Orthodox interpretations involve these principles, viz: 1. Man has not obtained, nor has he powers of mind by which he will attain, a correct theology without a revelation from God given in human language.

2. The mind is so constituted that we are able clearly to understand the terms of a proposition, and comprehend what is announced in human language, though we are utterly unable to discover the reasons or grounds of it.

3. Inasmuch as our minds are blinded by sin, so that we are induced to put light for darkness and darkness for light, while our powers of understanding language remain,-if not unimpaired, yet entire,-it is absurd to subject the laws of language to the dominant control of philosophy or speculative theology, while interpreting those communications by which God would lead us to a knowledge of the truth.

4. The language of Scripture is to be interpreted according to established laws which are within us, and by which we are made capable of communicating or receiving knowledge by means of speech or human language; and we should never admit a forced construction which, while it utterly disregards these laws, gives a meaning for which no substantial reason can be assigned.

5. If we are not guided by true rules of interpretation, the word of God will be to us contradictory, unintelligible, always uncertain, and, consequently, useless, and we shall still wander in all the dark and deceitful imaginings of a depraved heart and absurd mind.

The orthodox urge upon their opponents that so long as it is admitted that the Bible is the word of God, it should be regarded as the only sure rule of faith; and that it is manifestly improper to subject the interpretation of it to the ruling power of what the depraved mind conceives to be true philosophy or reason; and so long as they stand upon this foundation, they are not shaken by the storms of philosophy or the whirlwinds of fanaticism. By the same method of interpretation, millenarianism is clearly derived from the sacred Scriptures; and should our opponents succeed in proving that we are in error, they would ruin themselves by destroying their hopes of future blessedness. By the rules of language by which the doctrine of the divinity of Christ is proved from the Bible, his future personal reign on earth

with the saints is established. By an application of the same laws of language to the sacred Scriptures, they teach with great force the resurrection of the body and the resurrection of the saints at the commencement of the millennium, the future and everlasting punishment of wicked men when Christ shall appear to set up his kingdom, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the reign of the saints on earth with Christ during the thousand years. Millenarians ask for no new methods of interpretation, neither do they contend for one principle of language for historic, and another for prophetic, and another for didactic Scriptures. They believe the laws of interpretation are inseparable from language it. self, and the mind when seeking to understand its import; otherwise, the words of an author would be as senseless as "the sounding brass or tinkling cymbal."

Should it be supposed that what we have affirmed under this topic could not be verified, it will be necessary to refer only to a few passages to show that we have not said more than the truth will warrant. The Scriptures teach that Christ will come in the clouds of heaven, and often speak of his appearing to set up his kingdom on the earth. If antimillenarians should succeed in showing that these passages refer to the power of the Lord displayed at the destruction of Jerusalem, or to the future establishment of his kingdom on earth, they use arguments which might be made to bear equally well against the personal appearing of Christ at any future time. The Scriptures teach that Christ, when he shall set up his kingdom, will break the heathen with a rod of iron, and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel; that he "shall consume the man of sin with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming." If these and like Scriptures mean conversion instead of destruction, so that the greatest blessing is indicated by language which naturally describes the most extreme ruin and woe, why may it not with equal propriety be supposed that when the Bible calls Christ God it teaches that he is man? when it affirms that the wicked "shall go away into everlasting punishment," and that they shall "suffer the vengeance of eternal fire," the meaning is that they shall go away into everlasting blessedness, and that they shall enjoy the favor of eternal love? Certainly, when language is made to signify the op

VOL. VII.-NO. I.

8

posite from what it is always in all other instances made to represent, and that, too, without any other reason than to prevent a favorite theory from being disproved, the errorist and heretic may use the Scriptures to prove their dogmas with as much success as the orthodox do to prove what they receive for truth. We think, therefore, that it would not be prudent to attempt to show that millenarians reason falsely or put a wrong construction upon the Scriptures, or that their principles of interpretation are vicious. The truth of the orthodox creed is involved in this question; and may we not suppose that, because this is understood, our opponents are exceedingly unwilling to make the least attempt to show that the rules we adopt are unsound? Certainly prudence forbids it.

V. It would be a work of much labor and difficulty to attempt the disproval of millenarianism in a fair controversy with its friends.

In a theological controversy, those whose opinions are supported by the plain and obvious sense of Scripture have a much easier task than their opponents. They need only to quote the passages which refer to the subject under consideration, and the conviction instantly possesses the mind that their doctrine is proved. They are not under the necessity of making out a long, tedious, metaphysical argument, so subtle that it cannot be easily understood. They need only state definitely what they believe, and refer to Scripture for proof. This is a short and easy work, and the doctrine, with the proof of it, is received by the mind from the same point of view.

But their opponents,-who must derive the proof of their doctrines from the Scriptures by inferences which are so remote from the particular fact taught that it is with the utmost difficulty that it can be conceived how any person could ever have supposed them legitimate, and must meet the arguments of their opponents by showing that the obvious meaning is not the true sense of the passages quoted,have a long and difficult work. Moreover, their work is not. only arduous, but it is often very unsatisfactory. We are so constituted that we very unwillingly concede that an author says exactly the contrary to that which we naturally suppose he has said, when taking his language in its most obvious

sense, or the opposite of what we should mean should we use his language. Those, therefore, who attempt to maintain a position contrary to the obvious meaning of Scripture will often find that their arguments, however ingenious, are far from being satisfactory.

Such would be the work of those who should oppose millenarians. It is easy to say that Christ will appear and destroy the man of sin at the commencement of the millennium, for the Scripture says " And then shall that wicked be revealed whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming." But it would be a long work to show that this is only a spiritual coming, and the conversion of men, and not a destruction; or that Christ will destroy the man of. sin at his appearing after the millennium, since the man of sin must have existed and have been destroyed before that period will commence. It is easy to say that the saints will reign on the earth, for the Scriptures expressly teach that they will; and in another passage it is said "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." But it were a long and difficult, and, we apprehend, an unsatisfactory work, to show that here is no allusion to the saints who have fallen asleep in Jesus, but that pious men who will be like them are designated. By these examples the nature of the work of the opponents of millenarians is indicated; and here, unquestionably, we see one reason why millenarians are ready and willing to meet those who oppose them in a friendly discourse; and also, why their opponents are unwilling to meet fairly the subject in dispute. We must commend them for their prudence, for being ourselves "constitutionally biased," i. e. naturally averse, with the rest of mankind, to strenuous exertion, we should certainly be unwilling to undertake such an endless and unsatisfactory work.

VI. Should the attempt be made to refute millenarianism in a fair and candid manner, very many persons would ascertain what the doctrine is which is so offensive, and might be led to embrace it.

It is very evident that only a few persons have a correct knowledge of the distinctive peculiarities of those who are denominated millenarians. They may have seen their views caricatured; the inferences which their opponents have drawn

from it put for their views themselves. They may also have seen false statements respecting the principles of interpretation which are adopted by millenarians. In a fair discussion, in which a knowledge of the truth is the object to be attained, the points in dispute would be presented together with the Scriptures which relate to them, and the manner of interpreting them adopted by either party would be known to all. Under such circumstances many persons might be fascinated with the belief that Christ will certainly come, and will put an end to the reign of sin and Satan, and will raise up his faithful ones to sit with him in his kingdom, and participate in the glories of that period which they longed for and prayed might come while they were in the flesh. Furthermore, they might discover that millenarians do not seek to pervert Scripture, that they have no new modes of interpretation, but that they follow the same laws of language which the orthodox adopt in defending the doctrines of grace; whereas their opponents use the same lawlessness which is practised by the defenders of the most rank heresies. Many might discover that they were and ever had been millenarians since they became Christians, and that the reason they supposed they were not is, that they have mistaken the false representations of millenarianism for the doctrine itself.

It would be difficult to foresee what the final end would be if any considerable portion of the church should become millenarian. The churches have been exhorted to support benevolent operations in order that, by the gradual working of causes now existing, the millennium may be ushered in. It has been implied, if not directly taught, that all that is wanted to convert the world is money-the requisite funds. Should the churches abandon the present notion that the world is rapidly improving in divine knowledge and piety through the operation of associations and measures which characterize the present day, and become convinced that practical infidelity and worldliness are becoming more and more prevalent; should they be convinced that a darker day is coming, so that faith will hardly be found on the earth; it is feared that they would lose their courage, and would have neither the resolution nor the disposition to do anything to cause the gospel to be preached to all nations,