tery deluge, which is St. Peter's own topic of comparison, may well be supposed to have his ways of saving alive a remnant now again out of the deluge of fire. The second is that the passage offers in my judgment still greater difficulties to those who oppose the premillenarian view than to those who adopt it. For by St. Peter's words, We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, &c," we are almost absolutely forced to identify that new heaven and earth with the new heaven and earth promised in Isa. lxv, lxvi; (a promise probably alluded to also by Christ, Matt. xix. 28;) in the description of which Jews and Gentiles, distinct the one from the other, figure as the inhabitants, and its city the earthly Jerusalem.-Further, with reference to another objection urged alike from Dan. xii. 2,1 and John v. 28, as if indicating necessarily that the resurrection and judgment of the just and of the unjust are to take place at one and the same time, I must beg to make the suggestions following:-as regards Daniel, that it is doubtful whether the Hebrew original of the passage makes any assertion at all about the resurrection of the unjust; and, as regards St. John, that no

1 "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake; some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine," &c.

2 "The hour cometh when all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil to the resurrection of condemnation."

3 Let me refer on this very important but little considered point, to Professor Bush's Valley of Vision, p. 50. "The awaking is evidently predicated of the many, and not of the whole. Consequently the these,' in the one case, must be understood of the class that awakes; the 'those,' in the other, of that which remains asleep. There is no ground whatever for the idea that the latter awake to shame and contempt. It is simply because they do not awake, that this character pertains to them. The error in our translation has arisen from rendering the pronouns, 'some,' 'and some,' instead of 'these,' 'and those, referring respectively to subjects previously indicated. By the former method a distinction is constituted between those who are awakened; by the latter between those who are, and those who are not awakened." He illustrates his argument by the three following examples; the full force of which, however, he says, none but the Hebraist can understand: Josh. viii. 22; "So they were in the midst of Israel; these on this side, and those on that side:" 2 Sam. ii. 13; “ And they sate down; these on the one side of the pool, and those on the other side of the pool: " 1 Kings xx. 29; And they pitched, these over against those, seven days."

It appears to me, though from my want of skill in Hebrew a very imperfect

such inference can be justly drawn from the circumstance of their being in that passage from him conjointly mentioned. Independent of these considerations,' it is well known, and has been often observed, that the events of the two advents of Christ are often blended together in prophecy 2 and if here the resurrections of the just and unjust are mentioned together, there are many other passages in which the resurrection of the just is spoken of separately; indeed as if constituting the resurrection. distinctively. So that if from these two passages in John and Daniel, considered by themselves, we might reasonably have expected that the resurrections of the just and unjust would synchronize, we might just as reasonably perhaps have anticipated from the others, considered alone, that the resurrection of the just was one peculiar, and would take place separately. Which being the case, and the connexion of distant times, as I have said, not unusual in prophecy, it would, I think, be very unsound reasoning to infer a refutation of the literal theory of the First Resurrection, (especially evidenced as it is,) from this inconclusive passage in St. John, and the yet more inconclusive passage in Daniel.+

judge, that these examples are not so decisive on the point as Professor Bush seems to think. But if the meaning of the Hebrew in any such passage justify his view of the text in Daniel, I need not say how important it is.-Let me beg the reader to refer on this point to the quotation from the learned Rabbi Saadiah Gaon in my Note p. 207 suprà. He seems to have taken the passage in just the same sense as Professor Bush. Compare Macknight on 1 Thess. iv. 16.

In the verse just preceding, "The hour is coming when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God," there is meant by the hour, the whole long period of the Christian dispensation, though beginning from his first advent and ministry. 2 E. g. in the notable passage of Isa. Ixi. 1, 2, "To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; quoted but in part by Christ in his opening Sermon at Nazareth. Also Malachi iv. &c. &c.

"

3 E. g. Luke xiv. 14; "Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just:" Luke xx. 36; "They are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection:" Acts xxiii. 6; "Of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." Again on 1 Cor. xv. 51, Whitby observes justly that throughout the chapter, as all expositors ancient and modern have remarked, the apostle by the resurrection, which is his subject, means simply the resurrection of the just. Neither in this chapter, (e. g. verse 52, In a moment the dead shall be raised incorruptible," &c.) nor in 1 Thess. iv. 16, ("For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we which are alive," &c.) is a word said to suggest that there would be accomplished at the same time the resurrection of the wicked. And these (especially 1 Cor. xv) are the fullest prophecies existing on the subject.

4 Let me just add that were the two resurrections mentioned in Daniel syn

CHAPTER VI.

SUGGESTIONS AS TO THE PROBABLE ORDER OF EVENTS INTRODUCTORY TO, AND STATE OF THINGS DURING, AND CONSEQUENT ON, THE MILLENNIUM.

In the Apocalyptic prophecy of chap. xix, the scene depicted as immediately preceding Christ's destruction of Antichrist, and the introduction of the Millennium, was that of a battle-field, to which both Antichrist and his confederate powers had been gathered, under the invisible guidance of three associated spirits of evil; there to conflict against Christ's cause, religion, and people.' It also appeared, from other parallel prophetic notices given to St. John, that the voice of gospel-preaching wonder fully revived on the sounding of the seventh Trumpet, and the voice of protest against Antichrist's deadly errors; and the warning-voice finally of a tremendous destruction by fire impending on Babylon and Antichrist, would be going forth previously far and wide; and make itself heard not in professing Christendom only, but throughout the whole habitable world.2 And this seemed also to be foreshown, that the destruction of Babylon by fire would precede (by however short an interval) that of Antichrist.-There was intimation given further, in the prefiguration of Babylon's overthrow, of the state of mind that would just at that time characterize its inhabitants, as if one of complete carnal security :3 an intimation well agreeing with Ezekiel's notice of the state of those in the isles of Chittim on whom destruction by fire would fall, nearly cotemporarily with that of his antichristian Gog and Magog, viz. as "dwelling carelessly

chronous, the statement in verse 13 about Daniel himself rising to his inheritance at the end of the 1335 days, would fix at that epoch the resurrections of both. 1 See pp. 88, 114 suprà. 2 See pp. 72, &c, suprà.

3 Apoc. xviii. 7 ; "She saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow: therefore shall her plagues come in one day : " &c.

2

in the isles; " and agreeing also exactly with Christ's description of the state of those on whom judgment will fall at his coming: "As it was in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." To which St. Peter adds the further prophecy of open scepticism prevailing to a vast extent, on the subject of the nearness of Christ's advent: "There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming; for since the fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. -It would seem therefore that in this state of things and of feeling in professing Christendom, all suddenly and unexpectedly, and conspicuous over the world as the lightning that shineth from the East even to the West,*

1 Ezek. xxxix. 6.

2 Matt. xxiv. 38, 39.

3

$ 3 Peter iii. 3, 4: a passage already alluded to, and argued from, in reference to the pre-millennial question, at p. 197.

4 Matt. xxiv. 27, Luke xvii. 24.-In the context of this latter passage, verses 20, 21, there is an expression of our Lord which has, I believe, been universally misconstrued, and used in consequence to inculcate quite incorrect ideas of Christ's coming and kingdom.-I therefore think it may be well to subjoin a criticism on the text, originally published by me in the Investigator.

"Being demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, He answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, Lo here; or Lo there! for behold the kingdom of God is within you."

Ουκ έρχεται ἡ βασιλεια του Θεου μετα παρατηρήσεως. Ουδε ερουσιν, Ιδου ώδε η, Ιδου εκεί ιδου γαρ ἡ βασιλεια του Θεου εντος ύμων εσιν.

1. According to the usual interpretation of this passage, it was our Lord's meaning that the kingdom of God was simply a spiritual kingdom;-its seat the heart, its rise and progress therein indiscernible.

To this there occurs the decisive objection, that the observation was addresssd, not to his disciples, but to the Pharisees ;-i. e. to his enemies.

Moreover, it is obvious, from our Lord's connecting the subject in the verses following, with his own second advent, that He was answering the Pharisees ac cording to the intent of their question; and speaking not of his preparatory spiritual reign over men's hearts, but of its glorious establishment on earth, such as will be seen at his appearing and kingdom.

2. Sensible of the force of the first objection noted, Beza, Grotius, Doddridge, Whitby, Macknight, and others have adopted the marginal reading. Instead of within you, they translate the evTos vμwv among you: and explain the passage of the Messiah's kingdom already beginning to be preached among the Jews.

But to this the objection remains in full force, that the subject-matter of discourse was the kingdom as it is to be manifested at Christ's second advent. Besides which, it has been reasonably objected "that the EVTOS never has the

the second advent and appearing of Christ will take place that, at the accompanying voice of the archangel

meaning they give it in Scripture, and scarce ever in the Greek writers." (Scott.)

Nor, again can we well say of our Lord's ministry, by which He was then laying the foundations of his kingdom, that it "came not with observation.” Was it not by observation, and very careful observation too, of the evidences which Jesus offered, that men were then to be convinced that he was the Christ? Were they not to search the old prophecies with this view, and compare them with his life, character, doctrine, miracles? Were they not to look into, and so discern, the signs of the times?—It was unquestionably with observation that its foundations were then laid.

3. My persuasion is that the clause we speak of has been hitherto totally misapprehended. It has been taken and commented on, as a part of Christ's address to the bystanders. I conceive that it should be connected with the "Lo here! or, Lo there!" as a part of the exclamation of those men whom Christ speaks of, as thus reporting to one another respecting the Messiah's conjectured advent.

Then the sense will be; "Neither shall there be anything so partially revealed, or secret, in the ultimate establishment and revelation of God's kingdom, as that there shall be occasion for any doubtful rumours on the subject: as "Look here! for the King is to be found within our city! or, Look there; for the King is within your city!"—"For as the lightning that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven shineth even unto the other, so shall also the Son of Man be in his day!" It must be remembered that the Jews had their minds full of prophecies that spoke of the Messiah fixing his kingdom within their borders; though in what part of Judea He might first manifest himself, whether in Bethlehem, Jerusalem, or Galilee, they might doubt; each of those districts being mentioned in that connexion in prophecy. Hence the current but mistaken notion, that when He came to take the kingdom, He might possibly be concealed for a while, and have to be inquired after and sought out.

What can be more simple than this interpretation? What more agreeable to the general tenor of prophecy? What more in accordance with Christ's subsequent remarks on this occasion; or the "cometh not with observation," of the verse preceding?

I cannot think with Abdiel, that Christ's glorious advent and kingdom may be said to come with observation, because signs of its being neur will be observable. The signs of proximity are one thing; the coming or manifestation quite another. Observation is that fixed and attentive regard which we can direct to those objects and events only, that remain a certain length of time before the eyes: and to such objects and events it is then most specially directed, when they have enough of obscurity about them to leave us in a degree of doubt respecting their true character, and enough of interest to excite an anxious eagerness for the development. But so it will not be with the coming and manifestation of the King and kingdom. It will not come with observation. It will be instantaneous and irresistible in its light of evidence, as the flash of lightning.

The rendering of Evros iμwv, it will be observed, is within you, in the sense of within your city, or country. This is in strict conformity with its frequent use by the Greek writers, as designating a position within some local division or boundary. Now as it is common in topographical descriptions to put the occupiers of a locality for the locality itself, after certain prepositions such as ev, ek, dia, &c, so are there instances of the same figure of speech after adverbs such as For example:

εντος.

Ι. Ω. 199. Κεις εναι επί νηας εσω σρατον ευρύν Αχαιων within the locality of their encampment.

Abdiel's Essays, Investigator, Vol. i. p. 35.

+ So, Еk Mavτinvwv peer (Herod.) said of a river flowing from Mantiene: Пap' Αθηναίες, ὡς βεβαιον ον, ανεχωρεν Thucyd. i. 2 : &c.

VOL. IV.