Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

in that atoning Saviour the only condition of salvation? Is not the Holy Ghost the sole agent who brings man to the obedience of the truth, and transforms him into the Divine image? Is not the sacrament of the Last Supper the only rite that commemorates, "shows forth the Lord's death, until He comes" to be glorified in His saints? Can these means be abrogated? We have no promise of another revelation; not the shadow of evidence that another remedial process will be established. When Christ cometh in His glory, it will plainly be to reward the righteous and to punish the wicked. Mr. Waldegrave, in his fourth Lecture, writes with considerable force and earnestness on the dangers that attend the Pre-millenarian scheme, as it bears upon the Divine method of man's salvation. We have only room for the conclusions to which he arrives as the result of an investigation of this important topic.

"If such be the necessary effect of Christ's personal coming, upon His sacraments, His word, and His intercession, we must conclude, (on the hypothesis of a future millennium,)

"Either that for ten centuries before the final judgment no sinners will be brought to God:

:

"Or, that a new set of appliances for the salvation of sinners of mankind will be provided:

66

66

:

'Or, that Christ will not personally come till that millennium is over. 'Against the first of these alternatives, you will all most righteously protest.

"For adopting the second, Scripture......gives no warrant what

soever.

"We must, therefore, accept the third alternative, and acknowledge that Christ will not personally come, till that millennium is over."Pp. 160, 161.

Pre-millenarianism contradicts those Scriptures which plainly declare that, when Christ cometh, His Church will be fully perfected. Mr. Waldegrave employs his fourth Lecture in the discussion of this topic. The question he thus states: "Can Christ come personally, when any members of the mystical Church remain to be gathered in?" According to the Premillennial system, he affirms, that Christ "certainly must. For it is, on that hypothesis, not until after His glorious appearing that the great body of the saved shall be brought to God. Our text (Eph. v. 25-27) on the other hand, in conjunction with many others, seems to me to say, that the heavens must retain Jesus until the whole number of His elect is accomplished." In a foot-note he refers to Dr. Brown's consideration of the following texts: 1 Cor. xv. 23; Eph. v. 25-27; 2 Thess. 1, 10; Jude 24; Col. i. 21, 22; 1 Thess. iii. 13.

"I think it impossible," (says Dr. Brown,) "to resist the combined force of these passages. One broad magnificent conception pervades them all.

Pre-millenarianism contradictory to Scripture.

497

"The absolute completeness of the Church at Christ's coming; "The spotless purity in which it will then be presented as a chaste virgin to Christ;

"The resplendent glory in which, as the Bride, the Lamb's wife, she shall then be adorned for her husband;

"The praise which will redound from such a spectacle to the Redeemer Himself;

"The rapturous admiration of Him which it will kindle; and "The ineffable complacency with which the whole will be regarded by God, even our Father."-Second Advent, part i., chap. ii., p. 57.

Nearly related to the completion of the Church when Christ comes, is the plainly revealed truth that the entire Churchthose who are raised and those who are alive at Christ's coming-will be glorified, and their mortality swallowed up of life. "The same passages," says Dr. Brown, "which show the completeness of the Church at Christ's coming, prove also their simultaneous appearance in the glory of their resurrection." Premillenarianism contradicts this.

Again: Pre-millenarianism affirms that Christ is not yet seated upon His throne, and will not take possession of His kingdom, until His second advent. This contradicts those plain declarations in the Acts of the Apostles and in some of the Epistles, which affirm that Christ is enthroned in His Sovereignty, has commenced His glorious kingdom, and that He is carrying it on to its completion, and at His coming again He will deliver it up to the Father. (Acts ii. 29-36; iii. 13-15; iv. 26-28; v. 29– 31; 1 Cor. xv. 24-26; Col. i. 13; Heb. i. 3; x. 12, 13.)

Again: Pre-millenarianism is at variance with the simultaneous resurrection of the righteous and wicked when Christ cometh, and the universality of that judgment which is said immediately to accompany it. "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the 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 v. 28, 29.) What can be the obvious meaning of this language? Will not the same hour witness the resurrection of the good and the bad? Will not the same voice be heard by all? Would those to whom our Lord addressed Himself understand by this language, that a full thousand years were to elapse between the resurrection of the righteous and the wicked? Would our Lord ever utter such a dark saying,-a saying which, according to the Premillennial theory, they could not understand? (See also Matt. xxv. 31-46; Acts xvii. 31; Rom. ii. 5-16; 2 Cor. v. 9-11; 2 Thess. i. 6-10; 2 Tim. iv. 1; Rev. xx. 11-15.)

Again Pre-millenarianism is contrary to the plain assertion of the Apostle Peter, (2 Peter iii. 7-13,) that when Christ cometh, the present world shall terminate; that the heavens and

[blocks in formation]

the earth that now are shall be consumed by fire, and succeeded by the creation of new heavens and a new earth. We have not time to dwell on the various endeavours that have been made to escape from this difficulty. It is, of itself, positively fatal to the Pre-millenarian scheme.*

Again: Pre-millenarianism contravenes the many Scripture statements that the saints glorified with Christ at His coming, are so absolutely secure in the possession of their perfected happiness, as to be beyond the power of attack from their adversaries. No conflicts can follow their enthronement in complete bliss.

Other truths contained in the New Testament might be adduced which the Pre-millenarian scheme fairly contradicts, but we forbear to mention them. Enough, and more than enough, has been said to prove that, according to the plain and obvious teaching of our Lord and His Apostles, His literal coming will not precede, but follow, the millennial reign of righteousness and peace which the Church generally anticipates.

We must now take leave of the respected author of the Bampton Lectures that have come under our notice, thanking him for his valuable contribution to our religious literature. The subject is, in itself, not only deeply interesting, but also interwoven with the whole Christian economy; and one which no Christian can study, under the guidance of the word and Spirit of God, without becoming a wiser and a happier person.

"The hypothesis of the literal Pre-millenniau second advent, as its favourers well know, is incapable of establishment, save through the medium of an unwarrantable tampering with the prophecy of St. Peter, relative to that final deluge of fire which will UNIVERSALLY overwhelm our earth, even as it has already been UNIVERSALLY Overwhelmed by a deluge of water, which is avowedly exhibited as a parallel event.

"All agree, that the prophecy in question, as indeed itself declares, respects the literal Day of Judgment at the time of the literal second advent.

But if this be the case, and yet if the predicted conflagration be UNIVERSAL, then, in the first place, there will plainly be no possibility of the prosperous and permanent restoration of the converted Jews to their own familiar land of Palestine, agreeably to the repeated declarations of prophecy, because that land will have been destroyed in the UNIVERSAL Conflagration; and, in the second place, as little possibility will there be of the formation of a final confederacy of the wicked in the four quarters of our present earth, because, in the same UNIVERSAL conflagration, all the wicked will have perished, and none will be left save the saints.

"Hence, unless the prophecy of St. Peter be so dealt with as gratuitously to change UNIVERSAL into PARTIAL, (that is to say, the whole globe into its northern hemisphere only, as with Mr. Mede; or the whole globe into nothing more than the platform of the Roman Empire, as with Mr. Elliot,) the dogma of a Pre-millennian second advent will plainly be altogether untenable."-Faber's Many Mansions, Preface, pp. xxiii., xxiv.

[blocks in formation]

ART. X.-1. Russia on the Black Sea and Sea of Azof. By H. D. SEYMOUR, M.P. Second Edition. London: John Murray. 1855.

2. Journal of a Residence in Circassia during the Years 1837, 1838, and 1839. By JAMES STANISLAUS BELL. Two Vols. London: Edward Moxon. 1849.

3. The War and the Negotiations. Two Speeches by the RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P. for the University of Oxford, in the House of Commons, on May 24th, 1855, and August 3rd, 1855. Published at the Empire Office, 145, Fleet Street; and sold by all Booksellers. 1855.

4. A Letter addressed by MR. COBDEN to the Editor of the "Leeds Mercury," October 31st, 1855.

5. Travels in the Trans-Caucasian Provinces of Russia, and along the Southern Shore of the Lakes of Van Urumiah, in the Autumn and Winter of 1837. By CAPTAIN R. WILBRAHAM. London: John Murray. 1839.

THE campaign of 1855 being now ended, the cessation of hostilities gives us an opportunity of attempting a résumé of the progress made, and of the prospects before us. The past is

plain, the future is in obscurity: the one period is open to observation, to regret or approval, as the case may be; the other to speculation and hope. The past is history; the future is destined to become so by the course of events. Without anticipating our own future remarks, or pretending to be the exponents of the opinions of others, we think that, considered as a whole, Englishmen have good reason to be satisfied with the posture of affairs, and certainly to be thankful to Divine Providence.

We perceive that it is affirmed by some of the Peace party, that the war is not popular either in France or England. We have no objection to accept this as true, but our inference will be very different from that of the parties in question. In the present state of public opinion, of religious enlightenment, of social advancement, of industrial enterprise, and of political justice, we doubt whether, in the vulgar sense of the expression, any war could be popular. We do not live in the Middle Ages; our intellectual and social state is not that of the Russian serfdom; we have not been educated in the camp; our aspirations have not been directed to visions of conquest; and we have long ceased to risk the national happiness by enslaving our neighbours. But what then? Are there not such things as a conscious sense of duty? as social obligations to other nations? as political forethought and prudence? and as courage to anticipate future evils by present sacrifices? It is perfectly true that the war is not popular as a gewgaw and show, as a revel

and a pastime; but it is not true that its necessity and obligation are not felt and acknowledged by the most thoughtful and even religious people of the country. Indeed, this unpopularity of war, per se, in connexion with the deliberate resolve of the nation to maintain its present hostile attitude, is the best assurance we can have at once of the purity and the urgency of our motives. Only a sense of duty and necessity could make this war possible on the part of England.

Had not the Russian aggression outraged the living, immutable, and eternal laws of Providence so manifestly developed in man, in society, and in nature,-now, we trust, apprehended by Englishmen in a much higher degree than in the past periods of our history,-had it not been for this assault on the only principles on which society can possibly rest, it would have been impossible for any Ministry to drag this country into war. It was not merely a breach of treaties, and an outrage on the Turk, that the people of this country saw in the attitude assumed by Russia, but a much more imperative motive to resistance; namely, the violation of all the laws on which society, religion, and freedom must repose, if found at all on earth. No doubt there was much more popularity in a war, in the times of chivalry, brought about by a quarrel of true gallant Knights about a fair lady,—or in a Crusade, got up by monks and Priests, to massacre some horde of harmless heretics,-than is now manifested in this country. But when the consciences and convictions of an enlightened people are enlisted on the side of a contest such as is now going on, then we have, as much as is possible in such a case, a war of principle, and, we may add, of policy, in the largest and best sense of the term.

This is the character of the present struggle. It is not on our side a war of passion, and therefore it may not be fantastically popular; but, if we mistake not the temper of our countrymen, it is even much more than this; it is the war of their convictions, their moral sense, and their will. And they are right in placing the contest and their own obligations on this solid foundation. The war, being thus evidently a war of principle, has, as we believe, engaged the national mind, and elicited a fixed and resolute purpose to persevere, till safe and equitable terms of peace can be obtained. What are the principles at issue? As we have seen above, all the laws of morality, of justice, of religion, are involved. But, besides this, the social progress of the human race, the freedom of nations, the political rights of society, and the hopes and prospects of civilization, are equally at stake. For many years the whole business of Russia has been to weave a web to enslave all nations.

The whole of the East has long been entangled in her meshes, and the fall of Turkey would give her the absolute command of every country as far as the Indies. The possession of Poland,

« ZurückWeiter »