Earlier text: General ArticlesThe Ostrogoths and the Visigoths.
By A. T. J.
“AFTER Valens had [A. D. 376] terminated the Gothic war with some appearance of glory and success, he made a progress through his dominions of Asia, and at length fixed his residence in the capital of Syria [Antioch]. . . . He was informed that the North was agitated by a furious tempest; that the irruption of the Huns, an unknown and monstrous race of savages, had subverted the power of the Goths; and that the suppliant multitudes of that warlike nation, whose pride was now humbled in the dust, covered a space of many miles along the banks of the river. With outstretched arms and pathetic lamentations, they loudly deplored their past misfortunes and their present danger; acknowledged that their only hope of safety was in the clemency of the Roman Government; and most solemnly protested that if the gracious liberality of the emperor would permit them to cultivate the waste lands of Thrace, they should ever hold themselves bound, by the strongest obligations of duty and gratitude, to obey the laws, and to guard the limits, of the republic. “These assurances were confirmed by the ambassadors of the Goths, who impatiently expected, from the mouth of Valens, an answer that must finally determine the fate of their unhappy countrymen. The emperor of the East was no longer guided by the wisdom and authority of his elder brother, whose death happened towards the end of the preceding year [A. D. 375, Nov. 17]; and as the distressful situation of the Goths required an instant and peremptory decision, he was deprived of the favorite resource of feeble and timid minds, who consider the use of dilatory and ambiguous measures as the most admirable efforts of consummate prudence. “The prayers of the Goths were granted, and their service was accepted by the Imperial Court; and orders were immediately dispatched to the civil and military governors of the Thracian diocese to make the necessary preparations for the passage and subsistence of a great people, till a proper and sufficient territory could be allotted for their future residence. The liberality of the emperor was accompanied, however, with two harsh and rigorous conditions, which prudence might justify on the side of the Romans, but which distress alone could extort from the indignant Goths. Before they passed the Danube, they were required to deliver their arms; and it was insisted that their children should be taken from them, and dispersed through the provinces of Asia, where they might be civilized by the arts of education, and serve as hostages to secure the fidelity of their parents. “During this suspense of a doubtful and distant negotiation, the impatient Goths made some rash attempts to pass the Danube, without the permission of the Government whose protection they had implored. Their motions were strictly observed by the vigilance of the troops which were stationed along the river; and their foremost detachments were defeated with considerable slaughter; yet such were the timid councils of the reign of Valens, that the brave officers who had served their country in the execution of their duty were punished by the loss of their employments, and narrowly escaped the loss of their heads. The Imperial mandate was at length received for transporting over the Danube the whole body of the Goths' nation; but the execution of this order was a task of labor and difficulty. “The stream of the Danube, which in those parts is above a mile broad, had been swelled by incessant rains; and in the tumultuous passage many were swept away, and drowned, by the rapid violence of the current. A large fleet of vessels, of boats, and of canoes, was provided: many days and nights they passed and repassed with indefatigable toil; and the most strenuous diligence was exerted by the officers of Valens that not a single barbarian of those who were reserved to subvert the foundations of Rome, should be left on the opposite shore. It was thought expedient that an accurate account should be taken of their numbers; but the persons who were employed soon desisted, with amazement and dismay, from the prosecution of the endless and impracticable task; and the principal historian of the age most seriously affirms that the prodigious armies of Darius and Xerxes, which had so long been considered as the fables of vain and credulous antiquity, were now justified, in the eyes of mankind, by the evidence of fact and experience. “A probable testimony has fixed the number of the Gothic warriors at 200,000 men; and if we can venture to add the just proportion of women, of children, and of slaves, the whole mass of people which composed this formidable emigration must have amounted to near a million of persons, of both sexes and of all ages. The children of the Goths, those at least of a distinguished rank, were separated from the multitude. They were conducted, without delay, to the distant seats assigned for their residence and education; and as the numerous train of hostages or captives passed through the cities, their gay and splendid apparel, their robust and martial figure, excited the surprise and envy of the provincials. “But the stipulation the most offensive to the Goths and the most important to the Romans, was shamefully eluded. The barbarians, who considered their arms as the ensigns of honor and the pledges of safety, were disposed to offer a price which the lust or avarice of the Imperial officers was easily tempted to accept. To preserve their arms, the haughty warriors consented, with some reluctance, to prostitute their wives or their daughters. The charms of a beauteous maid or a comely boy, secured the connivance of the inspectors, who sometimes cast an eye of covetousness on the fringed carpets and linen garments of their new allies; or who sacrificed their duty to the mean consideration of filling their farms with cattle and their houses with slaves. The Goths, with arms in their hands, were permitted to enter the boats; and when their strength was collected on the other side of the river, the immense camp which was spread over the plains and hills of the lower Mœsia, assumed a threatening and even hostile aspect.”—Dec. and Fall, chap. 26, par. 13, 14. This immense body of people was the nation of the Visigoths. And although the historian simply speaks of them here by the general title of Goths, it is evident from the previous context that they were the Visigoths. However, in the words which immediately follow, the historian himself makes the point clear and positive that these were the Visigoths alone. He says:— “The leaders of the Ostrogoths, Alatheus and Saphrax, the guardians of their infant king, appeared soon afterwards on the northern bank of the Danube; and immediately dispatched their ambassadors to the court of Antioch, to solicit, with the same professions of allegiance and gratitude, the same favor which had been granted to the suppliant Visigoths. The absolute refusal of Valens suspended their progress, and discovered the repentance, the suspicions, and the fears, of the Imperial Council.”—Id., par. 14. From this it is plain that the positions of the two peoples are now thus: The whole nation of the Visigoths is within the empire, and the nation of the Ostrogoths is yet beyond the Danube. And to assist the reader in keeping the distinction between them clear, we would remark that Fritigern and Alavivus are the united leaders, or judges, of the Visigoths; while Alatheus and Saphrax, the guardians of their infant king, occupy the same position as the leaders of the Ostrogoths. The historian now continues the account of the Visigoths:— “An undisciplined and unsettled nation of barbarians required the firmest temper and the most dexterous management. The daily subsistence of near a million of extraordinary subjects could be supplied only by constant and skillful diligence, and might continually be interrupted by mistake or accident. The insolence or the indignation of the Goths, if they conceived themselves to be the objects either of fear or of contempt, might urge them to the most desperate extremities; and the fortune of the State seemed to depend on the prudence, as well as the integrity, of the generals of Valens. At this important crisis the military government of Thrace was exercised by Lupicinus and Maximus, in whose venal minds the slightest hope of private emolument outweighed every consideration of public advantage; and whose guilt was only alleviated by their incapacity of discerning the pernicious effects of their rash and criminal administration. “Instead of obeying the orders of their sovereign, and satisfying with decent liberality the demands of the Goths, they levied an ungenerous and oppressive tax on the wants of the hungry barbarians. The vilest food was sold at an extravagant price; and, in the room of wholesome and substantial provisions, the markets were filled with the flesh of dogs, and of unclean animals which had died of disease. To obtain the valuable acquisition of a pound of bread, the Goths resigned the possession of an expensive, though serviceable slave; and a small quantity of meat was greedily purchased with ten pounds of a precious, but useless metal. When their property was exhausted, they continued this necessary traffic by the sale of their sons and daughters; and notwithstanding the love of freedom which animated every Gothic breast, they submitted to the humiliating maxim, that it was better for their children to be maintained in a servile condition, than to perish in a wretched and helpless independence. “The most lively resentment is excited by the tyranny of pretended benefactors, who sternly exact the debt of gratitude which they have canceled by subsequent injuries; a spirit of discontent insensibly arose in the camp of the barbarians, who pleaded, without success, the merit of their patient and dutiful behavior, and loudly complained of the inhospitable treatment which they had received from their new allies. They beheld around them the wealth and plenty of a fertile province, in the midst of which they suffered the intolerable hardships of artificial famine. But the means of relief, and even of revenge, were in their hands; since the rapaciousness of their tyrants had left to an injured people the possession and the use of arms. “The clamors of a multitude untaught to disguise their sentiments, announced the first symptoms of resistance, and alarmed the timid and guilty minds of Lupicinus and Maximus. Those crafty ministers, who substituted the cunning of temporary expedients to the wise and salutary counsels of general policy, attempted to remove the Goths from their dangerous station on the frontiers of the empire, and to disperse them in separate quarters of cantonment through the interior provinces. As they were conscious how ill they had deserved the respect or confidence of the barbarians, they diligently collected, from every side, a military force that might urge the tardy and reluctant march of a people who had not yet renounced the title or the duties of Roman subjects. “But the generals of Valens, while their attention was solely directed to the discontented Visigoths, imprudently disarmed the ships and the fortifications which constituted the defense of the Danube. The fatal oversight was observed and improved by Alatheus and Saphrax, who anxiously watched the favorable moment37 of escaping from the pursuit of the Huns. By the help of such rafts and vessels as could be hastily procured, the leaders of the Ostrogoths transported, without opposition, their king and their army, and boldly fixed a hostile and independent camp on the territories of the empire.”—Id., par. 15. An excellent way to stop gossip is to stop it. Make an end of the matter. Let it alone. Say no more about it, either to wonder, to excuse, to moralize, or to deplore. Drop the hissing secret into the cool well of indifference. Forget it. There is a certain house set on a hill, where two or three charming women hold sway. Very animated and delightful is the conversation one enjoys at this house. Quick wit, delicate tact, tender feeling, high sentiment, all these have their part in it. Callers come smiling from that door. They have been amused, entertained, refreshed, often strengthened. The moral barometer has gone up. One element is noticeably lacking in the conversation of this family. The trivial discussion of other people's affairs, which forms so large a part of much of the conversation we hear, does not enter into the talk of these women. Personal matters seem by some magic never to get into it, never to be thought of. If, by any awkwardness, such matters are lugged in, the change of atmosphere is instantaneous and remarkable. These brilliant women become positively stupid. They are not interested. They have nothing to say. They look bored. One feels that he has committed a faux pas of the worst description if, unwittingly, in this parlor he drops into the familiar "they say," or "have you heard?" They never have heard. They never know anything about it. They look as dull as they know how to look. One does not even hear them bemoaning the fact that gossip is so prevalent, that reports will get about, and people will repeat and magnify and misjudge. They do not condemn gossip. It simply does not thrive in the atmosphere they live in. Very little of it goes into the house, and none comes out of it. Gossip has been understood to be a feminine fault. A reference to the newspapers is perhaps the best comment on that opinion. Scandal comes after gossip. The ball, small and clean enough perhaps at first, rolls up huge, obstructive, black with the grime of the public street. It is also a common belief that gossip prevails and flourishes in rural communities to a greater degree than in cities. That proposition is, however, yet to be demonstrated. Listen to the conversation of a group at a village sewing-circle, and then to that of a group of fashionable creatures on a hotel piazza. There is a difference of nomenclature. The rustic phrase is unlike the city jargon. But is not the substance of the conversation composed of much the same elements in each instance? The trouble is, gossip is the natural growth of poor and empty minds, be they country bred or city bred, masculine or feminine. Get richer soil, more oxygen in the air, choke out this tenacious little weed by planting larger things. "The best way," some one has said, "to eradicate a vice is to implant a virtue." If this is not sound horticulturally, it is morally. A mother, listening to the daily conversation of her daughter's school-mates, was seriously troubled by the excessive amount of this small-talk poured forth from the mouths of these young girls. Trivial comments on the dress and appearance of their companions (too seldom seasoned with charity), reports of what she said and what he said, of where she went with one boy, and how she snubbed another, of what her mother let her do, and what another mother—awfully mean—would not let her daughter do,—these things formed the warp and woof of their conversation. And this was not occasionally, but daily, almost hourly, rarely and briefly interrupted by allusions to more important matters. "Dear," said the mother to her daughter, "I don't like to have you get into the way of this contemptible gossip, this reporting and commenting on the affairs of others. If you have anything of the sort to say, I wish you would not say it to the girls, but come and say it to me. I know it is hard sometimes not to speak to some one about these things. We will have a little gossip together every day, if you please. But don't get into the habit of talking freely, in mixed company, of the concerns of others." The daughter agreed, and the proposed gossip in the mother's chamber took place a few times. But one day the child came smiling. "Mamma," she said, "I've thought of a better plan than yours. Let us not talk about these things at all! I find they slip out of my mind more easily if I say nothing about them, even to you." Wise girl! she had gone to the very root of the matter. Gossip is best left off, as the vigorous Hebrew proverb declares of another vice, "before it is meddled with."—Christian Union The Only True Guide.
By Edgar Kelsey
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1. A SECTARIAN spirit, or a spirit of preconceived ideas, only leads its possessor to those passages of Scripture the phraseology of which, when considered apart from their proper bearing, may be construed to favor their own ideas. Other texts have to be examined when presented as objections. But evasion is a common attribute of sectarianism. For instance, with that misleading method of interpretation,—the source of so many false doctrines which are either extremely repulsive or insidiously delusive, the cardinal idea of which was first uttered by Satan himself (Gen. 3:4), which turns God's penalty for disobedience to such an absurd thing as a "death that never dies," and declares that we naturally possess immortality, in spite of the absence of Scriptural proof and the presence of plain Scripture to the contrary,—its advocates can only evade those objections which they cannot answer. With sectarianism as a leading spirit, our advance in the light and knowledge of the Scriptures is effectually retarded. A spirit of skepticism, or infidelity, or any spirit of opposition, will not lead one into an impartial consideration of the general tenor of the Scriptures. By such guides men are very often led into the mistaken idea that in overthrowing the absurd interpretation of other misguided men they overthrow the Bible. But the Bible still stands, and false doctrines are constantly being dispelled by the increasing light of the approaching perfect day. Many professed Christians wait with much impatience the appointments of worldly pleasures, while prayer-meeting appointments seem to awaken in their hearts no appreciable anticipation. This spirit of indifference encourages proportionately greater indifference among the unconverted, and hurts the power of the church more than all the works of skepticism and infidelity can do. Professed Christians, who by mingling with the world become possessed of the spirit of indifference, especially need a baptism of the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth, so that they may realize their condition in the sight of God and their responsibility to their fellow-men. Those who possess a spirit of hypocrisy do not care for gospel motives. They take upon themselves the form of religion, adorned with the precepts of all its virtues, as a mere cloak to enable them to share confidence which should only be divided among true Christians. And, alas! when their hypocrisy is exposed and their real motive is seen, true Christians are unjustly compelled to share the burden of distrust which should rest entirely upon the shoulders of the guilty. Though it is a matter of much sorrow to every true Christian that so many take upon themselves the mere profession of religion, and so shamefully abuse the confidence thus unjustly gained, yet the Lord's children are not disheartened even by the hypocrisy of false brethren, for they know that deliverance will surely come. The Holy Spirit alone will protect us from the multitudes of errors, snares, and contrary spirits of Satan. The following elucidation of divine guidance will help us to appreciate the importance of being led by the Holy Spirit:— "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Cor. 2:9-14. And you who are without hope, will you not yield to the Spirit which convinces you of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment? It will guide you into all truth, and bring you into kindred relation with the good of every age and clime. You may be a joint-heir with Christ and all the redeemed to the rich blessings and everlasting joys of a glorious, eternal inheritance. If in this world you suffer matters of infinitely less importance to make you heedless of the grace of God, when it is too late, an unmistakable sense of your great loss will dawn upon you. And you will then be unable to deny the justness of the doom against which you are now so abundantly warned in the Scriptures of divine truth. We cannot escape if we neglect the great salvation. Let us then yield to the saving influences of the Holy Spirit, so that when the Judgment is set, and the cause of righteousness is fully vindicated, we may be found worthy in Christ, having been guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth.—Edgar Kelsey, in World's Crisis. A Pure Life’s Powerful Witness
By Joseph Parker
ONE pure life will do more toward the conversion of the world than any number of volumes on the "Evidences of Christianity." The casuist may perplex a reader by suggesting difficulties and creating doubts; but a holy life defies all casuistry; it is evermore the most powerful of self-defenses. We care not for a learned church, a wealthy church, nor a theological church; but, for the world's sake, let us strive for a pure church.—Rev. Joseph Parker. Justice Better Than Charity
CHARITY is good; but perhaps justice, which would in many cases make charity needless, is better. Charity helps one when he is down; justice would often keep him from falling. Charity is liable to enfeeble and humble him, and make him less of a man; justice invigorates him—makes him feel himself fully a man.—National Baptist. Christianity Is a Public Matter
By Watchman
WHILE being a Christian is in some respects a private matter, it is essentially and emphatically a public matter.—Watchman. Sincere Promises Within Your Ability
Let your promise be sincere, and within the compass of your ability. The Coming of a Literal Christ.
FOUR points were made in our last article on this subject, to prove that the interpretation of the dream of Daniel 2 is literal. Unless the rule which we laid down can be invalidated, no further proof can be asked for. The rule settles all such questions. It is this: "If a parable or symbol be taken literally, it is then no parable or symbol; but if the interpretation is not taken literally, it is then no interpretation." This rule cannot be invalidated. Therefore we did not offer additional proof because such proof was necessary to sustain the position, but because we wished to have the facts contained in the proof laid before our readers. But one more point we will present on this part of the subject. 5. The promise made to Mary concerning her son, Jesus, is proof that the kingdom is literal. It is found in Luke 1:32, 33: "The Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." In the Scriptures there is great stress laid upon the genealogy of Jesus, to show that he was the son of David. This was necessary, because the Lord had promised that he would perpetuate the kingdom and house of David; and the promises often made show that they could be fulfilled only in the Messiah of God. The king in this kingdom was to be the son of David and the Son of God. But the fact that he was to reign on the throne of David, and over the house of Israel, shows that it was to be a literal kingdom; and this is strongly corroborated by Peter's comment on the promise, in his sermon recorded in Acts 2: "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne." Verses 29, 30. Why according to the flesh, if it is not a literal throne and a literal kingdom? Nothing but a son according to the flesh, a literal son of David, and a literal kingdom, and a literal throne, will fulfill the promises to David. And this is further corroborated by the words of Jesus in Rev. 3:21. Here is a contrast in time of possession between the throne of the Father and the throne of the Son. "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." The throne of Christ, his own throne, in distinction from the throne of his Father, is the throne of David. It is the throne of David's son Jesus, because he was born of David's line, and was raised up "according to the flesh," that he might inherit it according to the promise. We have quoted the scriptures concerning the present and prospective position of the Saviour on these two thrones. He is now seated on the throne of his Father, at his "right hand," until his enemies, the kingdoms of this world, are given to him. To pursue this subject further is unnecessary; for we do not see how any one can fail to see the force of the reasons given and the texts quoted in favor of the kingdom of Christ being literal, and that it is to be set up in the future. Now we come to another important branch of this same subject, and one to which the head of these articles seems more immediately to relate. It is the literal second coming of Christ. We call it the coming of a literal Christ. If it is not a literal second coming, it is no second coming at all; for the first advent was literal. And if it is not a literal coming of Christ, then it is not the coming of a literal Christ. A literal coming necessitates the existence of a literal Christ, and a literal Christ cannot come in any other manner than literally. To deny the literality of the second advent is to deny the literality or personality of Christ, and this is but one of many unscriptural difficulties which they have to meet who deny the literal second advent of Christ. The relation of the subject of the literality of the kingdom, and of its being set up in the future, to the literality of the advent, must be apparent to every one. If the interpretation of the symbols representing the kingdom of God are interpretations in fact, and are to be taken literally, it evidently follows that the "coming" as well as the "power" and "majesty" of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:16, 17) is literal. He could not metaphorically come to spiritually reign in a literal kingdom. But we will enter at once upon the proof of a literal second coming of a literal Christ. A friend in Ohio, who had read several numbers of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES, wrote to us as follows: "If I gather correctly your views, I cannot embrace them. A favored people formerly looked for a personal reign on earth, but looked in vain. Christ said his kingdom was not of this world, and I apprehend that they who are looking for an outward sovereignty will be as much disappointed as those [were] who expected him to reign in Judea eighteen hundred years ago. His coming the second time without sin unto salvation is in the hearts of the children of men, when he sits as a refiner," etc. We copy these words, because we think the popular view of the coming and kingdom of Christ cannot be better expressed than this writer has expressed them. But we cannot see the shadow of a reason for agreeing with them. On this subject we notice two things which the prophets revealed concerning the incarnation and work of Christ. They are referred to in many scriptures, a few of which we will notice. 1 Peter 5:1: "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory, that is to be revealed." The sufferings of Christ were at his first advent. "The glory that is to be revealed" is at his second advent. Then, and not till then, will the saints be rewarded and partake of his glory, as we shall particularly notice hereafter. Acts 17:2, 3: "And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, opening and alleging that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead." Luke 24:45, 46: "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." We quote these texts to show that the prophecies foretold both the sufferings and the kingdom of Christ. Now concerning the faith of the "favored people," as compared with the more popular faith of the present day. The Jews saw the prophecies of the kingdom, but they would not admit a literal fulfillment of those which foretold his sufferings. The professed people of God of the present day can see plainly the prophecies of his sufferings, and their literal fulfillment, but they cannot accept the literal fulfillment of his coming and kingdom. His sufferings are now historic facts; they are scarcely questions of faith. But Jesus foresaw that there would be little faith on the earth when he comes (Luke 18:8); and even so now, when his coming is near, we hear the inquiry, "Where is the promise of his coming?" 2 Peter 3:3, 4. The "blessed hope" is turned into nothingness by a system of mystifying the Scriptures. Before we examine the two beliefs in the light of the word, let us look at them in the light of reason, as to this the people often appeal against the literality of his second coming and his kingdom. Two classes of prophecies are found in the Bible; one recounting his humiliation and sufferings, and the other foretelling his reigning in glory. The Jews read these prophecies concerning their Messiah, the Son of God, and reasoned thus: We know that when Christ comes he is to reign a king; he is to come in David's line, to sit on his throne; the word of the Father says that all his enemies are to be put under his feet; that all people, nations, and languages shall serve him; he shall break them with a rod of iron, and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel; the government shall be upon his shoulders, and his kingdom shall stand forever. It is as reasonable to consider, as it is just in fact, that the Father shall put his Son, the Messiah, in authority, and cause his enemies to bow before him. It is reasonable that David's great Son shall reign on his throne, and overthrow the oppressors of his people. But it is not reasonable to consider, as it is not just as a fact, that the Messiah should be reviled and maltreated, and even put to death, without resisting his enemies. That would be inconsistent with his nature and his character, and with the prophecies which record his triumphant reign over all. Oh, no! all that the Scriptures say concerning his humiliation, his sufferings, his ignominious death, is figurative; it cannot possibly be literally fulfilled. But it was fulfilled, and what then? Its unreasonableness still stares them in the face, and to this day the preaching of Christ crucified is a stumbling-block to the Jew. 1 Cor. 1:23. But in this day the faith is expressed in this wise: It is perfectly reasonable that Christ should appear as David's son; for thus the prophets speak. It is reasonable to believe that he would come in humility, bearing in quietness the reproach and scorn of his enemies. It is reasonable to consider that the Son of the living God should pour out his soul unto death, and have the sins of the world laid upon him; that he should suffer hunger and thirst, scorn and abuse, be condemned by the highest court among God's chosen people, and in great agony die an ignominious death. All this was written in the law and the prophets, and he is but an infidel who would deny its literal fulfillment. But it is highly unreasonable to think he will come again to vindicate his rights; to take vengeance on his enemies and dash in pieces the nations; to reign in glory upon a throne to which he was by birth entitled. It is an abuse of Scripture language to say that all this will be literally fulfilled. No; these scriptures are to be spiritually understood. His second coming is in the hearts of the people. True, there is much more said about his glorious reign than about his sufferings and death. His coming in triumph to redeem his saints and to destroy his enemies is also written in the prophets. But it is all to be taken figuratively. Now we insist that of the two beliefs, that of the Jew is the most reasonable. And in fact we believe that the Jews of the days of the Messiah stood upon better and safer ground in regard to the fulfillment of prophecy than do the majority of Christians of the present day. If the literality of the prophecies may be explained away, the Jews had the least explaining away to do. They stood as fully entrenched in their faith as do the Christians of to-day. They said, "We know that God spake unto Moses." Theirs was a historic faith. The Jew was a firm believer of that which the Scriptures affirmed had already occurred; but of what the prophets said of the future, he must be judge whether or not to accept it. He must at least be allowed to put his39 own construction upon it. And that is exactly the position of the Christian of to-day. But the latter is less excusable than the former, in occupying such a position,—a position which does such violence to the "sure word of prophecy,"—because he has the error and example of the former before him as a warning. We will briefly query concerning some of the facts of his first advent. There is no dispute about the fact that he "will come again;" that "he shall appear the second time." These are the exact words of the Scriptures. Did he come literally the first time? Did he literally fulfill the many scriptures which spoke of his coming? Was he literally bruised for our iniquities? Did he literally pour out his soul unto death? Was he literally hanged on a tree? Did he literally offer himself, his body, his personality, a sacrifice for sin? Was he literally buried, and did he literally rise from the dead? Did they handle his literal body, with the prints of the nails and of the spear in it, and thus identify it as the very person that expired on the cross? And did they actually walk with this literally resurrected Christ to "the mount called Olivet," and did he there literally and personally ascend until a cloud received him out of their sight? The answer to each and all of these questions is, Yes. Literal in every feature. And yet the prophecies of these things are not so clear, so free from obscurities, as are those which speak of his second coming, and of his reigning in the kingdom of his father David. All analogy is in favor of a literal second coming, and of his reigning in a literal kingdom. Were not the figurative view so strongly fixed in the popular mind, we should feel like apologizing for saying so much on this point. But with an error so popular we cannot deal too thoroughly. In our next we shall show that the scriptures which speak of his second coming do not admit of any but a literal interpretation, or rather, construction. The second advent of Christ is a more momentous event than has ever transpired since the creation of the world. It is of first importance that we have right views of it, and that we stand rightly related to it.