網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

us-when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed-taking vengeance, &c.

To your 2d proposition I reply: To say that Paul uses no appellation by which the Jews cr the Roman army can be understood, is assuming the point in question. If the Jews were not intended, whom did Paul mean, by them that troubled the Christians? And if the Roman army was not intended, what did he mean by taking vengeance? In Matt. 24th chapter, which all refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jews are not named; neither is the Roman arm.y. But whoever brought this as an argument against the common application of the chap.? It speaks of persecution, exhorts to faithfulness by the coming of Christ, and threatens the persecutors with destruction. Now the same persecutions are mentioned, the same exhortations given, and the same judgments denounced in Thess. and the time of the destruction is in both, declared to be, at the coming or revelation of Christ. Must not the Apostle then, have referred to the overthrow of the Jewish nation?

To your 3d proposition I reply: When we connect, and obey not the Gospel, with the phrase, know not God, it is impossible to resist the conclusion, that Jews were intended; for those who had not heard the Gospel, could not be damned for not obeying it. Besides, in the scriptural sense, the Jews were ignorant of God, and of the great work which he was doing. As vengeance is frequently used to express temporal punishments, I can see no reason for referring it in this instance, to a judgment beyond this world. See Isai. xxxiv, 8; xlvii.

3. Jer. li. 6; 36. In Luke xxi. 22, vengeance is applied to the destructioh of Jerusalem. The word therefore is against you. Inasmuch as all the churches enjoyed a season of rest, after the destruction of Jerusalem, i can see no difficulty in the phrase, admirea in all them that believe. It is the same as, glorified in his saints. Language far more comprehensive, is used with reference to the coming of Christ. See Matt. xvi. 27. where the phrase every man is used; and Matt. xxiv. 14. where the phrases, all the world and all nations, are

used.

Your 4th proposition is refuted by the circumstances, which called forth the Epis. from which the text under consideration is taken.From some circumstance, many of the Thessalonians believed that the coming of Christ was immediately to take place. The 2d Epis. to them was written partly to correct this error. Hence the Apostle says, "Now I beseech you brethren by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand." Now while the Apostle cautions them against expecting Christ immediately, and of being deceived, he holds up the idea, that Christ would come in their day. Hence after having said the day would not come unless there was a falling away, and the man of sin was revealed, he speaks of his already working, and of there being then signs of the iniquity, that would foretell the day. Suppose the day was a general judgment; how could it be uncertain? How

could it depend on there being a falling away first?

On your 5th proposition, I will only say; had your reading been more extensive, you would have found commentators, who agree with the opinion, which I have advanced.Hammond and Cappe both refer the text to the destruction of Jerusalem. So does Gill, though he afterwards contradicts the opinion. And Clarke has some doubts on the subject.

As 2d Thess. 1.5-10. is regarded, as one of the strongest texts, in favor of endless misery, I am anxious to have it fully discussed. And for this purpose, I will propose the following questions: Ist. If the revelation of Christ, here mentioned, was not his coming at the destruction of Jerusalem, wherein was the propriety, of exhorting the Thessalonians to faithfulness, with reference to it?

"You who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God." This, when considered with the verses in connexion, (see v. 5.) shows, that at Christ's coming, they would be delivered from suffering and persecution. But if we make this coming, still future, how can that be? Such exhortations are common. "For ye have need of patience; that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. For yet a little while, and he that shall come, will come, and will not tarry." Heb. viii. 36, 37.

2d. Was not the Apostle speaking particularly of the persecuted Christians and their deliverance; of their persecutors and their punishment? Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them, that trouble you; and to you who are troubled, &c. This language shows, that he was speaking, not of a general judgment, but a particular judg- ju ment, to come on the Jews for troubling the Christians.

3d. How will you reconcile the uncertainty of the day, with the idea, that it refers to a future judgment? "For that day, shall not come, except there come a falling away first" v. 3. chap. ii.

4th. Are not those who troubled the christians, the same, as the man of sin-the son of perdition? See v. 7. chap. 2d, where Paul says, the mystery of iniquity doth already work. See also v. 8. which teaches, that when this wicked one was revealed, he would be consumed by the brightness of the Lord's coming. And if so, must not his coming, have been in that age?

You express great astonishment at my saying aionion or everlasting is applied to hills; but why this astonishment, since aion is synonamous with olam? You ask, if I wrote this to deceive the unlearned? But before you threw out such an insinuation, you should have proven that the learned are wrong in saying, that aion expresses the meaning of olam. I am, &c.

OTIS A. SKINNER.

LETTER NO. II.

BALTIMORE, Oct. 27, 1834.

To Rev. Otis A. Skinner:

Dear Sir:-I promised in my last communication to send you something concerning the words aion and aionios. I now proceed to fulfil my promise. As the discussion of these two words would occupy too much space for one number of your paper I shall now confine myself to the noun aion. A proper understanding of the derivation and true signification of this word will cast much light on the present controversy. I find that the Universalists generally wish to keep the etymology of this word in the dark, because every well informed man among them must be aware that a proper development of it would overthrow their whole system. This disposition is manifest in your sermon on a paragraph of Matthew's Gospel, which you erroneously call "the parable of the sheep and the goats," where you say, you "will not stop to enquire into the etymological meaning of the (original) word." Now, sir, I think all good critics will agree with me when I say that a proper knowledge of the etymology of a word is indispensably necessary in order to have a right understanding of its true signification. Believing this to be the fact I shall proceed to shew its derivation and signification according to some of the best critics that ever wrote on the subject.

Aristotle, of whom Dr. A. Clarke says, "a higher authority need not be sought," says the

« 上一頁繼續 »