Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

second death hath no power over such; if they are blessed and holy-all of them-ion such," saith the Holy Ghost; how, I ask, can there be an apostacy-such a one as will grow up into Gog and Magog, covering the breadth of the earth-"in number as the sand of the sea?"-such a one as will bring the world into the state that it was when it was destroyed by a flood?-such a state as it was in when Sodom was destroyed?-such a state as is described, (Matt. xxv. 1-12,) when half of the church is so dead as not to be saved? But all this, according to the theory of Br. Whedon, springs out of a millennium, all the inheritors of which are blessed and holy-springing from persons "who lived again"-persons over whom the second death had no power. Who, I ask,

are to live at the last end of the millennium? Will they become as filthy as in the days of Lot? of Noah? Then doth not the second death have power over them? How then can John's words be true, " on such the second death hath NO POWER?"

How exactly answering to the conclusion to which I have come do those words of our Lord appear: (Luke xx. 35, 36:) "But they who are counted worthy to obtain that world, AND the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage. For neither can they die any more: for they are equal to angels; and are children of God, BEING the children of the resurrection."

Surely the Savior must have had reference here only to the resurrection of the just

the children of God-being children," on that account, "of the resurrection." But if brother Whedon's theory is true, all-the wicked as well as the just-are children of the resurrection. This idea the text plainly forbids. And Daniel does but shadow out the same great distinction of two resurrections, although in the manner quoted by brother Whedon, it might otherwise appear. He says, "At that time thy people shall be DELIVERED—every one that shall be found written in the book"-book of life. Here is the first resurrection. Then pursuing the course that our blessed Lord did subsequently in John, he says, "And many of them"-all, as I understand it, but without reference to time-" that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake;" but to preserve the distinction before alluded to, and with direct reference to the great deliverance, to wit, the redemption of the body, which he had just referred to, of all God's people written in the book, he adds, "some to everlasting life"-at the deliverance spoken of; "some to shame and everlasting contempt❞—at the resurrection of damnation. What other deliverance can the prophet refer to than the general deliverance, when he specifies, "EVERY ONE that shall be found written in the BOOK?" What book but the "book of life" can be intended ?

I only need to add here, that St. Clement, the disciple of Peter, afterward bishop of Rome, talks in the same language. He says, "Shall any one think it to be any very great and strange thing for the Lord of all to raise up THOSE that religiously serve him in the assurance of a good faith, when, even by a bird"-referring to the fabled Phoenix-"he shows his greatness to fulfil THE PROMISE?" He adds, "We must come to judgment in the flesh"-"in the flesh receive the reward." The reward was the "kingdom of God," which he elsewhere taught the church to expect "every hour." In Paul and Thecla also, Paul is represented as saying, "There could be no future resurrection unless we continue in chastity, and do not defile the flesh." But if one will not believe the prophets, sure I am he will not believe antiquity-not even the fathers.

Portland, March 8, 1842.

G. F. COX.

[No. XIII.]

THE following letter contains a reply to some of the incidental objections of Professor Whedon, and is a most valuable and important portion of the discussion. There are several points introduced in it, either one of which is

sufficient to do away forever the doctrine of a temporal and spiritual reign of Christ for a thousand years before his personal coming. The argument, for instance, drawn from Matt. xxiv. 14, "This gospel of the kingdom," &c., can never be met and confuted. Reader, look at these points and weigh them carefully.

J. L.

INCIDENTAL OBJECTIONS EXAMINED AND

ANSWERED.

I PROPOSE in this article to answer some of the incidental objections interspersed through brother Whedon's articles, that have not yet been attended to in answering the more leading objections. And even here I may omit some that he may regard as important. If so, and he will suggest them, I will give my views upon them, or yield to them.

1. While he allows the view I have adopted "may have no evil tendency upon myself, he fears its disastrous effects upon thousands" of others. The disastrous influence brother Whedon does not suppose will arise from the fact that the advent of Christ is near, or that we preach that it is near: but from an "excited belief that this event, with the dissolution of the earth, is near, when in truth they will soon find that it is all a delusion." Brother Whedon here assumes the point in question. His reasoning, therefore, can have, or should have, no influence on the question. The same objec

tion existed to the preaching of Noah, and must of necessity exist in all coming time, till the event arrives. If we yield to him, therefore, we can never preach that Christ's coming is near. If we may ever speak of Christ's coming, we may now. If we may ever preach that it is nigh, that "he cometh quickly," we may now. And there is no motive in the Bible more frequently applied to arouse man and the church, by the Holy Ghost, than is this same second coming of Christ-and that, too, on account of its nearness; and so much the more "should we do it"-all the church-" as we see the day approaching."

But, perhaps, his objection lies entirely against fixing the exact time; then he should release those who do not fix it. But it should be recollected, that scarcely a commentator of any note has lived who has not said something of the time when "the end of all things would come." His objection, therefore, lies against all biblical interpretation that has preceded us on this subject. Dr. Clarke, himself, fixes, as a propable event, the dissolution of the mundane system in a hundred and seventy-five years from A. D. 1825. This objection can have no force, therefore, when applied to the time, unless it is to the specific time named; and if he will enter the list here, he will find a task more difficult than he ever yet undertook of a Biblical character.

« AnteriorContinuar »