of Judah and Israel, were fulfilled by the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity.

II. That which alleges that all the prophecies in reference to the second coming of Christ and the establishment of His kingdom in the world, were verified by the judgments inflicted upon the Jewish nation and polity, at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans under Titus, in a. D. 70.

III. That which alleges that the same prophecies were verified in the overthrow of Paganism and the establishment of Christianity in the Roman empire, under Constantine the Great, in a. D. 323. And,

IV. That which alleges that the prophecies relating to the kingdom of heaven and the reign of Christ on earth, refer to the first introduction and establishment of the Christian Church; the dispensation of which is to merge into, form a part, and end at the close of, the millennial state. It also makes the Christian Church identical with "the kingdom of heaven," "of God," of "the Son of Man," etc.; and affirms Christ's spiritual reign in and over it from the beginning to the end of time at the close of the millennial era: when, they say, Christ will personally appear at the judgment-day, and simultaneously raise from the dead both the righteous and the wicked, when the former shall be rewarded and the latter punished, etc.

Now, we claim to have candidly weighed both the scriptural arguments and facts adduced in the support of these several theories (with the exception of that part of the Fourth Theory which alleges the spiritual reign of Christ in and over the Christian Church and the millennial era as a king, down to the end of time), and to have proved their fallacy.

But, the arguments and facts adduced by us thus far, we have designed to be taken simply in the way of deduction or inference, reserving the more direct proofs to that end, for the important subjects which remain to be discussed in Part III. of this treatise.

We now, therefore, enter upon a discussion of the topics connected with this important branch of the subject in hand.

This embraces an examination of the question: Will the second coming of Christ consist of an allegorical or spiritual coming, or will it consist of a literally corporeal or personal coming? and involving along with it the question: Is that event to be pre- or post-millennial?

We here join issue with the advocates of the Fourth Theory, as above, who, in their third thesis, allege,

That, as the idea of a kingdom involves the presence and reign of a king; so, throughout the prolonged period of "the times of the Gentiles" onward to the end of the millennium, they insist that Christ has reigned, and that He will continue to reign over His Church, Christian and millennial, after an invisible or spiritual manner; and hence affirm that His second personal coming will be post-millennial.

The subjects of remark relating to this thesis will be ranged under the following sections:

SECTION I.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED IDENTITY OF THE CHRISTIAN 66

CHURCH WITH THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN," ETC.; AND OF
CHRIST'S SPIRITUAL REIGN OVER IT AS KING.

This is a subject of momentous import. It involves a correct interpretation and application of all those prophecies of the Old and New Testaments in connection with the phraseology, "the kingdom of God;" "the kingdom of heaven;" "the kingdom of the Son of Man," etc. The question regarding them is this:

Are the phrases, "the kingdom of God," etc., and the Christian Church, or “Church of God," used interchangeably in the Scriptures to denote the same thing?

We answer emphatically, They are not. True, they may exist in alliance with each other, but are nevertheless entirely separate and distinct. Where such a union exists in its purest and most perfect form, as under and during the original theocracy of Israel, the kingdom, with its sovereign, administers laws to, governs, and protects the Church, as its loyal subjects. But, if they revolt against their sovereign, and drive him into exile, and set up a usurper in his place, while the CHURCH Continues to exist, the original theocracy, for the time, ceases to be, until it is again restored. Thus it was with the Israelitish Church State in the time of Samuel, when she abjured the theocracy and set up an earth-born rival in the place of God. Hence, saith He to Samuel, "they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not be king over them." Hence, too, though "God

11 Sam. viii.

1

gave them a king in his anger," viz., Saul, "and took him away in his wrath," ' and caused David to be anointed in his place, and appointed a succession of kings in the line of descent from him, that arrangement was not a restoration of the original theocracy; but, David being of the tribe of Judah, the design of it was, to lay a foundation to that end, to be accomplished in due time in the person of David's royal son, THE MESSIAH.

And so, when John the Baptist entered upon his mission as the harbinger of Messiah, he found the Jewish nation, politically, tributary to the Roman power. Yet the Jewish Church State existed, and to them he preached, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven," or the restoration of the original theocracy, "is at hand." Also, our blessed Lord, on entering upon His public ministry, presented Himself to the same Church, and took up the same theme with that of John, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Yea, more. He actually declared Himself to be their KING, the long-expected Messiah. And the nation being thrown upon their own responsibility in accepting or rejecting Him as such, we are not saying more than the truth to affirm, that, if they would, Messiah had then restored the original theocracy to them. Yea, it was their bounden duty to have done so; just on the same principle that it is the bounden duty of every man to render perfect obedience to the law of God. But, as in this latter case, so with them. As "the carnal mind is enmity against God, is not subject to his law, neither indeed can be: " so we read, though Messiah "came to his own" world, "yet his own" people, the Jews, "received Him not," but rejected and crucified Him!

We see, then, from this, that during the personal ministry of Christ at His first advent to the Jewish nation, the original theocracy, or "kingdom of God," was not then restored. Still, the Church did not cease to exist.

But, it may be asked, Was not "the kingdom of God" restored or "set up" immediately after the ascension of our Lord? and if so, does not this make it certain that "the kingdom of God," or of "heaven," and the Christian Church, are one and the same?

This is the popularly received view of the Christian Church of this day. The prevailing theory on this subject is, that "the

1 Hosea xiii. 11.

2 Rom. viii. 7.

3 John i. 11.

1

2

kingdom of God," or the Church, is a spiritual establishment. And this on the ground, that our blessed Lord declared to the unbelieving Jewish nation that "the kingdom of God should be taken from them, and be given to a people" (the Gentiles) who should "bring forth the fruits thereof." Also that St. Paul said to them, "Seeing ye put these things from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles." The objection amounts, in other words, to the assertion, "that Christ is now reigning as king in His own proper kingdom; and that this kingdom formally commenced on His ascension to the right hand of God, and that it will continue unchanged, both in character and form, till the end of the millennial age." In support of this theory, we are reminded that Christ and his apostles spoke of the "kingdom of God" or of "heaven" as at hand; as about to be established, etc.; and that the apostles, immediately after Christ's ascension, represent it as actually set up, etc.

A formidable array of objections these, to the views we have advocated of "the kingdom of heaven" as still future! The importance of the subject will require an examination into the import of the principal passages resorted to by our opponents in the support of their theory.

And here permit me to explain, in the outset, that we by no means object to the sentiment so generally expressed, so to speak, in the sermons and psalmody throughout Christendom, that "Christ reigns in the hearts of his believing people." Undoubtedly He does; but the figurative use of the word "reign," in such an application of it as this, is no authority for displacing the true, scriptural doctrine of Christ's kingdom, as contradis tinguished from that church state under this dispensation, into which the predestined subjects of it are "gathered out of (or from among) the Gentiles," and prepared spiritually for their final admission into it-as future.

Hence, the present church state is called in the New Testament "the kingdom of heaven in mystery," that is, it is that period during which God by his Spirit effectually calls, and enlightens, and regenerates, and justifies, and sanctifies his chosen people, in order to render them mete for their ultimate introduction into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus

1

Christ, at its manifestation. Thus St. Paul: "For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.... And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." This, of itself, might be taken as decisive of the point at issue; for it teaches us, that it is only in resurrection, that the Church is to be admitted to the possession of the kingdom. No, it is not Christ personally, but it is the Divine Paraclete, the "Comforter," the Holy Spirit, dispensed by Him to the Church on the day of Pentecost, who now "reigns" in the hearts of believers. Christ is now personally absent from the Church; nor, until He "comes again" according to His promise to receive her to himself, can He "reign" over her in His kingdom. A due examination into the import of the passages already alluded to, will be found to confirm this view.

1. The first passage alleged in proof that the Church in its present state constitutes the spiritual kingdom over which Christ is said to "reign," is the following, John xviii. 36: "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews but now is my kingdom not from hence."

The difficulty in understanding this passage lies in the Greek words Kooμos (world) and vov (now). The κooμos (world) here, evidently means the aggregate population of the earth. But, there is another Greek word mistranslated "world," viz., alwv, in the passage, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the (aivos) world." It should have been age or dispensation. Thus, Kooμos refers to the people; aivos, to the age, or period of time, when the people lived. The passage in question was Christ's reply to Pilate, "Art thou the king of the Jews?" And when our Lord said, "My kingdom is not of this world,” and also added, "but (vvv) now is my kingdom not from hence;" and Pilate asked him the second time, "Art thou a king, then ?” Jesus answered him, Thou sayest that I am a king;" that is, it is so; I am a king: "to this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the (Koʊμos) world,” etc., i. e., to the Jewish and Gentile world, "that I should bear witness unto the truth." And, for this reason, as Peter and John declared, " both Herod and Pontius

1 Rom. viii. 23.