able to see any difference in the import of the phrase "as," or "in like manner as," so long as "this same Jesus, who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come as ye have seen him go." Does not as mean likeness? Will "this same Jesus" so come? He moved from the earth heavenward; a cloud received him from sight, and his own testimony, as well as that of the angels, was, that he will come from heaven and a cloud disclose him,—that "every eye shall see him he went. If he does, he will come bodily, visibly; and as human eyes saw him go, so "they shall SEE the Son of man coming." come as It appears to me that Dr. Warren has spent a vast amount of labor and ingenuity to prove a difference without a distinction; nor can I discover in his labored argument anything but a cloud of dust to hide the real merits of the case. That our Lord will so come as, is the confessed import of the text,—that is, in a cloud, bodily, visibly to human eyes. But when, the two clothed in white did not intimate. As to the fact of his return in the same body, the text, translate it as we may, leaves no room for doubt. Let us then wait for him. But says the Doctor: "There is not the slightest intimation that so long as he remained visible there was any other than his usual aspect. As he went up 'a cloud received him,' and that was all. But is that the way he is to come again?" If Dr. W. is correct, it is to be even with less visibility and splendor. How bright the cloud was that received him, and how numerous his attendants, we are not told. But from the prophetic announcements, there must have been great pomp and splendor (Psa. 68: 17, 18): "The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels; the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive, thou hast received gifts for men." This Paul (Eph. 4: 8) expressly applies to Christ's ascension into heaven. In Psa. 24: 7-10 we have, if possible, a still more sublime view of what took place when he entered the celestial city: Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lifted up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in." What if the historian has not recorded a sight of the glorystill, it no doubt awaited and attended Him. when he comes again, we have the fullest assurance that his glory will be visible: "They shall SEE the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and GREAT GLORY." 66 And CHAPTER IV. SCOPE OF THE PAROUSIA. Translating en tee parousia, in or during the presence instead of at the coming of Christ, Dr. Warren argues that the Parousia embraces a lengthened period and a variety of events. He says:— "1. The first [event] as we all know, was the establishment of the new kingdom of heaven. The old theocracy founded by Moses was to pass away, and be succeeded by a new one of a more comprehensive sway and a higher glory. They shall see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.'-Matt. 16: 28."Parousia, p. 74. I have already shown that this promise had a literal fulfillment at his royal entry into Jerusalem; and that it referred to the first royal coming instead of his second coming, "in the clouds of heaven," as foretold Matt. 26: 64. That the kingdom promised to Christ (Luke 1: 3133) is to begin at, or in, or during his parousia, is true. But Christ have never yet been seen "sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven." "Ye shall SEE," Dr. Warren very well knows, does not mean, he "shall come invisibly." If seen, he must come visibly, which will be his parousia -coming to abide, as Dan. 7: 13, 14, teaches. "2. The second thing to occur in the Parousia was the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. 24: 27, 34). Let it be observed that this prediction is not in that part of the chapter which many suppose refers to the day of judgment, but in that which is universally conceded to relate to the overthrow of the temple and city."—Parousia, p. 74. It is only by ignoring the first of the three questions proposed by the disciples that Dr. Warren can possibly make the Parousia embrace "the overthrow of the temple and city." Christ foretold (Matt. 24: 1, 2) the destruction of the temple, saying, "There shall not be left here one stone upon another which shall not be thrown down." Language can be no plainer than this concerning the destruction of the temple-a thing by itself. The Saviour, with Peter, James, John and Andrew, sat on the mount of Olives, looking down upon the temple. They asked him, first: "Tell us, when shall these things be?" Did that mean the overthrow of the temple, or his parousia? No one in the light of his prediction just uttered, and the question in reference to it, and then the next question: "And what shall be the sign of thy parousia?" can fail to see that the two things are entirely distinct. The answers were as distinct as the questions. Concerning the time and sign of Jerusalem's overthrow he said (Luke 21:20), "When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh." Then he foretold the continuous desolation and treading down of the city by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are ended; after which is to come a series of signs of his Parousia, to culminate in his "coming in a cloud with power and great glory." We know that 1,810 years separate the two events; for the latter has not yet transpired, because no human being has testified to having seen it; and besides, the Gentiles still tread down Jerusalem. Therefore Jerusalem's overthrow was not to transpire during, in, or at the Parousia, but before it. "3. The destruction of the man of sin. 'Whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy by the brightness of his parousia.'-2 Thess. 2: 8. If the view I have presented of this personage be accepted,-the view which generally prevailed among the early Fathers, and is confirmed by some of the ablest historians of modern times,-we see a literal fulfillment of the promises in the events of the same great catastrophe. In the midst of the siege of Jerusalem, in the very flush of his power, Nero was suddenly hurled from the throne he disgraced, and died like a dog in one of the sewers of Rome." I marvel at this statement: "In the midst of the siege of Jerusalem." Let us hear Josephus on this point: "Now as Vespasian was returned to Cesarea, and was getting ready with all his army to march directly to Jerusalem, he was informed of Nero's death, after he had reigned thirteen years and eight days. ... Wherefore Vespasian put off at first his expedition against Jerusalem, and stood waiting whither the empire would be transferred after the death of Nero."-Wars of the Jews, b. 4, ch. 9. From the death of Nero to the accession of Vespasian to the Roman throne there were three emperors, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. Vespasian waited from Nero's death in A.D. 68 to the spring of A.D. 70, when he was proclaimed emperor before the siege of Jerusalem was commenced. The conquests of the cities and villages of Judea were under Nero; but the siege, and overthrow of Jerusalem was under Vespasian, two years after Nero's death. To "die like a dog," as Dr. Warren says Nero did, and to be "cast alive into a lake of fire, |