But it is further said that all these events are to take place previous to the appearance of the Son of Man. "The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. And then (immediately following these events) shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven." Now this prior commotion includes the dissolution of all the elements, "The heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat." Among the number of the elements, the air will of course be destroyed, for it is included among them; and with the air those clouds which depend upon it for their existence and visibility. Yet, after this, when the clouds have ceased to be, and when the heavens are no more, the Son of Man is to appear in these very clouds and in the midst of this heaven! Here, again, is an inconsistency in the literal sense of the passage. If the heavens, and with them the clouds are dissolved, then it is impossible that anything can appear in what has ceased to have an existence. Or if the Son of Man is to appear in the clouds, then the heavens cannot be destroyed previous to that appearance. Which way soever we turn we are met by a difficulty. If we receive one of the passages in the literal sense, we must either reject or spiritualize the other.
Again: at the time of our Lord's ascension, the two angels who appeared to the disciples declared, "this same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner, as ye have seen him go into heaven." Acts i. 11. It would therefore appear that, if these angelic messengers are worthy of credit, the descent of our Lord is to be exactly similar in circumstance to his ascent. Now, in his ascension into heaven, there are several things which require notice. 1st: It was private. He led his disciples from the city to the Mount of Olives. 2d: It was seen by none but his followers. The generality of the Jewish nations did not even know that such an event had taken place; they considered our Lord as a dead man; and hence when they accused Paul before Festus, one part of that accusation was that he affirmed one Jesus to be alive, who was (in their opinion) dead. Acts xxv. 19. 3d: His ascension was a solitary one. There is no account whatever that any persons were seen ascending with Him:—"He was taken up; and a cloud received Him out of their sight." And, 4th: It was unattended by any outward pomp. The Jews knew nothing of it;—there was no alteration in the visible world; and even those who witnessed the event, beheld nothing save a bright cloud into which he passed and disappeared. The ascension of the Saviour was therefore to the world a private occurrence, so far as privacy consists in general ignorance respecting it. It was seen by none but his disciples; it was without pomp or show. Of those who afterwards heard of it, numbers gave no credit to the story. And the only visible proof that it had taken place, was the effect which followed—the extraordinary out-pouring of the divine influence.
And if we keep to the literal sense of the words, this is to be his descent from heaven: He is to come in like manner as He went up. If, then, this be the case, then such descent will be an occurrence unknown to the generality of mankind, or only known by its following effects. It will be unaccompanied by any destruction, and even by any commotion in the realm of material nature. And many of those who hear of it may be expected to deny it, according to his own words: "When the Son of Man cometh shall He find faith on the earth?"
Such, according to the passage before us must be the manner of his Second Coming: but let us, if we can, reconcile this with the former descriptions. In the one case all nature is to be destroyed; in the other it is to remain unshaken. In the former instance He is said to descend with thousands of angels; in the latter, to come unattended. By the first description, He is to be seen visibly by all; in the second, He will be invisible to all except his followers. The two accounts thus stand in direct contradiction to each other. If He comes again in the same "manner" that He ascended, then the former passages cannot be literally understood: or if He comes literally in the manner they describe, the passage before us cannot be true.
I might here, as in the former case, go through every passage, and show that each of them contains within itself accounts which are inconsistent with those of the others: in one it is said that the Lord shall descend from heaven in flaming fire: in another, in the clouds: in a third, on a great white throne. In one it is declared that, before his face the earth and the heaven shall flee away, and their place be no more found: in a second, that after His coming the departed shall rise from the earth, and the grave and the sea give up their dead; consequently, if the latter part be true, the earth will not pass away at the time of His descent. In the whole there are inconsistencies which science, according to the literal meaning, may disguise, but can never reconcile.
We now turn to the consideration of other passages which, taken even in their literal sense, militate strongly against the doctrine in dispute. After the destruction of the antediluvian earth by the flood, Jehovah affirmed, "I will not again curse the ground any more, though the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every living thing as I have done." This curse which the Lord is here inferred to have pronounced upon the former world, in whatever sense the terms be taken, was accomplished in its destruction; and the end of that world by a flood of waters, completed its fulfillment. The curse of the Lord, therefore, when pronounced upon the earth, leads to its dissolution. But God Himself affirms that He will not thus curse the ground any more,—that He will not again suffer it to be destroyed, neither will He again smite everything living. The declaration is absolute. It is not said that He will refrain from it during a limited period, but that He will not do it any more—to all eternity. Yet if the commonly received doctrine be correct, this declaration of Jehovah must be untrue. If again everything living is to be smitten,—if again the earth is to be cursed with destruction as complete, if not more so than the former one; then it cannot be true that every living thing is not again to be smitten, nor the earth again to be cursed. In this instance the literal proofs clash with the solemn declaration of God.
If, however, it be objected that these words refer not so much to the destruction of the globe, as to the mode of that event, I reply that no such qualifying language is found in the text. The words are general; they are not "I will not again curse the earth with water," but I will not curse the ground,—I will not destroy the earth "any more," either in this way or in any other. "I will not smite any more everything living as I have now done," by an universal destruction. And, in fact, the promise that a flood should no more destroy the world, would have afforded little consolation to Noah, had he understood that another destruction more awful than the former, was approaching, in which not this world only, but the whole universe would perish; and when not the greater part, but all things living, would be destroyed, without the preservation even of a remnant. The flood is certainly in the following chapter referred to particularly as the more recent danger, and a repetition of which would be most dreaded by the survivors; but the very same declaration of Jehovah, which interdicts a flood of waters, equally interdicts any other entire destruction:—"I will not in any way curse the ground any more."
There is another subject upon which I must touch, but very briefly, since the arguments arising out of it might be carried to a length far exceeding my prescribed limits. The prophetic writings abound with descriptions of what is called "the kingdom of David:"—a kingdom which was to arise in the latter day, and upon which every blessing of heaven was to descend. "In those days," says the prophet Amos, "I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old." ix. "And in the days of these kings (that is, literally, in the latter times of the Roman power,) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; but it shall break in pieces, and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." Dan. ii. 44. Again, the same prophet: "I saw in the night visions, and behold one like unto the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and 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: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away; and his kingdom, that which shall not be destroyed." That these descriptions refer to the Redeemer, is evident. Isaiah when predicting his approach, and the establishment of his kingdom, says, "Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever." ix. 7.
Now the question is, to what authority or kingdom do these predictions refer? That it is not to the general government of God, is clear,—this had existed from eternity; but the dominion spoken of, was to commence at a definite period of time,—"at that time," and "in the days of those kings." The general subjection of all things to the Divine Being, is also something arising out of his very nature, and is neither given nor acquired; but this was something to be acquired. "The Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:"—"The saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom." Nor can it refer to the kingdom of the just in glory, for the descriptions are such as can only apply to the state of men on earth. "He shall feed his flock like a shepherd; He shall gather the lambs with His arm, and carry them in His bosom." Isa. xl. 11. "I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David." If, therefore, this kingdom be neither the general dominion over all, nor the state of the righteous in eternity, it can only relate to the kingdom of the church on earth. And that it does so, is plain from the very terms used. David is, by almost all professed Christians, acknowledged to have been a type and representative of the Messiah; and the Jewish nation over whom he reigned, most certainly prefigured the Christian church: the throne of David is therefore the authority of the Lord in his church on earth, and his kingdom is that church itself. Now this kingdom and this throne,—this church and authority are everlasting; they shall "never be destroyed;" they shall "not pass away;" they shall "stand for ever." But if the earth on which this church exists, is hereafter to dissolve and pass away, the kingdom must pass away with it. For though it is true that the just in heaven would still constitute a kingdom of the Lord, yet that kingdom would no longer be "the kingdom of David." The very declaration that the kingdom of the Lord on earth will never be destroyed, supposes as a necessary consequence, that the earth on which it is erected will also continue to exist.
In agreement with this are the words heard by John; "There were great voices in heaven, saying, the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and He shall reign for ever and ever." Rev. xi. 15. And over what is He thus to reign? Most certainly over the kingdoms which He is here said to have obtained—the kingdoms of this world; and over these He is to reign "for ever and ever." But how is He to reign for ever over the kingdoms of the world, if the world and its kingdoms are to be destroyed? Whenever the earth is dissolved, the kingdoms of the world will be no more; and he cannot reign over that which has no existence! If, then, the world and its kingdoms are to be destroyed, He can never reign for ever over them: or if He will thus reign for ever over the kingdoms of the world, then those kingdoms must exist for ever; and if the kingdoms exist for ever, the world on which they are founded must exist for ever with them.