Signs of the Times, Vol. 1, No. 10.
OUR PRESENT POSITION : or, the Waiting, Watching TimePage 1
OUR PRESENT POSITION : or, the Waiting, Watching Time.
By James White
TEXT : "Take ye heed, watch and pray; for ye know not when the time is." Mark 13 : 33. The time mentioned in the text is the time of the second coming of Christ. This is the theme of the closing portion of the chapter where our text is found. The definite time of the second advent is not revealed. Hence, Seventh-day Adventists do not set times for that event, as many first-day Adventists do. We believe, however, that the Scripture of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God for our instruction, faith and practice; and that the prophetic numbers of Daniel and John were designed for a specific object in the threefold warning to the last generation to prepare for the coming of Christ. Timists, or time-setting Adventists, reason well respecting the definiteness of the prophetic numbers, and that they were given for our learning, and demand our attention, as an important portion of the revealed word. But in supposing that two of the numbers of Daniel reach to the final conflagration and the resurrection of the just, they are seen by the discriminating to occupy a position where they should feel the rebuke in our text—"Ye know not when the time is." Seventh-day Adventists deny that any of the prophetic numbers reach to the second advent of Jesus Christ. They hold that William Miller was correct in the main in his calculations of the prophetic times; that his mistake, and consequent disappointment, was in the event, and not in the time. William Miller and his associates held that the events to take place at the close of the 2300 days of Daniel 8 : 14, and the 1335 of chap. 12 : 12, 13, were the renovation of the earth by fire, and the resurrection of the just. But close investigation, by light that has since shone from the sacred Scriptures upon the subject of the heavenly sanctuary, has discovered the fact that proof is greatly wanting to sustain the positions, that the cleansing of the sanctuary, at the close of the 2300 days is the burning of the world, or that the prophet standing in his lot at the end of the days means the first resurrection. The reader is cited to Thoughts on Daniel, by Uriah Smith, and works on the sanctuary and 2300 days, for sale at this Office, for a full, clear, and satisfactory exposition of this important subject. The prophetic times have a purpose to serve. But, not reaching to the second advent, believers are now left without definite time for that event. The reader, then, can at once see that our position does not disregard, but respects the periods of Daniel and John as important portions of the prophetic word, and at the same time is in harmony with all such expressions from the lips of our divine Lord as, "Ye know not when the time is." The position of the Adventists of 1844, that our Lord's discourse in Matt. 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, was a prophetic sketch of the leading events from the first advent down to the second, and that, therefore, all such expressions relative to the definite time applied to the last generation, gave these texts still greater force against their time position, and made it necessary for them to explain away the apparent difficulty. But with the vast majority the objection would not stay explained away, but constituted a popular and forcible objection—"Ye know not when the time is." And yet we solemnly believe that the hand of God has been in the great second-advent movement. William Miller, as an honest man, gave to the world the best light he had. He was right on the nature and object of the second advent; right in his application of the prophetic symbols; and right in his calculation of the prophetic numbers; but he was mistaken in the event. But even that mistake was in the providence of God, as verily as that of the chosen twelve, and the shouting multitude, when they cried, Hosannah, in fulfillment of Zech. 9 : 9, in view of Christ's taking the throne of David in old Jerusalem. They, in the direct providence of God, in fulfillment of the words of the prophet, were mistaken. So William Miller and fifty thousand Adventists of 1844 were mistaken in the event, while fulfilling the message of the angel of Rev. 14 : 6, 7, and the oath of the mighty angel of chap. 10. We do not blame William Miller and his friends for preaching the time, though while holding that the second advent would be at the termination of the periods, we see their difficulties in harmonizing such passages as our text with their position. But we do blame them for disgusting the public, and dividing and weakening their own ranks with setting a new time right upon the heels of each failure. And it is just here to state, that William Miller and his favorite organ, the Advent Herald, though he and his conductors did not embrace the scriptural view of the heavenly sanctuary—the only position that connects the past with the present, lights up the glorious future, and justifies the great advent movement—yet were not guilty of perpetual dabbling with definite time. Sylvester Bliss, who was for more than twenty years the local conductor of the Herald said a few years before his death, that any evidence for the termination of the periods at any time since 1844, when compared with the evidence for that date, was like a rush-light compared with the light of the sun. The statement in the publisher's preface to the Memoir of William Miller, that his "erroneous calculations of the prophetic periods he frankly confessed," gives a wrong impression. He confessed that he had been disappointed; that there must be, therefore, errors in chronology. But he never attempted to point out any error in his calculations, only that the time had passed. But his biographer has set this matter in its true light in honorably extracting largely from a pamphlet, dictated by William Miller and reported by himself, and published in 1845, entitled, Apology and Defense, from which we take the following statements :— "That I have been mistaken in the time, I freely confess; and I have no desire to defend my course any further than I have been actuated by pure motives, and it has resulted to God's glory. My mistakes and errors God, I trust, will forgive. I cannot, however, reproach myself for having preached definite time; for, as I believe that whatsoever was written aforetime was written for our learning, the prophetic periods are as much a subject of investigation as any other portion of the word. "I, therefore, still feel that it was my duty to present all the evidence that was apparent to my mind, and were I now in the same circumstances, I should be compelled to act as I have done. I should not, however, have so done, had I seen that the time would pass by; but not knowing that it would, I would, I feel even more satisfaction in having warned my fellow-men than I should feel, were I conscious that I had believed them in danger and had not raised my voice. How keen would have been my regret, had I refrained to present what in my soul I believed to be truth, and the result had proved that souls must perish through my neglect! I cannot, therefore, censure myself for having conscientiously performed what I believed to be my duty. "But while I frankly acknowledge my disappointment in the exact time, I wish to inquire whether my teachings have been thereby materially affected. My views of exact time depended entirely upon the accuracy of the chronology. "There is not a point in my belief in which I am not sustained by some of the numerous writers who have opposed my views. Prof. Bush, the most gentlemanly of my opponents, admits that I am correct in the time, with the exception of the precise day or year; and this is all for which I contend. That the 70 weeks are 490 years, and the 1260 and 2300 days are so many years, are admitted by Messrs. Bush, Hinton, and Jarvis. That the 2300 days and 70 weeks commence at the same time, Prof. Bush does not deny. And Dr. Jarvis admits that the former carry us to the resurrection and Judgment. Prof. Bush, Dr. Jarvis, Mr. Hinton, and Mr. Morris, admit that the legs of iron and the fourth beast of Daniel 7, are Rome, and that the little horn of Dan 8, is Rome. The literal resurrection of the body, the end of the world, and a personal coming of Christ, have not been questioned by several who have written against me. "Thus there is not a point for which I have contended that has not been admitted by some of those who have written to disprove my opinions. I have candidly weighed the objections advanced against these views; but I have seen no arguments that were sustained by the Scriptures that, in my opinion, invalidate my position." Thus William Miller speaks for himself in July, 1845. In a letter to the Herald, of Dec. 3, 1844, several weeks after the passing of the time, he says :— "I believe the ground we have formerly stood upon, as it regards the chronology of prophecy, is the only ground we can take; and if the defect is in human chronology, then no human knowledge is sufficient in this age to rectify it with any degree of certainty; and I see no good that can be accomplished by taking a stand for any future period, with less evidence than we had for 1843-4. For those who would not believe, with all the evidence we then produced, we cannot expect will now believe with much less evidence. "Again, it is to me almost a demonstration, that God's hand is seen in this thing. Many thousands, to all human appearance, have been made to study the Scriptures by the preaching of the time; and by that means, through faith in the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, have been reconciled to God. And those of us who have been familiar with the fruits and effects of the preaching of this doctrine must acknowledge that he has been with us in so doing, and his wisdom has in a great measure marked out our path, which he has devised for such good as he will accomplish in his own time and manner; as in the case of Nineveh by the preaching of Jonah. If this should be the real state of the case, and we should go on to set other times in the future, we might possibly be found frustrating, or trying to at least, and receive no blessing. I think my brethren will admit that God has been in the work, and he has tried our faith in the best possible manner." William Miller still held that the coming of Christ would be personal and visible; so do Seventh-day Adventists. He believed his application of the prophetic symbols had been correct; so do we. He still believed that he had been right in the year-day theory, and that the seventy weeks were the first 490 years of the 2300, consequently that the two periods commenced together, at the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem, Ezra 7; so do we. He could not see why his position was not correct, that the 2300 years commenced in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, 457 before Christ, and consequently would end in 1844; neither can we. What, then, is the real difference between the position of William Miller, after the time passed, and that of Seventh-day Adventists on this subject? This question should be fairly and clearly answered. William Miller still held that two of the periods of Daniel reached to the coming of Christ; therefore did not terminate in 1844. And as he, and his associates were not able to point out any error in his entire system of calculation, the most intelligent and consistent of them did not fix on any other dates from which to commence the periods. And those who did adopt other dates, rejected those adopted by William Miller only on the ground that the time had passed. In such a state of things it is no marvel that discouragement, division and apostasy have crumbled and wasted the once united and happy second advent body. Seventh-day Adventists do not recognize the advent of Christ to this earth, and the conflagration of the world, in the cleansing of the sanctuary at the close of the 2300 days of Dan. 8 : 14. Neither do they see the resurrection of the just in Daniel's standing in his lot at the end of the 1335 days of chap. 12 : 13. Both these are connected with the investigative Judgment of the righteous, which must take place in Heaven before the Lord comes to reward them at the resurrection of the just.74 The real difference, then, between the position of William Miller on this subject and that of Seventh-day Adventists is simply in relation to the event to take place at the termination of the periods. The subject is now one of the clearest, and most satisfactory to the close Bible student, in all the range of Christain theology. Such critical examiners and close reasoners as J. N. Andrews and Uriah Smith are enabled to show in their works that there is not one text in all the Bible which contains any evidence that the earth, or any part of it, is the sanctuary of Dan. 8 : 14, and that it is to be cleansed by fire; while at the same time they present a large amount of scriptural proof that the prophet refers to the new-covenant sanctuary in Heaven, and that its cleansing is in connection with the closing portion of the ministry of Jesus Christ as our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary, just prior to his second advent. And a critical review of the whole question of prophetic calculations fully justifies William Miller in rejecting the succession of new times for the second advent, urged upon him by some of the more restless of the Adventists, upon almost infinitely less evidence than that he had published to the world, which terminated the periods in 1844. Seventh-day Adventists adopt the positions of William Miller and his associates of 1844, relative to the manner and object of the second advent, the application of the prophetic symbols of Daniel, and the calculation of the periods. The time passed, the periods have ended, we are in the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary, waiting for the appearing of the Son of man. And right here the subject of the three messages of Rev. 14 : 6-12, opens before us with great clearness, and applies with tremendous force. The past, present, and future, are all made plain. The great advent movement of 1840-4 was of God. The position of Seventh-day Adventists upon this subject, resurrects the position of William Miller upon the prophecies. It most gloriously harmonizes the sacred Scriptures. And it relieves the subject of Christain experience, as manifested in the labors, sacrifices, and lives of such men as William Miller and those who associated themselves with him in honestly and zealously warning the world, giving them the best light they then had on the prophecies. The position of Seventh-day Adventists, then, has all the force of evidence of that of William Miller and his friends before the passing of the time; and in addition to that they have a perfectly satisfactory position upon the sanctuary, the nature and time of its cleansing, and the forcible application of the messages of the three angels of Rev. 14 to the past, the present and future history of the Second Advent movement, embracing the great Sabbath reformation. Every true Seventh-day Adventists may with cheerful confidence sing :— "For He has been with us; and he still is with us;
And he's promised to be with us to the end." "Speak unto the children of Israel that they go forward." FORWARD; be our watchword, Steps and voices joined; Seek the things before us, Not a look behind; Burns the fiery pillar At our army's head; Who shall dream of shrinking, By Jehovah led? Forward through the desert, Through the toil and fight; Jordan flows before us, Zion beams with light. Forward, when in childhood Buds the infant mind; All through youth and manhood Not a thought behind, Speed through realms of nature, Climb the steps of grace; Faint not, till around us Gleams the father's face. Forward all the lifetime, Climb from height to height, Till the head be hoary, Till the eve be light. Forward, flock of Jesus, Salt of all the earth; Till each yearning purpose Springs to glorious birth; Sick, they ask for healing, Blind, they grope for day; Pour upon the nations Wisdom's loving ray. Forward out of error, Leave behind the night; Forward through the darkness, Forward into light. Glories upon glories Hath our God prepared, By the souls that love him One day to be shared; Eye hath not beheld them, Ear hath never heard, Nor of these hath uttered Thought or speech or word. Forward, marching eastward Where the heaven is bright; Till the veil is lifted, Till our faith be sight. Far o'er yon horizon Rise the city towers, Where our God abideth-- That fair home is ours; Flash the streets with jasper, Shine the gates with gold, Flows the gladdening river, Shedding joys untold. Thither, onward thither, In Jehovah's might! Pilgrims to your country, Forward into light. Ministration of Angels.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
BUT when we endeavor to prove that there is a real, personal, devil, the questions immediately come up. Where did he come from? Did God create him? or, How did he come into existence? Spiritualists, in particular, harp much on this point, and thus overthrow the faith of some. Dr. Hare, a Spiritualist, says: "But I conceive that the existence of a devil is irreconcilable with all goodness and omnipotency; and that, were a devil created by God, the Creator would be answerable for all the acts of the being so created. Evidently the devil could be nothing else but what the Creator should make him, and could do nothing but what Prescience would foresee. The acts of the devil would therefore be indirectly those of his Maker." God never did create a devil. Then says the objector, he cannot exist; for God created all things that do exist. But stop! do all things remain just as they were created by God? Wicked men exist, do not they? Yes. Did God ever create a wicked man? No; for "God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions." Eccl. 7:29. God created man good, but he has made himself wicked. The same is true of Satan. God created him an angel. He rebelled and made himself a Devil. We will now proceed to ascertain by the Bible what his origin was, and how he became what he now is. In the earthly or typical sanctuary, the symbol of God's presence was between the two cherubim which covered the mercy-seat. Ex. 25:22. So in the heavenly temple, God dwells between two covering cherubs. Proof. "The Lord reigneth; let the people tremble: he sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved." "Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, thou that leadest Joseph like a flock; thou that dwellest between the cherubims, shine forth." Ps. 99:1; 80:1. "O Lord of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the earth; thou hast made heaven and earth." Isa. 37:16. This testimony is sufficient to establish the fact that God dwells between the cherubim. These mighty and holy angels, to use a military term, are the body-guard of the Lord. Ezekiel gives a lengthy description of these cherubims, chapters 1 and 10, and, in conclusion, says; "This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubims." Verse 20. In harmony with this Zechariah says; "These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth." Chap. 4:14. God's throne is in his holy temple. Rev. 11:15. This temple is in Heaven. Chap. 11:19. There is also a city in Heaven, called the New Jerusalem. Says Paul, "But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." Gal. 4:26. Again: "But we are come [by faith] unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels." Heb. 12:22. Probably the one on earth was named from the one in Heaven, the same as the sanctuary and temple were. So, also, we understand, the Mount Zion on earth was named from the true Mount Zion in Heaven. In the Bible we read much about the "holy mountain of God," the "hill of God," "Mount Zion," &c. That this does not refer to the earthly Mount Zion, is evident from many scriptures. Paul says, "But ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the Heavenly Jerusalem." Heb. 12:22. Here he locates Mount Zion in the heavenly Jerusalem. By comparing Rev. 14:1; 15:2; and 4:6, we see that the throne of God is on Mount Zion. To sum up, we have learned that there is a city in Heaven; that this city is Mount Zion; that on this mountain is the temple of God; and that in the temple is the throne of God, which is covered by two angels, or covering cherubs. We now call the reader's attention to a brief description of the city, as found in Rev. 21:10-21. "And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God, having the glory of God. And her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal; and had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels." Now mark the names of the precious stones which form the city: "And the building of the wall of it was of jasper; and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass. And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald; the fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius the seventh, chrysolite; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst. And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass. Some of these precious gems would sparkle like fire, and some would emit light of themselves. In this heavenly city were the tree of life, the river of the water of life, &c., which form the Paradise, Eden, or garden of God. Rev. 22:1-3; Gen. 2:8-17. We are now prepared to inquire about the origin of Satan, and for this purpose will call the reader's attention to Eze. 28: "The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God: Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a god, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God." Tyrus, or Tyre, was a rich heathen city on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. We understand the person here called the prince or king of Tyrus is none other than Satan himself introduced under that name. That this is so, we will now prove by what is said of him. Verse 3: "Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee." "Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God: Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold; the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so. Thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned; therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God; and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire." Verses 12-16. Mark the character of the person described. He is wiser than Daniel; no secret can be hid from him. "Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty." Again: "Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God." If this refers to the earthly Eden, no mortal has ever been in it except Adam and Eve; but this personage has been there. Hence, the one here spoken of is not a man. We do read, however, that the serpent, who is also called the devil and Satan, Rev. 12:9, was in the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve were there. Gen. 3:1-6. But we think the Eden here referred to is in the city of God above, as the sequel will show. Again the Lord says, "Every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius," &c. Read the list again. Turning to Rev. 21:19, 20, we have the same list of precious stones named in the description of the heavenly Jerusalem: "And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald," &c. This shows that the personage introduced in Eze. 28, has been in that city. The Lord says to him, "Thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire." As it was stated before, many of these stones in the holy city emit light of themselves; and hence they could properly be called stones of fire. One is thus described: "Carbuncle is a very elegant gem of a deep red color, with an admixture of scarlet; from its bright, lively color, it had the name of carbunculus, which signifies a little coal."—Clarke. "Thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire." Where is this? Ans. In the heavenly Jerusalem, where God dwells. Again, "Thou wast upon the holy mountain of God." Verse 14. We have before proved that the holy mountain of God, the true Mount Zion, is in the heavenly Jerusalem. Here then, is another proof that this person was once in the city of God. How could all this apply to the king of Tyrus? We can readily see that it is another person introduced under his name. In another article we will show that this person is Satan himself. The Saints' Inheritance.
By J. N. Loughborough
THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST EXPECTED A LITERAL KINGDOM.
WHEN our Saviour commenced his teaching, the Jews were expecting the Messiah, not, however, in the form in which he came; but as a king, to take to himself the scepter of the kingdom, and reign over Israel, and destroy his enemies. We see from the movements of the disciples of our Lord, that their minds were strongly impressed with the same idea; namely, that Christ was then to take possession of his kingdom. With this view of the subject, we can understand the meaning of their words, when they said, "If thou art the king of the Jews, tell the people plainly." And at another time when Jesus had performed a notable miracle, he "perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, and he departed into the mountains."* Again, when Christ rode up to Jerusalem, seated upon a colt, what a shout of "hosanna to the son of David" was raised by the people. What caused them thus to shout? Did they understand that in a few hours he was to hang upon the rugged cross, and expire, while all nature should be convulsed? No; they supposed he was riding to Jerusalem to take possession of the kingdom and throne of his father David. But Jesus died. Sadness filled the hearts of his disciples, and when on the morning of the resurrection he appeared to the women of their company, it was "as they mourned and wept." Why this mourning if they understood the plan of God for the salvation of lost man? Why such sadness if they really had faith in Jesus' resurrection? Why were they not looking forward with joyous hope to the third day, when they should again see him whom their souls loved? Instead of their manifesting such feelings as we should expect, had they understood what was to be accomplished by the death of Christ, we behold two of them conversing sadly of their disappointment as they walked in the way to Emmaus. We read that Jesus drew near and walked with them, "and said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another as ye walk, and are sad?" They answered, "Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things that are come to pass?" He said, "What things?" They said, concerning Jesus of Nazareth: "the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel; and beside all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulcher; and when they found not his body, they came, saying that they had seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive." "Astonished" to hear of the resurrection of Christ! Who would claim, with such testimony before them, that they understood the plan of redemption to be accomplished through his death and intercession? If they understood it, what necessity for Jesus to begin "at Moses and all the prophets," and expound "unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself?" Their testimony then in this conversation, that they trusted Christ would redeem Israel, must, and does, to our mind, embody the idea that they supposed Christ would redeem them from under the hand of the Romans, by whose Tetrarchs they were then ruled in their civil affairs. If Christ redeemed them from this, it would simply be by establishing his kingdom. This company returned to Jerusalem, however, believers in Christ's resurrection, and with their minds enlightened on the subject of Christ's death. But did they banish from their minds the idea that Christ was then to commence his reign? We will see. In Acts 1:6, we read: "When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" They were now more than ever satisfied that Christ was the one whose right the kingdom was. He had been raised from the dead and himself had shown them that it was necessary that this should take place, that the Psalms, &c., might be fulfilled. And now, seeing nothing in the way of its establishment, they asked the above question respecting the kingdom: "Wilt thou at this time restore it? Israel once had it, but lost it in the days of Zedekiah. The question is, Will Christ now restore it! They had not yet seemed to get the force of the parable which Jesus spake when he was nigh to Jerusalem, for the benefit of those who thought the kingdom of God was immediately to appear, in which he showed that the Son of man (like the nobleman) must "go into a far country, and return,"† before the kingdom could be established. The light also seemed to be obscure from their minds, which Christ gave them when their hearts were saddened on account of his telling them, "I go to him that sent me." "Whither I go, ye cannot come." Said he, "I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself."‡ But we ask, What is his reply to their question concerning the restoration of the kingdom? Does he tell them that he will never restore it? "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father hath put in his own power." This is virtually admitting that the kingdom was to be restored to Israel: not after the flesh; but as Paul says (Rom. 9:8), "The children of the promise are counted for the seed." "But," he says, "ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." This seems to indicate that they would understand this matter, after they should receive the Holy Ghost and be endowed with power from on high. Christ said, "When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come."§ Peter was among those who received this power, and has borne testimony concerning the matter. His testimony we will notice when we come to look at the time for the establishment of the kingdom. It is claimed that the expression used by Christ, "The kingdom of God is within you," is sufficient to prove that the disciples were not taught to look for a literal inheritance. We will quote the testimony: "And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: neither shall they say, Lo here! or Lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Was even the kingdom of grace established in the hearts of hypocrites? It was, if Christ meant to teach them by this testimony that the kingdom of God was in their hearts. The thing demanded in this text is, When shall the kingdom of God—the saints' inheritance—come? Christ does not say, as some would claim, that it had already come; but his very answer shows that the coming of the kingdom was a future event. He says, "Neither shall they say [when it comes], Lo here!" &c. If Christ meant to teach in this text that the kingdom had already come, what can you make of the prayer he taught his people to pray (Matt. 6:10), "Thy kingdom come?" Every saint, to the end of this age, may pray, "Thy kingdom come," because the75kingdom will not come till the "nobleman" returns, "having received the kingdom." The idea we gain from Luke 17:20, 21, is that when the kingdom of God comes, it will not be in a secret manner, but all will know it, and there will be no opportunity nor necessity for any to say, "Lo here! or, Lo there!" for the kingdom of God will be within you, or, as the margin reads, "among you." That this is the idea Christ meant to teach, is plain from what he immediately told his disciples. Verses 22—24. "And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it And they shall say to you, See here! or, See there! go not after them, nor follow them; for as the lightning that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day." This language agrees with that used by our Saviour concerning his second coming. Matt. 24:26, 27; Mark 13:21, 23. And instead of Luke 17 forming an objection to the position we have taken, it shows that the kingdom is yet future. But if we were to admit that the kingdom was spiritual (mystical), and that it was established in the days of Christ's first advent, we should find ourselves involved in a great difficulty on Dan. 2, which shows that the kingdom of the God of Heaven is not set up till the Roman Empire is divided into ten parts; whereas in the days of Christ, and for 300 years after, no such ten parts existed. The Roman Empire was divided into ten parts between the years 356 A.D. and 483. Then the image could not be smitten on the feet prior to 483 A. D., therefore the kingdom of the God of Heaven, brought to view by Daniel, was not established in the days of Christ's first advent. Were we to claim that the image was smitten in the days of Christ, and that since that time the kingdom has been gradually set up, we should find facts against us; for if you call the gospel the kingdom, where has it had the power to break one toe of the image in pieces? Facts show that instead of the stone's smiting the image, the image has smitten the stone all the way through the present dispensation; and, for proof of this, read the history of the persecutions that have befallen the gospel church by the hands of the pagan and papal powers; for which see Fox's Book of Martyrs, and Buck's Theological Dictionary. J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH. (Continued.)