p. 164 | Matthew Twenty-four by James White

California Conference of Seventh-day Adventists · Oakland, California · Apr 1, 1875

Matthew Twenty-four.

By James White

The readers of the Signs have been favored with a series of articles on the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, and we hereby express the hope that they have carefully read and treasured up the truths therein presented. The importance of the instruction given in this chapter in regard to the second advent, cannot be overestimated.

Perhaps no other chapter in the Bible has been made the subject of so much controversy. Universalists well understand its importance, and they have therefore been untiring in their efforts to enlist it in the service of their cause. It is indeed the deciding ground of the whole question between them and evangelical believers, for it must appear plain to all that, if the personal, second coming of Christ is not taught in Matt. 24, it is not taught in the Scriptures; and if the Universalists could succeed in spiritualizing this chapter, or of confining its testimony to the subject of the destruction of Jerusalem, it is easy to see that the ideas of a future advent, of a resurrection of the dead, and a future judgment might easily be discarded entirely. The victory on all these questions is with those who maintain their ground on Matt. 24.

If this is so, and we think none can dispute it, then it appears that all denominations who do not wish to yield the whole ground to Universalists, have an interest in maintaining the literal interpretation of this chapter. Certainly no part of the Scriptures more clearly teaches the actual coming of Christ, and the gathering together of the saints at his coming. Mistify this, and you have prepared the way to mistify every Scripture declaration on this important subject.

But there is another point of equal interest in this chapter to which we would ask the attention of all who feel an interest in the doctrines of the resurrection and future Judgment. Admitting that Matt. 24 teaches the literal second coming of the Lord, then we must admit that it teaches just as certainly that we may know when that event is near. Here we take our stand without any fear of successful contradiction. This is a consistent position as all must admit who candidly examine verses 29-51 in connection. And therefore there are but two sides to the controversy over this chapter, namely, that of the Universalists, and that of the Adventists. They who deny that Matt. 24 gives positive knowledge when the advent is near, even at the doors, virtually deny that it refers to the advent at all; and thus take sides with the Universalists. For again, they who deny that Matt. 24 teaches the literal coming of Christ, virtually deny that that doctrine is in the Bible, for no scriptures teach it more clearly and unmistakably.

We think all must agree with us in regard to the importance of this chapter in its bearing on the controversy between Universalists and evangelicals, and also between the Adventists and all their opponents. It should be well studied and carefully considered by all who have an interest in “the present truth.” J. H. W.