that Dr. Lightfoot, who was so intimately conversant in the Jewish phraseology, thinks, that this and similar passages are indubitably not to be interpreted of Christ's actual advent. By writers of reputation the belief of his personal reign on earth is, indeed, very generally rejected. This, however, I believe, to adopt the words of Mr. Pyle, that he shall reign in the hearts, and holy lives, and examples of his followers19.

Among others who have regarded the expression in Mat. xxiv. 30, they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, as undoubtedly figurative, (I repeat the names which have before been incidentally mentioned,) are Daubuz, Lancaster, Lightfoot, Vitringa, Le Clerc, Brenius, Whitby, Hammond; Benson, Macknight, Campbell, and Nisbett, together with bishops Newton, Newcome, and Pearce. The first coming of Christ, says bp. Hurd,' was then over, when he expired on the cross.' But his second, observes the prelate, is of a different kind and not to be understood of a personal appearance20. Indeed 'the word Christ,' says the same writer in another place, is frequently used in the apostolic writings for the doctrine of Christ; in which sense we are said to put on Christ, to grow in Christ, to learn Christ, and in other instances"."

18 Among others, it is rejected in express terms by Crellius (in Rom. xi. 23), Vitringa (in Apoc. p. 848), Brenius (de Regno Christi), Dr. John Edwards (Hist of the Various Dispensations of Religion, vol. II. p. 654), Peganius (on the Apoc. p. 238), Dr. Thomas Burnet (Theory of the Earth, vol. II. p. 308), Whitby (on the Millennium, ch. iv.), Hurd (vol. I. p. 123), and Jortin (on Eccl. Hist. vol. II. p. 424). Mede, speaking of this subject, says, 'I dare not so much as imagine, that it should be a visible converse upon earth (p. 741);' and how strongly Dr. More condemned the contrary opinion, the following citation from him will evince. The personal reign of Christ upon earth and of his holy martyrs is a very rash and groundless and unsafe conceit.' Myst. of Godliness, p. 181. The passage that follows is from Dr. Burnet. That Christ should leave that right-hand of his Father, to come and pass a thousand years here below, living upon earth in an heavenly body: this, I confess, is a thing I never could digest.'

19 On the Rev. p. 87. 21 Vol. II. p. 11.

20 Vol. I. p. 123.

Is it not surprising, that the very same persons, who declare, that the expression, the coming of the Son of man in the clouds, when it occurs in Daniel and the Evangelists, though acknowleged to be prophetic, is to be literally understood; when they meet with exactly similar language in St. John, universally admit that it there carries with it a figurative import? When Christ is represented as sitting upon a white cloud (xiv. 14), or described as sitting upon a white horse (vi. 2), the symbolic texture of the passages they presume not to deny. But is not this to incur the charge of inconsistency? To undermine such an interpretation, is it not sufficient to state the palpable variations, to which its advocates are reduced? The interpretation of these symbols St. John has himself also supplied (as Daniel and our Lord have done in the quotations above); for it is added respecting Christ in the verse last cited, and he went forth conquering and to conquer.

But although there is not sufficient reason for believing, that Christ will descend upon earth at the commencement of the millennium, and a second time become its inhabitant, yet does the New Testament contain passages which decisively prove, that at the day of judgment he will personally appear23.

22 This prophecy, says Daubuz, denotes the rapid progress of the Gos pel. Anciently a horse was not used for the convenience of riding, nor subjected to the drudgeries of agriculture. He was employed in war alone. Hence he became a symbol of conquest. To evince this, Dr. Lancaster refers to the prophecies of scripture and the oneirocritics of the East. White, he observes, is the symbol of prosperity; and therefore white horses were used by conquerors in their days of triumph. And it was, and still is, the custom of the Eastern nations to ride on white horses at the marriage-cavalcade. White horses were also looked upon by the aricients as the swiftest.-Therefore a white horse, in proportion to the capacity and quality of his rider, is the symbol of a very speedy and great advancement, and the certain prognostic of great joy and triumph.' On this subject Daubuz has furnished us with a profusion of evidence (in. p. 258-261, and 878).

23 See particularly John, v. 28, 29; Acts xvii. 31; and I Thess. iv. 16, 17.

What is the consequence of making it a rule to interpret prophecy literally? So completely does this method of explication, when applied to many of the predictions of Scripture, alter their genuine import, and such an air of wildness and improbability does it impart to them, that it is likely materially to promote the cause of infidelity. Instances of this it would be easy to accumulate. Were there not access to another mode of interpretation, the figurative and symbolic, the steadiest and most confirmed faith would be startled, and stand in suspense. What kind of plea has been advanced for perpetually recurring to the literal method of explaining prophecy, the following extract from an author of this class will shew. The prophecies, says Mr. Elhanan Winchester, that 'have been fulfilled already, have been accomplished in their most plain and obvious sense: which may serve for a rule, by which we may, without danger of mistake, interpret those that are yet to be accomplished. To a person, who has thought but little on the subject, this proposition sounds not unreasonable. Indeed were the statement in the premises correct, the conclusion which follows must be admitted to be fairly drawn. But, unfortunately, the preliminary observation is completely at variance with fact. The actual fulfilment of prophecies has proved, that many of them are literally, and many of them figuratively, expressed. The annotators on the Apocalypse, whatever be the country in which they lived, and whatever the sect to which they attached themselves, unite in agreeing, that a multitude of its predictions have had their com plete accomplishment, and yet, I believe, not one among them all has been literally fulfilled.

To prove that the coming of Christ, and the coming of the son of man are expressions, which signify nothing more than either the commencement of the Messiah's kingdom, or the establishment of it, I shall quote Mat. xvi, 28, and Mark, ix. 1. What our Lord said on a particular occasion

24 Lectures on the Prophecies, 1789. vol. I. p. 31. VOL. II.

the first of these evangelists thus expresses: verily I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom. This Mark records with the following variation: verily I say unto you there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power. The meaning is, some of those who now hear me shall live to see the Christian dispensation established: the gospel being widely propagated and having a powerful influence. It could not mean, that some should live to see him come in person, for that they had already done.

The most zealous defender of the doctrine of Christ's residence upon earth, with these two passages before him, cannot but acknowlege, however averse he may be to make the acknowlegement, that the coming of the kingdom of God, and the coming of the Son of man, are employed by the evangelists as synonimous expressions, and that the latter is used, where it cannot possibly signify his personal advent.

In the 29th v. of the xxivth ch. of Matthew, it is said, the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: in the 30th it is said, they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven. To understand the word heavens in the first of these contiguous clauses figuratively, and to interpret the word heaven in the second literally, is obviously unreasonable.

But the strongest objection against the hypothesis of Christ's actual advent, and his reign upon earth, is, I apprehend, not to be deduced from the collation of passages, nor from an application of the canons of verbal criticism. It is drawn from a consideration of those moral laws which the Deity has established, and from the nature of things. As the personal reign of Jesus would be a perpetual miracle, it would be totally opposite to the general plan of God's administration of the world, and inconsistent with that state of probation and discipline in which human-kind are placed.

That the full force of this objection may be discerned, some observations of archdeacon Paley shall be transcribed. Were the proof of revelation irresistible, it would restrain the voluntary powers too much; would not answer the purpose of trial and probation; would call for no exercise of candor, seriousness, humility, inquiry; no submission of passions, interests, and prejudices, to moral evidence and to probable truth; no habits of reflection; none of that previous desire to learn and to obey the will of God, which forms perhaps the test and the merit of the virtuous principle. Irresistible evidence would confound all characters and all dispositions. Would subvert, rather than promote the true purpose of the divine councils, which is not to produce obedience by a force little short of mechanical constraint (which obedience would be regularity not virtue, and would hardly perhaps differ from that which inanimate bodies pay to the laws impressed upon their nature), but to treat moral agents agreeably to what they are; which is done, when light and motives are of such kinds, and are imparted in such measures, that the influence of them depends upon the recipients themselves."

There are two declarations of our Lord himself, which militate so strongly against the idea, that the signal of the proper kingdom of Christ will be his descent upon earth, and that he will then assume the character of a terrestrial monarch, that they particularly deserve to be cited. The first is his memorable saying before Pilate, My kingdom is not of this world. The second is his answer to the Pharisees respecting the nature of his kingdom, 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". The kingdom of the Messiah or Christ,' says bp. Pierce, is not to be of that kind as ye expect,

25 Evid. of Christianity, vol II p. 368, 371.

26 John, xviii. 36. Our Lord does not employ here the word alav but κόσμος.

27 Luke xvii. 20, 21.