The gross error of limiting the Holy Spirit to one or two methods of working in impenitent hearts, is more common than some suppose. Among its evil consequences, one is realized by inquirers themselves. Instead of following the intimations of Divine wisdom in the word, in respect to what are proper views and affections, they not unfrequently prescribe some way in which they are to be converted. They will hear of no other. Their predilection for this way has been derived from tradition, from uninspired books, or from common talk. All such expectations God is able to disappoint. The paths by which He leads to the strait gate are numberless. He who looked to be struck dumb with terror, is melted all at once by love; while, perhaps, he who meant to advance rationally, deliberately, and gradually, is transported into paroxysms of terror, which make him tremble for his reason. But all the varieties of conviction leave the soul deeply impressed with the insufficiency of every sacrifice but one. "Thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: Thou delightest not in burnt-offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise." (Psalm li. 16, 17.)

HORE BIBLICÆ.

No. LXIV. THE FIRST RESURRECTION.

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection." (Rev. xx. 4, 5.)

THIS is a very remarkable and a confessedly difficult passage; nor is it surprising that widely different constructions have been put upon it by interpreters. The difficulties of the subject are such, indeed, that one can scarcely hope to master them entirely. Still, this scripture is a part of

My grief a burden long had been,
Oppress'd with unbelief and sin.

"The more I strove against their power,
I sinn'd and stumbled but the more;
Till, late, I heard my Saviour say,
'Come hither, soul; I am the Way.'

"Lo! glad I come; and Thou, blest Lamb,

Shalt take me to Thee as I am :
Nothing but sin I Thee can give,
Nothing but love shall I receive.

"Then will I tell to sinners round,
What a dear Saviour I have found;
I'll point to Thy redeeming blood,
And say, 'Behold the way to God!'"

God's revelation; and it is found in a book which Christians are expressly required to read, and which they ought to endeavour to understand. Moreover, the subject itself is one of deep and thrilling interest; one upon which inquiring minds are sure to dwell at one time or another. If it should be impossible fully to explain it, and to clear up every difficult point involved, some light may be thrown upon it, and mischievous and extravagant notions may be corrected. The main question among interpreters is this-Is "the first resurrection," here spoken of, a literal resurrection of the dead? or, are these words to be understood in a figurative or tropical sense? In order to arrive at a satisfactory answer, it will be necessary briefly to review three several theories of "the first resurrection;" our object being, first, to correct an erroneous exposition, and, secondly, to illustrate that which, upon mature reflection, appears to be the true one. First, then, we refer to that literal theory of "the first resurrection," which is, perhaps, most generally received.

According to this, the two verses quoted above are made to comprehend and include all the righteous dead in one category, and all the wicked in another. The subjects of "the first resurrection" are all the righteous, without distinction; and the terms, "the rest of the dead," are made to include and signify all the wicked. The former, it is maintained, will now be literally raised from their graves, and, with the glorified Saviour personally and visibly present among them, will dwell upon the earth a thousand years. At the commencement of this happy period, the earth itself is to be regenerated by fire, so as to undergo a marvellous and blissful transformation. At the end of the thousand years, it is said, all the wicked will be raised. Thus this text is taken to affirm a literal resurrection of all the righteous at the commencement of the millennium; and verse 12 of the chapter is supposed to describe a literal resurrection of all the wicked at the end of that period. So that the resurrection of the righteous and that of the wicked are to be regarded as two separate and entirely distinct transactions; one of which is to take place a thousand years before the other. Such, briefly, and in general terms, is the doctrine of "the first resurrection," as advocated by many popular writers of the present day. Those who hold these views are accustomed to maintain, moreover, that "the time is at hand ;" and that these sublime and awe-inspiring events, so far as they are pre-millennial, will transpire within a few years at the most. We need only add, what is pretty generally admitted, that, if this doctrine cannot be found in Rev. xx. 4, 5, it is vain to seek it in any other part of holy Scripture.

Captivating as the above theory may be, and eloquently as it has been defended by some highly-estimable writers, we regard it as being essentially erroneous; and we will now state, in as concise a manner as possible, some of the objections to which it appears open.

First. Such a division and separation of the resurrection of the righteous from the resurrection of the wicked, as this interpretation affirms, is not only unwarranted by the common and most impressive representations of

Scripture, but directly opposed to them: inasmuch as the inspired writers make the resurrection of the dead, "both of the just and unjust," one grand, unbroken, simultaneous transaction. For, though the sacred oracles sometimes speak of the resurrection of the just as a matter distinct, and in its nature and its issues widely different, from the resurrection of the wicked; still, so far as the time is concerned, both are commonly represented as taking place at once. This is true equally of the resurrection of the dead and of the final judgment. Thus: "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” (Dan. xii. 2.) * Again: "The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." (John v. 28, 29.) The evil and the good, the wicked and the just, the lost and the saved, stand up together; one awful voice, one trumpet-blast, awakes them all alike. In Matt. xxv., "all nations" are gathered together; this congregated mass of human beings is divided into two classes; the just are separated from the wicked: "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal." (Verse 46.) Here, also, the family of man, good and bad together, simultaneously "appear before the judgment-seat of Christ; that everyone may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." (2 Cor. v. 10.) To separate the resurrection of the righteous from that of the wicked by a thousand years, is plainly unscriptural; it is to break up a grand scriptural idea into far less impressive and even disjointed fragments.

Secondly. This interpretation does violence to the language of the text, and puts a forced construction upon its principal terms. The persons here said to live and reign with Christ a thousand years, are not the righteous dead in general, but only a particular class. The terms employed are such as cannot, without the most violent straining, be made to include all the righteous dead without distinction. Of the persons intended, we have, in fact, two separate descriptions. In the one place, we read of "them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held ;" in the other, of "them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God." To make so particular a description comprehend and include all classes of the righteous dead, is to divest the plainest language of everything like a definite meaning.

6

* Of the text of Daniel a living writer gives the following outrageous paraphrase: "The verse reads strictly, some,' that is, those who awake, 'to everlasting life;' and some,' that is, those who sleep, i. e., who still remain in their tombs, 'to everlasting shame and contempt.'" Thus the "many," who are affirmed by the Prophet to "awake," are divided into two classes, one only of which do actually "awake," while the other continue to "sleep in the dust" and still "remain in their tombs." And this is done to transmute the words of Daniel into "a description of the first resurrection." 2 $

VOL.

V.-FIFTH SERIES.

Thirdly. This interpretation does equal violence to Rev. xx. 12-15. This description is made to embrace only "the rest of the dead;" not all the dead, nor the dead in general, but the wicked dead exclusively. The terms employed contain, however, a grander and more extensive meaning, and demand a different interpretation. St. John does not say, "I saw the rest of the dead," but, "I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God." And it is added, "The sea gave up the dead which were in it.” Thus the ocean, the great deep, delivers up its millions of "the dead.” "And death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them." This is a most glorious conception. "Death" is personified; the dead are in his custody; he gives them up. Hades-not "hell," in the limited sense, as it denotes a place of torment-hades, "the spectre world," the common receptacle of departed souls, the world of disembodied spirits, good and bad, righteous and wicked, blessed and miserable, “delivered up the dead' which it contained. Oávaros and adŋs stand alike related to "the dead" in general. The first is the power that kills the body; whether by sickness, famine, poison, fire, or sword, it matters not. The second denotes the common receptacle of disembodied souls. Such appears to be the true and proper import of these terms. Let us then read, "I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened," &c. (Verses 12, 13.) Now to make a resurrection and a judgment thus circumstanced, and thus described, include one section only of the human race, is again to do violence to the plainest meaning of language. In fact, it is hardly possible to peruse this more-than-graphic description, without calling to mind the words of Jesus, "The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." (John v. 28, 29.)

Fourthly. Such an interpretation as the one now under review will not harmonize with what is said in the text about living and reigning with Christ. The promise to them that have "part in the first resurrection" is, that "they shall reign with Him a thousand years." Now, whether we take the thousand years literally, or whether we take them to denote a long but indefinite period, is of little moment. In either case, this period of millennial blessedness will come to an end. This is plain from the context: "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth," &c. (Verses 7, 8.) Yes; this period of millennial triumph will have an end. Satan will again be loosed from his prison; and men and devils will again combine to assault the church of God, and to make war upon His saints. If there is one thing plain concerning this living and reigning with Christ, it is this; namely, that it is limited to a thousand years. They "shall reign with Him a thousand years. And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison."

Such being the case, "the first resurrection" cannot be regarded as a

literal resurrection of the dead. The resurrection of the dead, literally understood, is always represented as being everlasting in its issues. For bliss or for woe, those issues are final, endless, unchangeable. "They that have done good" shall come forth" unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." (John v. 29.) Or, as Daniel puts the case, the one, "to everlasting life;" the other, "to shame and everlasting contempt." (Dan. xii. 2.) When the righteous are raised from the dead, their resurrection and its attendant blessedness are nowhere described as temporary. Nowhere is this blissful and stupendous deliverance thus minified; nowhere is it said to be for "a thousand years," or for any other limited period. Theirs is a resurrection "to everlasting life;" they rise to be "for ever with the Lord."

For the same reason we must maintain that the words, "They lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years," cannot refer at all to the personal exaltation and beatitude of the saints in a glorified state. In every other scriptural delineation of the subject, that glory is made to be perpetual and unchanging; a glory which can know no check, no interruption, no reverse. This, on the contrary, is only for a time. It will be succeeded by a period of diminished glory; perhaps, of positive depression and distress. Whether "the tribulation of those days" is to continue for a longer or for a shorter time, is not material. A period of post-millennial tribulation there will surely be; and such a sequel is utterly incompatible with the personal condition of glorified saints.

Fifthly. The scheme of interpretation now under review will not harmonize with what is here said of exemption from "the second death." This terrible doom consists in being "cast into the lake of fire." It is the perdition of the body and the soul in hell. Bear in mind, now, that “the first resurrection" is affirmed by St. John to take place at the commencement of the "thousand years;" and that it is said, "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power." According to this, such, and such only, as have "part in the first resurrection," will be exempted from "the second death." Participation in "the first resurrection," and exemption from "the second death," are collateral and co-extensive.

The question then is, What, upon the present theory, is to become of those who are born, and live, and die, in the course of the specified thousand years?"The first resurrection" takes place before they are born; and, if it is a literal resurrection of the dead, none of them can have part therein. Millions of human beings will thus be born, and live, and die; but none of them, according to this theory, can have "part in the first resurrection." Thus, all the generations of the millennial age are not only cut off from the blessedness promised in the text, but consigned, by implication, to "the second death." Now, that long-anticipated millennium is to constitute the brightest, happiest period of the church's history: a period during which believers will be multiplied beyond the stars of heaven; when "all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord ;" and when the glowing