“PREMILLENNIAL ADVENT OF CHRIST.”
By Roswell F. Cottrell
Under this heading, a writer in the Evangelical Messenger expresses surprise that leading and popular ministers, from the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists, should take a part in the Prophetic Conference at New York, since, as he says, “Judging from the speeches and addresses delivered at the conference, the view of the second coming of Christ set forth is essentially the same as that advocated by Second Adventists, the followers of Miller.” Of the fact that Adventists were not represented in the conference he says, “While it gives greater weight to the influence of the conference among other Christian bodies, it will give Adventists a better opportunity to make capital out of the fact and transactions of the conference, of which they will not fail to make use.” He says, “The utter failure of the predictions from the prophetic ‘key,’ which it was thought had been discovered by Wm. Miller, in 1843, and again in 1854, relieved the public mind from all its anti-scriptural strain, but not from all its evil effects.” By the “prophetic key” I suppose he means the key to the prophetic periods of time. Has the year-day theory of computation really failed? Does the fact that Adventists were wrong in expecting the coming of Christ in 1843 or 1844 prove that the period of 2300 days, upon which they had based that hope, cannot be computed, and, consequently, is of no use and might better have been left out of the Bible? It proves no such thing. The key of interpretation of the prophetic periods, has been demonstrated. It has not failed. The 2300 days ended in the past. No one now opposes this fact. Christ did not come, but the computation holds good. The time of his coming is unknown, because it is unrevealed. But still the word of God is of use to those who will use it. The giving of the period which should reach to the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary, has not proved an utter failure. Wm. Miller had no part in the movement of 1854, for he was dead years before that. That movement was a demonstration of the folly of men, and was a confirmation of the original position on dates. The writer’s objection to receiving the views of the Prophetic Conference is that “the whole matter rests on prophecy;” that “the divine utterances on the subject are not very clear; and that therefore the conclusions arrived at must be regarded as human deductions from mysterious ‘sacred utterances.’” What a pity that “sacred utterances” on so important a subject should be so mysterious, so wanting in clearness! Cannot the writer see that he makes the “utter failure” of which he speaks a failure on the part of the Divine Being to foretell with clearness the things which he manifestly attempted to foretell? But our friend finds much difficulty from the fact that “there are different comings of Christ spoken of.” He says, “The difficulty is to find to which coming a passage refers.” There can be but one second coming of Christ; and this was yet future when the apostle said to the Hebrews about A. D. 64, “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” Heb. 9:28. This evidently is not his coming to his disciples, before they had “gone over the cities of Israel.” In regard to the assurance expressed in Matt. 24:34,—“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled,” we say, No one has yet seen “the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory,” and therefore “this generation” does not allude to the generation then present, but to the generation described as existing at the time when the predicted signs in the sun, moon, and stars should have been fulfilled, and thus become matters of historic fact, as it is at the present day. Neither the given signs, nor the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven, were seen by the generation when living, hence the Saviour spoke of a generation then future, or his asseveration, made emphatic with a “verily,” has failed of fulfillment. For a Christian to place the blessed Saviour in such a light, rather than to believe what he plainly says, is the best aid and comfort to infidelity that he can possibly give. Again our writer says, “When Christ says, ‘There are some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom,’ Matt. 16:28, it appears from what followed that he referred simply to his transfiguration.” To this we only reply, Amen! We fail to see how Peter “spoiled one of the finest prophetic utterances for premillenarians, by applying Joel 2:28–32, to the scenes of Pentecost.” On that day was a remarkable beginning of the fulfillment of that prophecy; but that there was a complete fulfillment of Joel 2:28–32 on that day, is not sustained by the facts as stated in Acts 2; and to make its entire fulfillment at that time, is about equivalent to saying that the last days are all 1800 years in the past. Our friend further says, “In the year 66, Peter found scoffers ridiculing Christians for the failure of their predictions, saying, ‘Where is the promise of his coming?’” Not exactly so, my friend. The apostle simply said that “there shall come in the last days scoffers,” mocking, and taunting believers with the failure of their expectation with the question, “Where is the promise of his coming?” It is possible that we are in the last days; and there are now two sides to the advent question, premillennial and postmillennial. On which side are the scoffers more liable to be found? All can see at a glance. And though believers may have been tried with hope deferred, they will still hold on to the promise: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night.” Is it not strange that men of mind will, in contradiction of the plainest testimonies of Scripture, and all its warnings to watch against a surprise in the day of Christ’s coming, deliberately place themselves on that side of the question which will insure a surprise, should he come in their day! “The Lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites.” The danger is not on the side of those who are looking for his coming. The chief error of the Prophetic Conference, as we view it, is that they claimed that the coming of Christ is imminent, without appealing to signs fulfilled and warnings given, which are so clearly promised in the word of God. All that is promised in prophecy to precede that day will certainly be fulfilled. Signs in the sun, moon, and stars were promised, and on earth distress of nations and perplexity. See Luke 21:25. Warnings also of the approach of that great and terrible day are promised to the inhabitants of the earth. See Joel 2:1, and Rev. 14:6–12. “That day shall not come,” till these signs and warnings have been given. Consequently, no one can scripturally claim that Christ may come at any moment, unless he can point to the fact that these warnings have been proclaimed to earth’s inhabitants. There is a people who believe they see and hear the last message, that of Rev. 14:9–12, going abroad to the nations of the earth. Throughout these United States, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and in nearly all the countries of Europe, also in Egypt and in the isles of the great ocean, there are people who believe that they have heard this last warning, and are aiding in the work of publishing it to others in the regions beyond. Let all do as did the noble Bereans,—receive the word with readiness, and search the Scriptures daily, whether these things are so. The bare possibility that this is divine truth is enough to awaken the deepest interest. All should hear when the Lord speaks.