There are three questions in which every Adventist must feel the deepest interest at the present time.—1. What is our position in the line of prophetic events, by which God has brought us down to the end?—2. What is our position in reference to the termination of the prophetic periods which we have supposed to bring us also to the end?—3. What are the duties which this position demands of us? and what are the particular trials to which it subjects us? 1. What is our position in the line of events? In reference to the bearing of the events brought to view in the history of nations, and the signs pointed out by the Saviour, upon our relation to the end, there is no difference of opinion among Adventists. It exists only in reference to the particulars, the details, in the events which all admit, who admit them at all, cluster around the end itself. Let us come directly to some of these particulars—to the question, Have we had the event denoted by the cry, in the parable of the virgins? On this question three several opinions would be found to exist.—1. That which supposes the parable is not to be applied to the history of the people of God, in any of its particulars, but that it is only designed to exhibit the importance of a preparation to meet the Lord, as a general truth. 2. That which supposes the parable is to be applied in its particulars, but that the cry has not yet been made. 3. That which takes the ground that the parable is to be applied in its details, and that we have had the cry, if, indeed, we have not advanced to a farther point in its fulfillment. To me the choice is only between the first and the last of these views, viz.—That we are not to understand the parable in its details at all, or, that it is to be so understood, and that we have passed through its fulfillment, at least, to a point as late as that to which we are brought by the cry. And although I could find no very great difficulty in accounting for all that we have experienced, should I adopt the first of these two opinions, as the special application embraces all that can be designed by the general application, and so must be the most safe; and, further, as the special application, which generally prevails among us, is the result of events in our history which were entirely unlooked for till they came, and which all must admit are remarkably in accordance with the successive steps marked in the parable, I must act on the special application of it, till some decisive argument from the word of God, or time, if it must be so, shall make it appear that that cannot be the true application. Should that be the case, I trust I shall not then, any more than at the present time, reject the general truth supposed to be intended.
That the discourse of the Saviour, including the 24th and 25th chapters of Matthew, carries us down from his day to the end, no one will deny. That it was his design to inform his church upon the manner of his coming, and upon the dangers to which they would be exposed about the time of his coming, is also placed beyond dispute.
The parable of the virgins, which makes a part of that discourse, we understand as a distinct sketch of the Advent movement. It may help our memory and piety to repeat the illustration.
Verse 1. 'Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.' Then—at the time when the faithful and the wise servants, having marked the signs which were to indicate26that the Son of Man must be near, according to his word, are giving the meat in due season to the household; and the evil servant saith in his heart, My Lord delayeth his coming, and begins to smite his fellow servants, (the wise and faithful,) and to eat and drink with the drunken,—then the kingdom of heaven shall be likened unto the scene and the transactions, of which the Saviour speaks, in which ten virgins went forth to meet the bridegroom.
Among those who took a part in this movement, as among the servants whose office it was to give meat to the household, and also among the 'all nations,' (Matt. xxiv, 9,) who were to hate the disciples of Christ, and to whom the gospel was to be preached before the end, and who are to be gathered before the Son of Man, when he shall sit upon the throne of his glory; so among those who fulfill this feature of the kingdom of heaven there are two classes:—
Verse 2. 'And five of them were wise,' careful, 'and five were foolish,' careless.
Verses 3 and 4. 'They that were foolish,' careless, 'took their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise,' careful, 'took oil in their vessels with their lamps.' These lamps were evidently what we call torches, made by winding a bunch of flax or cotton upon the end of a stick, and saturating it with oil; and as this would soon burn out unless it were often supplied with oil, the oil in the vessel for that purpose, though a small matter in itself, was indispensably necessary. The omission indicated a want of hearty interest in the marriage arrangement. The lamp, or torch, as a symbol, doubtless denotes the Bible, as the oil does grace. Grace is to the word, what oil is to the lamp. The vessels may denote the means of grace which are adapted and designed to make the word give light. It is the highest folly—the most fatal carelessness, as to the great purposes for which the word of God is given to men, to think of deriving light from it, while we refuse, through pride, fear, or the love of human praise, to avail ourselves of those means of grace which are necessary to the understanding of its lessons, the observance of its requirements, and the attainment of its promises.
It was the Bible alone which produced the Advent movement. Those who embraced the Advent doctrine were distinguished, from the first, by their strict regard for the Bible. This was exclusively peculiar to them. Every question was decided by that. No fair argument has ever been brought from that against their doctrine; and to this day the individual who is unfashionably familiar with his Bible, is sure to fall under the odium of their faith: and it was the supplying themselves with such means of grace—ministers—conference meetings—Bible classes—publications—religious associates, &c. &c., as harmonized with their supreme regard for the Bible, which served as the most severe test, upon the interest of the professed believers in the doctrine, in the great event of Christ's coming. This also was their grand offence against 'the churches.' And on the other hand it was the want of the oil in the vessels—proper means of grace—which has occasioned the declension of those who remained in 'the churches,' a declension which the individuals and the churches themselves confess and begin to deplore.
Verse 5. 'While the bridegroom tarried they all slumbered and slept.' The wise slumbered, the foolish slept. Every one knows the difference between these two states, naturally; and between the states with which they correspond, spiritually, and every Adventist is familiar with the condition of things during the period to which it applies. 'The bridegroom tarried.'—They must, then, of necessity have had a time appointed in which they expected27him, for it would be nonsense to speak of a person tarrying who was not expected at any particular time. Its application to the case of the Adventists is too striking to need comment.
Verse 6. 'And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh! go ye out to meet him.' If other parts of the parable had spoken of days or nights, it might be supposed at once that this 'midnight' was a chronological mark; though it may be understood in that light, it is more likely to express the state of things when the cry is made—the security of midnight. Have we not had that cry? A query has arisen in some minds, whether we have had the true midnight cry, since it is found that 'all' who were looking for the Lord were not particularly affected by the preaching of 'the seventh month.' But it is well known that the universal terms, all, every, &c., are not always to be understood in the absolute sense; (see Matt. iii, 5; John iii, 26; xi, 48; 1 Cor. x, 33;) and even if the term 'all' is to be so understood in this case, is it not true that 'all those' who went forth in the beginning of the Advent movement, also arose from their slumbering and sleeping in the seventh month? Certain it is that the 'cry' originated, humanly speaking, and did its chief work in that part of the great field which was first visited with the Advent doctrine in its more general form. And as that was the only section in which the interest had passed the crisis, which was followed by the slumbering and sleeping, so it was the only one which could be, or needed to be, affected by the cry. Those who had not had time to fall into that state, after receiving the Advent truth, could not be aroused from it.
If we have not had the true cry, it is difficult to determine why the Saviour, in a discourse designed to guard his church against the dangers which they must be exposed to, at the period of his second advent, should not have warned us of such a false movement, as he must have seen it, if the movement of the seventh month be 'a false alarm.' As he has given us no intimation of such a counterfeit movement among his people, I must believe we have had the cry denoted in the parable. I do not see how we could have one bearing more of the genuine marks than that. But further, if we have not had the cry, that parable cannot be a sketch of our history; it must belong to another people and another time. Those who are denoted by these virgins must have had a time fixed in which they expected the Saviour; as soon as that time passed, he must have tarried; and from that time, till the cry was raised, they all, i. e. a large proportion of the body, must slumber and sleep. All this must be found in their history, or the parable cannot have a special application. But the time in which we expected the Saviour has passed, and the period since that should have been, with us as a body, an unbroken period of slumbering and sleeping, if we have not had the cry. Who, now, will presume to say that this has been the condition of the Adventists since the time passed in which they expected the Saviour? It might as well be denied that they have ever professed to expect him. Just as certainly, therefore, as the Adventists have had the state of comparative listlessness broken, into which they generally fell, after the passing of their time, we have had the cry; for 'WHILE he tarried,' till that was made, they slumbered and slept. Is it not as evident that we have had the cry, as that the virgins have gone forth to meet the bridegroom, or that we have had the tarrying time? Would it not be as dangerous to expect the cry hereafter as to look into the future for any of the way-marks by which we have been guided in the past.
Verses 7, 8, 9. 'Then [when the cry was made,] all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps; and the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out; but the wise answered, saying, Lest there be not enough for us and you, go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.' The 'not so' of our version, supplied by the translators, gives the answer of the wise virgins a harshness that does not belong to it. The reading here used is authorized by the best critics. (See Dr. Clarke.) They had proceeded so far, as companions, and the wise would have aided the foolish, if it could have been done with safety to themselves; while they pity them, they give them the only advice which can be of any service.
All this was fulfilled in the seventh month. The cry aroused all those who were first affected by the proclamation of the Advent doctrine. The Advent meetings were thronged. Those who had 'slept' because they had denied themselves the only proper means of grace, came, in the full character of the foolish virgins: The preaching under which they sat was unsatisfactory, and their other means of grace with their religious associates, had not only failed to aid them, but had been a positive hindrance. They must hear Advent preaching—join in their devotions—make them their associates. Confessing that all was darkness, they said almost in so many words, 'Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out.'
They were met by the Adventists in the full character of the wise virgins: 'We cannot help you. Our destitution, our dependence, our necessities are so great, we are barely provided for, so as to hope in the mercy of God, 'Go ye to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.' In God only can you find help.'
How is it that we can have forgotten these memorable traits in that scene! It seems as incredible as that the Israelites should have forgotten the awful splendors of Sinai, in view of which they trembled and durst not behold, so that before Moses descended, they had forgotten all the claims of the true God, and were dancing before the calf they had made.
Verse 10. 'And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.' The same carelessness which disposed them to go forth without oil, at first, seems to have marked this last effort also. The advice could not have been a mockery; they did not follow it as they should have done.
As this parable, viewed as an outline of our history, has been fulfilled, beyond dispute to my mind, down to a point as late as that to which we are brought by the cry, the only questions to which it can fairly give rise are these,—Has the bridegroom come? or, does the cry still present to us our duty: Go ye out to meet him? And so far as our prospects, as to the nearness of the advent, and our desire, are concerned, it would make but little difference which of these positions we take. In either case we should be required to take a position of constant expectation. In either case the end of our probationary state is involved, and our work in behalf of the world must be, in the main, performed.
There is hardly room, indeed, since the parable has evidently been fulfilled down to the cry, for any other question than this—
HAS THE BRIDEGROOM COME?
The decision of this question must depend upon what is to be understood by his coming to the marriage. If it means his visible coming in glory, he has not so come. If it means some other event, which is to precede his coming in glory, though it intimately connected with it, the bridegroom may have come in the sense of the parable. But will it not be spiritualizing to understand the text to refer to anything but his coming as the King of Glory? We have taken it for granted that it does speak of this, and have read the text, in our minds, as if it read, 'And while they went to buy, the Lord himself descended from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God—the dead in Christ were raised, those who were last among the living were changed, and these all were caught up together to meet him in the clouds, to be forever with the Lord.' These are precisely the ideas we have attached to these words; but is there anything like them here? Certainly not. It will be seen, then, at once, as indeed the form of speech requires, that the parable is to be interpreted in the spiritual or figurative sense: and as no one supposes that Christ will be married, as human beings are married, the only point to be settled is, What is denoted by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage?
In the interpretation of the parable, thus far, we have visible as well as literal facts to prove its fulfilment, and have therefore spoken in more positive terms than we may use in what remains. Though the facts to which we shall refer are as literal as those in the past, as they cannot, in the nature of the case, be visible to us, we must speak with more caution in speaking of their accomplishment.
That we may proceed intelligently, and for the particular benefit of those who may have forgotten them, I shall give an extract or two from Mr. Miller's rules of interpretation, which are substantially those of every judicious interpreter of the word of God:— 'Figures sometimes have two or more different significations:'—'To learn the true meaning of figures, trace your figurative word through your Bible, and where you find it explained, put it on your figure; if it makes good sense you need look no further; if not, look again.'— 'Parables are used as comparisons to illustrate subjects, and must be explained in the same way as figures.'
Let us proceed. As there is to be something in this movement in 'the kingdom of heaven,' which is to be 'likened' to the coming of the bridegroom 'to the marriage'—what may be denoted by that part of the scene? There are but two events which the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage can be supposed to denote.—1. The appearing of Christ to gather his Church to himself.—2. His actual inauguration, or coronation, as the Lord of the whole earth.
Now let us trace 'the figure through the Bible.' And where shall we find the appearing of Christ to gather his people, exhibited by the figure of a bridegroom coming to a marriage, or, the act of uniting himself to them, at that time, exhibited by a marriage? The existence of such a case is unknown to me. I know that the relation between Christ and the Church is brought to view in connection with the relation of marriage; and the strongest case even of that kind is given by Paul, Eph. v, 23—25. But there is not even a metaphor here, much less a parable or allegory. A literal and well known fact is referred to, to show what should characterize another literal and well known fact. He refers to the subjection of the Church to Christ, to show the proper subjection of wives to their husbands, and to his love to the Church, to show the love husbands should cherish for their wives; and not to the relation of marriage, to illustrate the relation of Christ to the Church. The figurative analogy between the two cases, as forms of speech, is entirely wanting. Besides, it refers to what then existed, in the Apostle's day, and not to something to take place in the future.
Again. It is assumed, that in the marriage of the Lamb, presented by the Revelator, the holy city, symbolized as the Lamb's wife, is a symbol of the Church, or at any rate, must comprehend the Church. Shall we suppose the bride to be the city, and the city the church, and apply the figure in order to see the 'good sense' it makes? To say nothing of the 'sense' of making a figure of the explanation of a figure, we would ask,—If the bride—the city—is the church, who are the nations of them that walk in her light?—Rev. xxi, 24. If the city, the tabernacle of God, is the church, who are the 'men' 'his people,' with whom the tabernacle or church is to be?—Rev. xxi. If the 'wife' is the church, who are they that are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb, as guests?—Rev. xix. If the city is the church, who are they 'that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city?' If Jerusalem which is above, the mother of us all, is the church, who are 'the children?' and how could Isaiah say of her: 'this is the heritage of the servants of the Lord?' Compare Gal. iv, 26, 27, and Isa. liv, 1—17.
If this is sufficient to show the 'good sense' of this meaning of the 'figurative word,' when we 'put it on your figure,' shall we suppose the bride to comprehend both the city and the church, and see what 'sense' it will make? We have only to apply the foregoing questions, varied to express this meaning, and we shall see that the consistency and harmony of the figure are equally destroyed. If the bride is brought to view in the figure, as both the city and the church, who are the other parties—'the children'—those of whom Christ says, 'he shall be my son?'—'his people?'—those 'who are called to the marriage supper?' &c. &c.
And we know that the interpretation of figurative language, parables in particular, “all its parts must be perspicuous and pertinent.”—Horne.28But we may add here, that the manner in which the parable closes does not appear to coincide with events which take place at the actual appearing of Christ, according to other portions. When he appears it is “to execute judgment.” The judiciary trial and decision having been previously made by “the Father,” “the Son” carries the decision into effect. And so in the case of the evil servant, at the coming of his Lord, he is cut asunder, and his portion is appointed with the hypocrites, where there are weeping and gnashing of teeth. The unprofitable servant, in the parable which follows that of the virgins, is treated in the same manner. But in this parable, after the bridegroom has come, and the door is shut, there is the common mark of a revival of religious interest. Prayer is heard: “Lord, Lord, open unto us.” If the coming of the bridegroom denotes the actual coming of Christ, and the shutting of the door the rejection of the wicked, to be let here to perish, is it possible, that after Christ has appeared, and the dead are raised, and the righteous caught up to meet the Lord, that such a state of things can exist? To me it seems impossible. It would seem to coincide much more naturally with the judiciary trial which precedes the execution, (the judgment which begins at the house of God,) than with the execution itself. It seems impossible to get to that point, by any figurative exhibition of the scene that agrees with the under consideration, without referring to the other parable of the marriage, to the fate of that one of “the guests” which had not on the “wedding garment.” “Then (when the King came in to see the guests) said the King to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matt. xxii, 11—13. That must coincide with the execution of judgment by Christ, as the office of the King does with the preliminary decision of the case. In this parable of the virgins no such execution of judgment is expressed.
Again. Supposing that the appearing of Christ, as the Judge, is denoted by the coming of the bridegroom, and the execution of judgment, at least in the case of the righteous, is denoted by the shutting of the door, it is difficult to harmonize the words of Christ in Luke xii, 35—38, which were certainly spoken in reference to his coming, if they were not a part of the same discourse that Matthew records in the 24th and 25th chapters. Compare Luke xii, 39—46, and Matt. xxiv, 43—51. In Luke, the point in the figurative representation of the truth, at which the saved actually meet the Lord, is at his “return from the wedding.” Now we know that the successive steps of the marriage scene are these. 1. The coming of the bridegroom to the marriage. 2. The marriage itself. 3. The return from the wedding.
We would ask, then, is it natural, is it like him, i. e. if we suppose these several particulars were designed to be applied in the interpretation, to speak to us, by a reference to two different points in the same imagery of only one event?
Once more. It seems to be impossible that the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage can denote the actual appearing of Christ as King and Judge, since it must be that the only act which can be denoted by the shutting of the door, and the consequent state of things must be realized, before his appearing as King and Judge.
What may we suppose the shutting of the door to denote? Some of our brethren talk as if there were a literal door to be closed, for, say they, “If the door is shut there is no passing in or out.” It is singular, indeed, if we have become so very literal, that we cannot see anything beyond an admitted figure, but the figure itself. By this act is undoubtedly denoted the exclusion from all further access to saving mercy, those who have rejected its offers during their time of probation. And none will deny that whenever the Bridegroom shall have come, that change in the condition of the great mass of the world will have taken place. That change must take place when Christ closes up his work as mediator for the world at large, in order to become King, not at that moment to possess his kingdom, the renewed earth, but to become king prior to its possession. Is there any evidence from the word of God to show that that change in his work is to take place any perceptible time before he appears in his glory—before his people are made immortal?
It must be considered as settled beyond dispute that this change in his work and office takes place before he appears in his glory as king. 1. When Christ appears to save his people, he appears in his glory as King and Judge, Matt. xxiv, 30, 31; xxv, 34. 2. The kingdom of the God of heaven, over which the Lord Jesus is to reign forever, is to be set up during the existence of the earthly kingdoms—Dan. ii, 44. One like the Son of man came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations and languages, should serve him.—Dan. vii, 13, 14. “He returned, having received the kingdom.”—Luke xix, 15. Then all his enemies are slain before him. As “the King of kings, and Lord of lords,” he makes war with, subdues and exterminates “the kings of the earth.”—Rev. xvii, 14; xix, 11—21. 3. There must be a change in his office and work, in reference to the world at large, before, or at the time he becomes king; and in the very nature of the case, this change must precede the appearing of Christ as king, or the setting up of the kingdom; for he performs the work typified by the “daily ministering” of the priests, until his enemies are made his footstool, (Heb. x, 11—13,) i. e. are given over to him as enemies doomed to death; and are no longer the subjects of his intercessions. And this change in his work and office must precede his appearing to gather his elect, for, 1. a part of his elect are under the dominion of death, one of the enemies to be destroyed, and he will not destroy that enemy till he has been put into his hands; and, 2. as he appears in his glory when he appears to gather his elect, he must have received that glory before he appears in it.
Now, as it is almost impossible that this order of events should not also require order of time, it would seem that some time must elapse, how much we cannot tell, between the closing of Christ’s intercessions for the world, and his appearing to gather his elect. May not that time be marked by the Lord himself—the first point by the coming of the bridegroom, when the kingdom of heaven is likened unto the virgins who go in with him unto the marriage; the last point by his return from the wedding, when he shall receive them to the marriage supper?
We admit that this does not of itself prove that the door is now shut, but as we must be very near the end, and that act must take place before Christ appears as king, what reason is there why it may not have taken place, which would not exist at any future time, before the actual appearing of Christ? So far as the condition of things around us bears upon the question, it goes to confirm it. Vs. 11, 12. “Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.” The master of the house has risen up, the careless are too late.
And what do we see and hear all around? Why, “the churches,” after having given a full rein to the scoffers, the fashionable and formal among them, in “fairs,” “tea parties,” &c. &c., are now willing to accommodate the more scrupulous—the class most affected by the Advent doctrine, but who were unwilling to confess it publicly, by taking oil in their vessels with their lamps—(foolish virgins,) and we hear of their calls to prayer, and special efforts to “get up a revival.” “Lord, Lord, open unto us.” But what is the result? By their own testimony, it does not appear that there is a single case which would have been considered, ten years ago, hardly a noticeable case of religious interest. Whether those cases which are reported, are worthy of being considered conversions to Christ, is more than doubtful. Would not the preaching of the most obvious truths in the gospel “stop these revivals?” If such revivals are to be received as genuine, it is time for the adventists to return to the churches, and not only make their confession, but renounce their hope. It may be shown from a large number of facts, that the last special cases of spiritual interest among the professed churches were the result, directly or indirectly, of the Advent doctrine; that where the doctrine has been avowedly opposed, and its believers silenced, spiritual death has followed, our enemies being judges. And we do not know of a single case of noticeable religious interest but where the doctrine is received, or at least not opposed; and these cases are so limited in their extent and number, that they can form no objection to the supposition that the door is shut, but rather go to confirm it.
However, as our brethren seem determined that if our position is correct, nothing more is to be done, therefore we hold that there is nothing more to be done, we may be pardoned in saying a word upon that point. Now we can see how that all our brethren can do, may be done, in perfect harmony with our views. The question, here, is not, whether there is anything to be done, but, what is to be done?
We believe there will be enough to do till mortality is swallowed up of life, especially since there must be, among such a diversity of opinions, “brethren who do err from the truth.” But we can no more resume our old plans of spreading the Advent doctrine, than we can labor for “the conversion of the world.”
We will try to make this plain. We suppose the condition of things, at the shutting of the door, would be very much as it was after the day of atonement among the ancient Jews. Let us visit old Jerusalem as it was in the days of the prophets. It is the tenth day of the seventh month—the day of atonement. The preparation to partake in the benefit of its services are plainly made known, it is “a day for a man to afflict his soul,” and if a jubilee year, to “break every yoke and let the oppressed go free,” or he is “cursed,” and liable to be “cut off from among the people.” The appointed sacrifices are prepared, and the son of Aaron appears in his priestly robes. The court of the temple, and every avenue which leads to it, are crowded with the multitude of worshipers. Here are the devout and holy Isaiah, and Jeremiah and Daniel, ready to take the position which secures the blessing. Here are backsliders who see their wanderings and are stricken at heart with a sense of their sins,—they too are ready to take the required position. Here also are the penitents who are awakened to a sense of their condition, and these are ready to take the required position. All these, being ready at the time, may receive the blessing. To the case of infants, idiots, and others whose circumstances relieve them from the responsibilities of the truth, God adapts the provisions of his mercy by a special arrangement. By the careless, the worldly, and those who worship merely because others do—the largest class by far, no benefit is realized.
Now if the transactions of this day are the last to be enjoyed, for this largest class there would be no further hope. So, too, if the devout, and the returning backslider, and the penitent turn away from their righteousness, knowingly and willingly, there is no further hope for them.
All now depends upon their holding fast, and going forward. Just so must it be, we suppose, when Christ finishes the work of atonement. But is there nothing more to do in such a state of things? God forbid. There is everything which the danger they are in of “falling away,”—of “drawing back unto perdition”—can enjoin; everything which the desire for the salvation of a brother can prompt; everything which the holding fast the profession of our faith, in the way of laboring to enter into that rest, may demand.
But can any impenitent sinners be converted if the door is shut. Of course they cannot, though changes that men would call conversions may take place.
As it is a fundamental principle in the economy of heaven, that “it is accepted according to what a man hath,” we know that at the closing of the door of mercy, all who fear God and work righteousness, according to the light they have, must be embraced by the arms of his mercy; though as the measure of light they might then have, would be different, the apparent form of their character must differ. And there may be changes in the form of their character, which we might call conversions, though it would imply no change in their inward character before God. That such may be found,29for whom we should labor, there can be no doubt; and in fact, it is with such a class only, few indeed is their number, that our labors are in any way successful. The few that makes up this class, would, therefore, form the limits of our labors, excepting that we exhort one another.
If then it is so very doubtful whether the union of Christ with his church, at his second coming, is ever spoken of by the figure of a marriage, is it any more certain that the marriage refers to the reception of the throne and kingdom? And if so, what are the reasons for supposing that Christ has closed up his work, to become king, and that the door is shut?
Let it be understood that we do not doubt that Christ is to be united to his church, but that is the act denoted by the figure; nor do we doubt that Christ is to come literally and personally. And the act which we suppose the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage to denote, is as literal an act as the personal coming—just as the first step in descending a flight of steps, is as literal as the last step.