Page images
PDF
EPUB

trodden down of the Gentiles, and the signs to follow have not come to pass. Therefore the only fair construction of the phrase, "this generation," is the one I have indicated, that which should live to see those signs -the generation concerning whom, not to whom, he spoke.

I believe I have met this great argument of Dr. Warren fairly, with no evasion or equivocation; and I in return ask him to candidly consider and either refute it, or acknowledge its force. His whole hypothesis stands or falls with this point: for if "this generation" does not mean the generation of Peter, James, John and Andrew, his whole system falls to the ground; and the Parousia is a future event, as also "the kingdom of God" a future institution; for it was not to come until after the great tribulation and Jewish dispersion with Jerusalem's treading down should be ended and the signs to follow had taken place. If there is any force in Scripture testimony, sound exegesis and logic, I am confident I have gained the case. And the wisest answer the Doctor can give is a candid acknowledgement of its correctness.

Again, Dr. Warren says:

"Let it be noted that in none of these passages [quoted from Christ and the apostles, in reference to the coming], nor in any other of either Testament, is there any affirmation that the Parousia was distant. Nearly two thousand years have passed ince that time, and if the Parousia is still future, it must then ave been afar off,-how much more than two thousand years we cannot say. Take this assumed fact-say twenty cen*uries-and carry it back and lay it along side the utterances quoted, as a supposed explanation of what their authors meant: 'at hand'. -'before some standing here taste of death, this generation,' 'from now,' 'quickly,' 'the time is short,' we who are alive and remain unto it,' a little, little while,' etc. Is that, I cannot help asking, a proper way of understanding inspired words?"

6

To this I reply: Our Lord did, as I have shown,nay, I will say proved,-tell his disciples that before he would come in the clouds of heaven and gather his elect that Jerusalem would be desolated, the Jews be led into captivity, Jerusalem be trodden down of the Gentiles till their times were fulfilled; and that certain phenomena would take place which would indicate its nearness. He also told them, "Ye know not when the time is." "It is not for you to know the times and the seasons which the Father has put in his own power." He never gave them one intimation that he would come before the great tribulation ended, and the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled. Did he? when? where? how? Let us look at this from God's stand-point-"one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day," and we shall see that "the Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some men count slackness."-2 Pet. 3: 8, 9. I have also given a fair and full explanation of those texts, from John, Christ, the twelve and seventy, relative to the kingdom of heaven being "at hand," by citing those texts relating to the two royal advents; and how and when the first foretold royal advent was fulfilled.

THE CONDITIONAL REIGN.

I now proceed to show that Christ's reign at his first advent was purely conditional.

:

Zech. 6 12-15, "And speak unto him [the high priest] saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of Hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is the BRANCH; he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord: even he shall build the temple of

the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and he shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne; and the council of peace shall be between them both. . . . And this shall come to pass if ye will diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God." That this related to the first advent is clear from the statement, "He shall grow up out of his place." Did the Jewish people diligently obey the voice of the Lord their God? If not, the promise was void.

There were good things promised to the Jews under Messiah which they forfeited by rejecting Jesus (Matt. 23: 37, 38). Among them was the gathering of Jerusalem's children to build the house: "How often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but ye would not. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." All failed because they rejected Jesus.

Again: Luke 19: 42, "If thou hadst known, even thou in this thy day, the things which belong to thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes."

THE PROFFERED KINGDOM LOST.

After Christ came in royal form to Jerusalem and the Jews officially rejected him, he said to them: "Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given unto a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."-Matt. 21: 43. Dia tauto, rendered in the text "therefore," properly signifies and is often rendered for this cause, and the text would read: "For this cause I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given unto a nation bringing forth the fruits of it." The cause referred to is the refusal to

render the fruits in their season, and rejection of the headstone of the corner. They lost the kingdom which John, Christ, the twelve and the seventy up to that time had proclaimed as at hand; and Christ (as I have shown from the 21st of Luke) placed its revelation and establishment after the times of the Gentiles, and after the signs which were to follow, and at his coming in a cloud with power and great glory. The fact of these two royal advents—the one in humiliation, the other in glory; the reign in the first instance conditional and forfeited, the other unconditional and absolute, removes the whole force of Dr. Warren's argument above quoted, so far as the words of Christ are concerned.

CHAPTER III.

PAUL'S TESTIMONY ON THE TIME OF THE ADVENT.

Paul was explicit in his testimony that there were hindrances to the Lord's coming, and that until they were removed, "that day" should not come. As to the duration of those hindrances he gave not the slightest hint. He not only wrote this to the Thessalonians, but states that he told them the same thing when he was with them, and charged them to hold fast "the traditions" they had received, "whether by word or our epistle."

The usual mode of evading the force of this fact is, to divert attention from it by introducing a criticism on the word rendered "is at hand." I admit all that is said on that point, that the word properly means "is present," or "has come," or whatever other form it may take. But that does not at all change the fact that "that day shall not come except there come the apostasy first." No matter whether they thought it had come, or that it was at hand. In either case, Paul showed them that their apprehensions were groundless: (1) there must first be an apostasy; (2) "that man of sin, the son of perdition," must come, for he was to be destroyed by the epiphany of Christ's Parousia. But he could not yet be revealed, for there existed a hindrance

« PreviousContinue »