165. I. Doctrine Of The Advent.

I. Doctrine Of The Advent. The doctrine of the advent is concerned with the manner of Christ’s second coming—whether it will be personal and visible or merely in a spiritual or providential mode; also with the time of his coming, particularly whether it shall be premillennial or postmillennial. The last question must be determined in view of the concomitants of the advent.

1. A Personal, Visible Coming of Christ.—There are some signs of a present tendency of thought away from the traditional doctrine of a personal, visible advent, in favor of a merely spiritual or providential manifestation. The prevalence of the new view would carry with it a recasting of the traditional doctrines of the general resurrection and the final judgment, or, rather, the elimination of these doctrines. We see no sufficient reason for the acceptance of this view, and therefore adhere to the manner of the advent so long held in the faith of the Church. That the Scriptures set forth the coming of Christ as in a personal, visible manner can hardly be questioned. Indeed, such expression of it seems so definite and clear as to leave no place for the opposing view. A few texts will suffice for the presentation of this point.

We have the deep words of Christ respecting his going to prepare a place for his disciples and his coming again to receive them unto himself: “In my Father’s house are many mansions : if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:2-3). These words are clear in themselves, and clear beyond question when read in the light of the ascension of Christ and the promise of his coming again: “Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? 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 1:11). Here are the very going and coming again which Christ promised in the text before cited. His going was personal and visible, and the promise is that his coming again shall be in like manner. The long-hidden purpose of God respecting the redemption of the world “is now made manifest by the appearing—τύς έπιφανείας—of our Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Timothy 1:10), which certainly was a personal, visible coming. Then why shall not the “appearing—έπιφάνειαν—of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ (Titus 2:13), for which we look, be personal and visible? Many such texts might be adduced, but it will suffice that we add a few simply by reference (Php 3:20; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16; 2 Thessalonians 1:7; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Peter 1:7). If such texts are in themselves less explicit than some above cited, yet when read in the light of the former, as they should be, they clearly mean the same manner of the coming of Christ. A point is sometimes made on the meaning of parousia—παροφϕία, from παρείναι—a word not rarely rendered in the sense of the coming of Christ. The point is, that the word means simply to be present with, not any act of coming. That it means to be present with is manifest in its composition, but that it means only this is contrary to fact. It is not rarely used in the sense of coming and arriving. There are instances in which such must be its meaning (1 Corinthians 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6-7; 2 Peter 3:12). So there are uses of the word in application to Christ which must mean more than his presence with us ; indeed, must mean his personal coming to us in order to his presence with us (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; James 5:8; 2 Peter 3:4). Perhaps the full meaning of the word in such use is a personal coming of Christ to be abidingly present with his people. And this accords strictly with the meaning of various texts which set forth his coming (John 14:2-3; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17); but we can no more eliminate from the word the meaning of his personal coming to us than that of his presence with us.

2. Theory of a Merely Figurative Sense.—A figurative sense of the second advent is opposed to the literal sense; that is, it denies a literal coming of Christ, and limits the whole account of it to the meaning of some purely spiritual work or specially providential interposition in the history of the Church. This was the position of a type of Universalism which, fifty years ago, was strong enough in some parts of our own country to make itself known. There is much less of it now. As this school denied all future punishment it was compelled to deny the traditional view of the second advent. The contention against it was based largely on the discourse of our Lord respecting the destruction of the temple (Matthew chapters 24 and 25). The endeavor was to find therein, together with the destruction of Jerusalem, the fulfillment of all that the Scriptures say respecting the second advent. At the present time some who have no sympathy with such a type of Universalism, nor indeed with any other, yet hold the same narrow view respecting the subject of that notable discourse. Such may consistently believe in other comings of Christ, and even in a final coming ; but after a figurative interpretation of that discourse, so far as it relates to the coming of Christ, they may so interpret all that the Scriptures say elsewhere respecting his second coming, and thus deny a personal, visible advent. The interpretation of that discourse on the ground of a literal advent is not without difficulty; but a theory which must interpret all that the Scriptures say upon the subject in a figurative sense involves much greater difficulty. This may be seen in the light of the evidences of a literal advent already adduced.

Respecting the discourse of our Lord, a central point of the issue lies in these words: “Verily I say unto you. This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” (Matthew 24:34). In the preceding part the coming of Christ is set forth in such forms of expression as the Scriptures elsewhere employ in setting forth the final advent. The following points are then made: That coming of Christ occurred in the time of the generation then living, the proof of which is in the words above cited; that coming was purely figurative in its mode, not in any sense literal; therefore, all that the Scriptures say respecting the final advent may be interpreted in a like figurative manner. Two points are made in behalf of a literal sense of the final advent. The first assumes a double sense of our Lord’s prophetic utterances, or a blending of the consummation of the world’s history with the destruction of the temple and the consummation of the Jewish economy. The second assumes that the word generation, as used in the above citation, means the Jewish race, not the Jews then living. Hence, as this race still exists and may exist even to the end of time, the coining of our Lord, which he sets forth, would not be separated from his final advent, but would remain one with it. Much may be said against both of these points, but we think them less objectionable than any theory which requires the interpretation of all the Scriptures say respecting the second advent in a purely figurative sense. Stock or race is a fully recognized meaning of the original word, γενεά, in both its classical and biblical uses. The continuance of this race, despite its dispersions and tribulations, is one of the wonders of human history, and might well have been included in the subjects of our Lord’s far-reaching prophecies.

3. The Premillennial Theory.—The theory is that Christ will come personally at the inception of the millennium and reign on earth for a thousand years. Such is the central assumption, and so far there is much unity of faith among premillennialists, while on subordinate points there are many diversities of view. Some think that the martyrs will be raised at this advent, and will reign with Christ; others, that all the saints will then be raised, that they may share in the glory of his kingdom. This advent will inaugurate the millennial life of the Church, and this reign will be the chief agency through which the triumph of Christianity shall be achieved. Our concern, however, is specially, almost wholly, with the question of a premillennial advent. The chief reliance of the theory is upon a single passage of Scripture (Revelation 20:1-6). This may be said, first, that the passage scripture contains not a word respecting any advent of Christ, nor ground. a word respecting his reigning personally on the earth. Further, it is in a highly figurative or symbolical book, and is itself highly symbolical. Consequently the construction of a theory of the advent on such ground is without the warrant of any principle of doctrinal formation, and the more certainly so as there are many explicit texts on that subject. So far as the passage relates to the resurrection, it will be considered in our treatment of that question.