘nave’) a word never used by the apostles to denote the temple at Jerusalem.”

 

[Page 350]

Still the same begging the question; still the same lack of proof. It has been observed, that the apostles never have occasion to speak of the temple by this term …, after Jesus rose from the dead, save in the present instance.

 

 

5. “If it be the temple at Jerusalem to be rebuilt, as the Tractarians say, by Antichrist, into which this Man of Sin is to enter, it could not be called the temple of God. It would be rebuilt by Antichrist, and would be his temple, and no more the temple of God than the mosque of Omar

 

 

Indeed! then the cathedral of St. Peter’s at Rome, built as it was by the Man of Sin, is no more the temple of God than the mosque of Omar: and down falls the assertion - “This man like a bishop sits in his cathedral, which is ‘the temple of God.’” But I have further fault to find with this argument. The Traetarians say, that Antichrist is to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. I am not sufficiently well versed in their writings to deny this, though I doubt its being correct. But, be that as it may, there are others than the Tractarians who do not contend for its being rebuilt by Antichrist, but only that it will be at some time overthrown by him after its rebuilding: Psa. 74. Thus this argument too falls to the ground, and the series is refuted.

 

 

But we may go further. The sitting in any part of any building raised for religious purposes by christians is no proof of Godhead being claimed by him who sits therein. It neither involves opposition to the claims of any god, nor self-exaltation above him. The edifices used by christians are for worshippers to meet in. The New Testament does not suppose God’s residence in any building now. Jesus is present wherever his people [Page 351] meet. But again, where edifices are consecrated, they are dedicated to a variety of persons, to St. Paul, St. Barnabas, the Trinity, the Virgin, and so on. The great cathedral at Rome is dedicated to St. Peter. Could God account it his temple which bears Peter’s name, and where Peter’s statue is worshipped?

 

 

The sitting then of any one in any part of any place of worship now, is no claiming of Godhead. And when we look at what Dr. C. has said, we shall find how far he is from proving his point.

 

 

“Catalano, quoting the account of the election of Pins II, adds - ‘When placed upon the high altar he is adored by the Cardinals.’ Remember what the high altar in the Church of Rome is. It is the place where the priest tells you he changes a piece of bread into the soul, divinity, body and blood of the Son of God, and where he keeps the Saviour in a pyx. When a Roman Catholic kneels to his altar he does a consistent thing - he believes God is on it.” p. 35.

 

 

On which I observe -

 

 

1. The apostle describes one thing, Dr. C. another. We agree in the following observation.

 

 

“The word vaos was always used to describe the holiest place of a heathen temple, where the image of the deity was, corresponding to what we call the chancel, the choir, or the altar-end of a church

 

 

If then the sitting in the chancel of a church, or the choir of a cathedral, be the proof of claiming Godhead, the clergymen of the Church of England are guilty of the impiety every Sunday. The cardinals sit in the altar-end of St. Peter’s, probably, while the ceremony of the pope’s consecration is being carried on. This then will not do. What then have we given us instead? (1.) The being elevated, (2.) by others [page 352] upon (3.)an altar in the chancel. 1 But elevation is not the same as sitting, and the altar is not the same as the chancel. If the cardinals did not worship him, no one, I suppose, would esteem the act to be impious. And as it is, the pope makes no claim, he is set there by others. His being seated on the altar would rather mark him out for a sacrifice, than for the Godhead. Is it ever written that God’s seat is on the altar?

 

1 “The words ‘sitteth in’ I may mention is from the Greek … to sit into, and implies being carried or moved towards, as the Pope is carried towards the high altar.” p. 37. Indeed it does not. The expression implies motion - that he enters into the vaos, but whether by his own power, or the carrying of others, the phrase expresses not.

 

 

2. Paul, you say, did not recognise Jerusalem's temple. Did he then recognise a Romish cathedral and its high altar? Did he believe that God occupied that spot? If not, the pope's sitting in a spot neither claimed nor ever occupied by the true God, is no proof of his assuming the Godhead.

 

 

(3.) Neither do the cardinals, nor Roman Catholics, nor the pope regard the act as setting aside the other objects worshipped in that cathedral. Peter’s statue abides there still and is adored; the host after that is lifted up above the same high altar. But the worship of the real Man of Sin must displace every other object of worship.

 

 

ii. But there is one building, the sitting in whose inner chamber would involve the assumption of Godhead. That is the temple at Jerusalem. Paul as a Jew could not call any literal building but that, “the temple of God

 

[Page 353]

(1.) It was called “the House of God “the House of the Lord In it God dwelt. In the holiest God promised visibly to dwell. “I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seatLev. 16: 2. Isaiah saw him there. “I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple Isa. 6: 1. To it he promises to return: Ezek. 43: 19.

 

 

(2.) Over this building God was ever justly jealous; for he had put his name there for ever, and his eyes and his heart were to be there perpetually: 1 Kings 9: 3. Into it none might enter but the priests the sons of Aaron. Into its holiest, none but the high priest once a year, and that, after [putting on special clothing and] purifying himself in a set order. Hence God smote even a king of Judah with leprosy, when he entered into the sanctuary even as a worshipper. Hence too it is mentioned as a high trespass of Manasseh, that he placed an idol in the house of God : 2 Chr. 33: 7.

 

 

(3.) Yet, from time to time, the natural impiety of the human heart broke out, especially in heathen kings, and we read either of their attempting to enter the Holy of Holies, or actually accomplishing their design. (a) Thus when Pompey took Jerusalem - “No small enormities were committed about the temple itself, which in former ages had been inaccessible and seen by none, for Pompey went into it, and not a few of those that were with him also, and saw all which it was unlawful for any other men to see but only for the high priestsJosephus. Ant. xiv, iv, 4. (b) So did Titus, when the temple was taken and burnt. “And now since Caesar was no way able to restrain the enthusiastic fury of the soldiers, and the fire proceeded on more and more, he went into the holy place [Page 354] of the temple with his commanders and saw it, with what was in it:” Wars vi, iv, 7. (c) So the Roman emperor Caligula gave order to Petronius “to make an invasion into Judaea with a great body of the troops, and if they would admit of his statue willingly, to erect it in THE TEMPLE OFGOD;1 but if they were obstinate, to conquer them by war, and then to do it:” Ant. xviii, viii, 2. (d) Similar was the conduct of Ptolemy Philopator, as recorded in the third of Maccabees. He came to Jerusalem, admired the order and splendour of the temple, and “wished to enter into the holiest” ([Greek…].) But when they told him that this was unlawful, inasmuch as those even of the Jewish nation were forbidden to enter, and none were permitted even of the priests, except the high priest their president, and to him but once a year, he refused to listen. The priests betook themselves to prayer; the warlike were scarce restrained from fighting to prevent it. “But he waxing bold, and dismissing all objections, already began to move towards the entrance, thinking to put an end to the matter above named. His own friends seeing this, betook themselves no less than the Jews, to call upon Him who has all might, to regard the circumstances, and not overlook the lawless and proud insult:” 3 Mac. i. He was prevented from entering by a sudden and supernatural seizure of illness.

 

1 The very expression used here, [see Greek …,].

 

 

Now these cases, though all exhibiting impiety, are yet inferior to that foretold. Those, except indeed Caligula’s, were outbreaks of impious curiosity. But here is manifested the determinate and intended defiance of God.

 

[Page 355]

In the act then of seating himself in the temple, if it be the temple of Jerusalem that is meant, we may see the carrying out of the Man of Sin’s design to exalt himself above every god, and to set himself in opposition to them all.

 

 

(1.) It discovers his opposition to the true God. He professes not to be the God of Israel; he refuses bloody offerings. He is the antagonist of the God of Israel. He will enter his house, as the strong man armed. He fears not his wrath. As Dagon bowed to the ark when it entered his temple, so shall the God of Israel be proved powerless to injure him. He will first bind the strong man, and then spoil his house.

 

 

2. He hereby exalts himself above him, and above every god. The God of Israel professes to be the only true God, and asserts his claims to the exclusion of every other object of worship. The Man of Sin then in asserting his claims above those of the God of Israel on the very spot he chose, asserts his superior title. The God of Israel has a controversy with all other gods. “Is there a god beside me? Yea there is no god. I know not any He then has a controversy with the God of Israel, and will thrust his defiance in his face. By that act of sitting in the holiest of the Jewish temple, he virtually implies his title to supreme Godhead, whether he be there worshipped by men or no.

 

 

V. I come lastly to consider Dr. Cumming’s view of the “lying wonders” of the Man of Sin. He would explain them of the church of Rome.

 

 

“I believe that the church of Rome may yet, before she is swept away, do supernatural things, as I am inclined to think she has done,” p. 42.

 

[Page 356]

But this, even if proved, would not suffice. It is not the church of Rome, but the popes of Rome who must do them. “And then shall the Lawless One be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume … even him whose coming is with all power and signs and lying wonders Till then, the proof that the popes are the Man of Sin is maimed of both feet.

 

 

“We then read of the ‘lying wonders This does not mean false wonders, but wonders establishing lies,” p. 42.

 

 

In the above sentiment I am happy to be able entirely to accord with Dr. C. But what then are we to make of the specimens of wonders which he gives? The pictures of Nicodemus and St. Veronica’s handkerchief, the picture and host that flowed with blood, the winking statue of Rimini, the two skulls of John the Baptist, the liquid blood of Januarius, the holy coat of Treves: are not these “false wonders The miracles of Ignatius Loyola it is evident that the Doctor disbelieves, on the surest grounds. How then can they fulfil the words, “With all power and signs?” Are these anything but fables? sheer falsehoods concocted to gain money, or sleight-of-hand tricks, like those of the conjurers of our streets? Frauds, at which the instructed laugh, cannot fulfil that description - “Whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and wonders of falsehood.” Those must be real wonders, which are to back the pretences of a man to be the supreme God, and which shall so prevail, as to draw into the net of God’s strong delusion all who believe not the truth, to their inevitable perdition.

 

[Page 357]

But the popes have never set up for themselves even a traditional and fraudulent claim to be the workers of miracles: a point not a little remarkable.

 

 

The Man of Sin, then, is an individual yet to appear. His presence must be a marked … [time of apostasy] in the world’s history. He comes when men have cast off faith in God and his Christ. The loftiness of the deceiver’s pretensions then attract universal attention; that attention deepens into faith, as his supernatural power blazes forth in undoubted miracles: then follows universal enthusiasm of the lost on behalf of this limb of Satan. And God’s wrath shuts the scene of rebellion.

 

 

 

 

*       *       *       *       *       *       *

 

 

The Pre-Tribulation Rapture

 

 

 

By G. H. Lang

 

 

There are two principal views upon the matters here considered: one, that the Parousia will commence prior to the Times of the End, and that at its inception all believers of the heavenly calling, dead and living, will be taken to the presence of the Lord in the air; the other, that the Parousia will occur at the close of the Great Tribulation, until when no believers will be raised or changed. The one view says that no believers will go into the End Times, the other that none then living will escape them. The one involves that the utmost measure of unfaithfulness or carnality in a believer puts him in no peril of forfeiting the supreme honour of rapture or of having to endure the dread End Days: the other view involves that no degree of faithfulness or of holiness will enable a saint to escape those Days. As regards this matter, godliness and unfaithfulness seem immaterial on either view; which raises a doubt of both views.

 

 

Our study thus far has shown that the former view is unfounded: we have now to see that the latter is partly right and partly wrong. It is right in asserting that the Parousia will commence at the close of the Great Tribulation, but wrong in declaring that no saints living as the End Times near will escape that awful period.

 

 

1. For our Lord Jesus Christ has declared distinctly that escape is possible. In Luke 21 is a record of instruction given by Him to four apostles on the Mount of Olives. It is a parallel report to Matt. 24 and 25 and Mark 13, and it deals specifically with the Times of the End and His Parousia. He foretold great international wars, accompanied with earthquakes, famines, and pestilences, to be followed by terrors and great signs from heaven (vv. 10, 11: comp. Seals 1-4, Rev. 6).These things are to be preceded by a general persecution of His followers (ver. 12), which will be the first indication that the End Days are at hand. Then Jerusalem is to be trodden down by the Gentiles right on until the Times of the Gentiles run out (ver. 24: comp. Rev. 11: 2 where the same term “trodden down” is used, and Zech. 14: 1-5). This shows that it is the End-times of which Christ is speaking, as is further shown by His earlier statement that at that time of vengeance “till things that are written” shall be fulfilled. All things that are written in the prophets concerning Jerusalem, Israel, and the Gentiles were not by any means fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

 

 

Then He mentions the disturbances in nature and the fears of mankind that are grouped under seal 6 in Rev. 6: 12-17, and adds explicitly that “then shall they see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and that when these things begin His disciples may know that their redemption draweth nigh (ver. 27, 28).

 

 

In concluding this outline of the period of the Beast the Lord then uttered this exhortation and promise: “But take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come upon all them that dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man

 

 

This declares distinctly: (1) that escape is possible from all those things of which Christ had been speaking, that is, from the whole End-times. (2) That that day of testing will be universal, and inevadable by any then on the earth, which involves the removal from the earth of any who are to escape it. (3) That those who are to escape will be taken to where He, the Son of Man, will then be, that is, at the throne of the Father in the heavens. They will stand before Him there. (4) That there is a fearful peril of disciples becoming worldly of heart and so being enmeshed in that last period. (5) That hence it is needful to watch, and to pray ceaselessly, that so we may prevail over all obstacles and dangers and thus escape that era.

 

 

This most important and unequivocal statement by our Lord sets aside the opinion that all Christians will escape irrespective of their moral state, and also negatives the notion that no escape is possible.  There is a door of escape; but as with all doors, only those who are awake will see it, and only those who are in earnest will reach it ere the storm bursts. In every place in the New Testament the word “escape” has its natural force - ekpheiigo, to flee out of a place of trouble and be quite clear thereof.* It never means to endure the trial successfully. In this very discourse of the Lord it is in contrast with the statement, “He that endureth (kupomeno) to the end [of these things] the same shall be saved” (Matt. 24: 13). One escapes, another - [is ‘left’ (see 1 Thess. 4: 17) and] - endures.

 

* It comes only at Luke 21: 36; Acts 16: 27; 19: 16; Rom. 2: 3; 2 Cor. 11: 33; 1 Thess. 5: 3; Heb. 2: 3; 12: 25. In comparison with Rom. 2: 3), see its use in the LXX in the interpolated passage after Esth. 8: 13: “they suppose that they shall escape the sin-hating vengeance of the ever-seeing God”; also Judg. 6: 11; Job. 15: 30; Prov. 10: 19; 12: 13. The sense is invariably as stated above.

 

 

The [hyper dispensational] attempt to evade the application of this passage to Christians on the plea that it refers to “Jewish” disciples of Christ, is baseless: (a) No “Jewish” disciples of Christ are known to the Scriptures (Gal. 3: 28; Eph. 2: 14-18). (b) The God-fearing remnant of Israel of the End-days will in no wise escape these things that shall come to pass (Mal. 3: 14; Zech. 13: 8-9; Jer. 30: 7-8). (c) Nor will they believe on Jesus as their Messiah until they see Him coming in glory (Zech. 12: 9-10, 13: 6; Matt. 23: 39). (d) The assertion that the title Son of Man is “Jewish” is equally unwarranted, for the term “man” is necessarily universal to the race, and does not belong peculiarly to any one nation. (Comp. John 3: 14-15; 5: 25-29: “whosoever” and “all”).

 

 

2. In harmony with this utterance of our Lord is His further statement to the church at Philadelphia (Rev. 3: 10): “Because thou didst keep the word of My patience, I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour of trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to try them that dwell upon the earth Here also are declared: (a) The universality of that hour of trial, so that any escape from it must involve removal; (b) the promise of being kept from it; (c) the intimation that such preservation is the consequence of a certain [disciple’s] moral condition: “Because thou didst keep ... I also will keep As this is addressed to a church, no question of a “Jewish” application can arise. Nor do known facts or the Scriptures allow of the supposition that every [regenerate] Christian [disciple] keeps the word of Christ’s patience (Matt. 24: 12; Rev. 2: 5: Gal. 6: 12; Col. 4: 14 with 2 Tim. 4: 10 concerning Demas); so that this promise cannot be stretched to mean all believers.

 

 

In The Bible Treasury, 865, p. 380, there is an instructive note by J. N. Darby (see also Coll. Writings, vol. 13, Critical 1, 581) on the difference between apo and ek. The former regards hostile persons and being delivered from them; the latter refers to a state and being kept from getting into it. On Rev. 3: 10 he wrote: “So in Rev. 3 the faithful are kept from getting into this state, preserved from getting into it, or, as we say, kept out of it. For the words here answer fully to the English ‘out of’ or ‘from’.” That the thought is not being kept from being injured in soul by the trials is implied in the expression “Keep thee out of that hour”; it is from the period of time itself that the faithful are to be kept, not merely from its spiritual perils.

 

 

3. Of this escape and preservation there are two pictures as there are two promises.

 

 

In Rev. 12 is a vision of (a) a woman; (b) a man-child whom she bears; (c) the rest of her family. Light on this complex figure may be gained from Hosea 4 and Isa. 49: 17-21; 50: 1. Israel and Zion, viewed as corporate systems in continuity, are a “woman,” a “mother”; individual Israelites at any one time are the “children”. This usage is the same as when an individual Romanist calls the church his “mother The “mother” is that system continuing through the centuries; yet in one sense, the woman at a given hour is composed of her children.

 

 

As to this “woman” the dominant fact is that at one and the same time she is seen in heaven arrayed with heavenly glory and on earth in sorrow and pain. This simultaneous and contradictory experience is true of the church of God only (comp. Eph. 2: 6 with 3: 13) and 6: 10-13; and 1 Pet. 1: 3-5 with vv. 6, 7). In Scripture Israel corporately has no standing in the heavens: her destiny and glory are earthly. The national divisions of earth do not continue in heaven.

 

 

As to the Man-child, his birth and rapture, as with the whole of this book from ch. 4: 1, pointed to events which the angel distinctly said were future to the time of the visions. There is no exception to this, and therefore there is no possible reference to the resurrection and ascension of Christ. Nor, in the fact, did our Lord at His birth escape from Satan by rapture to the throne of God: on the contrary, the Dragon slew Him in manhood and only thereafter did He ascend to heaven. Nor at the ascension of Christ was Satan cast out of heaven. Thirty years later, when Paul wrote to the Ephesians, he and his servants were still there (Eph. 6: 12), and another thirty years later again, when John saw the visions, his ejection was still future (Rev. 12).

 

 

The identity of this Man-child is indicated by the statement that he “is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” for this is a repetition of the promise (Rev. 2: 26-27), “And he that overcometh, and he that keepeth My works unto the end [comp. the keeping the word of My patience, as above], to him will I give authority over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of ironThis promise is given only to Christ and the overcomers of the churches. As it cannot here (Rev. 12) apply to Him it can only apply to them.

 

 

This removal of the Man-child cannot be the event foretold in 1 Thess. 4: 15-17, for those there in view will be taken up only as far as to the air around this earth when the Lord descends thereto from heaven, but this removal takes the Man-child to the throne of God, which is where Christ now is, in the upper heavens. This fulfils the promise that such as prevail to escape shall “stand before the Son of Man

 

 

As we have seen, the Lord does not descend from heaven till the close of the Great Tribulation, not before Satan is cast down. Moreover, this one child can be only a part of the whole family, not the completed church in view in 1 Thess. 4* and 1 Cor. 15. The “woman” out of whom he is born remains on earth, and after his ascent the “rest of her seed” are persecuted by the Beast; but his removal is before the Beast is even on the scene or Satan is cast out of heaven. Thus those who will form this [select] company escape all things that will occur in the End-times, as Christ promised; and the identification with the overcomers declares that they had lived that watchful, prayerful, victorious life, upon which, as the Lord said, that escape will depend.

 

 

* In 1 Thess. 4: 15, 17 the word perileipo, “that are left,” deserves notice. It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, but the force may be seen in the LXX of Amos. 5: 15, and of the verb (in some editions) at 2 Chron. 34: 21; Hag. 2: 1 In each case it means, to be left after others are gone. So the lexicons also, and they are confirmed by The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. In this place it seems redundant save on our view that the rapture there in question is at the close of the Tribulation and that some saints will not have been left on earth until that event, but will have been removed alive earlier; for to have marked the contrast with those that had died it would have been enough to have said “we that are alive,” without twice repeating this unusual word.

 

 

Consequent upon this removal of the watchful, Satan is cast out of heaven, and presently brings up the Beast, who persecutes the rest of the woman’s family (12: 17, 18; 13: 7-10). So that one section of the family - [are being judged as “accounted worthy” (Luke 21: 36, A.V. cf. Rev. 3: 10; 1 Cor. 10: 1-11; Heb. 10: 30) and] - escapes the End-times by being rapt to heaven, and the rest, the more numerous portion, as the term indicates, go into the Great Tribulation. These latter are such as “keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus” (ver. 17). In Rev. 14: 12, such are termed “the saints,” which in New Testament times, was the term regularly used by Christians of one another; and among their number John had already included himself (1: 2, 9). It covers therefore the church of God, of which he was a leader.

 

 

4. The second picture of this pre-Tribulation rapture is given in Rev. 14. In this chapter there are six scenes:

 

 

i “Firstfruits” with  the Lamb on the Mount Zion (1-6).

 

 

ii. The hour of judgment commences (6, 7).

 

 

iii. “Babylon” is announced as having fallen (8).

 

 

iv. The Beast period is present and persecution is in progress (9-13).

 

 

v. The Son of Man on a white cloud reaps His “harvest” (14-16).

 

 

vi. The “vintage” of the earth is gathered, and is trodden in the winepress on earth (17-20).

 

 

The agricultural figure wrought into this chapter by the Holy Spirit is the key to its teaching. In the early summer the Jew was to gather a sheaf of corn as soon as enough was ripe, and this was to be presented to God in the temple at Jerusalem as “firstfruits” (Lev. 23: 9-14). After some time (ver. 15) the whole of the fields would be ripened by the great summer heat and the whole harvest would be reaped. But this, though removed indeed from the fields where it had grown, would not be taken so far as to the temple, but only to the granary on the farm. Then the season closed with the vintage, and the clusters were not taken away from where they had grown, the winepress being in the vineyard and the grapes being crushed therein.

 

 

Thus the “firstfruits” are shown as on Mount Zion with the Lamb, the “harvest” is taken only as far as to the clouds, which accords with 1 Thess. 4; and the vintage is trodden outside the city of Jerusalem, where the armies of Antichrist are camped.

 

 

The last scene is the destruction of the Beast by the Lord at His descent to Jerusalem (Rev. 19: 15). Next prior to that event is the removal of the elect to the clouds: immediately before this is the period of the Tribulation: preceding that is the destruction of the harlot system of Rev. 17 (see ver. 16-18): this event follows first upon the striking of the hour of divine judgment: but before any of those things of the End commence the Firstfruits are seen with the Lamb in heaven, as He promised (Lk. 21: 36).

 

 

The Firstfruits cannot be a picture of the whole of the redeemed as they will finally appear at the end of the drama of those days, for firstfruits cannot be more than a portion of the whole harvest, neither can firstfruits describe the final ingathering. It were a contradiction to speak thus. Firstfruits must be gathered first, before the reaping of the remainder. The number 144,000 need not be taken literally. In the Apocalypse numbers are sometimes literal, but sometimes figurative.

 

 

As has been noted above, these had been purchased out of the earth, which shows that they were not then on earth, and they learn the song of die heavenly choir. Nor can this Mount Zion be at Jeru­salern, but must be that in the heavens, for the Lord will not descend to the earthly Zion till after the Tribulation, not before it, as this scene is placed.

 

 

The 144,000 of ch. 7 are a different company. They are the godly Remnant of Israel seen on earth after the Appearing and the gathering of the elect to the clouds, and are sealed (Comp. Ezek. 9) so as to be untouched by the wrath of the Lamb now to be poured upon the godless (Zeph. 13; Isa. 26: 20, 21).

 

 

The identity of these Firstfruits is revealed by a similar means to that which reveals the identity of the Man-child. These persons are shown as connected with the Father, the Lamb, and the Mount Zion, which also refers back to the promises to the overcomers, and shows that the Firstfruits will be a portion of the company of the victors, who, it is promised, will be marked as connected with the Father, the Son, and the New Jerusalem (Rev. 3: 12). These three marks of identification come together in these two passages only. Now the moral features attributed to these Firstfruits show that they had lived just that pure, faithful Christian life which necessarily results from watchfulness, prayerfulness, - [according to the Lord’s will] - and patient obedience to the words of Christ, as inculcated in the corresponding passages quoted.

 

 

As the Man-child and the rest of the woman’s seed were but one family, only removed in two portions, one before the Beast and the other after his persecutions, so firstfruits and harvest were grown from one sowing in one field, only they were reaped in two portions, one before the hour of judgment and the other after the Beast had persecuted. We have remarked above that these latter are termed “saints,” and that this was the regular title that Christians gave to one another; that it is amplified by the double description “they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,” and that in this description John had before twice included himself; so that the terms mean that company in which John had membership, the church of God. Moreover, as the Jewish remnant will not have owned Jesus during the period in view the terms can apply only to - [regenerate Acts (Acts 11: 26)] - Christians.

 

 

Finally, as between the gathering of the sheaf of firstfruits and the ingathering of the harvest there came the intensest summer heat, so between the removal of the Firstfruits and the reaping of the Harvest there is placed (ver. 9-13) the Great Tribulation, that final persecution which while, like all persecution, it will wither the unrooted stalk (Matt. 13: 21), ripens the matured grain. It is ripeness, not the calendar or the clock, that determines the time of reaping (Mk. 4: 29). The Heavenly Husbandman reaps no unripe grain: hence, “the hour to reap is come” when the harvest is “dried up”, (Rev. 14: 15), for the dryness of the kernel in the husk is its fitness for the gamer and for use. Thus the Great Tribulation will be a true mercy to the Lord’s people by fully developing and sanctifying them for their heavenly destiny and glory.

 

 

It thus appears that the foretold order of events will be:

 

 

1. The removal of such as prevail to escape the Times of the End. These will be [immortal when] taken up to God and to His throne on the Mount Zion, not to the air. Nor does the Lord come for them; they are simply taken, Like Enoch or Elijah: taken to stand before Him and His throne. Nor is a resurrection - [of the ‘holy’ dead (Rev. 20: 6)] - announced for this moment. The dead, because dead, will have escaped the End-times, which escape is the announced object of this rapture.

 

 

2. The Beast arises and persecutes.

 

 

3. The Lord descends to the clouds and gathers together His elect (Matt. 24: 29-31; 1 Cor. 15: 51, 52; 1 Thess. 4: 15-17; Tit. 2: 13; Rev. 14: 14-16). At this time there will be the first resurrection. Each who shall be accounted worthy of the coming age will “arise into his lot at the end of the days not sooner, certainly not before the End days have commenced (Dan. 12: 13). Nor may we assume of the Firstfruits that they will have priority in the Kingdom over equally faithful saints of earlier times.

 

 

4. After an interval the Lord descends to the Mount of Olives, destroys the Beast and his armies, and establishes the Kingdom of the heavens on the earth.

 

 

It is therefore our wisdom to give earnest, unremitting attention to our Lord’s most solemn exhortation “take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness [that is, fleshly indulgence], and cares of this life [that is, its burdens through either poverty or riches], and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man”: (Lk. 21: 34-36).

 

 

Oh, dare and suffer all things!

Yet but a stretch of road,

Ten wondrous words of welcome,

And then - the FACE OF GOD!

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

THE KINGDOM OF

THE BEAST

 

 

A little consideration given to the Scriptures which predict the rise of “The Beast” would readily lead us to conclude that he is to be a representative of those over whom he is destined to rule. In the providence of God a Beast is destined to rule beasts; and the characteristics of these, who are subjects of the Beast, are clearly told forth in the Scriptures of Truth.

 

 

A little  consideration given to the Scriptures which predict the rise of “The Beast” would readily lead us to conclude that he is to be a representative of those over whom he is destined to rule. In the providence of God a Beast is destined to rule beasts; and the characteristics of these, who are subjects of the Beast, are clearly told forth in the Scriptures of Truth.

 

 

1. BRUTE-BEAST INSTINCT

 

 

“But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of stress. For men will become lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive:” (2 Timothy 3: 1, 2).

 

 

Every stockman knows that this is the governing instinct of the feed lot of the pasture. The most brutal (not always the biggest) of the heard claims, with a selfishness that man was never designed to manifest. That same brute-beast love of self and money has inflamed many a stockman probably more than any other thing; it is so beastly, so unreasonable.

 

 

What constitutes the peril of our day, as described in 2 Timothy, is first of all this brute-beast selfishness and greed. Surely no one can deny the many evidences of that selfishness in our world today. Over the whole swamp of deception and lies of our present day could be posted one word, the word of the kingdom of all beasts - Greed.

2. BRUTE-BEAST COERCION

 

 

“Anyone who has attended a Freedom Rally will know that there are people from all walks of life; every ethnicity, every faith, every political persuasion, all gathered together under one common cause - Freedom.

 

 

“The flags of countless nations catch the wind as people march upon towns and cities. Banners, placards, and the iconic Vendetta masks can be pictured at every demonstration. …

 

 

“For those at the helm of this draconian regime, the uniting of people - who might never have seen eye to eye - will be a most inconvenient and unwanted by-product. This has been demonstrated through the Western world, with scenes of extreme police brutality flooding onto social media whilst the mainstream media remain largely silent, save for the odd article of ridicule and condemnation.

 

 

“Yet, despite the real threat of truncheons, tear gas, [pepper spray], rubber bullets, plastic bullets and even live rounds; millions - that’s right, there are millions of us - are still turning out onto the streets of our respective home nations, week in, week out. …

 

 

“Whilst we know we cannot rely on Government statistics, it is safe to say that a significant percentage of the Western population have received at least one dose of the Covid ‘vaccine

 

 

“This is a matter of personal choice, as has been the case for decades, yet there is something very reassuring about the increasing number of vaccinated Freedom Rally attendees.

 

 

“An ever growing sentiment that is being voiced at these gatherings is ‘I did what I was asked, I took the first two doses, I’ll take no more

 

 

“Even those among us who didn’t fear taking the vaccine are now saying ‘enough is enough.’ Not least because it is unheard of to receive two, three and now four doses of an experimental drug within such a condensed period of time, but more importantly, because even those who did take the jab, do not want to play any part in medical apartheid.

 

 

“Humans inherently know right from wrong. We know that [constant Governments’ bribery, and] forcing  people to take a vaccine in order to keep their job or go to a nightclub is wrong, even if we have taken the shot ourselves.

 

 

“There is a heart-warming conviction growing among the vaccinated that they now have a moral duty to stand with their unvaccinated neighbour. Because yesterday the State were gunning for the unvaccinated, today they are gunning for the un-boosted and tomorrow the tyranny.

 

 

“Never has any threat been as unifying, throughout the entire world, than that of the removal of our most basic and fundamental right - to be free. That is not to say that individuals have lost their identity nor abandoned their most strongly held principles, but there is a common recognition - even by those who might be deemed the most fanatical among us - that this cause, this fight, this desperate struggle to hold on to our freedom, takes prevent above all else.

 

 

AN UNHOLY ALLIANCE

 

 

“Staying true to form, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby has used his considerable position of power and influence to sow further seeds of division and contempt. This time the unvaccinated were his target, and his unsanctified, judgmental remarks were, of course, lapped up by the Mainstream Media. “Never one to shy away from controversy, Justin Welby is the 105th Archbishop of Canterbury and the most senior bishop in the Church of England has, once again abused his position to incite division among the masses.

 

 

“Welby has suggested that people who refuse to get jabbed - [with an experimental vaccination of unknown contents] - are ‘immoral’.

 

 

“Asked by ITV News if being vaccinated is a ‘moral issue’, the archbishop said: ‘I’m going to step out on thin ice here and say yes, I think it is

 

 

“Aware of how the offence his statement would cause, he went on to say: ‘A lot of people won’t like that, but I think it is because it’s not about me and my rights

 

 

“The Archbishop even went as far as to make the - [experimental mRNA] - vaccination a condition of a Christian’s adherence to the Lord’s commandment to love thy neighbour: ‘… go and get boosted, get vaccinated. It’s how we love our neighbour

 

 

‘… to love one another - as Jesus said - get vaccinated, get boosted

 

 

“His inflammatory remarks following a string of verbal attacks made by those in positions of authority, including the UK Prime Minister, Boris Jhonson, who called people opposed to taking the Covid vaccine ‘Nuts’. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern gleefully announced that New Zealand will become a two-tier society between vaccinated and unvaccinated; and US President Joe Biden unceremoniously declared: ‘This continues to be a pandemic of the unvaccinated

 

 

“It is not just the Church of England head who has jumped on the bandwagon of divide and conquer, in a recent interview, Pope Francis called those who have chosen not to take the Covid vaccine ‘Negationists.’

 

 

“Speaking to journalists aboard the Papal Plane, the head of the Catholic Church said he doesn’t understand why people refuse to take COVID-19 vaccines.

 

 

“The Vatican City State sovereign, whose liberal views have seen a significant divide among Catholic fellowship said: ‘Even in the College of Cardinals there are some vaccine negationists.’

 

 

“Prior to his mid-air address, the Pontiff told an Italian news program that taking the Covid ‘vaccine’ was ‘ethical obligation’ and the refusal to do so is ‘suicidal denial’.

 

 

“A little consideration given to Prophetic Scriptures which predict the rise of “The Beast” would readily lead us to conclude that he too was a representative of those over whom he is destined to rule. In the providence of God a Beast is destined to rule beasts; and the characteristics of these, who are subjects of the Beast, are clearly told forth in the Scriptures of Truth.

 

 

“In 2 Peter and Jude, generally acknowledged to be the epistles for the last days, both refer in plain language to these subjects - to these beasts. In 2 Peter we read: ‘But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish

 

 

“In Jude 10 we read: ‘Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do not understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals - these are the very things that destroy them.”

 

 

Behold the in-roads made by sin! Man, made in the image of God in Genesis, becomes at the close of this evil and apostate age, all too generallylike brute beasts

 

 

3. BRUTE-BEAST MORALITY

 

 

Romans 1. covers this phase of man’s degeneracy also. Brute-beast theology is followed by brute-beast morality. Part of the first chapter of Romans seemed a few years ago to describe conditions not likely to ever exist again in our civilised lands. Today all is changed, and the Sodom-like countries and cities of our present day await a similar destruction, not directly from the hand of God as in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, but from the skies nevertheless. The morality of our world, in the condition it is in today, spells Divine judgment. Beasts recognise no moral code and people today [even some from within the church of God]* are repudiating the moral code of Christianity. Evidently from the teachings of Christ (Matt. 19: 8) hardness of heart preceded divorce. Tender hearts are not the possession of beasts, and so the hardening process, once known in Pharaoh’s day, is manifest before our eyes; and man goes on through what he knows as a natural brute beast, to perish in his own corruption: “They not only continus to do these very things, but also approve of those who practice them” (Rom. 1: 23). Before the judgment of the flood, men took wives of all that they chose. Easy divorce suits “natural brute beasts and they in turn by choice or compulsion worship ‘the Beast’.

 

[*See 1 Cor. 5: 9-13. Cf. 2 Pet. 2: 1-3, 9b-10, 12-15, R.V.]

 

 

4. BRUTE-BEAST BRANDING

 

 

Much has been written about the mark of the Beast. We are not concerned at present with the symbol and its form, but rather with its acceptance, whatever the mark may prove to be. Two forms of government are represented in the iron and clay of Daniel’s image: and both are being exercised in our world today. Are we justified in concluding that men and women, becoming by their own choice like beasts that perish, going to escape this final mark of submission to beast dominion? We believe not.

 

 

5. BRUTE-BEAST EXPRESSION

 

 

“Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you” (James 5: 1). “Of them [apostates] the proverbs are true: ‘a dog returning to its vomit,’ and ‘a sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud’” (2 Peter 2: 23).

 

 

Wallowing in the mire, returning to that which has been vomited up, in these and other ways beasts declare themselves. Wolves, hyenas, animals that prey on others, express themselves thus. Men, as selfish accumulators, wail like beasts over their losses; Men, pouring forth the corruption of their own hearts, turn to enjoy again what has been poured forth, and, after enduring a temporary clean-up for a period, are soon back to the enjoyment of mud and dirt.

 

 

-------

 

 

THE STIMULUS OF THE ADVENT

 

 

“‘For many years as a pastor of a church for several years as an evangelist,’ says D. M. Stearns, D.D., - ‘it has been my inspiration, my life, to tell of the Coming of Him who alone can bring peace on the earth. And He will; and while we submit cheerfully to the powers that be, and do what we are asked to do [in His word], we look higher than men - we cease from man and look to Him alone who can - [and one ‘day’ (Obadiah 15-17) will] - do these things. The pre-Millennial coming of Christ to set up His kingdom on earth really does energise, and never paralyses. … Now these are facts, and if any of your churches are lacking in missionary zeal, there is only one reason why; they do not understand the Coming of Jesus Christ. We are not here to win the world to Jesus Christ, it is not in the [His] plan. We are here to get a ‘Bride’* for God’s Son. We are here to get an ‘Eve’ for the ‘last Adam’, and when the last Adam shall receive His ‘Eve’ and the ‘Marriage of the Lamb’ shall take place, then He will come in His glory to set up His Kingdom

 

[* See Gen. 1: 23, R.V. “… she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Also, Gen. 24: 1-4, 8, 23-27, 38-40, 58 - a ‘wife’ for Isaac - selected from amongst Abraham’s ‘kindred’ (v.v. 3, 4.). Here we see the biblical principle of selection. Again, in Ruth 1: 16 and 4: 13 - at a time “when there was a famine in the land”; and when “Boaz” took “Ruth” from amongst his own ‘people’ to be his ‘wife’.

 

.: “Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad, and let us give glory unto him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And it was given unto her that she should array herself in fine linen, bright and pure: for the fine linen is the RIGHTEOUS ACTS OF THE SAINTS. And he saith unto me, Write Blessed are they which are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb 

 

HOW MANY CHRISTIANS WILL QUALIFY?]

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

RUTH

 

 

By ARLEN L. CHITWOOD

 

 

The book of Ruth is fraught with significance and meaning.  Teachings surrounding salvation by grace occupy only a small part of the book and are seen at the beginning of the book, in the first chapter (vv. 3-5).  Then the remainder of the book deals with that which follows salvation by grace, taking the regenerate in a spiritual journey which carries him/her from the point in spiritual life following the birth from above forward into the Messianic Kingdom (vv. 6ff).

 

 

It is vitally important that regenerate Christians, shortly following their conversion, be told why they have been saved and be provided with instruction concerning the spiritual journey in which they now fond themselves engaged.

 

 

If not, how can Christians properly make the decision which Ruth made in chapter one - to cleave unto Naomi and travel with her toward another land (which has to do with the Christians’ connection with Israel, the Word given through Jewish prophets, and travel toward another land as well)? Or, if not, how can Christians on this journey to another land understand the reason for the inevitable spiritual warfare which awaits them and the need to properly prepare themselves for this warfare (Eph. 6: 10-18)? Christians must begin receiving instruction concerning the journey set before them, the land lying out ahead, the inevitable battle for the land, etc.

 

 

Note the parallel between the testing of the Israelites under Moses at Kadesh-Barnea in Numbers chapters thirteen and fourteen and the testing of Ruth and Orpah in Ruth chapter one. A testing of this nature can occur only following certain things having been known evident in the type of the Israelites under Moses); and at the time of testing in the types, two kinds of redeemed individuals are seen in each instance.  The end of the matter has to do with two kinds of saved individuals relative to the inheritance set before them: (1) those who overcome and ultimately realized their inheritance; and (2) those who were overcome and were overthrown in the desert, short of realizing the goal out ahead: their inheritance in the land of promise.

 

 

In the Book of Ruth, exactly the same thing can be seen in Ruth’s and Orph’s actions, though details are not given. It is simply stated that one [Ruth] moved forward with Naomi,  but the other turned back.

 

 

Christians need to understand that the only way in which they can overcome Satan’s attack is through believing the Word and following God’s instructions, as these instructions relate to all things in the spiritual life.

 

 

If Christians do not believe all of God’s Word, defeat will be inevitable. The whole of the spiritual life, taking one from the point of birth from above (Ruth chapter one) to an inheritance in the Messanic Kingdom (Ruth chapter four) is really that simple to grasp in its whole overall scope.

 

 

Now is the time of the Christian’s labouring in the field (the world [Matt. 13: 38]), he/she is to be labouring in such a manner that the labour is not only a progression toward the goal of his/her calling (ultimately realizing an inheritance in another land) but also a preparation for meeting Christ (typified by Boaz) before the judgment seat at a time following his/her labours in the field.  Both the journey and the preparation are part and parcel with the labour in the field in this respect.

 

 

Thus, each of the three chapters present different facets of a complete, threefold picture concerning exactly how a Christian is to govern his/her life during the present time in order to be found among those revealed as overcomers at the judgment seat of Christ and subsequently be allowed to come into the realization of the goal of their calling (to be realized during the coming Messianic Era).

 

 

CHAPTER 1. The book opens by depicting two types of regenerate believers. One type (the overcomer) is shown through the actions of Ruth, and the other type is shown through the actions of Orpah. Following their becoming members of the family (regeneration), both Ruth and Orpah found themselves on a journey toward another land, with Naomi; and both exhibited a determination to continue the journey.

 

 

Only one though (Ruth) continued the journey to the end. The other (Orpah) turned back to her own people and land, apparently during the early part of the journey.

 

 

Thus, following things surrounding the birth from above, the book immediately deals with things pertaining to both the spiritual and the carnal Christian - with things pertaining to the overcomer and the one who is overcome. And the book deals with these things in relation to the race of the faith, the journey from the land of one’s birth to the land of one’s calling.

 

 

That’s the way matters are introduced in the book. It’s not labouring in Boaz’s field (ch. 2) or preparing for meeting Baaz on his threshing floor at the end of the harvest (ch. 3a) which is seen first, but the journey toward another land. And this order is for a reason. There can be no proper labour in the field or preparation for that which lies ahead apart from possessing some type understanding of the goal, knowing something about why these things are being done.

 

 

Chapter 2.  Naomi and Ruth arrived in Bethlehem at the time of barley harvest with the wheat harvest to follow. In Israel during those days , barley would normally have been planted first and harvested first during the spring, with wheat planted and harvested later than barley. And this entire sequence from the Book of Ruth provides deep spiritual lessons relative to Christians and the harvest in which they presently find themselves engaged.

 

 

“Barley,” normally ripening and being harvested first in Israel, would form the type sheaf of grain which the priest waved before the Lord on the feast of First Fruits. And, as the previous Passover was associated with death (Christ died as the Paschal Lamb on this day), the feast of First Fruits was associated with resurrection (Christ was raised from the dead on this day).

 

 

That is, beginning with the barley harvest, the one working in the field is to labour during the time of harvest in connection with and associated with the first resurrection.

 

 

(Note that Christ was raised on the third day, as Jonah in the type [cf. Matt. 12: 39, 40; Luke 24: 21]; and all of God’s firstborn Sons (following the adoption of the firstborn status) will be raised up from the dead to live in God’s sight yet future on the third day [the third millennium, dating from the same time as Christ’s resurrection - from the time of the crucifixion; e.g., Hosea 5: 13- 6: 2.])

 

 

So it is with the Lord’s servants today. Either they find themselves labouring in the field in connection with things surrounding both a three-day journey [pointing to resurrection] and a rest [pointing earth’s coming Sabbath], or they find themselves labouring in the field in an opposite fashion [in a manner separate from the things surrounding both a three-day journey and a rest]. The former will result in fruit-bearing, [and a selection] but not so with the latter.

 

 

A Christian is to set his sights on the goal out ahead (his inheritance in the millennial kingdom), and he is to be busy throughout the course of his Christian life, in his Master’s field (the world). And, relative to the harvest, he is to concern himself with one thing. He is to concern himself with that provided for him to glean, not with that provided for another to glean.

 

 

“Boaz said to Ruth, ‘My daughter, listen to me. Don’t go and glean in another field and don’t go away from here.’” All that Ruth had to do was glean that which the workers, at Boaz’s instructions, had left her to glean. And Ruth gleaned in Boaz’s field after this fashion from morning until evening, from the beginning to the end of the harvest (2: 4-23).

 

 

And so it is with [obedient] Christians bringing forth fruit today. The Lord of the harvest has provided for each and every Christian. Christians are to wait upon the Lord to provide and they are to glean that which has been provided for them to glean. It is through this process - waiting upon the Lord and looking to the Lord - that fruit is to be borne in a Christian’s life.

 

 

(But, again, note it is the new man alone - the man of spirit alone - who has any connection with this gleaning process, looking forward to an inheritance and rest out ahead. The old man - the man of flesh - must be reckoned as dead and left in the place of death. He has nothing to do with the harvest, the inheritance, and the [entering into God’s promised and future (Heb. 4: 1, 9, 11, R.V.)] rest.)

 

 

The complete picture has to do with dying to self while walking in resurrection life, as one patiently endures under trials and testings, waiting upon the Lord of the harvest to provide throughout the time of harvest. If a Christian obeys the Lord and allows these things to occur in his life in this manner, Christ, in turn, will allow that Christian to have a part in His coming reign. That Christian will come into the realization of the salvation of his soul during the coming day of Christ’s glory and power.

 

 

However, the inverse of that is also true. If a Christian doesn’t deny self, walk in resurrection life (which he can’t do if he desn’t deny self), and patiently endure under trials and  testings, that Christian will lose his soul and have no part with Christ during the coming of his glory and power. That is, he/she will not be considered worthy of the age to come and resurrection out from the dead. (Luke 20: 35.)

 

 

Chapter 3. The Book of Ruth, in this type-antitype structure, presents one of a number of parallel word pictures about the Church which God has provided in the Old Testament Scriptures. Ruth chapter two, dealing with work in the field during the time of harvest, covers one such part of this developing picture; and the beginning of chapter three, dealing with preparation for meeting the Lord of the harvest on His threshing floor following the harvest, covers another inseparably related part of the developing picture.

 

 

“Wash and prepare [anoint] yourself, and put on your best clothes” (Ruth 3: 3).

Here is a threefold preparation for meeting Christ at His judgment seat.  And this verse is unique in Scripture with respect to a complete and concise statement pertaining to the subject at hand.

 

 

Ruth 3: 3 is addressed to saved individuals, relating exactly what must be done if these individuals (regenerate believers) would one day come into a realization of the salvation of their souls, ultimately entering into the rest set forth in verse one. And, though different parts of this threefold preparation are dealt with numerous places throughout Scripture, this is the only place in all the Scripture where everything is brought together and the matter is stated in so many words, in a complete manner, such as can be seen here ... wash... anoint ... put on clothes. They all relate to proper preparedness for meeting Christ on His threshing floor, at His judgment seat, when the harvest is over.

 

 

Wash. The washings associated with the Levitical priests in the Old Testament (a washing of the complete body [regeneration], followed by washings of parts of the body), in turn, pointed to, foreshadowed respectively, both Christ’s past work at Calvary and His present work in the heavenly sanctuary as our High Priest. Christ died for our sins providing a cleansing typified by the complete bath which the priests were given upon their entrance into the priesthood. And Christ presently ministers today as our high Priest to provide subsequent cleansings, typified by the subsequent cleansings at the laver in the type.

 

 

Thus, Christ, through washing the disciples’ feet in John chapter thirteen, was demonstrating truths typically seen through the Levitical priests washing their hands and feet at the laver in the courtyard of the tabernacle.

 

 

Anoint. “Oil” is used in Scripture for anointing purposes, and “oil” was used in this manner to anoint prophets, priests, and kings. And there is a connection between the use of oil after this fashion and the Holy Spirit coming upon an individual to empower him for the office to which he was being consecrated.

 

 

Matt. 25: 1-13 sets forth matters as they would exist relative to Christians today. Note that this parable has to do with the kingdom of the heavens. In Ephesians, Christians are commanded to be filled with the Spirit.  Thus, the importance of spiritual growth is inseparably related to the filling of the Spirit: a necessity if they would be properly prepared to meet Christ at His judgment seat.

 

 

Put on your best clothes. Thoughts surrounding clothes in the Book of Ruth, brought over into the antitype, have to do with Christians being properly clothed for going forth to meet the bridegroom. The marriage and the marriage festivities are in view, and being arrayed or not being arrayed have to do with acceptance or rejection relative to the matter at hand.

 

 

In view of that which lay ahead and what Scripture elsewhere has to say about the matter, only one thing can possibly be in view in this part of Naomi’s command to Ruth, as it relates to Christians. Only the wedding garment can be in view.

 

 

This apparel, according to Rev. 19: 7, 8 is made up of “the righteous acts of saints  This is something which Christians progressively weave for themselves, over time, as they glean in the field and beat out the grain. And to do this work in a proper manner, with the wedding garment being progressively woven, an extra supply of oil is necessary. Relative to the man appearing without a wedding garment and the subject at hand in Matt. 22: 1-14 - the wedding festivities - the man was cast into outer darkness outside the banqueting hall (v. 13) Clear instructions concerning necessary preparation have been given, and clear warnings have been sounded if these instructions are ignored.

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

RAPTURE AND REIGNING*

 

[* From an address given at a prophetic conference, “Within This Generation]

 

 

 

It is of paramount importance that we should rightly conclude who it is that this Scripture refers to, by the words, “We shall be caught up Does it include all that are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ?* The Message is addressed to the Saints; are all that are saved also Saints? Maybe we have hitherto understood that if we are saved by grace nothing else matters. All things that appertain to the life that now is, as well as that which is to come in our Lord’s Millennium are included with the New Birth. There are those who teach, that, if saved, then sons; if sons, then heirs, joint-heirs with Jesus Christ - so all things are ours, all is of grace, for we are Christ’s. What, however, is the consensus of Scripture teaching on this vital point? Will there not be some, “ashamed before Him at His Coming” (1 John 2: 28), saved, “but so as through fire” (1 Cor. 3: 15), while others will obtain an “abundant entrance” into His Kingdom (2 Pet. 1: 11)? Again, there are those who come “out of great tribulation, having washed their robes” (Rev. 7: 14) and made them white in His blood, while others are “accounted worthy” (Luke 21: 36) to escape it, and alternatively to stand before Him.

 

[* It is being taught today that all who are regenerate will escape Antichrist’s persecutions by a Pre-tribulation rapture! According to this theory, (1) there is no need for Christians to repent; (2) no need to pay attention to the numerous warnings against Apostasy from within the Church; (3) no need to worry about disobedience to Christ’s precepts, or the numerous conditional * promises and accountability truths; (4) no need to prepare ones self to suffer for speaking truth; (5) no need to confront and reject what false prophets are saying, - the ‘sign’ which our Lord Jesus said would characterise the end times!]

 

 

See a list of these conditional promises next. All who reject these, for whatever reason, are guilty of giving the people of God a FALSE HOPE and going beyond what is written throughout His Word!]

 

 

In the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, the question of Salvation by Grace is not raised because it was written exclusively to those who are saved, and have gone on to serve Him; therein nine times over they are exhorted to overcome, endure and remain faithful to the end. Amazing position, possessions and blessings are extended to those who do so. “They shall sit with Him in His Throne” (Rev. 3: 21). “They shall rule the nations” (Rev. 2: 27). “They shall inherit all things” (Rev. 21: 7), etc., etc.

 

 

Will any true Bible teacher really extend these inestimable blessings to all believers irrespective of the sort of life they live after regeneration, or to Christians of the Laodicean class, for these also were saved by grace, they are of the Church, the called out ones, and St. John addresses them as my brethren in the kingdom (Rev. 1: 9)? Or what of those of whom we read are as babes driven with every wind of doctrine (Eph. 4: 14); again, those who should have developed into teachers, but still having need of milk (Heb. 5: 12); and those who fall away, who once loved and served their Lord, but have allowed their love to grow cold (Matt. 24: 12)?

 

 

I affectionately submit that to teach any such that they attain to the highest, the “prize of the of the high calling without either running the straight race or fighting the good fight, solely on the ground that they have been born, born of the Spirit, the vestibule of the new life, given in order that they might serve Him, is wresting Scripture, and throwing dust in the eyes of the unready, Laodicean type of believer. Some at least may think it wise to face up to this question, and read again the description and character of the Overcomer, as given, for example, in the first Epistle of John, and Revelation, chapter 12, verse 11, considering also the conditions imposed by the Word of God for being a ready and prepared people for His glorious appearing. Here are a few of these:- Those. who “love His appearing” (2 Tim. 4: 8), which, of course, does not mean being fond of hearing the Advent Message, but living in the light of it as we would be found at the time of it. Again, those who “purify themselves even as He is pure (1 John 3: 3). This is done, of course, by the washing of water by the Word, for thereby we are perfected in Him, having previously had past sin cleansed by His blood. Those that “watch and pray” (Matt. 24: 44) who are also ready. Those who are like unto men that “wait for their Lord” (Luke 12: 36). Those that lead others to - [live a life of] - righteousness. Those who are the good under Shepherds.

 

 

I commend a fresh study of the Sermon on the Mount, which some have invited us to set aside as being “Kingdom Truth” and, as they contend, not applicable to the Church, notwithstanding that our Lord said of it: - “He that heareth My Word and doeth it I will liken him to a man that built his house upon a rock” (Matt. 7: 24).

 

 

It should be carefully noted that it began with the so-called beatitudes; they are correctly described as eight traits of character expected of those who would sit with Him in his throne, for of them He said, Theirs is the Kingdom. “They shall inherit the earth” (Matt. 5: 5). Some dispose of teaching that this is not acceptable to them by passing it on to the Jews, but both companies alluded to in this Message are clearly defined as cosmopolitan. The saints sing, “He redeemed us from the earth out of every Nationality” (Rev. 5: 9). So also the great multitude are from every nation, tribe and tongue plus 144,000 of all the tribes of Israel.

 

 

But to proceed with the picture. No one knows the day or hour of the cry, “behold I come as a thief nor of the removal from the earth of those whose lives are “hid with Christ in God But when this great Event has happened there would seem to be 2,520 days remaining to complete the age. The period is given in halves, in days, in months, and in “times” or years (Rev. 11: 2; 12: 6; 12: 14). Seven calendar years of 360 days each, including the “great tribulation” period. There does not appear to be warfare in the first part of this last period. On the contrary, there is to be a super-head over a large part of Europe, of whom it will be asked, “Who can make war with him?” (Rev. 13: 4). There is also to be a false prophet over the ecclesiastical system, together with the devil himself incarnate upon earth. For, when watchful saints are caught up, the devil is cast down, exceeding wroth because he knows “he has but a short time The reign of these three is in operation in the absence of the Restrainer, and also those saints (i.e., ones who did not lose their savour, (Matt. 5: 13) that restrain; this makes the Great Tribulation possible and causes the pouring out of God’s bowls of judgment, culminating in a final titanic struggle. This War, its objective, the scene of the conflict, together with the belligerents, is described in the prophecies of Ezekiel, chapters 38 and 39, although the nations involved have not their modern names, but are called after their original ancestors, the sons of Japheth, the son of Noah. They are set out in Genesis (Gen. 10: 32) as the ancestors of the Gentile Nations. The heart of the conflict will be fought from Syria to Bozrah in Edom, South of Palestine, along the valley of Meggido, the deepest valley on earth, 220 feet below the sea level, from whence the battle derives its name, Armageddon. Rosh, Meshech. and Tubal descending from the North with hordes on horseback, with all kinds of armour. Tarshish and her young lions, coming up through Egypt, from the South, in fulfilment of her obligations to defend Palestine from alien invasion. Then comes the final clash. Of this final struggle in an age of War the Saviour Himself said, “Except those days were shortened there should be no flesh saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened” (Matt. 24: 22). They will be shortened by the completing of the background of the picture, the grand finale of the last generation of judgment upon this - [evil and apostate] - age - even a rent heaven, and a descending Lord Jesus Christ, the event described by St. Paul in his second letter to Thessalonica (2 Thess. 1: 7-10):- “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with the mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and [see it as a disjunction] that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting” - [i.e, ‘Aionion’ (Greek)] - destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power”- the destiny of the disobedient saved to remain in Hades for a thousand years - “When He shall come to be glorified in His Saints and to be admired of them that believe” - the experience of Saints and believers - [at that time]. This is the last day of this evil age, when the Resurrection of those “that are accounted worthy” (Luke 20: 35.), occurs at the end of this age. The rapture of (living) Saints having taken place seven years earlier, the antitype of the feast of first fruits, a sheaf taken from the harvest field seven weeks before the field was reaped (Lev. 23: 10). St. James tells us He begat us to be a “kind of firstfruits” (James 1: 18), wherefore “be ye doers of the word, not hearers only deceiving your own selves” (James 1: 22). At - [the end of the Great Tribulation, and] - our Lord’s Coming to the earth He comes with and for those who will been - [resurrected from the dead, and] - caught up to meet Him; these are described as the “firstfruits” (Rev. 14: 4). With them He will reign on earth for a thousand years (Rev. 20: 4) - the last age of the present Adamic race lived under conditions originally intended at the creation, but forfeited by man through sin, and to be restored - [Rom. 8: 19-21] - by the Man Christ Jesus at the Restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

 

 

“Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of Him in peace, without spot and blameless, lest ye being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ:” (2 Pet. 3: 17).

 

 

*       *        *

 

 

SOME IFS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

ADDRESSED TO BELIEVERS

 

 

FAITH AND INWARD DISPOSITIONS

 

 

1. We are Christ’s household, if we hold fast to the end our joy in hope. Heb. 3: 6; John 8: 31.

 

 

2. We are His companions (Greek) if we hold fast to the end our first confidence. Heb. 3: 14.

 

 

3. Presented to Him blameless, if at least we continue fixed in the faith. Col. 1: 23.

 

 

4. If any hear Christ’s voice, and open the door, Christ will sup with him and he with Christ. Rev. 3: 20.

 

 

5. If you will hear His voice, harden not your heart. Heb. 3: 15.

 

 

If not

 

 

6. If our heart condemn us not we are confident toward God. 1 John 3: 20, 21.

 

 

7. If any receive not the kingdom as a little child, he shall not enter it. Luke 18: 17; Mark 10: 15.

 

 

8. If not repentance for lost love, the candlestick removed. Rev. 2: 5.

 

 

9. If not watchful, Christ will arrive unexpected by us. Rev. 3: 3.

 

 

10. If not repentant for fornication, will be cast into great tribulation. Rev. 2: 22.

 

 

11. If not repentant for immoral doctrine, Christ will fight against such. Rev. 2: 15.

 

 

PRACTICE

 

 

12. If we live after the flesh, we are about to die; if we mortify the deeds of the body, we are about to live. Rom. 8: 13.

 

 

13. If defilers of God’s temple ourselves to be defiled, or marred (Greek). 1 Cor. 3: 17.

 

 

14. If evil-doers against the civil power, be afraid. Rom. 13: 4.

 

 

15. If your eye cause you to stumble, pluck it out: else - Matt. 5: 29, 30.

 

 

16. If any add to the Revelation, plagues added. If any take away, his name taken out of the holy city. Rev. 22: 18, 19.

 

 

17. If we seek applause of men, no reward for us in the kingdom of heaven. Matt. 5: 46; 6: 14.

 

 

18. If Paul’s work done willingly, a reward to be given. 1 Cor. 9: 17.

 

 

19. If the righteous draw back, God will have no pleasure in him. Heb. 10: 38 (Greek).

 

 

20. Paul strove, if by any means he might attain the first resurrection. Phil. 3: 11.

 

 

21. If we suffer with Christ, with Christ to reign, 2 Tim. 2: 12.

 

 

22. Joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with him. Rom. 8: 17.

 

 

23. If we abide in Christ, our prayers are heard. If we do not, we become withered, and shall be cast as a branch into the fire. John 15: 6, 7.

 

 

24. If we deny Christ, denied by Him. 2 Tim. 2: 12; Matt. 10: 33.

 

 

If not

 

 

25. If not born out of water and spirit, no entrance into the kingdom of God. John 3: 5.

 

 

26. If we do not change and become like little children, no entrance for us into the kingdom (Greek). Matt. 18: 3.

 

 

27. If not possessed of righteousness beyond the Pharisees, no entrance into the kingdom. Mart. 5: 20.

 

 

28. If not obedient, no entrance into the kingdom (Greek) Heb. 3: 18; 4: 5, 6; Matt. 7: 21.

 

 

29. If we forgive not men, not forgiven of God. Matt. 6: 14, 15.

 

 

30. If we forgive not our brethren we shall be dealt with as the unmerciful servant. Matt. 18: 34, 35.

 

 

31. If quarrels not settled, the offender to be delivered to the judge, and to be cast into prison. Matt. 5: 25, 26.

 

 

32. If not striving lawfully, not crowned at last. 2 Tim. 2: 5.

 

 

33. If not faithful in the false riches, how can we obtain the true? Luke 16: 11, 12.

 

 

34. If on the true foundation be not built godly works, loss to be suffered and escape to be so as through fire. 1 Cor. 3: 12, 15. If our character and works stand the trial, reward to be given.

 

 

35. We desire resurrection, if at least, on being clothed, we shall not be found naked. 2 Cor. 5: 2, 3.

 

 

36. We will press on, if God permit. Heb. 6: 3.

 

 

Inference from previous dispensations

 

 

37. If the breaking one of the commands at Sinai, entails just recompense, how much more shall disobedience to one of Christ’s? Heb. 2: 2, 3; Luke 12: 47, 48.

 

 

38. If those who turned away from the voice at Sinai, escaped not, much less we if we turn away from any of the commands of Christ! Heb. 12: 25.

 

(From an old tract; revised).

 

*       *       *

 

 

THE JUDGMENT SEAT

OF CHRIST

 

 

By G. H. LANG

 

 

1. God has an inescapable duty to be the “Judge of all the earth” (Gen. 18: 25).Those who submit to Him are subject to this judgment equally with the insubordinate: “The Lord shall judge His people” (Deut. 32: 36; Ps. 135: 14; Heb. 10: 30). The children of the sovereign are amenable to the laws and the courts and liable to penalty for misconduct.

 

 

2. This judgment is ever in process. There is a perpetual overruling of human affairs by higher authorities. Prominent instances are Job (ch. 1, 2), Ahab (1 Kin. 22), Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4). The first case shows the judicial proceedings effecting perfecting, the second death, the third reformation.

 

 

Job was a godly man under discipline for his good: an upright man was made a holy man. Thus still does God chasten His sons that they may become partakers of His holiness (Heb. 12: 10-11).

 

 

Sinning Christians were disciplined even unto premature death, and it is explained that this operates to save them from liability to condemnation at the time when God will deal with the world at large (1 Cor. 11: 32).

 

 

3. But this continuous judicial administration has its crisis sessions, its special occasions. Instances are: the Flood; the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; the judgments on Egypt at the time of the exodus of Israel; the destruction of the seven nations of Canaan by Israel; the overthrow of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and later by Titus.

 

 

Hereafter there will come the destruction of Gentile world dominion and the punishment of Antichrist. Then the judgment at Jerusalem of the living (Joel 2; Matt. 25), when the Lord has returned to Zion. And after the thousand years the final session of the court of God, the great white throne, whereat will be declared the eternal destiny of [some (Rev. 20: 15) not all, of] those there judged.

 

 

But it is most necessary to keep in mind that all such separate and specific sessions are but part of the ceaselessly operating judicial administration of heaven and earth.

 

 

4. It is important to remember that the Son of man is the chief` Judge of the universe. It was He who acted at the Flood: “Jehovah sat as king at the Flood” (Ps. 29: 10). It was He who, in holy care that only justice should be done, came down to enquire personally whether Sodom and Gomorrah ought to be destroyed (Gen. 18: 20-21), and Who again came down to deliver Israel from Egypt (Ex. 3: 7-8). It was His glory as judge that was seen by Isaiah (ch. 6; John 12: 41), and later by Ezekiel (ch. l).

 

 

He is the Man appointed to judge the world in righteousness on behalf of God the Father (Acts 17: 31); for the Father has entrusted all judgment unto the Son, in order that He may receive equal honour with the Father (John 5: 19-29).

 

 

5. Yet it is particularly needful to note that the last cited passage is in reference to the future sessions of the divine judgment, for the judging in question is there set in direct connection with the raising of men from the dead (John 5: 21-22, 27-29). For when the Son of God became man He ceased for the present to supervise those judgments of heaven. This was among the dignities of which He emptied, that is, divested Himself, for His immediate and blessed purpose in becoming man was their salvation from judgment (John 5: 24). Therefore He said: “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him” (John 3: 17); nor has He yet resumed the office of supreme Judge, though appointed thereto as man. In relation to the world He is still the Dispenser of the grace of God, not yet the Executor of His holy wrath, as He will one day become.

 

 

This is clear from three chief considerations:

 

 

(i) That the Father has called Him to sit at His own right hand until the time when His enemies are to be put under His feet (Ps. 110: 1; Heb. 1: 13; 10: 13). That is, He is not yet sitting upon His own throne and asserting His own right and authority, as He will do in a later day (Rev. 2: 26-27; 3: 21; Matt. 25: 31); but He is waiting expectantly that coming day.

 

 

(ii) And therefore is it twice  pictured that, as Son of man, the Lamb, He is hereafter to be brought before the Father to be invested officially with that authority to judge and to make war the title to which is His already but the exercise of which is in abeyance (Dan. 7: 13-14; Rev. ch. 4 and 5). In both of these scenes it is God the Father who is shown acting from the throne of judgment until the Son has been thus formally installed as Judge.

 

 

(iii) And therefore is He now the Advocate of His people before the Father (1 John 2: 1). But the Advocate cannot be at the same time the Judge.

 

 

6. Thus during this interval the especial concern and sphere of the Son of man is the company He is calling out of the world, the church of God. The building of His church is His present work (Matt. 16: 18): the regulating of the affairs of the house of God, over which He as Son is the appointed ruler (Heb. 3: 6), is His immediate and dear concern.

 

 

And this work calls for both grace and judgment. He “can bear gently with the ignorant and the erring, sympathizing with our infirmities” (Heb. 5: 2; 4: 15), but dealing with kind severity with the wilful of His people. “Behold then the goodness and severity of God” (Rom. 11: 22). Nor may we abuse His goodness by making light of His severity; or if we do, it will be unto painful disillusionment.

 

 

7. Judgment upon His own people therefore God exercises now; this is the very period for it; but the general judgment of the world is deferred: “The time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God” (1 Pet. 4: 17). And again: “If we discriminated [sat in strict judgment upon] ourselves, we should not be judged, but when [failing in this holy self-judgment] we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord [here perhaps the Father, comp. Heb. 12: 5, 9, where He who chastens is the Father of spirits] that we may not be condemned with the world” (1 Cor. 11: 30-31). And this chastening may extend to bodily weakness, positive sickness, or oven death. So it was in the cases of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5: 1-11, and see Jas. 5: 19-20; 1 John 5: 16-17; Matt. 5: 21-26; 18: 28-35).

 

 

8.The Lord made many most serious statements as to His dealings with “His own” servants at His return. Some of these are:

 

 

(i) Luke 12: 22-53. From  dealing with the crowd He turns and speaks specifically to His own disciples (ver. 22). Only genuine disciples, regenerated persons, are able to fulfil His precepts here given. To mere [unregenerate] professors the task is impossible, and such cannot be in view. They are to live without any anxiety as to the necessities of life, and in this are to be in express contrast to the nations; they are His “little flock,” for whom the Father intends the kingdom, and therefore they are to give away, not to hoard, and so to lay up treasure in heaven (21-34). It is impossible to include the unregenerate in such a passage; nor would it be attempted save to avoid the application to Christians of part of the succeeding and connected instruction.

 

 

This instruction is that disciples are like the personal household slaves of an absent master, who upon his return will deal with each according to his conduct during the master’s absence. In particular, the steward set over the household will be dealt with the more strictly that his office, opportunities, and example were the higher. The goodness of the master is seen in exalting the faithful (though from one point of view he had done no more than his duty and was an unprofitable servant) to almost unlimited privilege and power: “He will set him over all that he hath” (ver. 44): his severity is shown by “cutting in sunder” * the servant who had abused his trust, and appointing his portion with the unfaithful (35-53).

 

* Equals “severely scourge,” because the scourge used cut deeply into the flesh - see margin.

 

 

(ii) This is elaborated and enforced in later statements. Luke 19: 11-27. The picture is the same, namely, the absent master and the faithful or unfaithful servants. The “Pound” represents that deposit of truth entrusted to the saints (Jude 3), for their use among men while Christ is away: “Trade ye till I come.” The Nobleman himself held and used it while here, and left it with us when He went to receive the kingdom. If we traffic with knowledge it increases in our hands and we gain more; if we neglect to do so - [or speculate by personal statements, which go beyond what is written] - it remains truth, retaining its own intrinsic value (“thou hast thy pound”), but we do not accumulate knowledge, nor benefit others, nor bring to our Lord any return for His confidence in us. In this parable it is not the personal life of the slave that is in question; that may have been good: it is his use of the truth in either spreading it among man, or hiding his light under a bushel of silence, or, as the picture is here, burying the pound in the earth.

 

 

The unfaithful servant loses opportunity further to serve his lord, the pound is taken from him. Sadder still, his lord has no confidence in him. But he is not an enemy of his lord, nor is treated as such. He does not lose his life. The contrast is most distinct between him, however unfaithful, and the foes and rebels: “But these mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me” (ver. 27).

 

 

(iii) Matt. 24: 42 - 25: 30. Only a few days later the Lord repeated this instruction, with fuller detail. The head slave, set as steward of the house during the absence of the master, will be set over all his lord’s possessions if only he have acted faithfully (45-47). “But if that evil servant” abuses his position, and becomes self-indulgent and tyrannical, he will be “severely scourged,” and his portion be allotted with the hypocrites, where he will weep and gnash his teeth over his folly and lot.

 

 

Only a [regenerate] believer who does not consider his own heart will assert that a Christian cannot act the hypocrite, be unfaithful, or arbitrary and unloving. But the pronoun “that” - “But if that evil servant, etc.,” leaves no option but to regard him as a - [truly ‘born again’ and justified by faith] - believer, for it has no antecedent to whom it can refer except the faithful servant just before described, no other person having been mentioned. “That evil servant”; what evil servant? and there is no answer but that the faithful steward has become unfaithful*: And such cases are known. Nor will we, for our part, join to consign all such to eternal ruin rather than accept the alternative of the temporary, though severe, punishments intimated by the Lord being possible to a [genuine] believer. Those who take the latter course, mainly influenced to support certain dispensational theories, have surely never weighed the solemnity of thus easily consigning so many backsliders to endless misery.

 

* Weymouth is definite.. “But if that man, being a bad servant” plainly identifies the good and bad servant as one person. And see Alford.

 

 

Since, then, an unbeliever is (a) not set by the Lord over His house, nor (b) could feed the souls of his fellows, nor (c) could be so faithful as to become at last ruler of all the possessions of the Lord, this man must be a true believer. But when such a one may lapse from his fidelity he does not thereby become unregenerate; consequently the unfaithful steward is still called one of the Lord’s “own servants”; and therefore a believer may incur the solemn penalties veiled under the figures used.

 

 

If it be thought inconceivable that the Lord should describe one of His blood-bought and beloved people as a “wicked servant” (Matt. 25: 26), it must be weighed that He had before applied the term to a servant whose “debt” had been fully remitted: “thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt” (Matt. 18: 32). Thus one who, as an act of compassion by the Lord, has been fully forgiven all his failure as a servant may prove a “wicked servant,” his wickedness consisting in this, that though forgiven he would not forgive. To deny that a child of God can be unforgiving is to blind the eyes by denying sad and stern fact. The Lord left no room for doubt that members of the divine family were in His mind by the application of the parable He then and there made: “Even so shall my heavenly Father do unto you [Peter, whose question as to forgiving had drawn forth the parable, and the other disciples, ver. 1, 21], if ye forgive not, each one of you (hekastos), his brother from your hearts” (35). It is the Father and the brothers who are in question, not here those outside the [regenerate] family circle.

 

 

Moreover, if this parable be pressed to include a mere professing but unregenerate person some inevitable implications must be accepted. It is by no means denied that there are such persons, but if they are in view here these consequences follow:

 

 

(a) An unregenerate person has had “all his debt forgiven

 

 

(b) In spite of this free forgiveness he remains unregenerate.

 

 

(c) A forgiven sinner can have the free pardon of his sins revoked, in which case he will thereafter stand in his former lost estate exposed to the eternal wrath of God. He may be saved today yet lose this tomorrow.

 

 

(d) Though delivered to the “tormentors” he may entertain hope that he may yet himself “pay all that is due” (ver. 34); that is, the wrath of God against the unregenerate can be somehow, some time satisfied by the sufferings and efforts of the sinner himself.  In these cases therefore “Christ died for nought”; they can at last secure their own deliverance.

 

 

In the fact, however, being “delivered to the tormentors” has no reference to the eternal judgment of the lost. In the lake of fire neither lost angels nor lost men are stated to torment one another, but are all alike in the same torment. It is a picture of present and temporal chastisement under that continually proceeding judgment of God above indicated, and which applies to His [redeemed] family as to others. Regarded thus the above confusing implications do not arise, implications which no one divinely illuminated could accept. But it results that the wicked servant is a real [regenerate] servant, not a hypocrite, and were it not for the severity of the [forthcoming] punishment no one would be likely to question this.

 

 

It is not difficult to see what the punishment is.

 

 

(a) The forgiveness of his great failures as a servant can be revoked, and he be made to feel the sin and bitterness of not having walked by the same spirit as his Lord, nor rendered to Him the due use and return of the benefits grace had bestowed.

 

 

(b) Paul says of some who had once had faith and a good conscience (or they could not have thrust these away), and who had started on the voyage of faith (or they could not have made shipwreck), “whom 1 delivered to Satan” (the present “tormentor,” as of Job); but not to be afflicted by him in hell, but for their recovery, “that they might be taught not to blaspheme,” which the torments of the damned will not teach them, as far as we see in the Word (1 Tim. 1: 19-20. See also 1 Cor. 5: 3-5).

 

 

(iv) We remark upon one other instance of these solemn testimonies by Christ, the parable of the virgins (Matt. 25). It is to the same effect.

 

 

(a) They are all virgins, the foolish equally with the wise, which figure is inappropriate to indicate a worldling in his sins, even though he be a professing Christian. In the only other places where it is used figuratively and spiritually it certainly means true Christians (2 Cor. 11: 2; Rev. 14: 4).

 

 

(b) They are all equally the invited guests of the bridegroom, not strangers, let alone his enemies.

 

 

(c) They all have oil, or, the foolish could not say “our lamps are going out.” Without some oil the lamps could not even have been lit, for a dry wick will not kindle and certainly could not have burned during the time they had slept.

 

 

(d) But the foolish had no supply to replenish the dimly burning flax and revive their testimony. They had formerly been “light in the Lord,” but had been thoughtless as to grace to continue alight.

 

 

(e) They found means for this renewing for in spite of the darkness they gained the bridegroom's gate.

 

 

(f) They did not lose their lives, as enemies, but they did lose the marriage* feast, and were left* in the darkness outside the house. This is parallel to the “wicked servant,” who also did not lose his life but did lose the entrance into the joy of his master at his return, and was cast into “outer darkness

 

[* See 1 Thess. 4: 17, R.V. Cf. Rev. 19: 7, 8, R.V.)]

 

 

Two observations are vital to grasping the meaning of these judgments.

 

 

(i) A marriage feast is obviously no picture of anything eternal. Plainly it is a temporary matter. Grand, intensely happy, a highly coveted honour, especially when the king’s, son, the heir apparent, is the bridegroom, it yet is but the prelude to a life, a reign, not anything long-extended, let alone permanent. Does not this correspond to the joy of the millennial kingdom as the glorious prelude to the eternal kingdom? For the “marriage of the Lamb” comes at the immediate inception of that millennial kingdom (Rev. 19: 6-9). And are not the invited virgins those of whom verse 9 says, “Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb,” rather than the wife herself? A bride is not usually invited to her wedding feast: it cannot (save, perhaps, among Moslems) be held without her. Does not this give the clue to what the [foolish] virgins and the unfaithful servant lose?

 

 

(ii) “Outer darkness” is no picture of the lake of fire. It is the realm just outside the palace where the feast is held, not the public prison or execution ground. If the strict sense of Scripture pictures be kept, and imagination be not allowed to fill in what the Divine Artist did not put in, much confusion will be avoided.

 

 

It has been felt that the words of the bridegroom to the virgins, “Verily I say unto you, I know you not” preclude us from taking these to represent His true people. But again the picture itself will give the real sense. The bridegroom is here pictured as standing within the heavy and thick outer door that secures every eastern house of quality, and the door is shut. He does not open it, or he would see who they are, and that they are some of his own invited guests, but standing the other side of the closed door he says, in idiomatic English, I tell you sincerely, I don’t know who you are (Ameen lego humin, ouk oida humas). Into such a picture it is not permissible to read in divine omniscience; it must be taken simply as it is given.

 

 

Its force may be gathered more readily by the distinction between what is here said and what the Lord said in Matt. 7: 15-23). There He spoke of false prophets, bad trees, men who, like the sons of Sceva in Acts 19: 13, used His holy name without warrant. Picturing Himself as standing face to face with these He protests, I never at any time made your acquaintance! Here the scene is changed; there is no closed door between: the verb to know is different: and the word rendered “never” is most emphatic and gives force and finality to the assertion (Oudepote egnon humas). He did not speak thus to the virgins.

 

 

9. It is not our present purpose to consider all such testimony of the Word. Enough has been advanced to show how much and how solemn is the teaching of Scripture as to judgment upon careless Christians. We wish only to deal now with the time of the judgment seat of Christ as to His people.

 

 

The most general opinion is that this judgment lies between the moment of the Lord’s descent to the air, when they, dead and living, are caught up to Him there, and that later moment when He is to descend with them to the earth to set up His kingdom. That is, the judging of His saints will take place during the Parousia.

 

 

Observations

 

 

(i) No passage of Scripture seems distinctly to place this judgment in this interval and in the air. It seems to be rather assumed that it must take place then and there since the effects of it are to be seen in the different positions and honours in the kingdom immediately to follow.

 

 

(ii) As regards the parabolic instruction Christ gave when here it is to be observed that it speaks only of persons who will be found alive when the “nobleman,” “the master of the house” returns. Strictly, therefore, these parables tell nothing as to the time and circumstances of the judgment of dead believers. It must be allowed that the principles of justice will be the same for dead and living, but the details as to the judgment of the former cannot be learned from these passages.

 

 

(iii) Some presuppositions held are:

 

 

(a) That every believer will share in the first resurrection and the millennial kingdom.

 

 

(b) The opposite, that not every believer will do so.

 

 

(c) That the judgment of the Lord will result in some of His people suffering loss of reward because of unfaithfulness, but nothing more than loss. This involves that none of the positive and painful inflictions denounced can affect true believers.

 

 

(d) The opposite, that the regenerate may incur positive chastisement as a consequence of the Lord’s judgment at that time. Thus in Touching the Coming of the Lord (84, 85. ed. 1), upon Col. 3: 25, “For he that doeth wrong shall receive again the wrong that he hath done (margin): and there is no respect of persons Hogg and Vine apply this text to that judgment of Christ at His parousia, and say: “It may be difficult for us to conceive how God will fulfil this word to those who are already in bodies of glory, partakers of the joy of the redeemed in salvation consummated in spirit, soul and body. Yet may we be assured that the operation of this law is not to be suspended even in their case. He that ‘knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the day of judgment’ (2 Pet. 2: 9), knows also how to direct and to use the working of His law of sowing and reaping in the case of His children also. The attempt to alleviate the text of some of its weight by suggesting that the law operates only in this life, fails, for there is nothing in the text or context to lead the reader to think other than that while the sowing is here the reaping is hereafter. It is clear that if it were not for this supposed difficulty of referring the words to the Christian in the condition in which, as we know from other Scriptures, he will appear at the Judgment seat of Christ, the question whether that time and place were intended would not be raised

 

 

(e) Some (Govett, Pember, and others) who hold that the millennial kingdom may be forfeited by gross sin, suppose that all believers rise in the first resurrection, appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, and being adjudged by Him unworthy of the kingdom they return to the death state to await the second resurrection and the great white throne judgment. Their names being then as believers found in the book of life, they have eternal life in the eternal kingdom, but they will have missed the honour of sharing in and reigning in the millennial age.

 

 

These two last ideas (d) and (e) seem alike utterly impossible. It seems wholly inconceivable that a body heavenly, spiritual, glorified, like indeed to the [immortal] body of the Son of God himself, can be subjected to chastisement for guilt incurred by misuse of the present sin-marred body. Not only the manner of the infliction but the fact of it seems to us out of the question.

 

 

It seems equally so that a body that is immortal and incorruptible can admit of its owner passing again into the death state. The ideas and the terms are mutually contradictory and exclusive. Of those who rise in that first resurrection the Lord said plainly: “neither can they die any more” (Lk. 20: 36).

 

 

What, then, is the solution of these difficulties?

 

 

10. We turn to passages dealing directly with the subject.

 

 

(i) 2 Cor. 5: 10. “We make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be well-leasing unto Him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done through the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad This chief statement leaves unmentioned the time and place of the judgment.

 

 

(ii) Heb. 9: 27. “It is laid up for men once to die and after this judgment” (meta de touto krisis, no article). Thus judgment may take place at any time after death. Luke 16 shows Dives suffering anguish immediately after death, for the scene is Hades, the realm of the dead between death and resurrection, and his brothers are still alive on earth. But again, Rev. 20: 11-15, shows another, the final judgment, after resurrection, after the millennial kingdom. Both are “after death

 

 

Neither of these passages suggests the parousia in the air as the time or place.

 

 

(iii) The statements of the Lord as to His dealing with His own servants at His return, contemplate that His enemies will be called before Him immediately after He will have dealt with His own household: “But these mine enemies, who would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Lk. 19: 27). “Hither,” that is, to the same spot where He had just been dealing with His servants. This, as to servants then alive on earth at least, excludes the parousia in the air, for His enemies will not be gathered there.

 

 

(iv) Luke 16: 19-31. Dives and Lazarus are seen directly after death in conditions the exact reverse of those just before known on earth. The passing of the soul to that other world, and the bringing about of so thorough a change of condition, is too striking, too solemn just to happen, Someone must have decided and ordered this reversal; that is, there must have been a judging of their cases and a judicial decision as to what should be their lot in the intermediate state.

 

 

This judgment therefore may take place at or immediately after death, as Heb. 9: 27 above.  And in the time of Christ thus almost all men believed. See, for example, the judgment of Ani directly after death, before Osiris the god of the underworld, in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Or, as to the Pharisees, to whom particularly Christ spoke of Dives and Lazarus, see Josephus, Antiquities, 18:3.

 

 

(v) 2 Tim. 4: 6, 7, 8. “I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I have kept the faith; I have finished the course, henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have loved His appearing

 

 

Paul was now certain he had won his crown. When writing to the Philippians a few years before (3: 10-14) he spoke uncertainly: “not that I have already obtained,” for then he had not yet finished the course; but now he writes with certainty. How could this assurance have become his save by communication from the Righteous Judge? But this implies that the Judge had both formed and communicated His decision upon Paul’s life and service, even though Paul had not yet actually died. In such a case, as it would seem, any session of the judgment seat “in that day” will be only for bestowment of the crown already won and allotted, not for adjudication upon the race or contest, the latter having before taken place as to such a person.

 

 

(vi) The expression “I have finished my course” is taken from the athletic world which held so large a place in Greek life and interest and is so often used by Paul as a picture of spiritual effort. In 1 Cor. 9: 24-27, it is used as a plain warning that the coveted prize may be lost. Phil. 3: 12-14 employs it to urge to intense and unremitting effort to win that prize. The Lord is the righteous Judge, sitting to adjudicate upon each contestant in the race or contest.

 

 

Now of unavoidable necessity the judge of the games automatically formed his decision as to each racer or wrestler as each finished the course or the contest. The giving of the prizes was indeed deferred to the close of the whole series of events: Paul’s crown would be actually given “in that day”; but not till then did the judge defer his decision as to each item or contestant. It could not be, for the most celebrated of the Greek games, the Olympic, lasted five days.

 

 

The figure, taken with the case of Paul, and in the light of Dives and Lazarus, suggests a decision of the Lord as to each believer before or at the time of his death. That decision issues in determining the place and experience of the man in the intermediate state, and may extend to assurance that he has won the crown, the prize of the high calling.

 

 

(vii) Rev. 6: 9, 11. The Fifth Seal. As before shown, these martyrs “under the altar” are not yet raised from the dead, for others have yet to be killed for Christ’s sake, and only then will they be all vindicated and avenged. But to each one of them separately a white robe is given. Now ch. 3: 4, 5, shows that the white robe is the visible sign, conferred by the Lord, of their worthiness to be His companions in His glory and kingdom. This again makes evident that for these the Lord’s judgment has been formed and announced. No later adjudication upon such is needful or conceivable: only the giving of the crown “in that day

 

 

11. From these facts and considerations it seems fairly clear that the judgment of the Lord upon the dead of His people is not deferred to one session but is reached and declared either (a) immediately before death (as Paul), when there is no further risk of the racer failing, or (b) immediately after death (as Lazarus), or (c) at least in the intermediate state of death (the souls under the altar).

 

 

If this is so, then it will follow that the decision of the Lord as to whether a believer is worthy of the first resurrection and reigning in the kingdom is reached prior to resurrection, in which case the two insoluble problems above stated simply do not arise; that is, there is no question of one raised in a deathless state returning to the death state, nor of [immortal] bodies of glory being subjected to chastisement. Believers adjudged not worthy of the first resurrection will not rise, but will remain where they are until the second resurrection.

 

 

We agree fully that the judgment seat of Christ will issue in chastisement for unworthy living by Christians, but this will not be inflicted after resurrection.

 

 

(viii) Rev. 11: 18 repays exact study. The four and twenty elders worship God because He has put forth His “power, His great power” (teen dunamin sou teen megaleen) and has exercised His sovereignty. In consequence of this asserting of power there are five results. (1) The nations are angry, (2) God’s wrath replies, (3) there arrives “the season for the dead to be judged (4) for the faithful to be rewarded, and (5) for the destruction of the destroyers of the earth.

 

 

Since prophets and saints are to receive their reward at the resurrection of the just (Luke 14: 14), the first resurrection (Rev. 20: 1-6), the season for the dead to be judged and rewarded is here found directly before the destruction of the Antichrist and his helpers in the wasting of the lands.

 

 

Concerning this judging of the dead three features are to be noted.

 

 

1. It must be of godly dead, for it is before the thousand years, whereas the judgment of the ungodly dead is thereafter (Rev. 20: 1, 11-15).

 

 

2. It is a judgment of persons who are dead at the time they are judged. There is no ground for reading in that they have been raised from the dead before the judgment takes place. They are styled “the dead.” No one would think of styling living persons “the dead.” The term employed (nekros) is nowhere used of persons who are not actually dead, physically or morally. Moreover, resurrection does not of itself assure life. That unique and glorious change to be the portion of such as share the first resurrection (1 Cor. 15) is their special privilege; it does not attach to all resurrection. Dead persons can be raised dead. In John 5: 29 our Lord creates a clear contrast: “They that have done good shall come forth unto resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto resurrection of judgment The Lord did not say that they shall come forth out of the tombs alive, but that they shall come forth unto resurrection of life or “unto resurrection of judgment” (eis anastasin). There seems no scripture, indeed, that at the moment they come forth they have even a body [of ‘flesh and bones’ (Lk. 24: 39, R.V.)], other than that psychical counterpart before noticed and which persists in the death state.

 

 

Thus in Rev. 20: 12 also it is as dead that they, are judged: “I saw the dead standing before the throne ... and the dead were judged It should therefore be supposed that those there present whose names are found in the book of life will thereupon be restored to life, that is, will be given an immortal body, even as the Lord said: “The Father raiseth the dead (egeirei tous nekrous) and makes them live (zoopoiei), thus also the Son makes to live whom He will” (zoopoiei, John 5: 21). Here two operations are distinguished by the “and makes them live

 

 

3. The verb to be judged, “the season of the dead to be judged is the infinitive passive aorist (kritheenai). Being an aorist it has the force of a completed and final action. But this final judgment, which disposes of the case, may be the conclusion of a process of judgment. This is seen in another place where this aorist is twice used, Acts 25: 9-10. Festus asked Paul whether he would be willing to go up from Caesarea to Jerusalem “there to be judged of these things before me.” Paul answered that he already stood before Caesar’s court “where I ought to judged” (kritheenai). Both Festus and Paul meant that a final verdict should be reached and the case be determined; hence the aorist. But the history shows that Paul had been many times before the courts, twice before the Sanhedrin and several times before Felix (Acts 23 and 24). Thus this passage in Rev. 11: 18 does not forbid that believers may have been before judged by Christ, either in this life or after death, or both; what it states is that at the season indicated the decision of the Lord will be given, announcing, as we suggest, whether the person is of the “blessed and holy” who are accounted worthy of the impending resurrection from among the dead and of [a] place and reward in the kingdom then about to be inaugurated.

 

 

This short discussion is no more than suggestive, directed to certain obscurities and perplexities found in our main theme, designed to provoke enquiry so as further to elucidate truth and dispel darkness. May the Lord in grace use it to this end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADVICE TO THE DEBTOR

PART ONE OF FOUR

 

 

“As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate try hard to be reconciled to him on the way, or he may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. I tell you, you will not get out until YOU have paid the last penny.” Luke 12: 58, 59, N.I.V.

 

 

A glance at the text above will indicate that, in this instance, Jesus is NOT speaking about the ‘free gift’ of eternal life, (Rom. 6: 23, R.V.): that has been paid for in full by our Lord Himself. Here, His words are addressed primarily to His ‘disciples’. That is, to those who followed Him throughout the country to listen and learn from His teachings: and, in Acts 11: 26, we are informed that “the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch”, (Acts 11: 26).

 

 

Here is a recorded instance, where Jesus teaches His disciples who were in ‘the crowd’ (verse 54) a solemn lesson drawn from the circumstances of present-day life. A debtor is in danger of being imprisoned for his/her debt: and the ‘adversary’ - the prosecutor or creditor - is intent upon obtaining the arrears which are due to him.

 

 

Like hundreds of thousands of instances today during our present-day ‘Credit Crunch’ - where one owes money for goods purchased, and the creditor, after some delay in the payments, wants to receive what is now due. He is put off: it is not convenient, times are hard and employment is very difficult to find at present. He calls again; the debtor does not deny that payment is now due, but no ‘service’ (verse 35) - no attempt to pay is forthcoming. ‘Let him call again is the debtor’s response’! He calls a third time, and now he utters a threat. If you will not pay me, I shall enforce the law by turning you over to the officer. After a considerable time, payment is still not rendered: and at length he lays hands upon the debtor, and says ‘I will be paid: come to court with me

 

 

Now it is evident that this is not the kind of activity which Christians should adopt. They are to forgive those who are in their debt; and they are forbidden to go to court to recover it:-

 

 

“If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints” - [i.e., those amongst them who ‘will inherit the kingdom of God,’ (verse 10)] - “will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we” - [the apostle Paul includes himself with those in the Church at Corinth] - “will” - [at some time in the near future] - “judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another - and this in front of unbelievers!

 

 

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means YOU HAVE BEEN COMPETELY DEFEATED ALREADY. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated. Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers:” (1 Cor. 6: 1-8).

 

The theology of many today would have Christians believe God will not demand payment for their wilful sin and disobedience (Heb. 10: 26-30, R.V.)! That He will always turn a blind eye to disgraceful behaviour in the lives of His redeemed people! Not so. “ … “I will come near to you for judgment. I will be quick to testify against sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud labourers of their wages who oppress the widows and the fatherless, and deprive aliens of justice, but do nor fear me, says the LORD Almighty. ‘I the LORD do not change’…” (Mal. 3: 5, 6a., N.I.V.). “Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favouritism (Col. 3: 25, N.I.V.).

 

 

God expects all who are ‘called saints’ to be considerate and accommodating toward all others - especially toward those who are in the family of faith. That is, who are now being deprived of their basic rights as fellow believers. We see this behaviour occurring all around us today by those who should know better.

 

 

It is here, at this point in time, when our Saviour’s lesson to His disciples begins. The creditor has his hand upon the debtor’s shoulder; and both are on their way to court. What is the debtor to do? Shall he ignore the circumstances which he has allowed to develop? or even deny that there is a debt? Shall he defy the creditor, by expecting him to overlook the situation or come to an unjust decision? Shall he rail at him as a ‘hard man,’ when he says there is payment due? Not if a little common sense would prevail, and the thought of what the future day of judgment will hold for anyone who is foolhardy enough to continue going down this road of self-destruction! It is only when the verdict by a righteous judge is considered, that the words of advice from Jesus will suddenly spring into the life and mind, to one who has been blinded by Satan to the responsibility and accountability truths which Jesus taught: “As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate He said, “try hard to be reconciled to HIM on the way

 

 

Confess your debt to him NOW; confess to him now your own negligence and injustice in having allowed disgraceful and selfish behaviour to develop, and to go on for so long between you and your neighbour; and, by having so long delayed any attempt to improve the situation ask him to forgive you your part, or the whole. It may be that now - some time after the offence has been named and brought to his attention - he may listen to you.

 

 

But the advice of our Lord Jesus is still more explicit. The brother or sister has been, and continues to be mistreated, and the Magistrate is now very angry and says: “Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right? As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard - [Gk. “take pains” In other words, go out of your way] - to be reconciled to him on the way Because of the long delay, the affair has now become more serious. No time can afford to be wasted, and a sense of urgency should prevail. The creditor is evidently in earnest, and he is determined to enforce payment. Therefore, we must be as earnest as he is, and be reconciled to each other quickly. It will not take long to get from our house into his courthouse.* Every step of defiance now, will bring us nearer his place of judgment then: and a true impression of the predicted decision he will make, will indicate to us the urgency and the zeal that is urgently now needed.

 

[* Heb. 9: 27.]

 

 

“As you are going” mercy may have its full scope, especially if acts of repentance and compassion are genuine and visible: and he is not bound by any law. He may forgive part of the debt or even the whole debt. Come to an agreement with him NOW as you are going, and none will dare interfere between you and him, for it is yet a private matter. But, if we neglect the God-given opportunity now; and our injustices continue to come before the eye of the righteous judge, then a completely different principle and course of action must eventually take effect. There is such a thing as insulting the Spirit of grace: “For we know him who said, ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay And again, ‘The Lord WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE (Heb. 10: 29, 30).

 

 

His court is the place of justice, and unlike the present time of mercy; at that time justice will take certain unmeasured steps; and God’s law will not allow itself to be disrupted by any considerations of previous long suffering and mercy. Like the present ‘Credit Crunch,’ the time of spending will then have ended, and a time for paying our debts will now have arrived. It will be a time of REWEARD according to OUR works - whether those works be good or bad. God has set aside a certain time and a certain place where He will reward His redeemed people - even for as long as “a thousand years.”* (Rev. 20: 4-6.)

 

[*NOTE. The regenerate believer may question how life can be imparted to one who already has eternal life. He/she may rest upon the all-sufficiency of Christ’s merits; and, at the same time, have little or no regard for His warnings to His redeemed people, and the consequences which may arise from our present attitude and neglect of them.]

 

 

Robert Govett, in his book ‘Entrance Into The Kingdom’ explains it this way:-

 

 

“Whoever said that there was no further punishment for the guilty believer than simple exclusion from millennial bliss? There are different degrees of punishment. A quiet love of the world in its present forms, in the case of the uninstructed saint, may perhaps require at the Lord’s hands no more than simple rejection from the scene of joy. But a deliberate choice of the works of the flesh after the present TRUTH is presented and owned, a shocking and stumbling of the world by open breaches of [apostasy and] morality, would demand far more. There is time in a thousand years to inflict as much of the wrath on the delinquent son [or daughter] as the Father shall deem necessary. ‘I say unto you, my friends ... I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear. Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell [Gk. ‘Gehenna’, R.V.], yea, I say unto you, fear him.’ ‘That servant which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did not commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes’: Luke 12: 4, 5, 47, 48. This doctrine brings the fear of God in all its magnitude and awe, to bear upon the disobedient [regenerate] child of God. And this motive is assigned to perfect holiness. ‘Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God 2 Cor. 7: 1”

 

 

In another book, on the scriptural teaching of the Intermediate Place and State of the Dead, and the lurking danger to Christians who envy those with great worldly wealth, the same author has written the following:-

 

 

“‘Better a poor but wise child,’ says Solomon, ‘than an old and foolish king who will no more he admonished’ - No longer knows how to take warning’ NIV] - ‘For out of prison he cometh to reign; WHEREAS ALSO HE THAT IS BORN IN HIS KINGDOM BECOMETH POOR.’ (Eccl. 4: 13, 14). This, as it stands, does not give any intelligible sense to the concluding verse. But a more accurate translation of that verse is the following: ‘Better is a poor and wise child than an old and foolish king, who will no more be admonished; for from the house of the prisoners (the one) shall come to reign; whereas, (on the other hand,) he that was born to his royalty shall become poor The interpretation of this is now simple. The poor and spiritually wise child, after his soul has been awhile detained among the souls in custody, - [i.e., in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’ the underworld of the dead. Psalm 16: 10; Luke 16: 23, 28, 30, 31; Acts 2: 27. Cf. 2 Tim. 2: 18, R.V.)] - shall come forth at ‘the first resurrection’ to reign with Christ: whereas the king, old and spiritually foolish, though he was born on earth to a kingdom, shall become poor, and be cast into the house of the prisoners: and to their respective destinies shall the just be reversed; except that the portion of the child is royalty forever, while the others temporary royalty is countervailed by perpetual poverty and imprisonment*

 

 

[*NOTE: In both Old and New Testament scriptures, God has shown us where disembodied ‘souls’ go immediately after the time of DEATH: and from there they must WAIT until the time of their RESURRECTION: and the ‘First Resurrection’ (Rev. 20: 5); precedes the time when ‘Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them’ (Rev. 20: 13b) by ‘a thousand years’! See also Gen. 37: 35; Num. 16: 30, 33; 1 Sam. 28: 3-19; Psa. 139: 8b; Matt. 12: 40; Rev. 6: 9, 10; 20: 4-6, 13, etc.]

 

 

‘Sheol’ / Gk. LXX. ‘Hades’ is, according to the scriptures, the place of the stern and strict execution of the Judge’s sentence. ‘From the far side of its GATES’, says the scriptures (Matt. 16: 18b), we must wait to have part and ‘inheritance’ in that age - [i.e., Christ’s promised millennium (Psalm 2: 8; cf. Psalm 72.)] - and in ‘the resurrection from the dead (Luke 20: 35). Cf. Matt. 16: 18; Heb. 11: 40; Matt. 12: 40; 13: 41.

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

ADVICE TO THE DEBTOR

PART TWO

 

 

Now let us apply the parable. Who is the creditor here? To whom does each owe money, home, food, clothing, health, service, reason and life itself? What does he ask as his due from each one of us? “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven:” (Matt. 5: 44). “If anyone loves me, he will OBEY - [See Acts 5: 32; cf. 1 John 3: 24] - my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him:” (John 14: 23). JEHOVAH is the King who will take account of His debtors. And what does He ask of all who have heard of JESUS? Faith, for eternal salvation in HIM; and then afterwards, our obedience to the precepts of His Beloved Son. And has He not many times demanded this debt from us His servants? And have we not put off the rendering of it? Then we stand where the parable supposes us to be. We and He are on our way to His Court of Justice! The present time is the hour of mercy, the day of His long-suffering. But though mercy is free to forgive us now, yet our time here is conveying us onward - step by step we draw closer to the Judgment Seat of Christ and ‘a just recompense of reward[Compare Col. 3: 24, 25 with Rev. 2: 14-17, 20-23, and Rev. 3: 10, 11, 19-21, R.V.).] ‘It is appointed unto men, once to die, and after this cometh the judgment’ (Heb. 9: 27, R.V.). “Unless YOUR righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you [My ‘disciples’] will certainly NOT enter...” (Matt. 5: 20). From this Creditor we have no escape. “The man of integrity walks securely, but he who takes crooked paths will be found outProv. 10: 9. Hence the Saviour’s advice to His ‘disciples’ is: “Try hard to be reconciled Satan would blind our minds to the coming glory and kingdom of Christ, and he would advise the contrary: - ‘Don’t be in such a hurry, let them suffer your injustice for a while longer. You have plenty of time to repent - after you have had your own way for many years ‘A few more years will not make any difference, and by then you might even get rid of those who now suffer under your self-centred lifestyle But what does our Lord Jesus say: “Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many I tell you, shall seek to enter in, and will not be able to:” (Luke 13: 24, R.V.). And what door might this be? Is it the door into His eternal kingdom in ‘a new heaven and a new earth’ - [Rev. 21: 1,] - after this earth is destroyed - [by ‘fire’ (2 Pet. 3: 7)]? NO, a thousand times NO! It is to ‘attain’ - [i.e., ‘to gain by effort’] - an entrance into His millennial kingdom: and that entrance does not depend upon His imputed righteousness, which every regenerate believer presently has! Is ia an undisclosed standard of each of His disciples righteousness! “Except YOUR righteousness exceeds...” Therefore, Christ’s words of advice and encouragement should be heard, fully understood, and immediately acted upon: “Try hard to be reconciled to him From whom will you take your advice? From the only Saviour of men, who rewards His servants according to THEIR conduct - the ‘faithful’ and ‘wise,’ to be put ‘in charge of all his possessions’; or the ‘wicked’ and ‘foolish’ to be ‘cut to pieces’ and assigned ‘a place with the unbelievers Luke 12: 44, 46.

 

 

Why does our Lord’s good advice not arouse multitudes of regenerate believers today? Why do they not appear to care about the possible loss of their inheritance during His millennial reign? See (Cor. 6: 9, ff; Gal. 5: 21; Eph. 5: 5, 6. Cf. Rev. 3: 1-3, R.V.)?

 

 

God expects His people to attend to His words. He has not written to us in such terms as we cannot understand. Neither has He used coded terminology open to various interpretations. Politicians are very good at saying words which mean more than one thing; but we cannot expect God to be like that! What He says, He will do: it is what He intends to do in that future ‘day’ (2 Pet. 3: 8, 9, R.V.); and that cannot be left open to many interpretations. In fact, one of the reasons why there is a multiplicity of references and a repeating of divine truth, is to set it out at various angles so that there can be no doubt whatsoever about what He has said. Confusion is the result of giving heed to Satanic suggestions and notions. The author of confusion is the devil. “For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work;” (James 3: 16, A.V)

 

 

If we are in earnest, we would say: - ‘Lord Jesus, I cannot delay repentance for another moment; I will do to others as I would expect them to do to me. I must be reconciled to by neighbour before I go to sleep tonight. Lord God, I acknowledge Thy claims upon me, and I read of Thy mercy and forgiveness. But I have nothing to pay. Please forgive me, and grant to me the grace and strength I need to live today as Thou hast demanded

 

 

But if God’s favour is not with us on the way, because we have continually neglected, despised or tested His patience, then the next scene which we are likely to encounter is the Judgment Seat of Christ.*

 

[* See Heb. 9: 27, R.V.: “And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men one to DIE, and after this cometh judgment; so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation. Cf. 1 Pet. 1: 3-5, 9-11: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again unto a living HOPE by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, [4] unto a INHERITANCE incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, [5] who by the power of God are guarded through faith unto a SALVATION ready to be REVEALED in the last time.” … [9] receiving the end of your faith, even  the SALVATION OF your SOULS. [10] Concerning WHICH [future] SALVATION the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: [11] searching what time or what manner of time the [Holy] Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it [He] testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories [see Rom. 8: 21] that should follow them

 

We must learn to interpret the words “judgment,” “inheritance,” and “salvation” by the context used above!]

 

 

What will happen then? The proving of the debt; the deciding of the amount; the accusation; the evidences; the sentence; the handing over the trembling debtor to the officer; and the officer casting him into the prison. Outer darkness broods over them, and weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth will be heard because of the loss of the inheritance in the ‘kingdom of Christ and of God’. Matt. 13: 42; 22: 13; Eph. 5: 5. cf. Heb. 12: 14-17; Rev. 19: 7, 8.

 

 

How long shall the debtor remain there? “I tell you, you will not get out until YOU have paid the last penny What does this mean? Truly, what God’s justice has spoken, God’s justice will rigorously enact. Does the Judge say everlasting fire? NO. It is for ‘a thousand years,’ but when ‘the thousand years are finishedthen ‘the book of life’ is opened: (Rev. 20: 7, 15, R.V.).  Nothing will suffice until the last penny: and the prison ‘gates,’ will remain locked to the unworthy until then. Matt. 16: 18.

 

 

See then brother and sister ‘in Christ’, by this unpalatable truth, Satan’s other deceptions are broken into pieces. He always featheres his arrows with some truth to make them hit the target; but beware, the tips contain deadly poison! Does he not sometimes whisper:- ‘Have no fear, you are justified by faith alone, you now have Christ’s imputed righteousness; you are not to be included in those threats. ‘God is Love The millennial kingdom of Christ is for the Jews only. At that time, you will not be in Hades, because you will go to heaven immediately after the time of your death as a spirit! Only a mad, ignorant, and simple-minded man would suggest anything different. You don’t need to study Old Testament scriptures and prophecies; they were all fulfilled at Christ’s First Advent. Christ has won the ‘Prize’ for you: and it is impossible for you to lose your ‘Crown’

 

 

The debt may be forgiven to its last penny; this is mercy’s proclamation now: after mercy’s last tear is shed, then the time of judgment. This Judgment must take place before the time of resurrection when Jesus returns, (John 14: 3, and before the time of the pre-tribulation rapture (Rev. 3: 10). It will determine when - “…those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead,” (Luke 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11; cf. 2 Tim. 2: 17, 18, R.V.) - will have arrived.

 

 

Once our life on earth has ended, and the “Gates of Hades” are closed behind us, what opportunity is left to us of hoping to “gain a better resurrection?” (Heb. 11: 35.) “Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted HERE” - [‘in Hades’ (Luke 16: 23)] - “and you are in agony.” ... “Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment: (Luke 16: 27, 28.)”

 

 

What can be there for the deceived and disobedient Christian but gnawing remorse, and the regret of countless opportunities to REPENT which were ignored during his / her former life? “‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will REPENT.’”

 

 

The first principles of prudence, which were scorned and neglected, will strike the heart of God’s unrepentant people. The love of Jesus lightly regarded and a disobedience to His commands during the day of testing, will fill the intolerable agony and contemplation of the realisation of the tremendous loss. If, when living UPON the earth, God’s debtor cannot win for himself something that his standard of ‘righteousness’ has failed to ‘attain (Matt. 5: 20; Phil. 3: 11): then he “will not get out” from UNDER it until he has “paid the last penny.” The Redeemer therefore, in holy compassion to the debtor, warns and beseeches His regenerate servants now, to urgently “be reconciled to him on the way.” “Try hard to be reconciled” - for if the debt is not recognised now and repentance is not forthcoming; once it comes into the judge’s court, there will be no opportunity then to do anything about it.

 

 

Multitudes have not yet come to trial. They are yet ‘on the way’. Then they must be diligent to be delivered from the long chain of arrears. Nothing is more important to us now, for we “do not even know what will happen tomorrow:” (Jas. 4: 14).

 

 

Christian! Do you want to be rich in the future? Then you must first have your debts forgiven, and have respect your neighbour by treating him as you would like to be treated yourself. Do you dread the bankruptcy of a wasted Christian life? If you shudder at the prospect of having to spend time in a prison UPON the earth: then what will the prison in ‘Sheol’ / ‘Hades’ UNDER it be like? Remember it is not enough to confess the debt - to say with cold acknowledgment, ‘I know that I am a sinnerConfession of a debt is not its payment: God looks for our ACTIONS - our continued good actions toward all others. These will cause God to hear and answer our prayers, more than any crying or intense pleading by words alone, no matter eloquent they might be! A famous children’s hymn by John Burton, 1803-77, put it this way:-

 

 

I OFTEN say my prayers,

But do I ever pray?

And do the wishes of my heart

Go with the words I say?

 

I may as well kneel down

And worship gods of stone,

As offer to the living God

A prayer of words alone.

 

For words without the heart

The Lord will never hear;

Nor will He to those lips attend

Whose prayers are not sincere.

 

Lord, teach me what I need,

And teach me how to pray;*

And do not let me seek Thy grace,

Not meaning what I say.

 

 

[* Too often we want God to answer our prayers, in our time and in our way! It’s as if we know better how to direct and accomplish His plans and decisions for the present time! It’s as if God should not be allowing current events to happen as they are happening today! It’s praying for peace at a time when God has declared that there will be no lasting peace; and believing God will be persuaded to change world events today by our prayers!

 

All of this type of praying is not according to God’s will! In fact is sounds like is a gun is being held against His head to do as they think needs to be done: and when the words ‘go on, go on’ and ‘not on my watch’ are heard by others in the meeting, will somehow help to change God’s mind and His plans for the present time! this religious behaviour can only be described, in my opinion, as disgusting and disgraceful: which only emphasises the fact that these words are coming from the lips of deceived Christians who should know better! These people are giving others who hear their prayers a false ‘HOPE,’ which will only cause disappointment, distrust, and a falling away in the near future, when their prayers are not answered  at a time when they think they should be!

 

 

To suggest that regenerate believers cannot, and do not often pray like this, is like ‘throwing sand in our face’! These prayers will only discourage our complete trust in the our Lord Jesus who knows, sees, hears, and controls all things: and has come down to earth to tell us the end of all things from the beginning!]

 

 

“Behold, ye trust in lying words, that cannot profit. Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye have not known, and come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name and say, We are delivered; that ye may do all these abominations? … “…I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all of your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim

 

 

“Therefore pray not for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: For I WILL NOT HEAR THEE:” (Jer. 7: 8-10, 16, R.V. Cf. Heb. 10: 26-30, R.V.

 

 

[2b] “Thus saith the Lord GOD: Woe to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the sheep … [6] “My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill: Yea, my sheep were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and there was none that did search or seek after them. [8] “As I live, saith the Lord God, surely forasmuch as my sheep became a prey, and my sheep became meat to all the beasts of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my sheep, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my sheep; [9] therefore ye shepherds, here the word of the LORD; [10] Thus saith the Lord God: Behold I am against the shepherds; and I will require my sheep at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the sheep; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; and I will deliver my sheep from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them. [11] For thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I myself, even I, will search for my sheep, and will seek them out:” (Ezek. 34: 2b, 6, 8-11, R.V.) Cf. Acts 24: 14-16; Gal. 6: 1-10, R.V.).

 

 

A continued neglect of accountability truths and conditional promises, will eventually bring upon us the ordered and measured steps of justice from the Hand that bears the two-edged sword - that Word of God which modern day hirelings, with their false prophetic teachings, accompanied by their anti-millennial misinterpretations have made blunt! Be earnest and repent. Is He, who Himself entered the prison, not to be believed? Obedience has both present - [Acts 5: 32; cf. 1 John 3: 24, R.V.] - and future advantages - [Luke 22: 28-30. cf. Rev. 2: 25, 26, R.V.)] - which the careless, greedy, sensual, impatient, selfish, and canal regenerate believers, on the other side of “a great gulf fixed” (Luke 16: 26. Cf. Luke 23: 42, 43, R.V.) may not enjoy.

 

 

Robert Govett, commenting on 2 Peter 1: 10, 11, A.V. - “Wherefore the rather brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure; for if YE DO these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” - wrote the following:-

 

 

“Stability in our Christian course is the promised result of advancement in grace. Not a few Christians, and those of long standing in the faith, do stumble and fall foully. Their fall resounds far and wide. The ungodly triumph. The case of Christ sustains a serious blow. Those, then, who so fall are not the advancing Christians here spoken of. They had been for some time declining in knowledge and grace. At length came the temptation which tripped their feet. After some time ceasing to ply the oar, the boat was dashed by the current against the shore.

 

 

The believer’s every fall, though it may not exclude positively and absolutely from the kingdom, renders his entrance uncertain. It is just the contrary to rendering it sure. The one who has so fallen may recover himself, and be roused to extra diligence for the future. But repeated falls must strongly tend to exclude finally from the promised millennial glory.

 

 

To DILIGENCE God will furnish ‘the abundant entrance into the everlasting kingdom’ of Christ. Christ has two kingdoms; the temporary one of the thousand years, and the eternal one. The temporary one is the porch leading into the eternal one. All believers will obtain an entrance into the eternal one. But to obtain part in the temporary, is to have the rich or abundant entrance into the eternal.” (R. Govett.)

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

ADVICE TO THE DEBTOR

PART THREE

 

 

“Give DILIGEANCE that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hail thee to the judge, and the judge DELIVER THEE INTO PRISON. I tell thee, THOU SHALT NOT DEPART THENCE, till thou HAS PAID THE LAST MITE:” (Luke 12: 58, 59, A.V.)

 

 

So important is this truth - (the truth that God punishes disobedient believers after death) - and that Christ and His apostles, did not cease to preach it to His redeemed people. Those to whom Christ addressed himself knew this truth; and Peter, after being restored from his fall, would continue to repeat it. Known accountability truths always need exhortation to keep them fresh in our minds. But especially is this true of the importance of good works, and their connection with the resurrection at the time of Christ’s return in millennial glory. Now if those who were established in this truth, needed to be frequently reminded of it; how much more do those who have never heard of it need it made known to them. When so many important truths have slipped away from the teachings of the churches of Christ today, how should their true members be otherwise than ignorant of future events? How should regenerate believers be zealous of holy living, when God’s rewards for holy living are forgotten and ignored?

 

 

But is all this emphasis upon the works of the regenerate, and the possibility of a future ‘just recompense of rewardnot another form of purgatorial teaching similar to that found in Roman Catholicism? NO, it is NOT! Roman Catholic teaching about punishment after the time of death in Purgatory, is added to the sufferings of Christ for ETERNAL salvation, thereby falsely teaching its followers that Christ’s sufferings were NOT sufficient to purchase this ETERNAL salvation for ALL of His redeemed people!

 

 

‘Hades’ / ‘Sheol’ is the place where disembodied SOULS go immediately after the time of death: “You will not abandon me to Sheol” [= Gk. ‘Hades’ (Psa. 16: 10. cf. Acts 2: 27, where ‘grave’ in the NIV should be ‘Hades’ as in the Greek text & R.V., A.S.V. and all other good translations.]. “He, seeing this before, spake of the RESURRECTION of Christ, that his SOUL was not LEFT IN HELL [Gk. ‘Hades’]: (Acts 2: 31, A.V.). “What does ‘he ascended’ mean except that he [Christ] also DESCENDED [first] to the LOWER EARTHLY REGIONS? He who descended is the very one who ASCENDED” - [after His resurrection, but never before that time, (John 20: 17)] - “higher than all the heavens ...” (Eph. 4: 9, 10): and the ‘captives He led in His train’ (verse 8), were His enemies not His friends, (Col. 2: 15).

 

 

It was with reference to this FUTURE salvation - “the salvation that is ready to be revealed IN THE LAST TIME” - which is the goal of our faith, “THE SALVATION OF SOULS,” which the apostle Peter wants to make known to ‘God’s elect1 Pet. 1: 1, 5, 9, 10. And because, we “do not know what a DAY may bring forth” (Prov. 27: 1; James 4: 14), Peter stresses the importance of holy living, for we “call on a Father who JUDGES EACH MAN’S WORK IMPARTIALLY” (verse 17): and the outcome of that righteous judgment, could mean that, at the time of Christ’s return, many of His servants will not ‘attain’ unto the ‘better’ resurrection ‘out from the deadHeb. 11: 35; Phil. 3: 11. Cf. Rev. 20: 4-6; Luke 14: 14; Luke 20: 35.

 

 

“Nothing,” it has been said, “is more dark to the human mind than the future. It is a direction in which we are unable to look. We can look back; we can look around us, interpret events that are taking place, but the future truly is unknown. Isaac said, ‘Behold now, I am old, I know not the day of my death’ (Genesis 27: 2). It seems to me that when he spoke of being old, he was saying that he expected to die before too long. If so, he was wrong, as he lived another 40 years after he uttered those words! That underscores for us that we truly do not know the future, even when we feel we have many pointers that certain things are imminent.

 

 

“Our natural state of ignorance regarding the future increases therefore the value of that which sheds light upon it. That is what makes [Bible] PROPHECY not only relevant but invaluable

 

 

As there is more than one ‘kingdom of God’ - (a millennial kingdom, upon this earth; and an eternal kingdom upon ‘a new earth after this earth is destroyed) - there is also more than one general resurrection ‘of the dead’: and the ‘salvation of the soul’ has to do with the TIME of Resurrection, and the nature of the REWARDS (to be distributed by the righteous Judge) to each of His servants AT THE TIME OF ‘the FIRST RESURRECTION when Christ returns to establish His millennial kingdom upon this earth.*

 

* Let it be carefully pondered that this is no mere detail of a disputed prophecy, but is a fearful reminder of Heaven’s summary of the former lives of those of His servants who will be judged ‘worthy’ to be resurrected at this time. This resurrection of reward is of practical urgency to us all; especially to all who agree with me that this resurrection turns on a regenerate believer’s fidelity - Phil. 3: 11; Rev. 20: 4-6; Luke 20: 35. All within the Church of God, who influence others to believe the contrary, are making a fatal blunder by not disclosing to regenerate believers the possible loss of their ‘inheritance’ in the ‘kingdomGal. 5: 13-21; Eph. 5: 1-7. There are those who would like to get rid of unpalatable truths; but the Righteous Judge will not allow anyone to be cheated out of a moral and righteous judgment: ‘Thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the last mite

 

 

The outstanding characteristic of this teaching of Christ, which ought to make a wise man fear Christ’s coming judgement seat, is that their will be no escape for any souls that will be LEFT in Hades at the time of His return.

 

 

Commenting upon the immediate context of our Lord’s words above, an anonymous writer has exposed a divine truth which many of our modem-day bible teachers (so called) take extreme measures to keep concealed: -

 

 

“Those that would purpose that believers should not incur any punishment - rather, only affectionate discipline for their training and correction, should take careful heed to the gravity of our Lord’s declarations in Luke 12. It is not the possession of the talents that determined the reward or punishment of the servants, it was their use of them. A believer who stands before the Judgment Seat of Christ with no more than he had at conversion can expect to receive a like recompense.

 

 

“Some will argue, ‘Surely, ‘that servant’ who beat the slaves, was an unbeliever.’ Though no such suggestion is implied by the parable. Far from being a comparison of two different servants, what is portrayed is a change of mind in the wicked servant, showing the recompense of either good or bad stewardship. If the third servant were an unsaved individual, his works could in no way, and on no ground, be even considered for acceptance.

 

 

“When Jesus said, ‘You too, be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour that you do not expect’, Peter asked, ‘Lord, are you addressing this parable to us, or to everyone else as well?’ That Jesus statement implied both a general warning to all believers, and a specific warning to the apostles, is confirmed in His answer in verses47 and 48. The apostles, having received much, would have greater responsibility and accountability, while he who did not know the master’s will and committed deeds worthy of a few stripes, will receive a few. It is not uncommon that many who teach on these parables, do so with the presupposition that the references to punishment are references to eternal damnation.

 

 

“They then conclude that the unfaithful servant must, therefore, have been an unbeliever. However, even a cursory study of God’s dealings with His [redeemed] people, will prove this to be an unwarranted assumption. God DOES PUNISH HIS PEOPLE.

 

 

“Others will contend that the parable shows that the unfaithful servant was a believer who lost his [eternal] salvation. But that would make our [initial] salvation contingent upon service, and deny the completed work of Christ upon the cross.

 

 

“Perhaps an even more graphic analogy is drawn by the Lord in the parable of Luke 19. For here, He says, ‘A certain nobleman went to a distant country to receive a kingdom for himself and then return’. Then, after relating the tasks which the nobleman assigned to his slaves, He continues, “But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him saying, ‘We do not want this man to rule over us.’” The distinction between the ‘slaves’ [regenerate believers] and the ‘citizens’ [unregenerate believers], in this parable, is clear. The slaves were rewarded or punished for their degree of service. The citizens who rejected the nobleman were brought to him, and slain in his presence.

 

 

“The difficulties which the parable presents to both the Calvinist and the Arminian theologies are resolved only by trying to force the scriptures to say something that they do not.

 

 

“To assume that the absence of work is evidence that an unregenerate spirit, is to negate the warnings to Christians concerning the consequences of our disobedience to the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

 

“To assume that it is our ETERNAL life which is at risk, for failing to attain to the holiness which Christ desires of every believer, is to add to the gospel of grace, the necessity of our works. ‘If the security of the saved depends on service, what limit of toil is necessary to preserve it? If a serving believer must serve to be [eternally] saved, how much must he serve? Can service save one who is already saved? God places [eternal] salvation before, and not after ‘good works’”. (R. E. Neighbour.)

 

 

“For example, we are offended by the immoral conduct of Christians, particularly when such conduct is exposed by unbelievers and flaunted as an indictment against Christianity. And so, we ‘defend the faith’ by saying to non-Christians, and even to ourselves, ‘Surely, he is no Christian.’ ‘No Christian’, we adamantly protest, ‘could do such a thing.’

 

 

“But how often have the accusers looked at a woman (man) to lust after her (him) in their heart, and thus, according to Jesus, committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt. 5: 27)?

 

 

“Do they therefore, ponder in their heart, ‘Surely, I am no Christian, for no Christian would do such a thing’? No, instead we compare ourself with the immoral person and not with the standard of Christ.

 

 

“And what guarantee has the Christian that he too will not fall into such conduct tomorrow, or next week, or next month, or next year?

 

 

“Our justification [by grace] is not preceded by, nor dependent upon, works as a determinant of [this] justification. This is the Scriptural denial of the doctrine that ETERNAL salvation depends in part upon outward sanctification, so that no one can be assured of [eternal] salvation until he has persevered in holiness to the end of life.” (Lang.)

 

 

“We are, most assuredly, told to judge those in the church, but it is not their [eternal] salvation that we are judging; it is their CONDUCT. And Jesus said that the church’s decision to expel one from fellowship is bound in heaven as well as upon earth (Matt. 18: 17, 18). And so, the sinner who is justly cast out of the church, and remains UNREPENTANT, will also be excluded from the fellowship of overcomers in the MILLENNIAL kingdom - not from eternal life. God, alone, may exclude from eternal life, the one who rejects His only begotten Son.”

 

 

*       *       *

 

 

ADVICE TO THE DEBTOR

PART FOUR

 

 

 

“And why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right? For as thou art going with thine adversary before a ruler, on the way give diligence to be quit of him; lest haply he drag thee unto the judge, and the judge shall deliver thee to the exactor, and the exactor shall cast thee into prison. I tell thee, Thou shalt in no wise come out thence, till thou have paid the very last mite:” (Luke 12: 57-59, Numeric English New Testament).

 

 

In part three, we made mention of the future “Salvation of the Soul,” in this tract we are focused upon the question asked by our Lord as recorded in verse 57:-

 

 

“And WHY even of yourselves judge ye not the right [Gk. ‘the righteous thing’]

 

 

The reader will notice a difference in the words used at the end of the question above. It is not ‘what is right’ but ‘the right’ or ‘the righteous thing That is because “in this revision where rigorous police duty has been kept up against all manner of intruders, and where the definite article ‘theis in the Greek permitted where the English refuses it, a bell as it were is ringing to attract attention, Here, forsooth, GIVE HEED, reader, Article HERE no article there: a distinction, AND IT IS FOR THEE TO FIND WHEREIN IT IS

 

 

I believe that the judgment mentioned here, is ‘of yourselves.’ That is, it is self-judgment and NOT the judging of others. We will, at the judgment seat of Christ, be held accountable by the righteous Judge OF HOW WE HAVE JUDGED OURSELVES; of how we have, in the light of that judgment, behaved toward others after regeneration; and of how we have matured in ‘the faith’: of how much debt [we may have accumulated], by our disobedience to Christ’s precepts!

 

 

This begs the question: ‘What are we, as sincere and humble Christians, now intending to do about our daily shortcomings and past failures

 

 

SUMMING UP

 

 

It is important for us no notice and benefit from the close connection between these verses, and the subject matter of the whole chapter - (Luke 12). The purpose of these latter verses in this chapter is to sum up (or bring to a head), the teachings of our Lord to His “disciples” (verse 1), to bear upon US TODAY.

 

 

(1) We are to beware of false doctrines (12: 1), because of the terrible effect they will have upon others by leading us and them away from the whole truth. False teachings are so prominent within the church of God today that one writer has put it this way: -

 

 

“We have a saying, ‘Great is the truth, and will prevailThat is never so in this age. Truth is always with the minority; and so convinced am I of this that if I find myself agreeing with the majority on any matter, I make haste and get over to the other side, for I know I am wrong.” (Dr. A. T. Pierson.)

 

 

(2) We are told by our Lord to fear God, who has power to throw us into ‘Hades’ (verse 5). Here is the scriptural proof that the righteous Judge has a place where He can deal with His disobedient children - and He will not allow them ‘to get out until they have paid the last penny’!

 

 

(3) God expects His redeemed people to be faithful to truths which the Holy Spirit has disclosed to them from His Word; and servants of Christ are unfaithful when they deliberately conceal responsibility truths from other Christians!

 

 

“Therefore seeing we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by the manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. [3] But if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to them that are perishing: [4] in whom the god of this age hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of THE GOSPEL OF THE GLORY OF CHRIST, who is the image of God should not dawn upon them:” (2 Cor. 4: 2-4, R.V. & A.S.V.)!

 

 

Being a just Judge, God most certainly will hold us accountable for any neglect or misuse of accountability truths, which He has given us to fully understand and disclose to others! “And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment:” (Heb. 9: 27, R.V.). “That servant WHO KNOWS his master’s will and does not get ready OR DOES NOT DO WHAT HIS MASTER WANTS will be beaten with many blows:” (verse 47).

 

 

The fact of the matter is that God’s redeemed people are being STARVED TO DEATH from hearing and accepting accountability truths and conditional promises! These are constantly being hidden and withheld from regenerate believers by apostate teachers who KNOW and fully UNDERSTAND these truths, but are unwilling to disclose them to the Lord’s redeemed people!

 

 

Why do we NOT JUDGE OURSELVES as often as we should? It is because we are continually being tempted, influenced and deceived by Satan: and we are allowing ourselves to be carried away by apostates, who know, but are doing all in their power to prevent ‘Christians’ - [Acts 11: 26b] - from hearing or fully understanding these truths!

 

 

“I wrote to you in my epistle to have no company with fornicators; [10] not altogether with the fornicatiors of this world, or with covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world: [11] but now I write unto you not to keep company, if any man that if named a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one no, not to eat. [12] For what have I to do with judging them that are without? Do not ye judge THEM THAT ARE WITHIN, whereas them that are without God judgeth? Put away the wicked man from among yourselves:” (1 Cor. 5: 9-13.)” … [6: 9] “Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall NOT INHERIT the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, [10] nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, SHALL INHERIT the kingdom of God. [11] And such WERE some of you: but YE WERE WASHED, but ye WERE sanctified, but ye WERE justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God:” (6: 9-11, ASV & R.V.).*

 

[* Note the contrast of lifestyle the apostle made in verse 11 by the words, - “and such were some of you” - [i.e., before the time of their initial salvation - with their experiences after receiving that salvation,] - ‘ye were washed,” “ye were sanctified,” “but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God.” He does NOT say at the time of writing to them - ‘ye ARE washed, Justified, sanctified,’ etc. He was comparing their former experiences before becoming Christians, with what was possible after Christan APOSTASY by “some of you’ in the FUTURE! See 1 Cor. 10: 1-12. Also, cf. Gal. 5: 13-21; Eph. 5: 5-7. Do not be deceived, God is not mocked - “the UNRIGHTEOUS shall NOT INHERIT the kingdom of God]

 

 

What are these unscriptural teachings?

 

 

(1) That our ‘spirit’ can ascend into Heaven at the time death; and there is no need to wait for our ‘body’ to be united to it! This theory taught by Spiritists who believe ‘death is resurrection.’ “At death the soul clothes itself with a very ethereal or subtle body, and rises up out of the corpse. This spirit-body is the spiritual body, of which Paul speaks

 

 

NO. It does NOT. This did not happen after our Lord’s death! and there is no proof anywhere in Scripture for what spiritists believe and teach: nothing at all in any of their false teachings in spiritualism: false teachings which many regenerate believers are accepting today! Resurrection from the dead, embraces the WHOLE man. That is, all that ‘Death’ has separated, ‘Resurrection’ - when our Lord Jesus will return - reunites. Look and see - Rom. 10: 7; Eph. 4: 9. Cf. John 3: 13; 14: 3; 2 Tim. 2: 17, 18; Rev. 6: 9-11; 14: 13; 20: 4, 5, R.V.

 

 

After surrendering His animating ‘spirit’ into His Father’s hands (Luke 23: 46), Jesus descended into ‘Hades’ / ‘Sheol’; and from there, as a disembodied soul Himself, preached  to the ‘spirits in prison’: 1 Peter 3: 19. For ‘three days and nights’ He was not seen alive, until after the time when His ‘spirit’, ‘soul’ and ‘body’ were reunited at the time of His RESURRECTION. He remained in the underworld of the dead for ‘three days and three nights’ as a disembodied ‘soul’ (Acts 2: 31, R.V.)

 

 

“Christ rose in His capacity of ‘firstfruits.’ Now the firstfruits are a specimen of the whole harvest which is to follow: 2 Cor. 4: 14. Jesus Christ is ‘the first-born from the dead.’ His other brethren who are to be born after Him from the dead, will then be like Him in that birth: He indeed having the pre-eminence, but their resurrection being after the pattern of His: Col. 1: 18; Rev. 1: 5.

 

 

“The Swedenborgians and Spiritists assert, that man is only temporarily a corporeal being. He is essentially a spiritual being: the body is but the scaffold to the building; taken away for ever, after the soul is matured at death.” (R. Govett.) See ‘Spiritism A Foe to Christianity’).

 

 

[36] “And as they spake these things, he” - [the Resurrected Messiah] - “himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. [37] But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they beheld a spirit. [38] And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and wherefore do reasonings arise in your heart? [39] See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye behold me having. [40] And when he had said this, he shewed them his hands and his feet. [41] And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here anything to eat? [42] And they gave him a piece of fish. [43] And he took it and did eat before them.” … “[46] and he said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day.” (Luke 24: 37-43, 46. R.V.).

 

(2) Beware of the danger of reading into Scriptural texts what the texts do NOT teach! Two good examples of this, can be found in 2 Cor. 5: 8 and 1 Thess. 4: 16.

 

 

In the former text, it is assumed by multitudes of regenerate believers, that because Christ is now BODILY present in Heaven; that this is where they will go immediately (as a ‘spirit’) after death! Here is a total disregard of the apostle’s teaching in verse 4: “For while we are in this tent - (i.e., inside a mortal body, destined to decay immediately after the time of Death) - “we groan and are burdened, because we do NOT WISH TO BE UNCLOTHED but to be clothed WITH OUR HEAVENLY DWELLING” - (i.e., with an immortal body like that of our resurrected Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (see Luke 24: 37-39, R.V.) - “so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by LIFE

 

 

In the latter text: “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, AND THE DEAD SHALL RISE first

 

 

It is believed that this text declares that God will RESURRECT ALL ‘the dead’ at this time! Nothing could be further from the truth! It is contrary to the numerous teachings of Christ and His Apostles:-

 

 

(a) “Those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age - [i.e., the promised millennium (Ps. 2: 8; Rev. 20: 5)] - and in the RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD…” (Luke 20: 35, R.V.).” (b) “… that I may know him, and the power of his - [i.e., Christ’s] resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death; if by any means I may ATTAIN unto the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may apprehend that for which also I was apprehended by Christ Jesus:” (Phil. 3: 10-12, R.V.). (c) “… others were tortured, not accepting their deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection” … (d) “And all these all, having witness borne to them through their faith, RECEIVED NOT the promise, God having provided some better thing concerning us, that APART FROM THEM they should NOT BE MADE PERFECT:” (Heb. 11: 35b-39, 40, R.V.

 

 

(3) By failing to understand what is meant by the word ‘SALVATION’; and in particular, the expression “the salvation of SOULS” - “the salvation that is ready to be REVEALED IN THE LAST TIME”, which Peter has described as: “the GOAL of your faith, the salvation of YOUR SOULS:” (1 Pet. 1: 5-9, R.V.).

 

 

One of the better commentaries concerning this future ‘salvation’ is by Philip Mauro. Commentating on the Authorized Version’s translation of Hebrews 10: 38, 39 he wrote:-

 

 

“1. The words ‘any man’ are introduced by the translators as the subject of the verb ‘draw back’; but the fact that they are in italic type shows that they are without warrant in the original. The antecedent subject is the ‘just man,’ who is to live by faith. The expression is the same that Paul used of himself in Galations 2: 20, ‘the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God.’ Jesus Christ is not only the author, but also the finisher of faith. As already seen, it is only the [regenerate] believer, the man who has been justified by faith, that can ‘draw back.’ The unbeliever has not come to anything from which he could ‘draw back.’ There is no question at all as to the correctness of the reading, ‘if he draw backThe drawing back to destruction is put in direct contrast with the living by faith, and going on to the saving of the soul. It is true that the believer cannot draw back from his standing in Christ. He cannot dray back from ETERNAL life. But he needs to be warned lest he draw back from the pilgrim’s place and return to the world.

 

 

2. “It should be pointed out that the word ‘perdition’ should be ‘destruction The difference is important. The people of God will surely suffer destruction if they draw back into the world. Because it is polluted, it will destroy them with a sore destruction (Mic. 2: 10); that is, will involve them in great and irreparable [future] loss. But they will never come into ‘perdition

 

 

3. The words ‘of them that believe’ should read simply ‘of faith.’ While the meaning is substantially the same, yet the exact wording ‘of faith’ is important, for the reason that this word ‘faith’ announces the theme of chapter 11. That Great chapter is given to the people of God for the very purpose of instructing them in regard to the nature of that faith which is effectual to ‘the salvation of the soul.’”

 

 

(4) Take another example from the life of Jacob and Esau. Why do we not put Esau first? Was it not Esau who was the firstborn of the twins? Is the loss of Esau’s double portion of the father’s ‘inheritance’* not another very good reason why Christians should judge themselves by continually looking to see what things in this life they place at the top of their list of their priorities. The loss of Esau’s first-born status, and his record in the book of ‘Hebrews’ has an important significance for most regenerate people today! Regenerate Christians can also lose their ‘inheritance’ in the millennial kingdom of Christ: as Esau bartered away his first-born status to Jacob! Christ has two kingdoms - the millennial when He returns - and the eternal in ‘a new heaven and new earth’ (Rev. 21: 1) - after He hands the millennial kingdom to God the Father; and “after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power” (1 Cor. 15: 24).

 

* “For one mess of meat he sold his birthright. With tremendous irony and perfect truthfulness all earth’s passions are catalogued under ‘a mess of meatIt is the bartering for present passion, for future [millennial] glory: it is mortgaging the - [promised (Ps. 2: 8; cf. Rev. 2: 5, 7; 25-27; 3: 21, R.V.)] - Kingdom for worldly gain: it is counting God’s conditional promises cheap.” (D. M. Panton.)

 

 

The millennial Age will be a time, not only of reward for those who have overcome by the blood of the Lamb, but also of chastisement for such disobedient believers as will be found to have failed in their walk - through indolence, or the minding of earthly things - and will, consequently, be sentenced in abodes of the dead until the Last Day. For it will then appear, that, through their lack of earnestness and prayer for the Holy Spirit’s help, their sanctification was not perfected during their earth-life; and it must be so before they can dwell forever in a new heaven and a new earth with the Lord. They did evil in the body as well as good, and DID NOT JUDGE THEMSELVES and REPENT with bitter crying before the Lord: Therefore, they must be judged by Him, and even as they did, so must they also receive ‘a just recompense of reward’.

 

 

(5) Hence, the Judgment-seat of Christ will dispense temporary chastisement for trespasses, as well as rewards. This is plainly indicated in the verses under our consideration, as well as in other striking passages in the First Gospel, which, as we study them in due course, will increase our knowledge of a solemn but disliked and much neglected truth.

 

 

Hence the decisions issued from the Judgment-seat of Christ will have the following results:-

 

 

“Those servants of the Lord who shall be found to have been faithful to be judged worthy of the ‘First Resurrection’, will immediately be made Priests of God and of His Christ, and will reign with Him for ‘a thousand years’. They will thus enjoy the great Sabbath rest that remains for the people of God, and will themselves rest from their works, even as He did from His.

 

 

“But the unfaithful servants will be banished into the darkness of Hades / Sheol without the pale of the Millennial Kingdom, WHERE THEY WILL BE DETAINED, and dealt with according to the sentence of the Lord - the Righteous Judge - until the Last Day. Then, when the time of reward has past by, He will raise them up to everlasting life, even as He has promised to do in the case of all who have believed on Him.” (G. H. Pember. M. A.)

 

 

Hence the need for regenerate believers to act in judgement upon themselves now, so that when the time finally arrives to determine who will be judged ‘worthy’ to enter the coming Kingdom, they will not be ashamed. “The sacrifice of the Age to Come for the pleasures of this Age is ratified at the Bema.” Therefore, the millennial birthright potentially belongs to every regenerate believer, but actually only to those who fulfil divine conditions.

 

 

“There are but few, when they come at the cross, cry, ‘Welcome cross,’ as some of the Martyrs did to the stake they were burned at; therefore, if you meet with the cross in thy journey, in what manner soever it be, be not daunted, and say, ‘Alas, what shall I do now!’ But rather take courage, know that by the way of the cross is the way to the Kingdom - Bunyan.

 

 

“Take up your cross, then, in His strength,

And calmly every danger brave;

It guides you to a better home,

And leads to conquest over the grave.

 

 

Take up your cross and follow Christ,

Nor think till death to lay it down;

For only those who bear the cross

May hope to wear the glorious crown.”

 

                                                                                   - Charles William Everest, 1814-1877.

 

 

LET US PRESS ON, AND THIS WE WILL DO IF GOD PERMIT