REESE

LIBRARY

UNIVERSIT

OF INTERPRETATION.

therefore, to watch, for, ere they were aware, they should be involved in the terrible scenes connected with his coming to judgment, which he describes in the remainder of the 24th and through the 25th chapters of Matthew. We shall have occasion, hereafter, to refer to these chapters for another purpose. We have given this brief exposition at present, merely to confirm the truth of our position, that the predictions of Christ recognize no new principles of interpretation, but are as literally to be verified as those of the ancient prophets, and to be understood according to the grammatical construction and import of the language employed in delivering them.

Equally true is it of the predictions of Paul, of Peter, and of Jude. They plainly refer to events in the church and world, to be literally, historically verified, i. e. matters of direct, public, visible observation, not allegorical resemblances, and are easiest and best understood according to the grammatical interpretation. As for those of John, in the book of Revelations, they are indeed delivered mainly in symbolical language, but the symbols are not all new. They are chiefly taken from Daniel, Ezekiel, and Zechariah, and are an exposition of many things contained in them, and therefore must be subjected to the same principles of interpretation applicable to them-which is not the allegorical but grammatical interpretationaccording to the established import of the symbols, and to designate THINGS, AS REALLY AND HISTORICALLY TRUE, i. e. EVENTS TO OCCUR, as if they had been described in alphabetical terms.*

Besides, they are interspersed with alphabetical interpretations, which serve as the clue to the mean

* See Rev. 1. 20; 4. 5; 5.8; 7. 13-16; 11. 3, 4, 8; 17. 13, 14, 15, 18; 19. 8, 10; 20. 2, 4, 5.

ing of some of the more complicated symbols. Symbolical language has indeed been called figurative, and made a pretext for the spiritual interpretation, founded on a hidden sense. But we shall have occasion, elsewhere, to show that symbolical language is even more definite and immutable, as to its import, than alphabetical-that it does not possess the character of what rhetoricians call allegory-and that it is used, as truly and designedly as the alphabetical, to designate events and scenes that are to occur in the church and world, as literally matters of public observation, events of history.

The common and most plausible attempt made to prove the allegorical or spiritual interpretation to be correctly applicable to unfulfilled prophecy, is the following. The phrase, the kingdom of God, or the kingdom of heaven, or, the kingdom of the heavens, it is said, evidently, very often in the New Testament, denotes the church of God as a spiritual society, and, therefore, the language of prophecy relating to it, must, of course, possess an allegorical or spiritual meaning. In like manner, it is said, that the coming of Christ is a phrase employed in the New Testament, not in its literal sense, but analogically, to denote some special movement, or interposition of his providence, and, therefore must be analogically and spiritually understood.

In reply to this, we remark, that the thing thus assumed must be proved. The phrase, the kingdom of heaven, we affirm, is not of mutable import, according to men's fancies-now denoting the church of God on earth, as it is visibly organized, and then, its invisible members, the elect of God-then, again, the intermediate state after death-then, the Millenium—and then, eternal glory. It properly, according

to fair grammatical construction, denotes the glorious dominion of Jesus Christ, to be established on earth at his coming, not a kingdom in the heavens, sometimes illustrated, it is true, and frequently spoken of, as in its embryo condition, in its forming, preparatory, or inchoate state, comprising the saints on earth with the saints in heaven-destined to a future state of triumph and joint dominion with Jesus Christ, but never as an organized spiritual society, either in union with, or opposition to, or in contradistinction from, the kingdoms of this world.

And as to His coming,* we utterly deny, that the phrases which are employed by Christ himself, and the New Testament writers, to designate His interposition for the introduction and establishment of His kingdom, either do, or can, upon any fair principles of grammatical construction, mean anything but His VISIBLE PERSONAL APPEARING-His second coming, or glorious return to earth. The assumptions, therefore, on which this whole system of spiritual interpretation is based, we pronounce to be altogether fallacious and untenable. They never have been proved.

In a proper place, we shall show, that the idea of the church being the kingdom of God, was not current in the world for several centuries after the Christian era; yea, was not excogitated till after the introduction of the Platonic philosophy, from the schools of Alexandria, by Origen, and the rise of the spiritual interpreters. After the conversion of the Emperor Constantine to Christianity, and the establishment of the church and of the Christian religion by the laws of the Roman empire, the idea of an allegorical kingdom was conceived and adopted, and became, through

* See Chap. XI.

the corruptions of the times, the grand means, the ladder, as it has been called,* by which the Bishop of Rome ascended to his lofty seat, where, claiming the kingdoms of this world, as the vicegerent of Jesus Christ, "he opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."+

There is, indeed, an analogical use of language, which, founded on an assumed relation between moral, spiritual, and intellectual things, and physical, sensible, and material forms, determines the meaning and use of terms originally taken from the latter, as suitable representatives or expressions of our thoughts in relation to the former. It cannot, however, be claimed as a basis for Scriptural exegesis any more than for any other description of exposition. It, however, has been carried by a writer on the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures, to the most extravagant results, and claimed as ample warrant for the double sense, allegorical or spiritual interpretation of the Scriptures. But the author's whole system is founded on the following vague, mystic, Aristotelian assumption, "that all things in nature, being outward productions from inward essences, are natural, sensible, and material types, of moral, intellectual, and spiritual antitypes, and finally of their prototypes in God." This is avowedly making a physico-theological, or metaphysical speculation about the origin of creation, the philosophical key for the interpretation of the Scriptures, and needs but to be stated for its refutation. It dif

* The Glad Tidings, by H. D. Ward, p. 65, 82. † 2 Thess. 2. 4. S. Noble's Lectures on the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures, pp. 156, 157.

fers in its characteristic details, but is essentially of like character with the system of interpretation introduced by Origen, and which, in the progress of our discussions, we shall have occasion to notice.

Whether, therefore, we contemplate the manner in which the cotemporaries of the prophets interpreted their predictions,—the manner in which the providence of God has interpreted, by their actual accomplishment, those which have been fulfilled-and the manner in which Christ and his apostles delivered theirsusing the very same phrases and language with the former prophets, and never giving the least intimation of any change to be made in the principles of interpretation-there is but one conclusion to which we can come, viz.-THAT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM OF PROPHECY, UNFOLDED IN THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, RECOGNIZES AND ESTABLISHES, THE LITERAL OR GRAMMATICAL INTERPRETATION, AS THE ONLY APPROPRIATE METHOD.

Here we might rest, but we advance a step further. We claim for this system of interpretation the explicit direction and sanction of God himself.

4. The spirit of inspiration long since authorized us to expect, and has pledged the literal fulfillment of prophecy, and God himself authoritatively and formally ordained that to this test must every prophet subject his predictions. The prophet exhorts us to study the predictions, and to compare them carefully with their accomplishment.*

"Seek ye out of the book of the Lord and read:

No one of these shall fail;

None shall want her mate:

For my mouth it hath commanded,

And his Spirit it hath gathered them."

* Isaiah, 34. 16.