« AnteriorContinuar »
is rather for the confirmation, than for the discovery of Divine truth. Surely it will not be contended that we should withhold our belief of a doctrine until we have discovered all the arguments by which it may be supported. The truth of the doctrine of the first resurrection rests, 1. On its being the universally received doctrine of the church in the first three centuries of Christianity; 2. On the express testimony of Holy Scripture, confirming the testimony of the church. But when the opponents of this doctrine endeavoured to overthrow it by resolving the language of St. John (Rev. xx. 4, 5) into a mere figure, telling us that there is no literal first resurrection, it became us to search the Scriptures, to discover on what authority they founded so bold an assertion. In doing this, it occurred to me to examine closely the language in which the Apostles spoke of the resurrection, to see whether any thing could be inferred from it, either supporting or opposing the view of a general resurrection simul et semel: and I think it must be admitted as remarkable, by every unprejudiced inquirer, that wherever the resurrection of the saints is spoken of it is expressed by ek, simply or in composition, preceding νεκρων, or των νεκρων and that where the general resurrection is spoken of we have no preposition, but simply αναστασις νεκρων Or των νεκρων.
Such is THE FACT. How is it to be accounted for, on any other principle than that maintained in this paper c?
NOTE. Since writing the ahove, the Christian Observer has appeared which professes to contain my reply to his correspondent. The paper has been altered and mutilated without my consent, which I must think in itself an act of editorial unfaithfulness. The Editor was at least bound to give me the option of withdrawing it, after he had made his proposed amendments. This he had neither the justice nor the courtesy to do. But, besides this act of injustice, he has inserted a note, in which he gives his readers to understand that I have employed some very irritating language, unfit for the public eye. He professes to quote the word " insulted,” as if I had used that term in an angry and offensive manner. The sentence, which he seems so greatly to disapprove, in reply to the gentle conciliating language of his own correspondent, was, I believe, nearly as follows : “ The uncourteous style of this communication, and the unfounded im. putations on the character of one wholly unknown to the writer, need no remark. With a parade of charity he acquits me of wilful dishonesty! and intentional untruth! by affixing upon me an imputation scarcely less insulting.” Such is the sentence to which the Editor affixes the charge of " pungent retort,” and “ personal animadversion.” And the following expressions of his own correspondent applied to an unknown opponent are, I must presume, in his judgment, characteristic of “good temper, fraternal kindness, and calmness of judgment:"_" Taking up the sentiments of others ;'* « taking incredible liberties with the word of God ;' “ manufacturing one word out of two ;" “ building on the authority of others;" “ retailing their arguments; “ jumping suddenly to conclusions, and then seeking for arguments to support them."
So much for the Christian Observer's profession of impartiality. Perhaps it would not have been worth while to notice this unfairness, but that it may account for the silence of the contributors to the Morning Watch, if in future they should choose not to reply to objections advanced in periodicals of this description. If we cannot gain a fair hearing, it is useless to attempt a defence.
TO CORRESPONDENTS. Mr. Borthwick's paper is again unexpectedly delayed, but we can positively
promise it in our next. The paper of Fidus is also postponed. Two from Sevenoaks are under consideration, and several shorter ones. communications to be sent two months before the day of publication, having ex
perienced some inconvenience in our arrangements from wantof sufficient time. In answer to applicants for our first Number, we have to state, that the SECOND
Edition will be ready for delivery at the end of September.
CONTENTS OF NO. IV.
ON THE GRADUAL UNFOLDING OF PROPHECY. IN studying the prophetic Scriptures, nothing strikes us with
greater wonder and delight than the exact accordance and symmetry which we discover between all the several parts of a prophecy when it is fully understood, compared with the irregularities and seeming disorder which we attributed to the same prophecy before its interpretation was unfolded. This wonderful art-by which the mystery of God is veiled till he pleases to discover it, when it becomes clear without any additional revelation—while we reverently admire, we may also profitably inquire into, and shew some of the important ends it answers. Of the many ends which are attained by this clearing up in the fulfilment, growing out of the previous mystery of prophecy, the scope of our present argument leads us to mention one only~ namely, that it records beforehand the purposes of God in a manner which his church may understand, so as to derive from thence the continual assurance that nothing happens by chance, but that all things are minutely determined and overruled by him; while, on the other hand, such a degree of mystery overhangs it, that the men of the world are repelled from its study, and therefore neither presumptuously attempt to forward nor impiously to counteract the designs of God. To the people of God, a waiting, watchful spirit is that most frequently enjoined in Scripture; and this frame of mind is mainly produced and encouraged by the assurance of certain great interpositions on their behalf, coupled with ignorance of the exact time when these acts shall be performed. The soul is thus kept suspended upon the will of God, with whom alone are the issues of events; and in constant readiness to welcome every development of his purpose, in the evolution of those times and seasons which the Father hath kept in his own power.
VOL. I.NO, IV,
Previous to the first coming of our Lord, though the harp of prophecy had long been silent, we know (Luke ii. 38; Mark xv. 43) that there were many who, like Anna and Zacharias, were waiting for the consolation of Israel; and, though they knew not the exact time when the Lord would visit and redeem his people, did know that the period was then approaching; and were ready, with Simeon, to exclaim, "Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation.” The sources of these their expectations were manifold. Some, undoubtedly, were, like Simeon's, special revelations; some might be traditions; but the greater number are to be traced to their study of the prophecies respecting the Messiah, all of which seemed now to have their preliminary signs accomplished, and the whole world to stand in readiness for its promised Redeemer. The dying Patriarch had declared that “the sceptre would not depart from Judah till Shiloh came;" but the sceptre had passed into the hands of Herod, and Judea was a province of Rome. Of Jesse nothing but
a stem” remained, as a root in a dry ground, whence the “rod” or scion should spring (Isai. xi). The fourth monarchy of Daniel was fully manifested : it ruled the whole world, and was as beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it” (Dan. vii. 7). And, more than all, Daniel's seventy weeks had nearly expired, which were “ to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy” (Dan. ix. 24). But, though these signs led the Jewish people to expect that God would at this time " raise up for them an horn of salvation in the house of his servant David,” yet they fell into mistakes, both as to the nature of this salvation, and as to its time of manifestation : a brief notice of which will help us to account for mistakes of a like kind, into which the Christian church fell, respecting the spiritual domination of Antichrist in the Papacy, and his literal manifestation as a person, in the last days of this present dispensation. The first
error we notice, in those who accompanied our Lord, was one of impatience. They saw in the prophecies but one Messiah, to whom various offices were assigned; some of humiliation and suffering, some of mighty power: they rightly concluded that all these acts would be performed by the same person; but they erroneously, though naturally, concluded that they would all be performed at the same time. When, therefore, they saw Jesus do many of those acts which proved him to be the Messiah, they cried out with impatience, “ How long dost thou make us to doubt? if thou be the Messiah tell us plainly,” and