The Coming of Christ: Matthew 24 and the First Century
By S. S. Griswold
The Coming of Christ.—No. 8.
Unless the 24th of Matthew refers to a coming of Christ that was about to take place immediately, much of what is there said would have no meaning. Those to whom Christ was speaking (verse 44) were told to hold themselves in readiness, because in such an hour as they thought not, the Son of man would come. And so with the remainder of the chapter, the whole of which was only applicable to that time. For if Christ was not then about to come, why should he thus warn them to whom he was speaking? It was the apostles, disciples, and Christians, of that age, that were to be ready, lest the coming of the Son of man should take them unawares. Such I most firmly believe was what Christ taught, and intended to teach, and in that manner he was understood, as the history of the belief of the early Christians, for the first century, will abundantly show; for it was the almost universal belief of all Christendom in that age that Christ would appear. This mistake lay in the manner of that appearing. Like the Jews who committed the mistake of Christ’s first advent, so those Christians committed a similar one respecting the second advent. And the same error has at times been committed ever since, and is being now propagated, viz., that Christ is to come bodily from the heavens. It is the same mistaken view, as I have said, the Jews committed, and will eventuate in a similar disappointment. Time and time again has there arisen in the church those who have maintained Christ’s personal return to this world, the final conflagration of this earth, &c., and that the time was then at hand. Among the many who have thus maintained, are Edward Irving and William Miller of modern times, and the Second Adventists of the present day, all of whom saw, as they thought, unmistakable signs of Christ’s immediate appearing. But as yet, all their predictions have proved untrue. And the true epiphany of Christ is continually before us. But let us pass to consider the 25th chapter of Matthew, beginning with the parable of the ten virgins, which is introduced by the adverb, “then,” denoting the time when that parable would have its applicability. “Then shall the kingdom of Heaven be likened unto ten virgins,” and during the time of establishing and building up of the kingdom of God, or the coming of the Son of man, the growth of the kingdom would be, in many things, like the invited guests to an eastern wedding, some of whom held themselves in readiness to enter the marriage feast when the bridegroom should arrive, while others neglected to be thus ready. How applicable was this parable to what the Lord said in the closing verses of the previous chapter, which read from verse 44. And hence Christ repeats his warning at the close of this parable, verse 13: “Watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.” Here the same reason for their watching is assigned, viz., the immediate coming of the Son of man. The parable following was designed to illustrate the principles by which the kingdom of Heaven (the true church) was to be governed. The parable of the talents represents men as agents of Christ to whom was committed the interests of his kingdom. This parable covers the ground occupied by the church during the Christian dispensation. The closing illustration, commencing at verse 31, illustrates the principles by which men would be adjudged under the reign of Christ. The opening sentence, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory,” refers to the full investiture of Christ, with the universal government of mankind, and the principles by which he will reward every man. While the illustration looks forward to the final adjudication of all mankind, and to their reward as the result of their obedience to the principle therein set forth, the popular doctrine of the Judgment day was not probably intended. The judgment here referred to, is rather that of administration and its consequences than that of a particular day of ending the administration, and pronouncing a judicial sentence. Dr. Neander thus writes concerning that passage: “On the whole, then, we are not to look upon this representation as a picture of the final Judgment. Its aim is to set forth most vividly and impressively the great and fundamental truth, that no faith but that which proves itself by works, can secure the kingdom of Heaven. We cannot fail to see in the ‘throne,’ the ‘right hand,’ the ‘left hand,’ &c., a figurative drapery attending and setting off the one fundamental thought. . . . The form of description, then, we suppose to be parabolical, and its character in this respect was probably still more obvious when Christ delivered it. See Life of Christ, p. 375.” I have now examined every important reference to Christ’s coming in the gospels, and, if our exegesis be correct, have not found a single passage that speaks of a personal, bodily coming. There is, then, no such teaching by Christ as his personal, bodily return to our earth. Hence, the second-advent theory must be unscriptural, untrue. That mode of interpretation is evidently not the correct one. The true coming of Christ is a spiritual coming. Nor is the idea of “a spiritual coming” a theological invention, as my reviewer asserts, and he adds, “There can be no such coming of Christ,” and yet he prays, I presume, daily for just such a coming of Christ, viz., a coming of Christ by his Spirit—the Holy Spirit. But time will at last settle the question which of us is in the right.