mystical key to unlock this divine arcanum. This will throw a radiant glory, a divine beauty, a halo of love and benevolence over the symbols and shadows of the Mosaic economy, and is a striking exposition of the whole Jewish polity. Nowhere is the love of God so marvellously shown and so mysteriously displayed, as in the gift of his well-beloved Son. In contemplating this scheme of mercy, this inimitable love, this proof of boundless grace and compassion, we are smitten with astonishment, and filled with wonder; every susceptibility of the soul is stirred, every chord of the heart vibrates with joy, every loving feeling is excited, and every tender emotion is fired and rapt with holy expectancy. And nowhere is the justice of God more awfully and vividly manifested, than in the atonement made by Jesus Christ. His sufferings were deep, poignant, unutterable, whether we regard them mentally or physically. Did ever the world behold a personage so pure, so kind and beneficent, so sympathizing and tender-hearted, so disinterested in all his projects and purposes, and so philanthropic in all his actions? yet how great and diversified were his sorrows, how acute and intense his sufferings! "God spared not his Son." He became our voluntary substitute and surety. We had contracted an enormous, an incalculable debt of sin, rebellion, and moral delinquency; he came to cancel and obliterate our debts. We behold the sword of divine justice plunged to the very heart's pericardium, reeking with his blood, and satisfying the claims of an angry God, and opening a way for the sinner's access to the throne of grace, and to the fountain of love and mercy. The atonement of Christ is an awful mystery, but it is a profound reality; upon its belief or rejection is suspended our present and eternal happiness. How many of the vaunting literati of our day ignore this glorious doctrine, scorning both its claims and its credentials! In the very centre of the sunbeam they grope in darkness. In a world of miracle and mystery they stumble at the doctrines of the gospel, and reject with supercilious contempt and philosophical pride, what God has stamped with his own infallible wisdom and supreme authority. To embrace this doctrine is to manifest the greatest wisdom, and it is the only means of securing present peace and eternal salvation. MILLENARIANISM. No. VIII. WE have not yet done with our ex- | opportunity of learning his sentiments amination of Mr. Birks' argument for on this point from his own exposition the futurity of Christ's kingdom. Our readers may recollect that, in our last paper, we quoted rather largely from this writer, that we might give them an of them. We must here shortly recapitulate his views, and, for the sake of brevity, we shall do so partly in his language, and partly in our own. the kingdom not having come, are identical with those which he assigns for its having really come with power! He then goes on to tell us that when the Son of God took our nature upon him, he ceased to exercise visibly that dominion which he had held from the beginning as the Word of God. This dominion (he adds) Christ reassumed, whence, after having finished the work of redemption, he ascended up on high, After adverting, then, to the essential and universal dominion of God, which cannot be said to come, because it began with the creation, and must endure through eternity, and which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost must share for ever; he goes on to represent the kingdom of God, which is to come, as being the kingdom of redemption, and as consisting in the manifest restoration of God's authority over the fallen universe. This king--that is to say, Christ then reassumed dom (he says) really began from the first hour when visible fruits of redemption appeared. It came with greater power and fulness when Christ, the true king, was manifested. In the preaching of the gospel, moreover, and in the judgments executed on the Jewish people for unbelief, it may truly be said to have come with power. Yet (adds Mr. Birks) the kingdom is still future, because the King has withdrawn; because his will is not yet made known to the greater part of mankind, and very partially even to the church; and because the enforcement of his will by the open distribution of reward and punishment is still delayed! These are strange reasons to assign for that kingdom being still future, which began when visible fruits of redemption first appeared, that is to say, as far back as the days of righteous Abel; and which came with power in the preaching of the gospel, and in the execution of judgment on the Jewish nation. This kingdom (says Mr. Birks) really came with power after the King had withdrawn, and yet it has not come at all, because he has withdrawn! It came with power when judgment was executed on the Jewish nation for un- | belief, and yet it has not come, because the execution of judgment is stili delayed! It came with power in the preaching of the gospel, when the will of God was gloriously revealed by the Holy Spirit; and yet it has not come, because that will has only been partially revealed to mankind! The attentive reader will perceive that the reasons which Mr. Birks assigns for that essential and universal dominion which he had held prior to his incarnation. Mr. Birks then adds to this universal kingdom two portions of its universality, viz., the kingdom of secret providence, and the kingdom of the visible church! He enlarges the whole by the addition to it of two of its parts! Such, then, according to this writer, is now our Lord's position. In our nature he holds the essential and universal kingdom, and, in addition to this, the two kingdoms of secret providence on earth, and the visible church. But he has not yet received the kingdom promised him by the Father. That kingdom must be marked by his own visible presence; by the full and clear manifestation of his righteous will, and the open enforcement of that will by the execution of righteous judgment. Mr. Birks' hypothesis here leads him into a serious dilemma. This kingdom which (he affirms) the Father has yet to give to the Son must of course be in the possession of the Father. It must be a portion of his essential and universal dominion. But, according to Mr. Birks, the Son now shares this essential and universal dominion along with the Father, and must, therefore, be already in possession of the kingdom. How then, can that be given him which he already possesses? Before he can receive this kingdom from the Father, he must himself deliver it up to the Father! Hence, to be consistent, Mr. Birks must maintain that the Son of God, after having laid aside his essential and universal dominion that he might take our nature upon him, and make atonement for sin, and having | GIVEN him a name which is above every reassumed this dominion on his ascen- name. 1 sion-must lay it aside a second time in order to receive a portion of it as his promised kingdom! He must thus, in effect, before receiving this kingdom himself, deliver it to the Father, that the Father may deliver it to him; and then, at the end, he is to deliver it again to the Father, that God may be all in all! Such is really the scheme of Mr. Birks when carried out to its legitimate results. We believe the view entertained by Millenarians generally is similar. With few exceptions, they maintain that Christ's promised kingdom is still future. They cannot surely have sufficiently considered the subject. We do not see how any who hold this hypothesis can escape from the confusion and contradiction in which it involves Mr. Birks. In our humble judgment, the exposition given of it above is sufficient to demonstrate it to be both antiscriptural and absurd. How unlike is this scheme to the simplicity of Scripture! The Old Testament abounds with predictions of the coming and kingdom of the Messiah. John the Baptist began his ministry with the startling announcement that this long-predicted kingdom was at hand. Our Saviour and his disciples repeated the announcement:-The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Jesus went farther. There be some, he said, standing here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. He proclaimed its actual advent. The kingdom of God is among you. Jesus never spoke of reassuming that eternal dominion which he had held from the beginning as the Word of God." Very different was both his own language and that of his inspired apostles. My FATHER, he says, HATH APPOINTED unto me a kingdom. All power is GIVEN unto me in heaven and on earth. GOD HATH MADE.. Jesus.. Lord, says the Apostle Peter. The Father hath GIVEN him to be head over all things to the church, is the testimony of the Apostle Paul. God also hath highly exalted him, and Angels and authorities and powers are MADE subject to him. Such is the uniform language of the New Testament. The exaltation, and power, and sovereignty, which Christ possesses now, have been given to him, not “reassumed" by him. The kingdom over which he now reigns is a kingdom he has received from the Father, not a dominion which he has “reassumed.” The famous passage in 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25, which occupies so prominent a place in this controversy, gives the same view. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. It is clear that the apostle is not speaking here of a kingdom which Christ is yet to receive, but of a kingdom which he has received; not of a reign which is future, but of a reign which is already begun. When the apostle here says of Christ he must reign, he is evidently referring to his reign over the kingdom, which at the end he is to deliver up to the Father. But the expression farther implies that he is already reigning over this kingdom, and therefore has already received it. No unsophisticated mind; no mind, indeed, unless one hopelessly warped by prejudice, could read this passage without learning from it that Christ is already reigning over a kingdom, in which he is to put down all opposing rule, and authority, and power, which, at the end, he is to deliver up to the Father from whom he received it. Thus, the whole concurrent voice of the New Testament proclaims Christ as already on the throne of his promised kingdom-as already set by the Father as his King on his holy hill of Zion. Our readers may possibly now be disposed to ask if Mr. Birks adduces any Scripture passages in proof of his strange and inconsistent hypothesis. "Yes, he does," we reply. He adduces five! Of these five, the first is a parable; the second is a highly figura tive passage from the Apocalypse ; the third proves what no one disputes; and the remaining two have no bearing whatever on the point nuder discussion! He tells us besides, that "out of a hundred and forty passages, where the kingdom of God is mentioned, there are about forty where it plainly refers to the time of the advent," p. 196. He does not tell us where to find these forty passages. We suppose, however, that the five he has quoted are the most powerful he can adduce in favour of his hypothesis. From an examination of these, therefore, our readers may judge as to the character of the rest. Let us proceed then to consider them. The first is a favourite passage with Millenarians. They are constantly referring to it, and seem to regard it as a main pillar of their cause. It is worthy, therefore, of serious consideration. We shall give it as quoted by Mr. Birks, along with his introductory remarks. "The kingdom which is promised (he says), consists in the full revelation of God's will, and the execution of his righteous judgment toward the fallen creation. That this is still future is plain from the whole scope of the New Testament. A few passages which openly affirm it are the following." Luke xix. 11-27: And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us. And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him. ... But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. VOL. XXXIII. Now let it be observed that this passage is quoted to prove that Christ has not yet received his kingdom; that his kingdom is still future. "Here it is plain (says Mr. Birks), that while our Lord's right to the kingdom is to be solemnly recognized in heaven during his absence, the exercise of it, in which he is King de facto, begins on his return," p. 194. Christ, therefore, according to Mr. Birks' interpretation of this parable, is not "King de facto" till his return to our world! Let us see whether the parable does teach this. Without staying, then, to comment on a circumstance so suspicious as the question of the quotation of a parable, and, we might add, a highly figuratire passage from the Apocalypse, as main proofs of a doctrine, which, if it be true, we should expect to find prominently revealed throughout the New Testament, we request attention to the following observations :— Christ as I. This parable represents the nobleman as going into the far country for the purpose of receiving the kingdom. Was this the purpose for which our Saviour ascended to heaven? According to our views, it was. cended that he might be solemnly invested with his mediatorial rule; that he might be made LORD;-Head over all things to the church. On his ascension he took formal possession of his throne. But according to the scheme of Mr. Birks, the immediate purpose of Christ's ascension was not that he might receive the kingdom, but that he might "reassume his eternal dominion." According to Millenarianism he did not ascend to receive the kingdom, but to pass through what is called "the season of waiting before the kingdom is assumed." But the parable flatly contradicts this idea. This scheme is thus inconsistent with the very passage which is adduced as a main proof of it, while ours is in perfect harmony with it. But, II. According to this parable the nobleman, on going into the far country, is immediately invested with the king P dom. He is at once made king. We read of no season of waiting or delay. Even so with Christ. On his ascension, he was at once invested with regal authority. Then the Father said to him, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool. Then God made him LORD: gave him to be Head over all things. This is in perfect accordance with our views, but not with those of Mr. Birks. According to this writer, Christ is not yet invested with the kingdom which he went to receive. Nearly two thousand years have passed away, and still he has not received it! He has waited eighteen centuries, but the time for receiving it has not yet come! So say Mr. Birks, and Millenarians generally. But the parable teaches something very different. III. What Mr. Birks says about Christ being "King de facto," only on his return when he begins to reckon with his servants, is grounded on a fallacy which we have already pointed out, viz., that a king reigns only when he is holding an assize. If this principle were a true one, then we should have to look for the manifestation of our queen's sovereignty, not to her legislature; nor to the submission of her subjects to her laws; nor to the powerful means of coercion and defence which are at her command; but to those courts of justice in which she presides through her appointed deputies, for the defence of the innocent and the punishment of the criminal. But this, it is plain, is but one of the functions of her sovereignty. We might ask here, how could this king call his servants to account on his return, had he not been their "king de facto" BEFORE his return? The whole parable evidently proceeds on the supposition, that he was their legitimate sovereign during his absence, and that as such they were bound to obey him. So far then as the parable pictures to us the present position of our Saviour, it represents him as possessing now the sovereignty of our world de facto and de jure as well, and as having been invested with this sovereignty on his ascension. On his return, it is, of course, our belief that he will judge the world in righteousness, just as, in the parable, he represents himself as doing. IV. The parable, properly understood, is thus in perfect harmony with the views propounded by ourselves, but utterly irreconcilable with those of Mr. Birks. It certainly gives no countenance whatever to Millenarianism in any of its forms. Christ here exhibits himself as having been the rightful King of our world, even when an inhabitant of it. He represents himself as leaving the world to have this right formally recognized by the Father. In the far away country to which he has gone, he exhibits himself as solemnly invested with the sovereignty he had gone to receive. He is therefore already our world's King. Even now, during his absence, he reigns. The rod of his strength has been sent out of Zion, and he rules now in the midst of his enemies. When he returns, he returns for the purpose of exercising the judicial functions of his sovereignty by summoning the nations to his bar, and rewarding every man according to his works. Such is the teaching of this parable. But this is not Millenarianism, nor is there anything here to give countenance to it. The next passage adduced is from Rev. xi. 15-18: And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned. And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy |