It would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine any thing more to the purpose than what the learned Bishop has here said-but alas-how much is it to be lamented that in defiance of the consistence and connection of the discourse-in opposition to every principle of sound reasoning-he, imme diately afterwards, asserts that, "in an higher sense, it may "be true also of the end of the world and the general judg 66 ment. All the subsequent discourse too," he adds, " we 66 may observe doth not relate, so properly to the destruction "of Jerusalem as to the end of the world and the general judgment. Our Saviour loseth sight, as it were, of his "former subject and adapts his discourse more to the 66 "latter." But, is not all this said, not only, without proof--but, in direct opposition to the principles of sound criticism? What evidence is there that our Saviour loseth sight of his former subject, and that he adapts his discourse more to the latter? So far is this from being the case, that in the conclusion of the quotation from him, in page 125, he expressly declares that it relates to the destruction of Jerusalem! In short, what better and more solid ground of satisfaction can be given of the meaning of any Writer, than the consistence, and connection of the discourse? Can it, for a moment, be supposed that our Saviour should disregard these, without fixing, the most inju rious imputation, upon his character-not as a divine instructor only-but, even as a man of sound understanding? Can the Scriptures be more effectually degraded, in the eyes of the intelligent and discerning part of mankind, than by such representations? What grounds of triumph, must they not, inevitably afford to the Unbeliever? But Bishop Newton is not the only one who, to support a double meaning, has found himself obliged to make conces sions which are injurious to christianity; for Mr. Thomas, in his Strictures on Dr. Edwards's Sermon, on the predictions of the Apostles, concerning the coming of Christ, speaking of the 36th verse of the chapter under consideration, says, "I should conclude that the prediction more immediately relating to the end of the world, begins here, (though it may be alluded to, in several other parts of the chapter), "especially if we consider the emphatic meaning of that day a phrase corresponding to the great and remarkable day, compare 2 Tim. i. 12. 18. and iv. 8. To this," he says, 66 it may be objected that what follows in the 40th and 41st verses, cannot be admitted to belong to any prediction of the last day. It is evident, however, that there may be a transi "tion, in the following verse, from this prediction to that "concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. This transition seems to be made, by the particle but in v. 37. 66 Here Mr. Thomas appears to admit, a double transition→→→ first from the destruction of Jerusalem, to the final judgment, which, he supposes, to begin in the 36th verse, and then, again, from the final judgment to the destruction of Jerusalem in the 37th verse. But if this representation be true; it will be very difficult indeed to vindicate the perspicuity of the Evangelist. Mr. Thomas may perhaps reply, in the language which he has actually made use of in page 27, that "the "rule of criticism delivered in the former part of Dr. Ed"wards's Sermon, is not much regarded here, and that it "does not appear to be necessary"that" it seems much "more reasonable to suppose that the Evangelist wrote in the "language of nature than of critical precision," and that, "it does not appear very respectful to the great Author of "language to prescribe rules for the revelation of himself to his creatures." But will not the unbeliever think, and with reason, that this is little less than giving up the argument to the adversary and admitting the validity of his objection? Will he, or, indeed, ought he to be silenced by such reasoning as this? Can it be imagined, that if God condescends to reveal himself to his creatures; it would be in a language which is unintelligible to them? Or can it be admitted that the language of nature is at variance with sound criticism? * * It is very well observed, by Dr. Benson, that "we justly condemn the 68 answers of the Heathen Oracles, as riddles; dark and obscure, vague and. "indeterminate; capable of being turned many ways; without knowing "certainly which sense was intended, or in what way they are to be under"stood. But divine prophecies should be intelligible, and have one "determinate meaning; that it may be known when and how they are ac"complished. We admire it as an excellence in Homer, and other cele"brated Writers of antiquity, that their meaning is expressed clearly; and may we not expect, when God speaks to men that his meaning should "be expressed in as clear and determinate a manner ?" See Benson's Essay on the Unity of Sense of Scripture, prefixed to his Paraphrase, p. xxi. Vol. II. When When Mr. Thomas says that our Saviour seems to declare that "it was no part of his Mission to announce the time of "the final judgment," he says, what appears to be, strictly, true--but when he adds, that he expressly forbids curiosity "in such enquiries," and quotes Acts i. 7. for the proof of it, he should have recollected that our Lord's declaration, in that instance, had no relation to the day of judgment—but to the question of the Disciples-when he would restore the kingdom to Israel? * Mr. King, in his Morsels of Criticism, in commenting upon this verse, says, "we need not hesitate to affirm, that to apply "these words to the destruction of Jerusalem, (which was to "happen while some of the persons who heard the words were "still living) must be very strange and improper indeed; since "we know that it was our Lord's professed intention that such "of the Jews as believed and remembered his words, should be "effectually warned and should escape and save themselves by "flight, and do moreover know, that they actually did take "the warning and do so." t This reasoning of Mr. King's, however plausible it may, at first sight appear, will not, on a close inspection, be found to have the smallest weight in it; for where, it may asked, was the strangeness or impropriety of our Lord's saying, even of that event, which he wished his Disciples to guard against, and to escape from,-Of that day and hour knoweth. no man. They had asked him, and he had told them, very frankly and fully, what the signs and tokens of that awful catastrophe would be? They had farther asked him,-When shall these things be? And, to this question, he gave them a general answer, in the 34th verse, attended with the most solemn assurances, that it would be, in that generation. But though, by this declaration, they were fully apprized, that it would be in that generation, he, in the 36th verse says,-Of that day and hour knoweth no man. Of the precise moment, or period, when it shall happen, I have nothing to inform you that is not necessary for your safety-you have sufficient means of escape, in the intelligence which I have, already, given you, if make a proper use of them. I tell you, you therefore, to watch, and for this reason, especially, because * Of the sense of this passage more will be said hereafter. Jyo you know neither the day nor the hour when it shall be. So far was this, from strangeness, or impropriety, that a better, or a more natural argument for watchfulness, could not possibly have been suggested, by the most sagacious reasoner; for, had they known the precise time, when that event was to have happened where would have been the necessity for watchfulness? In that case, they would only have had to remember, the particular time, which he had fixed, for its accomplishment and, they would have been sufficiently prepared, for avoiding the impending danger! But perhaps our Lord's argument cannot be stated in a more satisfactory manner, than by presenting it to the Reader, at full length, as it stands in its connection, in the chapter itself. Let it but be recollected, that the question of the Disciples, in consequence of the prediction of Jesus, that there should not be one stone left upon another which should not be thrown down, was When shall these things be? and the connection will be abundantly apparent. Our Lord's general answer to this question is, in the 34th verse,―This generation shall not pass away till all these things, i. e. till all the things which he had, more particularly described, in the preceding part of that chapter, be fulfilled. And, to confirm the certainty of this prediction, he adds, in terms, the most energetic which language can convey, ver. 35. Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. In this connection, our Lord immediately adds, ver. 36.-Of that day and hour, when these things shall happen-for that is evidently the ellipsis to be supplied, otherwise here is a relative without an antecedent or, in plainer terms, an apparent reference to something which had been said before, when, in reality, he was beginning a new subject, which had no relation to it: Of * * Some have supposed that the Evangelist is here speaking of the day and hour when the Heavens shall pass away, mentioned in the preceding verse-but Bishop Newton having quoted this verse, says, " It is a common figure of "speech in the Oriental languages, to say of two things, that the one shall be, and the other shall not be, when the meaning is only, that the one "shall happen sooner, or more easily, than the other. As in this instance “of our Saviour, Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not "pass away--the meaning is, Heaven and Earth shall sooner or more easily pass away than my word shall pass away; the frame of the Universe shall sooner, or more easily be dissolved, than my words shall not be fulfilled. "And thus it is expressed by St. Luke upon a like occasion, xvi. 17. It is "easier for Heaven and Earth to pass than one tittle of the law to fail." that day and hour, or season, knoweth no man÷no, not the.... Angels of heaven-but my Father only. In the 37th verse, the connection is carried on, with a precision which would have done honor to the closest reasoner. Ye know, says our Lord, neither the day nor the hour when the Son of Man. cometh but this know, that-As the days of Noah were, so shall also the nature of the coming of the Son of Man, the Messiah, be; i. e. not only suddenly, and in a moment, when they thought not of it-but, as in the time of Noah, in clouds in the destruction-not, in the exaltation of the Jewish Nation. The expression, the coming of the Son Man, as used in this connection, is deserving of very particular attention, as the judicious Reader will perceive that it has, a very strong tendency to confirm the common acceptation of the word generation, and, in short, the unity of sense of the whole chapter, as relating to the destruction of Jerusalem, exclusively of the day of judgment; for the same expression is used in a part of the chapter, where it cannot possibly have any other reference than to the coming of the Messiah. Ver. 26, 27. Wherefore if they, to wit, the false prophets, shall say unto you-Behold he, the Messiah, is in the desert-go not forthBehold he is in the secret chambers, believe it not for, as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the nature of THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN, for perspicuity, BE. And, this is still farther ex-, plained, in the 30th verse, by the Son of Man coming in clouds. They shall see the Son of Man, the Messiah, coming. in the clouds of Heaven, with power and great glory. If this relates to the calamities which were coming upon the Jewish. nation, it will, with equal clearness, appear that, the same calamity is referred to, in the 37th, 38th, and 39th verses. As the days of Noah were-so shall also the nature of THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN, the Messiah, BE. Two The Evangelist goes on and says, ver. 40. 41, most evidently, with a reference to the calamitous times, of which he had before been speaking. Then, i. e. at that time, shall two be in the field-the one shall be taken and the other left. women shall be grinding at the mill—the one shall be taken and the other left. Watch therefore for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come, i. e. ye know not the exact period when the desolation, which I have predicted. shall take place, and therefore, |