began to compare them with what was written in the Revelation concerning the new Jerusalem, the new heavens, and the new earth, and the bride of the Lamb made ready for a marriage with him; and finding that this bride was thought by the best commentators to be the Jewish church and nation (?), represented formerly by our Saviour as not having on her wedding garment that the new heavens and the new earth were things promised to the Jews; that the new Jerusalem was described in the very words of the prophets and Jewish writers, speaking of that glorious state they expected towards the end of the world, I was strongly inclined to conceive this glorious conversion, which St. Paul saith shall be, even to the Gentile, life from the dead, and which is by the prophets frequently represented as the new birth, revivescence, resurrection of their dead church and nation by the Messiah, so that death shall be no more, MIGHT BE the very resurrection intended by St. John; and the flourishing condition and union both of the Jewish and the Gentile Church thus raised from the dead, and so continuing in peace and plenty, and a great increase of knowledge and of righteousness, and a return of the primitive purity of doctrine and manners, MIGHT BE the reign of the saints on earth a thousand years, which the apostle mentions; this naturally led me to a discourse of the Millennium, WHICH BEING FRAMED ACCORDING TO THIS NEW HYPOTHESIS, I shall now offer it to the consideration of the learned." "Either, then, Dr. Whitby, who thus claimed to be the author of the theory, was greatly mistaken, and other investigators of the subject have been in like manner mistaken, or this Whitbyan Millennium, described in our extracts is a NOVELTY-an innovation upon the preceding faith and teachings of the Church-with no show whatever of historic orthodoxy. Its distinguished propounder gave it originally as a mere "HYPOTHESIS,' and a "NEW" one; as an unproved and yet unapproved thesis, never before broached. "We are surprised, that a thing of such origin should have crept into such prominence and formidableness in the thinking, preaching, praying, and joyous hoping of Christian people. Whitby died on the 24th day of March, 1726. Two hundred years ago this now largely cherished doctrine existed only in one man's mind, who gave it as a new thing-as a compromise between the ancient Chiliasts and their modern opponents-as the possible result of a new method of dealing with otherwise plain prophecies! To-day, alas! it is proclaimed on the platform, preached from the pulpit, set down in systems of Dogmatics, and defended in Christian Polemics, as a vital part of the Church's faith, the indispensable motive to evangelic zeal, and the grandest hope of the world! Fortunately, it has not yet found acknowledgment in any of the Church's Creeds; and, for the sake of truth and the safety of men, we pray that it never may. But, it is amazing, that with such a history, it should have advanced to such a dignity. And yet, perhaps, we ought not to wonder. When we consider how the fancies, follies, and inventions of men crept into and swayed the Church under the papacy, wrenched it from its apostolic foundations in the very * See his Treatise on the true Millennium, appended to last vol. of Patrick, Lowth, Whitby and Lowman's Commentary and Paraphrase on the Old and New Test. p. 1118. DEC. 1, 1868. root matters of salvation, filled the house of God with the abominations of a disguised paganism, and, in the course of a few centuries, transmuted the professed body of Christ into Antichrist; we should hardly be startled at what has happened with "THIS NEW HYPOTHESIS.” Not one of the papistic errors by which the faith of the Church was overlaid before the Reformation, was in any manner contained in the creeds to which Rome professed to adhere. The history of every one of them presents a striking parallel to the history of the Whitbyan Millennium. There was in no instance less plausibility in their favour than in this "hypothesis," which has so captivated and debauched the Protestant Churches. One by one Rome's ruinous heresies came in alongside of the true and saving doctrines of the gospel. First, they were brought forward as NEW HYPOTHESES, which pleased and flattered the natural man, won the admiration of some enthusiastic imaginations, and then gradually settled themselves around the Christian heart, as if they belonged to the one only faith. And so it was with this Whitbyan dream. It is an invention of man, or, as Luther boldly says, OF THE DEVIL. It was not at all known in the Church for the first sixteen hundred years of its existence. Its principal inventor put it forth as a new theory. But it fell in with the rationalising fondnesses of human nature. It readily and delightfully adapted itself to the heathen and worldly philosophies of human perfectibility and self-redemption. It furnished splendid materials for pleasing poetic oratory on high Christian occasions. It seemed to be exactly reflected in the humanitarianism, liberal advancement, materialistic improvements, popular emancipation, educational progress, and extension of civil freedom, which have so specially marked the last century. an attractive thing for the carnal imagination to dwell on. And so it made friends, won upon men imperceptibly to themselves, clothed itself in prophetic images which it has stolen from their proper subjects, and found lodgment in the sanctuary of the Lord, where it has no more right to be than the Romish dogma of the Immaculate Conception." It is Correspondence. Why did Jesus use, concerning his return, a word which did not imply motion ?" Why speak of his Presence* and not of his Coming?" There were Greek words which would have expressed his motion towards the earth; they are used in the New Testament.† Ón further enquiry, it appeared, that the word "Presence occurs not in any of the gospels save Matthew's; and there only in the prophecy on the Mount of Olives. Might not the context of that great prediction, then, give the solution + Ελευσις οι Εισοδος. THE RAINBOW." DEC. 1, 1868. of the difficulty? I looked and there 1 found it! It was by degrees only, in proportion as the unbelief of Israel appeared, that Jesus unfolded the tidings of his departure from earth, and of his return to it. His first notice of it was given, when he was asked the reason why his disciples did not fast when those of the Pharisees and of John did. He made reply, that fasting was not suitable to his disciples then; but it would be byand-by, because the Bridegroom should be taken from them. Matt. ix. 15. When he sent out his twelve apostles to the cities of Israel, he told them they would not have perfected them before he came. Matt. x. 23. In Mattew xvi. our Lord draws out of his messengers' mouths the witness that Israel knew him not. He then asks of them what were their own thoughts about him? Peter then confessed Jesus as the Son of God-the God of life. The Lord sees in this the principle of his own resurrection, and of his people's (v. 18), and foretells the millennial kingdom which is to follow thereon. (v. 19). He gives up thenceforward the Jewish title of "Messiah," and takes the wider one of "Son of Man," which however is closely connected with his millennial kingdom. Dan. vii., Psa. viii. But there the Saviour speaks openly of his death, which was of course implied in the tidings of resurrection. He must be killed at Jerusalem, and raised the third day. Peter resists the testimony and is rebuked. Jesus further expounds the bearing of his death on his disciples. If the Head is to suffer, so also are the members to endure. Such suffering may, indeed, be eluded, but it will be loss in the day of the coming kingdom and reward. Then was given the promise, that some of those present should not die before they saw the Son of man coming in his kingdom; and accordingly, on seventh day after, Jesus exhibits to three of his apostles his own glory, and that of the Father, on a high mountain apart by night. The same chapter renews our Lord's prediction of his being slain (xvii. 22). For the third time the Saviour utters it as he moves towards Jerusalem for the last passover (xx. 18, 19, 22, 28). For the last time Jesus presents himself to teach in the temple, and after the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the lawyer have tempted him, he bursts out in eight indignant 66 woes" against the leaders of his people. They thought and said, that they were better than their fathers, but it was a mistake. They should be tested, and the falsehood of their notion practically demonstrated. Christ would send them apostles and prophets, and some they would beat, some they would kill, some they would crucify, as they did the Lord. Then would commence the dark "days of vengeance "—days yet to be— of which the prophets are so full. Jerusalem was the murderess city, over which the Son of God had yearned in vain. He was now about to leave the temple, and his departure from it would leave it only" the house of the Jews,” not the Lord's house; while forsaken by its God, it could not but be desolate. Matt. xxiii. 38. And while thus deserted by its God, the Romans would come and tear it stone from stone (xxiv. 1. 2). Moreover, even when rebuilt by Israel in unbelief, as it soon will be, it will still be desolate on its top will be set "the abomination of desolation," the token visible of its being polluted by a just God. Then the Antichrist, the Great Desolator, will arise, and sit in the deserted temple, defying Jehovah. (2 Thess. ii.) After predicting its desertion, Jesus adds, 66 For I say unto you, YE SHALL NOT SEE ME TILL ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." This implies that Jesus will be present before he is seen. Here is the origin of the idea of the Secret Presence. Hence, too, there are two different words which speak of the Saviour's return; beside the word "Presence," it is described as being the taking off a veil," and a "manifestation." When once the Jews confess him as the sent of God, the vail of cloud shall be taken off. Accordingly, at the close of the series of the signs given of his return to his people Israel, after the mourning of the tribes, we read, "They shall see the Son 572 of man coming." The disciples then understood our Lord's implication, that he would be secretly present before he revealed himself; and this accordingly is taken up by their questions-" When shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy Presence, and of the end of the Age ?" Why should there be a sign of it, if it were visible from the first? We want no token of the existence of that which we see. Moreover, it is deeply interesting to observe, that our Redeemer had prepared the minds of some of his apostles at once to understand his allusion. The secret of his Presence, which is to usher in the kingdom, had already been shown to Peter, James, and John, on the Mount of Transfiguration. Now, it was these same three who put to our Lord the questions which have just been stated; and the force of their middle question may be thus expressed: "If you are to be present, but in secret, how shall we know it? What visible token will be the signal to us ?" Now, there are two aspects of the Presence:-an inside one and an outside one; for our Lord's disciples at the Transfiguration were thus divided. To Jesus' Jewish disciples-yet to arise after the Church has lost its standing-Jesus gives as his Secret Presence the taking of one the sign of disciple to himself, unseen by supernatural agency, and the leaving another on the earth. To the Jews in general, who shall repent at the close of the Great Tribulation, is granted the sign of the luminous cross in the sky; at which they remember their sin and repent. At least that is my interpretation of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven." If any do not like it they may suggest a better. But the interior of the Presence is disclosed to the saints of the Church. The watching ones of the Churches will be caught on high like Enoch, like Elijah, without tasting death. To those outside the Presence, Jesus gives a regular series of signs. It is only after our Lord begins the second part of the prophecy-the seven parables DEC. 1, 1865. that he commences warning his disciples to watch, because of ignorance of the coming of " your Lord." The Jews own not Jesus Lord-only the Church does. But for the Saviour's word of warning, given in verses 23-27, this idea of the Secret Presence would be most mischievous to Israel; for Satan will make use of it to his own ends. When Jesus is secretly present on high, and the Days of Destruction are begun on earth, followers of false Christs will spring up, who will undertake to point out to the Jew the secret place wherein Messiah is at that moment concealed. "Come to the desert! He is there!" or," He has entered the temple! Come, and I will point him out to you!" But no! This testimony is false; Jesus will not show himself first in the temple'tis polluted. Its uncleanness will not be done away till Antichrist has been paralysed with the manifestation of the Presence and destroyed; the desolation of it cannot end till Christ, as foretold, enters it in his glory. Ezek. xliii. The Lord's antidote then against this deceit is a striking one. He assures his disciples, that when he returns none shall point him out on earth; but he himself will reveal himself in an instant by the brightness of his glory. He will be seen seated on a cloud in the sky, even as the lightning, long secretly present in the cloud, comes forth out of it in glory. Matt. xxiv. 27. It is remarkable that, as Peter, James, and John were the three that saw the the Presence on the Mount, so threePeter, James, and John, in their epistles speak of the Presence; but the James of the epistle is not the James of the Gospel. Peter speaks most upon this topic; his second epistle is a comment on Matthew xvi. & xvii. The vision on the Mount was God's evidence given to his Church that Jesus is personally to return for his kingdom. The same power that manifested the glory then, can in a moment restore it. Was it secret then? Did Jesus require the again. And the apostle enlarges on three to keep it a secret? So will it be *Andrew is added beside, which doubtless has its lesson. confine myself to the direct line before me. Mark xiii. 3. But I THE RAINBOW. Dec. 1, 1868. the spiritual state of the disciple, which is necessary to enable him to enter it with joy. Paul is the only other writer who in his epistles names it, and he does so more than all the others put together; for to Paul the Secret Presence had been revealed, not by night, but at midday; not apart, but when in close contact with the ungodly. He beheld it not as a thing of earth, but a glory flashing from the sky. 66 Is it not remarkable that a "Real Presence," not named in the New Testament, has in the minds of Rome and the Ritualists supplanted the true Presence," of which God speaks so oft? Their Presence is the wafer at the Lord's Supper. It is pointed out and lifted up for the adoration of disciples in a chamber of earth, but that is not God's testimony: against such a Presence Jesus bears witness. The true Presence is one which no man can feign or forge-" The Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ "-on which en In AN IMPORTANT QUESTION. DEAR BROTHER.-In the November number of the Rainbow there is a brief notice to your correspondent Y. M., in which you say, " Believers looking for the Lord will undoubtedly escape the great tribulation under Antichrist. deed, Antichrist will not be revealed until they are removed." Comfortable doctrine this; but are you quite sure it is taught by the word of God? You have ably set forth the responsibility of Christian teachers, and I am very certain that you would not willingly yourself teach a doctrine the truth of which is doubtful, nor go beyond that which is written howbeit, the above two lines contain the whole doctrine of the "Secret rapture of the saints," as first taught by the late eccentric Rev. Edward Irving; and as you ought to prove "all things," will you (if you can do so) kindly point out any passage of sacred Scripture which distinctly confirms your words, for I cannot find a trace of the doctrine in the New Testament. If erroneous, it may not certainly be dangerous to the present generation of Christians, because they will all have fallen asleep before the last days set in ; but how will it affect those who shall come after us? Should it become universally received, and it should prove after all, that fiery trial will begin at the house of God (1 Peter iv. 12), will not the believers of future days (who look not for tribulation) think it some strange thing," and some of them be tempted to say, "My Lord delayeth his coming"? 66 Where is the momentous doctrine taught in sacred Scripture, that in OUR future, the Church has nothing more to fear from the malice of Satan and his agents? Our Lord has left this on record, "I came not to send peace, but a sword;"" In the world ye shall have tribulation ;" and, "We must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." Acts xiv. 22. Who are the saints with whom Antichrist" will make war (Rev. xiii. 7), and overcome"? Are they not those whose names are "written in the LAMB's book of life"? Strangely, it is taught that these are not Christians at all, but the elect Jewish remnant! as if the whole earthly destiny of Israel had not already been exhaustively written in the sacred Scriptures of the Old Testament, and the New Testament given especially to the Christian Church. Similarly so is our Lord's parable (Matt. xxiv.) of the budding fig-tree treated. Oh! it is said, that is not for us who are believers; it concerns only "the Jewish remnant" whom we shall leave behind when we are silently translated; and they only will suffer the coming trials! But how can this prophetic parable be of any use to Jews, whether elect or not, for they despise it, all of them; and will neither read the New Testament (they spit on it) nor listen to the gospel. The elect remnant of Jews will not be converted to Christ, neither believe, till they see him "coming in the clouds " (Rev. i.)," and see him standing on the Mount of Olives." Zech. xii.-xiv. The fond reverie that believers will be removed" before Antichrist is revealed," is assuredly not in accordance |