In previous chapters of our inquiry we have sought to find out when the resurrection and rapture of the saints will take place, before or after, the apocalyptic Week of Daniel. Except in an incidental way, we have not examined the great words used by the Apostles in reference to the Second Coming of Christ. It now remains to do this, because, in view of the frequent and lengthy references to this subject in the Epistles, it cannot but be that we shall find light there on the subject of our inquiry.

Let us search the Epistles and see whether any evidence exists there of the Apostles' revealing a new coming, which is to precede by several years the one spoken of so frequently by our Lord in the days of His earthly ministry. It is admitted that our Lord taught the Apostles on Mount Olivet to expect Him at the Day of the Lord, when He would appear visibly, in great glory, for the overthrow of His foes, and the inauguration of the Messianic Kingdom. If, therefore, we can find in the Epistles that the Apostles and their converts also were looking expectantly for the revelation of Christ from heaven at the Day of the Lord, then we shall be able to conclude, not only that the Coming of the Gospels and that of the Epistles are identical, but also that the theory that the Church will be raptured to heaven some years before the Day of the Lord is a delusion.

There are four principal words used in the Epistles in reference to the End of the Age and the Return of Christ. They are

It is admitted by the real leaders of the pre-trib school that the terms Appearing, Revelation, and Day of the Lord are all synonymous, or at least related, expressions referring to the Day of Christ's glorious Advent at the close of the Age. It is contended, however, that the term Coming refers to an advent of Christ that will take place some years - at least seven - prior to the Appearing, Revelation, or Day of Christ. The Coming is for the Church; the Glorious Appearing for the world and Israel.[1] Now, if the Apostles revealed a new coming prior to the Glorious Appearing, there must be a clear trace of it either in their discourses in the Acts, or in their Epistles. Again, the scheme is that Christians will be raptured to heaven at the Coming and will return with Christ, seven or more years later.

Not only so, we must nowhere find the Coming associated with the reward of the saints, the judgment, or the destruction of Antichrist. Likewise we must nowhere find the Christian hope associated with the Appearing, the Revelation, or the Day.

Let us study the Epistles on this important subject; and we may begin with the occurrences of Appearing-epiphaneia.

(1) 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (R.V.).

The first use of the term is in 2 Thessalonians 2:8, where we read:

Clearly the Appearing of Christ is His Glorious Coming at the Day of the Lord. And, used in connection with the regal word Parousia, it indicates the triumphant arrival of the King. "It is a powerful picture how the mere breath of the Lord will destroy this arch-enemy."[2] As an eschatological term Appearing has a clear and definite meaning at its first mention in the New Testament. Of extreme significance is the use of Parousia for the same crisis of judgment, but we leave the word till [the] next chapter.

(2) 1 Timothy 6:14 (R.V.).

But how can Christians observe this instruction if, as pre-trib assert, they will be raptured to heaven several years or decades before the Appearing of Christ? Undoubtedly the Appearing is the event that will terminate the service of Christians on earth. Clearly, therefore, they cannot be raptured before it takes place.

(3) 2 Timothy 4:1.

Here the Appearing of Christ is held out as the time when Christ's Kingdom will come, and when Christians will stand before Christ Jesus. Alford says: "We have here His coming, when we shall stand before Him - His Kingdom in which we hope to reign with Him."

(4) 2 Timothy 4:8.

Does this look as if the Apostle Paul did not make the Glorious Appearing of Christ his hope? He himself loved that appearing: he had his heart set upon it, because of the reward that the righteous judge was to give him. Undoubtedly this refers to the hope of the Church,  -  "the first stage of the advent"  - since our Lord said: "Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just" (Luke 14:14). The Glorious Appearing and the resurrection of the saints synchronize. Both occur, as the context shows, "at that Day"  - the well known Day of the Lord.

(5) Titus 2:13.

Now it is to be pointed out that in the Greek of this great passage the two substantives hope and appearing are, as Ellicott points out in his Commentary, "closely united, and under the vinculum (linked) of a common article." It is not, "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing," as if two separate events were in view. It is simply: "looking for the blessed hope and appearing." The one expression explains the other, or, as Green says in his Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament: "The 'manifestation' is but another expression for the hope" (p. 198). See also A. T. Robertson, vol. 4, p. 604, and his Grammar of the N.T. (p. 786), where he applies the law to a famous example in this same passage.

If Greek grammar is our guide, then we are bound to the conclusion that "the blessed hope" of Christians is "the glorious appearing" or "the appearing of the glory" of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Hence it is that in the translations of the New Testament into modern, idiomatic English, the passage in Titus 2:13 runs:

Moffatt:

Weymouth:

Goodspeed:

Conybeare:

Wade:

The new rendering, "the appearing of the Glory of our great God and Saviour" is most significant. Every Christian Hebrew would know at once that the Coming of Jehovah at the Day of the Lord is in view. This was the hope of Israel; every Israelite looked forward to that great Day when the chosen People, looking upon Jehovah would say: "Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad in his salvation" (Isa. 25:9).

At Pentecost the Church of Christ shared this hope; for the Coming of Jehovah is now the Coming of Jesus for the Church. This is seen already at Acts 1:11 -  "This same Jesus . . . shall so come in like manner"  - a promise that Darby rightly referred to the glorious "manifestation in this lower world," when "He will return to earth to be seen of the world," (Synopsis in loco.) In Acts 3:19-21, Peter preached the same Glorious Appearing as is found in the O.T. and the Gospels, and at Acts 1:11. It is for what our Lord called the "Regeneration" (Matthew 19:28). At 2:19-21, the Apostle quotes from Joel, applying to the Day of Pentecost a prophecy of the End-time, which I shall quote in some modern versions, including Darby's:

Moffatt:

Weymouth:

Wade:

Goodspeed:

Darby:

On the Greek word used here (epiphane) Darby says that it "has in it the sense of 'manifestation, appearing, displaying itself.' Compare Titus 2:11, 13." New Translation, notes at Acts 2.

These words of Darby's enable us to see that Paul in Titus 2:13 has the same day, and the same majestic event in view, namely: the Coming in glory of Jesus the Messiah, who is Jehovah, the Hope of Israel, and our Hope as well (1 Tim. 1:1).

And a man half-asleep can see that modern scholarship's contribution at Titus 2:13 spells the ruin, and the irretrievable ruin, of pre-tribs comforting program of the End. For according to them "the blessed hope" is a secret event, clean detached from all connection with the Day of the Lord, which, they tell us, is a terrible and terrifying affair, occurring several years or decades later; whereas according to Paul the blessed hope of Christians is none other than the Glorious Appearing itself.

The use of the word appearing in the Pauline Epistles is absolutely decisive on the principal issue of our inquiry: for Christ's Appearing brings Antichrist to the pit (2 Thess. 2:8); closes the career of Christians' upon earth (1 Tim. 6:14); sets Christians before their Lord when He comes to reign (2 Tim. 4:1); forms the object of Christians' affection (2 Tim. 4:8); and is definitely held out - as clearly as language can make it - as the "Blessed Hope" of the Church (Titus 2:13).

Is it not terribly serious, therefore, that pre-trib leaders should attribute to Satanic influence the rejection of a secret, Pre-tribulation Rapture, and the acceptance of the Glorious Appearing of Christ as the Blessed Hope of Christians?[3]

Several years ago an expositor[4] of note among pre-tribs, who had some concern for exact exegesis, and saw that the Christian hope in Titus 2:13 is nothing else than the Glorious Appearing of Christ took to task the Editor of a prophetic magazine for erroneous exegesis on this passage. Exegesis apart, he deserved a prize for his courage. Well, he corrected the Editor's carelessness in perpetrating the error - which had always been a foundation pillar in the school - that "the blessed hope" of Titus 2:13 referred to the Rapture, several years before the "Glorious Appearing." He pointed out that the Greek demands the sense that the blessed hope is simply the Glorious Appearing. I was astonished to see this in an orthodox magazine, and was curious to see how this courageous writer was going to square his sensible exegesis with the pre-trib presupposition that the blessed hope precedes the Glorious Appearing by at least seven years; or could it be possible that a reaction had set in with a return to the truth of Scripture? But alas, for the vanity of human wishes! The writer who began so well ended up with a more violent leap in the dark than the confreres whom he criticized: for, he would have us believe, Paul in Titus 2:13 was not referring to the proper hope of the Church at all! "The blessed hope" of the Glorious Appearing is not strictly for the Church, since it occurs some years after the more blessed hope of the Rapture of 1 Thessalonians 4:17. We are to believe, ex hypothesi, either that Paul, like the opponents of pre-tribs, "confused" the Rapture and the Appearing of Christ, or else that, knowing that the Secret Rapture seven years before the Glorious Appearing was the true hope of Christians, he carelessly led Titus and the whole Church universal to believe that the Glorious Appearing was the true hope. An imaginary pretribulation rapture is to be more esteemed than the blessed hope of Titus 2:13. I do not think we need to expose the hollowness of this latest contention and its implications.

It is like nothing so much as a man's having a gourd that he dug around and manured and watered, and covered with a booth of leaves to keep out the sun, which was arising with withering in his wings.

The candid student will see that there is one and only one sound interpretation of Titus 2:13, and that is that "the appearing of the Glory of our great God and Saviour" is the true and proper hope of the saints. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 is but a more detailed reference to the same event. The theory that the latter is a secret event, is one of the most amazing innovations ever made on the faith of the Church; and the theory that it occurs several years before the Day of the Lord is once and for ever shattered by the sure and satisfying statement of the Apostle's that Christians, redeemed and schooled by the grace of God, live lives "of self-mastery, of integrity, and of piety in this present world, awaiting the blessed hope of the appearance of the Glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, Who gave Himself up for us to redeem us from all iniquity and secure Himself a clean people with a zest for good works," (Moffatt).

Just as Paul taught that the Glorious Appearing is the hope of the Church, so did the Apostle Peter. Addressing the Elders of the Churches he says in his First Epistle:

A comparison of this with Paul's similar declaration in 1 Thessalonians 2:19-20 proves that the crowning and the rewarding of the saints take place at the Coming of Christ; Luke 14:14, 1 Corinthians 15:52, and Revelation 11:18 show that the rewarding takes place at the resurrection on the Day of the Lord. For ordinary people, therefore, it is clear that, in Peter's view, the Appearing of Christ coincides with the Coming and the first resurrection.

The Apostle John taught the same thing, as the following passages from his first Epistle shows:

Again:

It is a simple element of Christian belief that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead, and is now at the right hand of God; also that He will one day come forth in power and glory. One of the names given to this crisis is apokalupsis - Revelation or unveiling. All pre-trib teachers taught that this great event coincides with the Day of the Lord and the inauguration of the Kingdom.

Now, if pre-trib theories of the End-time are true, it follows that this word, when used in the Epistles, must never be found associated with the existence of the Church on earth. If it is so used even once then the theories are wrong. We found that the Glorious Appearing is called "the blessed hope;" what of the Revelation?

(1) 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10:

The first occurrence of the word is in 2 Thessalonians 1, where the Apostle describes in splendid and awful colors the very arrival of the Day of the Lord. The common versions are good, but the sense is brought out rather better in the modern ones. Here is Goodspeed's:

Could Paul have written this passage if he believed that Christians are to be raptured away to heaven several years or decades before the Day of the Lord comes? The suggestion is fantastic. Once it is seen that "rest" is a noun, the object of "recompense," then Darby's scheme falls like a house of cards. He and his associates and followers have a comforting scheme that the Elect will be raptured away several years before the Day of Judgment described in this chapter. Yet Paul, dealing specifically with the question of relief from tribulation, says that Christians will get it "at the Revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of his power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel" (R.V.).

Not all the wisdom of Rabbis and sophists has succeeded in fitting this text into the new program of the End-time,[2]

(2) 1 Corinthians 1:7:

The next (chronological) occurrence of the word Revelation is in 1 Corinthians. In the immediate context the Apostle thanks God for the grace that had been given unto the Corinthians, enriching them in everything, especially in "readiness of speech and fullness of knowledge" (Weymouth) and he adds:

And Canon Evans in his volume in the Speaker's Commentary says:

Nobody holding to a secret Coming of Christ and a pretribulation Rapture of the saints as the immediate hope of the Church could have written the words of 1 Corinthians 1:7. If we compare them with those in Titus 2:13, written by the same hand, we cannot possibly avoid the conclusion that the true hope of Christians is the approaching Advent of our Lord in great power and glory.

(3) Romans 8:18-19:

This passage does not mean that Christians will have been some years previously raptured to heaven, and concealed there, as the theorists assert. It simply means that Christians, who are sons of God now, though in humiliation, and not recognized as such by the world, will be manifested in their true character and glory at the Revelation of Christ (1 John 3:2).

Christians will be transfigured and openly manifested as the sons of God. This is the "redemption of the body" that he refers to in verse 23 of this same chapter, and "the glory that shall be revealed to us-ward" according to verse 18. Just as in 2 Corinthians 15:23-54 the Parousia is followed at once by the resurrection and transfiguration of the redeemed (vv. 23, 51-52), and the inauguration of the Kingdom.[5] So in Romans 8:18-30, the Revelation of Christ ushers in the redemption and transfiguration of the body,[6] and the regeneration of nature (vv. I9-22): the saints are conformed to the image of God's Son, and creation itself is delivered from bondage, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God.

No wonder the Church waited for the Revelation!

In their volume on Romans Sanday and Headlam remark on our passage:

(4) 1 Peter 1:7:

Very evidently this passage treats of the blessed hope of Christians, for, after speaking of Christ's appearing, Peter says, "Whom having not seen ye love." At the Revelation, Christians will see Christ and share His glory. Moreover, according to this text, the saints will be tested and rewarded at the Revelation of Christ. It must also be the time of resurrection as Luke 14:14, Revelation 11:18, and 22:12 prove.

(5) 2 Peter 1:13:

Here again the Christian's hope is the Revelation, for then it is that grace and glory will come to them. Moreover, at 4:7, in this Epistle, he desiderates for his readers similar alertness and sobriety in view of the approaching End. Could Peter have written like this if he believed that several years before the End, and the Revelation of Christ, Christians would be raptured secretly to heaven?

(6) 1 Peter 4:13:

This verse is a companion of 2 Thessalonians 1:7. Each deals with the tribulation and trials of the saints. Paul tells his readers that, at the Revelation of Christ, Christians will be recompensed with rest: Peter has the same message. Just now Christians suffer and pass through fiery trials. At the Revelation of Christ's glory they will rejoice.

It is clear from the above use of the word Revelation that the Apostles Paul and Peter knew of no coming prior to the Revelation of Christ in His glory. This revelation is everywhere implied as being the hope of the Christian Church. It brings rest from tribulation (2 Thess. 1:7), and reward for service here below (1 Pet. 1:6-7); it is the grand event that Christians ardently wait for (1 Cor. 1:7), being the time for the redemption and transfiguration of the body, and the regeneration of Nature (Rom. 8:19-30); it is the time for fullness of grace and glory for all saints (1 Pet. 4:13; 1:13). No wonder Peter spoke of the Revelation as a time to be glad with exceeding joy.

We have now found that the terms Consummation, End, Appearing and Revelation are all linked indissolubly with the hope of the Church: shall we find that the Parousia brings the triumph of the King? Let us see.

The next word claiming attention is Parousia, which is usually translated in the Authorized and Revised versions by coming, and in the recent independent translations by coming and arrival. We first meet it in the N.T. at Matthew 24:3, which reads: "What will be the sign of your Coming and of the close of the age?"[1] Here and everywhere else in the Gospels it refers to the triumphant Advent of our Lord at the close of the present world-period. Pre-tribs admit this, but contend that the Lord was addressing the Apostles as representatives of a Jewish Remnant of the End-time, and that it is to the Epistles of Paul that we must go to get light on the Church's hope; the Coming of the Son of Man is not for the Church, but for Israel and the world. Literally, as I have said, a volume is required to examine adequately the theories of the standing, sufferings, and missionary preaching of that Remnant. But in the Epistles of Paul we are on common ground: it is allowed that Parousia in the Epistles always refers to that Coming of Christ which is the hope of Christians. Let us go, therefore, to Paul. And it is in his earliest Epistles (excepting Galatians), those to the Thessalonians, that we meet with several references to the word that we are to examine. Pre-tribs think that Paul is with them, and rely on these very Epistles to prove their whole case on the Second Coming. Here are the references according to the Revised Version. For the sake of completeness I also give the occurrence of the word in the great chapter on resurrection:

Only two of the above texts require detailed study. We may as well consider first the stronghold of the new program of the End.

(1) 1 Thessalonians 5:13.

Most pre-tribs are frank enough to admit that if this passage goes against them, then their main position is lost; their whole safety rests, in the last resort, upon the holding of this fort against attack. To borrow a figure from Provost Salmon, we face an adversary who has been driven from one fortress after another, but now secures himself with special confidence in his last; if he fails here he must fall back in a rout. What does the Apostle say?

The careless reader will have read the above passage without observing any appreciable change in its wording; others will have noticed a significant variation at verse 13. Whereas Paul writes: "I would not have you to be ignorant brethren, concerning them that are asleep," the citation above reads, "concerning the rapture of the saints," for so it is often unconsciously read by every theorist who approaches the text. According to Paul, he is going to give fresh instruction concerning "them that are asleep;" according to the theorists he is about to give a revelation concerning the Rapture of the saints. In a former chapter I quoted the dictum of a pre-trib in America -  "the Rapture is an incident of the coming, spoken of directly once, and only once; and then given as a new revelation to meet the sorrows of the Lord's bereaved. It is never repeated." Such statements are characteristic of thousands made in pamphlets, books, and magazines; they are typical of the exegetical looseness that characterizes so many of the school. For, first, it may be asserted with all ness that the Rapture was not given in 1 Thessalonians 4 "as a new revelation." I have already shown in chapter 6, with the complete concurrence of Darby, Kelly, Newberry, and, indeed, of all the earlier theorists, and present-day ones like Scofield, that the Rapture of believers was not "given as a new revelation" by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4, but by the Lord Jesus Christ twenty years earlier. Secondly, it is to be asserted that the new revelation given "to meet the sorrows of the Lord's bereaved" was not the Rapture at all, but the fact that at the Coming of the Lord, the saints who survive till then will have no precedence or advantage whatever over the saints who sleep. Thirdly, in view of the Rapture craze, fathered by theorists, it needs to be asserted that the real message of comfort about the Apostle's words is not that there will be a Rapture, but that at the Lord's Coming the saints, whether watching or sleeping, will live together with the Lord, and be forever with Him; so that, as Faussett beautifully puts it in his commentary: there will be "no more parting, no more going out," and Moffatt: "no more sleeping in him or waiting for him." Fourthly, it will be shown before we have finished with strange theories, that the Rapture, so far from being "spoken of directly once and only once, and never repeated" was so spoken of more than once, and was often repeated.[2]

To anyone not infatuated with special theories the meaning of 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18 is as plain as a pikestaff: in the words of Faussett:[3] "Jesus is represented as a victorious king, giving the word of command to the hosts of heaven in His train for the last onslaught, at His final triumph over sin, death and Satan," (Rev. 19:11-21).

The N.T. grammarian, A. T. Robertson, writing on the phrase "with a shout" in verse 16 says: "an old word, here only in N.T., from keleuo, to order, command (military command). Christ will, come as conqueror." Conybeare translates by a "shout of war," and adds: "the word denotes the shout used in battle." Alexander in The Speaker's Commentary has the paraphrase: "with a cry of command ringing forth, like that of the general of a great army."

"Christ will come as conqueror." Here is the keynote of the passage. And this is proved beyond all doubt by the kingly word Parousia, used here. It is one of the great contributions of modern scholarship that we now understand what the early Christians felt when they read in Paul's Epistles of the Parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. Scholars and archaeologists have been digging in the rubbish-heaps of Egypt and found this word used in scores of documents in everyday life for the arrival of kings and rulers, or the visit following. Let us have this in the words of a scholar, who has rendered priceless services in explaining the words of Paul. In his great work, Light from the Ancient East,[4] Deissmann deals with the word Parousia. I quote some paragraphs from it: -

Finally:-

These words, mutatis mutandis (things being changed which are to be changed), are an exact reproduction of pre-trib ideas of 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17. It is Darby and Kelly who insist, and loudly insist, that this latter passage "does not describe an event visible to men on earth." It is they who assert that that sublime Advent will take place "without any interruption of the ordinary course of human life," and that the passage does not contain "any hint of a visible return of Christ to earth." And, as if to complete the resemblance between the two schools, Beet indicates that in his opinion the reign of the risen ones in Revelation 20:4-6 will not be exercised on earth but in heaven - exactly the position of Kelly and his colleagues, who vigorously insist that the risen saints during the millennium will not reign on earth, but from heaven.

Thus we see how thoroughly the strange doctrine of a secret, invisible advent of Christ is a complete undermining of the fundamental position of Pre-millennialism. In vain may the theorist protest against the violence of Beet's exegesis; in vain may he insist that the language of the Apocalypse requires a visible, glorious Advent breaking in upon the life of humanity; he himself by his own violent principles of interpretation has provided Beet and his school with the requisite justification. Every argument he uses against Beet is a refutation of his own system.

Similarly it must be admitted that if the innumerable company of the sleeping saints who rise at the Advent of 1 Thessalonians 4 may rise and be transferred to heaven without any interruption of the life of humanity beyond a passing scare and inconvenience, then the same must be granted as possible of the resurrection of the martyrs in Revelation 20:4-6. Finally, if millions of living Christians, whom the world sees and with whom it has intercourse every day, can be translated in clouds to heaven without the world's witnessing it, then it is but straining at a gnat to deny that God can bind Satan - whom we have never seen - and overthrow Antichirst and his allies secretly, and without a glorious Advent of which all the world will know. Thus we see, I repeat, that the Secret-Rapture theories are a menace to the hope of Christ's Coming.

But there is no need to labor the point: the Secret Rapture theory is being increasingly abandoned by theorists. R. A. Torrey gave it up; so did Anderson; now Messieurs Hogg and Vine indicate[12] their doubts about it, combined with a reluctance to give the fond thing up; they say: "What is to happen 'in the twinkling of an eye' cannot be witnessed and therefore must, in so far, be secret," (p. 168).

Yes, people can never see lightning; it cannot be witnessed; it is so secret! May one point out that what is said to take place "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" is not the Rapture of the saints, but their transfiguration, as 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 proves? Yet every theorist works the phrase to death to prove a million miles of miracle at the Rapture; for, they tell us, the whole round world will see nothing of the stupendous events of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. It is as pure a myth as ever entered the brain of man.

Men who taught this dangerous delusion were capable of teaching other beautiful and comforting errors on the Second Coming. And they did; and did it with such success that multitudes in all the Churches hail them as heaven-sent truths, worth dying for. "It is amazing," says an American theologian, "how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion."[13] And very devout and Christian men, "with half-baked theories about the Second Coming of Christ," can be as successful as any deceiver. The very excellence of their character and Christian standing adds to the danger. This accounts for the amazing popularity of the Secret-Rapture, pre-Tribulation theory:[14] some spiritual giants espoused it. But sound exegesis, and the new discoveries about the use of the word Parousia in popular speech, are the annihilation of all ideas of secrecy at the Advent, and of an Advent to be followed by the triumph of the Man of Sin.

In their work Touching the Coming, Messieurs Hogg and Vine complain that the translation coming is wrong; relying, or seeming to rely, on Cremer's Lexicon, they claim that presence is the fundamental meaning of Parousia and that the word should be so translated (pp. 58-67). With rashness the authors set aside the comments of Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, and all the scientific commentaries, and press on the reader their view that presence is the only acceptable translation (pp. 60, 153). The reader is even led to believe that Cremer treated the translation arrival as erroneous, and as "somewhat artlessly" admitting that translators thus made the Greek word Parousia "mean what, in fact, it does not mean." This is a complete misstatement of Cremer's position. He gives the first meaning of Parousia as presence, with 2 Corinthians 10:10, and Philippians 2:12 as his examples of this sense. He then gives arrival as the second sense of the word, quoting 1 Corinthians 16:17, 2 Corinthians 7:6, 7, 2 Thessalonians 2:9, and 2 Peter 3:12, as examples. He then goes on: "With this meaning is most probably connected the application of the word to the second coming of Christ."[15] He gives numerous examples and continues:

And Cremer is appealed to by our authors to prove that Parousia does not really mean arrival, and should always be translated "presence." What next!

The burden of Cremer's article is, in fact, the annihilation of pre-tribs' and our authors' views on the word Parousia, and their whole program of the End; this although Cremer is sixty years behind the times of Deissmann, Milligan, Moulton, and Abbot-Smith. Cremer admits that Parousia in Matthew 24:27, 37, 39, means "arrival," and he goes on to identify it with the terms Appearing, Day, Revelation, and Coming in the Epistles. Our authors say that "'Coming' is properly represented by a perpendicular line thus |; parousia is properly represented by a horizontal line thus  - ." Yes, but if we read the page sideways we get an opposite effect. And our authors read Cremer on the skew.

Cremer goes on to raise a doubt about the rightness of using Parousia in the sense of arrival. But he is not quarrelling with modern translators for translating the word coming or arrival. His doubt is over the Apostles themselves: they used it undoubtedly in the sense of arrival: how did they do this when the original sense was presence? That is Cremer's argument.

When teachers misread the Lexicon, how can we trust their reading of the N.T., which it explains?

What Cremer did not know fifty years ago has been made abundantly clear by the Papyri discoveries in the Near East, cited copiously in this chapter. Parousia was everywhere used in the sense of the arrival or coming of kings and rulers on a visit to a town. How appropriate to the Arrival of our Saviour-God, Jesus Christ, when He comes in triumph to rescue His afflicted people, and establish the kingly rule of God. All the new translations of the N.T. that have been published in the last sixty years, in the light of intense research, give coming, advent, arrival, appearing, to translate Parousia, when used of the End. Darby, Kelly, the American and English revisers, Weymouth, Moffatt, Goodspeed, Way, Wade, and the Twentieth Century, all make use of those terms. The new N.T. lexicons of Souter, Abbot Smith, and the monumental one of Milligan and Moulton, which incorporate the new material from the Papyri discoveries, all give arrival or coming as one of the fundamental meanings of the Greek word Parousia. And now the famous Greek lexicon compiled by Liddell and Scott, in the new edition revised and augmented throughout by Dr. H. S. Jones, gives the senses presence, arrival, occasion, visit, and then says, "In the N.T. the Advent, Ev. Matthew 24, 27 al." (Part 7, 1933 p. 1343.) So also the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1936) on the anglicized form: "The second coming or advent of Christ (the sense in 1 Corinthians 15:23, etc.)."

But no translation (not even Darby's), and no up-to-date lexicon of N.T. or classical Greek will satisfy the authors. Why? Because they want a "blanket" meaning for the word to cover a new-fangled, fantastic scheme of the End-time, which turns topsy-turvy all previous programs, including Darby's. They themselves require a chart to explain their scheme. I will give a silhouette in a few words, and not unfairly: the Coming or Presence of Christ, according to them, begins at the Secret Rapture, extends over an undetermined period of several years, and ends with the Appearing in great glory of our Lord.

Let the reader think of the implication in this: after Messiah's Presence begins, ex hypothesi, Antichrist arises, deceives the nations, oppresses the Covenant People, and comes to a full triumph in the Great Tribulation when the millions of saints in Revelation 7:9-17 are martyred! A truly bewildering and misleading program as to His Coming.

If the writers had applied their idea, in which there is an element of truth, to the Advent of our Lord in glory, and to the period of His "visit," when He opens up a new era for the world, by His kingly rule, there would be much in the new researches to support them; but their scheme, as they put it, is totally without foundation; it is an innovation on the faith, and on pre-trib traditions as well. Moffatt, whose translation embodies the results of the new lexical research, translates parousia by "arrival," again and again. It is his usual word: -

Prof. Frame then goes on to show "that the question is not: Will the Christians who die before the Parousia be raised from the dead? but: Will the Christians who die before the Parousia be at the Parousia on a level of advantage with the survivors?"

Secondly, concerning the nature of the revelation made by Paul, it is as clear as light that it was not the Rapture, still less an entirely new coming of Christ "for the Church," but merely a new detail of the Lord's Coming to show the sure blessedness of the sleeping saints. That the burden of 4:13-18 is the place and blessedness of the Christian dead at the Advent, is clear from the fact that four times they are referred to, as the following from the R. V. will show:

And Paul meets the difficulty by indicating a new circumstance concerning the relation of the survivors to the holy dead at the Advent; this to show that at the Coming of the Lord, the living will have no precedence over the dead, and that these, consequently, will be at no disadvantage,

Prof. Frame observes on the central point:

Nor, he might have added, to the purpose of this Advent.

Excellent also is the interpretation of Moffatt in his Commentary in Expositor's Greek Testament (EGT):

Pre-tribs also make use of the Rapture of the saints to meet the Lord "in the air" to prove their extraordinary theory that Christ does not come on to earth at this time, but returns to heaven. This also was an essential part of the postmillennialists' argument; the idea of Christ's reign upon earth was as obnoxious to them as it is to most theorists.

The truth is, pre-tribs are precluded from an adequate appreciation of 1 Thessalonians 4; the Secret Rapture delusion has blurred their vision, and the importance attached to the Rapture has led them to overlook the elementary principle that "no prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation" (2 Pet. 1:20, R. V.), but must be compared diligently with other Scriptures. For when we compare 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 with other Scriptures, and carefully weigh its own terminology, we have no difficulty in seeing that the Second Coming will not be secret, but in visible glory; that the hope of the Church is not an event to be followed by the rise and reign of the Man of Sin, but by his destruction, and the reign of Christ and His saints on the renewed earth.

But if any doubt exists that the Coming of 1 Thessalonians 4 will take place at the Day of the Lord, it is removed by the opening verses of chapter 5 of the same Epistle, where the Apostle is still speaking of the Second Coming.

This passage causes great embarrassment to pre-tribs, and they are reduced to unnatural explanations to square its teaching with their theories: the Apostle is no longer speaking of the Second Coming of Christ, but of the third; no longer dealing with the Advent as it affects Christians, but unbelievers; the Day of the Lord, and "the times and seasons," have no reference to the Church's hope, but only to the Day of judgment some years later. So they assert.

If the Day of the Lord has no reference to the Christian hope, why did the Apostle give the Thessalonians so much instruction concerning its arrival, and the necessity of sobriety and alertness on the part of Christians in view of its coming? If he held the views of pre-tribs, why did he not drop the subject of the Day of the Lord altogether when speaking to Christians, and confine himself to the Rapture? This is what pre-tribs do; they insist that Christians have not the least practical concern with the coming of the Day of the Lord as a hope, since they will have been with the Lord for years when it comes. But the awkward thing is that the Apostle, far from eschewing the giving of instruction to Christians about the Day of the Lord, has given very detailed instruction, in the Second as well as the First Epistle, about the coming of that Day; and this, not merely to arouse their interest in a subject of prophetic inquiry, but to prepare them mentally and morally for its coming.

Light is thrown upon 1 Thessalonians 5:1-6, by considering what led the Apostle to write it. The Thessalonians had two difficulties about the Lord's Coming. The first was concerning the hope and place of the dead. The Apostle answered it in the closing verses of chapter 4, where the living are referred to but incidentally, to show the precise relation of the two classes. The second difficulty of the Thessalonians followed from the first: if the dead saints missed the blessedness of the Coming and Kingdom of Christ, then their own position became precarious, since they were mortal men and might not survive to see the Advent and share its glory. Unless, therefore, they could be sure that Christ would certainly come in their own lifetime, their hope was vain. Hence they requested from the inspired Apostle information "concerning the times and seasons," that is, they wished to know the precise period that must intervene before the Advent, and they desired to know exactly when the Lord would come. In other words, their second difficulty was about the living and their prospect of seeing the Day.[18]

Paul answers it in chapter 5 by dealing with the Day of the Lord as it will affect the living. The dead are no longer in view, since he has already settled the difficulty concerning them; they are not mentioned at all now, until the end of the whole section. The Apostle informs the Thessalonians that their request to know the intervening period prior to the Advent is beside the mark, since the time of the Lord's Coming is not a subject of calculation at all; for the day of the Lord's Coming will be like the arrival of a thief - sudden and unexpected. Like a thief, however, that day will come upon the ungodly alone; not so upon the believers, since they are expecting that Day, and will be ready for it whenever it comes.

The true significance of this section is obscured for pre-tribs by the unfortunate break into chapters at this point. Convinced that the meaning will become clearer, I propose to set down here, in parallel columns, three of the admirable modern versions of Paul's oracle in 1 Thessalonians 4:13, to 5:2, without any division into verses and chapters; then I shall add two paraphrases from famous expositors of the passage in Paul.

Of the many idiomatic translations of First Thessalonians I purposely choose three that were not made by professional theologians, but by classical scholars, two of them - W. G. Rutherford and A. S. Way - Greek scholars of renown. This is done simply to avoid the suggestion that I have sought translations with a theological bias.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:2

1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:2

Having given three translations by classical scholars of the crucial passage in Thessalonians I propose now to give two paraphrases of it by eminent exegetes; the first is by Dr. Plummer as given in his commentary; and the second by G. Milligan in his volume in the Macmillan series. Then I shall give the setting and argument as seen by G. G. Findlay in his volume in Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (CGT), and by Zahn in Introduction to the New Testament (INT) (vol. 1, pp. 221-2, 253). There will be some repetition, of course, but there will also be increasing light from some of the most lucid expositions ever given of these Epistles.

 Findlay gives thus the setting and argument of 1 Thessalonians 4:13 to 5:11: -

CONCERNING THEM THAT FALL ASLEEP (4:13-18)

THE COMING OF THE DAY (5:1-11)

What the speaker failed to observe was how admirably his parable also fits the teaching of Paul; for the great Apostle in speaking of the effect of Christ's Coming upon the living, remarks that, to the worldly-minded the Day of the Lord will come as a thief, because, to use Anderson's parable, "they neither expect nor want Him." It will be otherwise, however, with Christians: "they will not scream with surprise and fright" for, to continue in Anderson's words "His coming is the most natural thing possible." The Lord meets His Bride and judges the faithless at the same crisis.

(2) 2 Thessalonians 2:8:

Only one other use of the word Parousia in the Epistles to the Thessalonians need detain us longer: it is one that has already been cited, but not considered.

This text confirms the doctrine drawn from 1 Thessalonians 4:14 - 5:10, for Christ is again represented as coming in the character of a Conqueror and Rescuer; again, the regal word Parousia is used; Antichrist is sent to his doom; "the mere outburst of His presence shall bring the adversary to nought, cf. the sublime expression of Milton,  - 'far off His coming shone.'"[24] The same glorious event as gathers the saints brings judgment upon the Man of Sin.[25]

The examination of the terms End, Appearing, Revelation, and Parousia established the fact that one and all are undoubtedly used of the Day that brings the fulfillment of the Church's hope; also that the candid interpretation of the passages where they occur presupposes that the Church will be on earth until the End of the Age, as our Lord had taught in the Parable of the Tares, and the Great Missionary Commission. One set of terms remains to be examined, namely those bearing on the Day that closes the present world-period and ushers in the Age to Come. One of these terms, "the Last Day," was examined in our study of the resurrection in the Gospels; but there are several others that refer to the same day, namely: "the Day," "in that Day," "Jesus Messiah's Day," "Messiah's Day," "the Day of the Lord Jesus," "the Day of the Lord Jesus Messiah,"[1] and "the Day of the Lord." To avoid wearisomeness I shall arrange the texts into groups and comment on each, with an occasional reference to an individual text. And we shall confine ourselves to the Epistles of Paul, for they are common ground pre-trib leaders applied all the above expressions to the Glorious Appearing of Christ. Well then, do we ever find the Day of the Lord inseparably linked with the Church's hope, or some vital aspect of it? If the secret, pre-tribulation Rapture is true we must never find Christians in the New Testament looking for the Day of the Lord, as if it were the time for the fulfillment of their hope, or for closing their career on earth.

1. THE DAY

(1) 2 Thessalonians 5:4. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day should over take you as a thief. (Darby's version.)

The natural meaning of this passage is that "the day" will overtake both Christians and the ungodly. Upon these it will come with the unexpectedness of a thief; not so, however, with those. Christians are looking for the Lord, and His Coming will find them expecting Him. As Frame says "Although the day comes suddenly for both believers and unbelievers alike, it is only the latter (v. 3), and not the former (vv. 4-5a) who are taken by surprise," (p. 180).

And Stier says: "Christ comes to His people as their Lord; to the unfaithful and secure, as a thief in the night."

In his lucid work in Expositor's Greek Testament (EGT), Moffatt says:

There is only one Coming, but it has two different effects and characters towards those who watch, and those who slumber. This accounts for the Lord's warning to the Overseer at Sardis: "If, therefore, thou shalt not watch, I will come as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee" (Rev. 3:3 R.V.). It depended on the Overseer's attitude whether Christ's Coming would have the character of blessing or judgment.

(2) 1 Corinthians 3:13: Each man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it because it is revealed in fire; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is.

Darby points out in his New Translation that it is the Day that is revealed in fire. Clearly it refers to the same event as 2 Thessalonians 1:8, where the Lord is "revealed in fire" taking vengeance on the unrighteous, and bringing rest to the saints.

When are the saints tested and rewarded? According to Paul in our passage, at the Day of the Lord; elsewhere at His Appearing and Reign (2 Tim. 4:1, 8); at the Parousia (1 Thess. 2:19, 3:13), and at His Coming to judge and reign (1 Cor. 4:5, 8); according to John, at the Last Trumpet (Rev. 11:18), at the beginning of the kingly rule of Christ (Rev. 20:4-6), and at the Day of Judgment (1 John 4:17); according to our Lord, "at the resurrection of the just" (Luke 14:14), at the Last Day (John 6:39-54), at His Coming as Son of Man (Matthew 16:27), and at His Coming "for the Church" (Rev. 22:12). This last passage is illuminating: "Behold I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each man according as his work is."

The resurrection, judging, and rewarding of Christians take place at the Day of the Lord. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder in the interest of a theory.

It is quite impossible to believe that Paul would have made these references to alertness, testing, and hope in relation to the Day, if he believed that Christians would be raptured away from the world a generation before the Day appears.

(2) IN THAT DAY

We now come to another eschatological expression that is used in Paul's Epistles. I refer to the phrase "in that day." It is used frequently in the O.T., and when it is not used in a local, demonstrative sense, it has but one meaning - the Day of the Lord. It was the day when the outcasts of Israel would be gathered, Israel converted, the sleeping saints raised, Jehovah manifested in His glory, and the Kingdom established. We find it in the Gospels in the same sense. "Many will say unto me in that Day, Lord, Lord did we not prophesy by thy name?"[2]  - again the day of the Kingdom and the day of judgment, as the context shows.

Can we find this expression associated with the hope and reward of Christians?

(1) Thessalonians 1:10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at in all them that believed (because our testimony unto you was believed) in that day.

(2) 2 Timothy 1:12 I am persuaded that he is able to guard that which I have committed unto him against that day.

(3) 2 Timothy 1:18 The Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day.

(4) 2 Timothy 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have loved his appearing.

(1) Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which began a good work in you will perfect it until Jesus Messiah's day.

(2) Philippians 1:10 That ye may be sincere and void of offence unto Messiah's day.

(3) Philippians 2:16 Holding forth the word of life; that I may have whereof to glory in Messiah's day, that I did not run in vain neither labour in vain.

All the pre-trib leaders recognized aright the true significance of Messiah's Day: it is the day when Messiah comes forth in glory to set up His Kingdom in the Future Age:[4] our Lord showed us clearly what He understood by the expression: He said to the disciples:

Darby, Kelly, Trotter, C.H. Mackintosh, and a thousand others saw the truth of these things; what is astonishing is that they failed to see how intimately the Day of Messiah is bound up with "'the blessed hope" of the Church. The first passage in Philippians clearly presupposes that Messiah's Day terminates the service of the saints on earth: progressive sanctification goes on in them until the Day when Messiah appears, and they shall be like Him, for they shall see Him as He is, (1 John 3:2). In the second, the Apostle prays for the same grace in believers as he desires for them elsewhere at the Parousia, as 1 Thessalonians 3:13 and 5:23 prove. In the third the Day is clearly the same as the Parousia in 1 Thessalonians 2:19-20, where the Apostle is also speaking of his reward. That being so, Messiah's Day is the day of the saints' resurrection (Luke 14:14). An interval of several years or decades between the Parousia (with the first resurrection) and Messiah's Day is without foundation. I observe that Kelly and F. W. Grant, in their expositions of Philippians leave the expression "Day of Christ" unexplained.

(4) THE DAY OF THE LORD JESUS

(1) 1 Corinthians 1:7-8 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Messiah; who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye be unreproveable in the day of our Lord Jesus Messiah.

This text was examined in chapters 8 and 10; the collation of Revelation, End, and Day of Messiah, our Lord, makes it certain that the End of the present world-epoch is in view. Where, then, is there room for a previous rapture of the Church? 1 Thessalonians 5:23, links them all with the Parousia.

(1) 1 Corinthians 5:4-5 In the name of our Lord Jesus, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

The underlying presupposition is that when the saints are raised at the Last Day they give account to God. 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, 4:5-6, Romans 14:10 (R.V.), and other places give the scene. And the passage under consideration refers the testing and judgment to the Day of the Lord. Moreover, the Church, not the Remnant, is in view.

(2) 1 Thessalonians 5:2[6] For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

Alford interprets thus:

Why did he not do that? Here was the chance of a lifetime to shut out misunderstanding and error. He does not take it. Instead, he writes: the Apostasy must come first and the Man of Sin have his Parousia.

Pre-tribs cannot get five minutes into an address, or five pages into a book, on prophecy without remarking on "the fact"  - which contains scriptural teaching on the Lord's Coming, and "the double bearing of the fact," which tells of new traditions of men on the beautiful, secret, pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church and the risen saints as an indispensable precursor of the terrible, dreadful, horrible and awful Day of the Lord, and occurring years and years before that Day breaks on a world already distracted by the prior removal of the light and salt of the earth and by the reign of Antichrist. These things, it is claimed, are as plain as A.B.C. in the Epistles of Paul; so they are - if one closes one's eyes and swallows two big assumptions, namely: that the Day of the Parousia is always and only a calm, bright day, fit only for a wedding or a rapture, and without shadows or dust of battle or any such thing; and that the Day of the Lord is always and only a day of darkness and thick clouds, and awful gloom, fit only for a battle, or a clash of powers from the unseen world.[11] The New Testament smites both assumptions at every turn: the Lord associated the glorious Day with the muster of the saints (Matthew 24:37); Paul, the Parousia with the great Day of battle, and "the blessed hope" with Jehovah's Glorious Appearing;[12] John, the marriage-supper of the Lamb and His Church with the Day of wrath upon the world.[13] Yet pre-tribs swallow the assumptions mentioned as truths, and, believing in the unity and harmony of the Bible, bend a hundred texts to fit the assumptions.

Paul did differently. Having shown in 2 Thessalonians 1 the two sides of blessing and judgment, rest and doom, at the Revelation, or Day, or Parousia of the Lord, he links the Coming and the Day in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 as the most natural thing possible; wishing to give right teaching on the Coming of the Lord, and the Rapture of the saints, he says that the Apostasy and Antichrist must come first.

Beginning to exhort them touching the Coming of the Lord, he proceeds to speak of the Day of the Lord. Is not this a remarkable circumstance? It is a convincing proof that the two things were synchronous in Paul's mind, and not separated by a period of years as the theorists assert. And if we adopt another meaning of the preposition and translate "on behalf of," the case is even worse for the new theories; for the passage then reads:

To minds unswayed by presuppositions, the meaning is clear. Paul is seeking to refute a delusion that the Day of the Lord had already come. He does so, first, by citing two principal characteristics, and, secondly, two principal precursors, of the Day of the Lord. The characteristics of the Day are the Arrival of the Lord, and the muster of the Elect; it is as if he said, "how can the Day have come, when the two things that characterize it have not happened? As you are still suffering here on earth, and the Lord has not come in person, how can the Day have arrived?" He merely mentions these two features because his first Epistle, written a few months previously, had fully expounded them. The two precursors of the Day of the Lord are the coming of the Apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin. These he develops to remind them of his doctrine preached orally when with them; for, as Zahn says in Introduction to the New Testament (INT):

If anything was wanting to justify the above exegesis concerning the identification of the Day of Christ and the Day of the Lord Jesus Christ with the hope of the Church, it is supplied by the fact that many advocates of the theories introduced by Darby are now teaching the same doctrine as that set out above. Having short or convenient memories they are insisting in the strongest manner that the Coming of Christ synchronizes with the Day of Christ. Now, as I have shown in the first chapter, Darby, Kelly, Mackintosh and Trotter all taught in the most decided manner that the Coming of Christ is one thing, the Day of Christ is another; the two are separated by an unknown period of years. Not only this, when pre-millennial writers like Tregelles, Newton, Müller, Alford, Saphir, West and Erdman taught that the Day of Christ was the same thing as the Coming of Christ, their teaching was repudiated in energetic fashion by orthodox pre-trib advocates. It was confusing in the extreme and a betrayal of the blessed hope, to mix it up with the Day of Christ; so it was arrogantly asserted.

Now, however, if Gaebelein,[19] Anderson[20] and Scofield[21] are to be believed, the blundering and confusion must be attributed to the past eminent leaders of the pre-trib school of prophecy, for it is now being asserted on the housetops that "the Day of Christ" synchronizes with the hope of the Church at the Parousia.

It is contended, according to the new school of the new persuasion, that whilst the Coming of Christ and the Day of Christ are identical, yet they occur long before the Day of the Lord. It is this day that concerns Israel and the world, whilst the Coming and the Day of Christ refer exclusively to the Church. I want the reader to note the remarkable volte face [change in position] in this defense of pre-trib theories; for when properly understood, it reveals in the clearest manner the utter worthlessness of the exegetical foundation upon which the new theories rest. The change occurred as follows. Prior to the appearance of the Revised Version of 2 Thessalonians 2:2, that text read "the day of Christ" and not "the day of the Lord" as in the Revised Version. To Darby this change made no difference whatever, for he taught, with commendable consistency, that all these expressions - "the Day of Christ," "the Day of Jesus Christ," "the Day of the Lord," "the Day of Jehovah," signified one and the same day. So that even after he had adopted the reading "Day of the Lord" in his translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:2, he continued to speak of "the Day of Christ" as synonymous (Synopsis on Phil. 2:16).

The Revised Version, by eliminating the one unfavorable[22] instance of "the Day of Christ" at 2 Thessalonians 2:2, proved a veritable godsend, in that it released Philippians 1:6, 9, 10; 2:6; 1 Corinthians 1:7-8, and 2 Corinthians 1:14 for service elsewhere in prophetic charts and programs. But yesterday it was shocking to apply them to the hope: today, shocking to withhold them. In other words, all the favorable texts mentioned above[23] were now coolly and conveniently brought forward by about thirty-five years and applied unabashedly to the blessed hope of the Church! Only the Day of the Lord was left at the close of Daniel's apocalyptic Week in order to prop up that part of the new program of the End which continued to assert that whilst the Coming and the Day of Christ had no predicted signs or events preceding them, the Day of the Lord was to be preceded by signs innumerable, especially by the Apostasy, and the revelation of Antichrist. And those of us who still assert that the Day of Christ and the Day of the Lord are the same, are looked upon as benighted [intellectual darkness; unenlightened] people, though their identity was a fundamental part of the new system before the R.V. appeared. We can cite page after page from Darby, Kelly, Mackintosh and Trotter to prove our position. Yet they have been torn to ribbons in the house of their friends.

This historical sidelight, and the complete change of front it has revealed, will serve two purposes. First, it confirms us completely in our exegesis in applying "the Day of Christ" and kindred expressions to the blessed hope of the Church; secondly, it shows that what passes for new light may mean simply that one is living by one's wits; that one is an opportunist snapping up chances by the way, a policy known to Mr. Micawber.

I remark in passing that many people will have been persuaded that both sections of the Darbyist school are right: Anderson, Scofield and Gaebelein, in that "the Day of Christ" is emphatically the day for the fulfillment of the blessed hope of the Church; Darby, Kelly, Trotter, C.H. Mackintosh, and large numbers even today, in that "the Day of Christ" (or Messiah) is the same as "the Day of the Lord."

As for the new view that the Day of Christ, or Messiah's Day, will precede the Day of the Lord by several years or decades, it is sufficient to point to 1 Corinthians 1:7, where Messiah's Day, the End of the Age, and the Revelation are all linked together. More damaging still is the consideration that, on the new view, the glorious Day of Messiah, which is a principal theme of O.T. prophecy, is to be succeeded by the rise and reign of the Man of Sin and the deepest degradation that Israel has ever known. Messiah's Day forsooth [in truth]! "Messiah" means anointed, that is, King; and these new innovators in Israel want us to believe that this King's glorious Day, the Day of days of the King of kings, is going to be followed by Antichrist's triumph and Reign, not His own, and by that interregnum of confusion, apostasy, and delusion that their word-painters have made so familiar. It is fair to say that Darby, Kelly, Trotter, and C. H. Mackintosh at least spared us this preposterous tax on our credulity.

Hence even this new-fangled version has been found troublesome, and a still newer one has been found. Messrs. Hogg and Vine in Touching the Coming have discovered that the expressions "Day of Christ," "Day of Jesus Christ" and "Day of the Lord Jesus" are a period of time beginning with the Rapture and ending with the Glorious Advent (pp. 66-70, 97). And the proof of this latest dispensational novelty? None but the requirements of their own fantastic program; they make what they would prove, the presupposition of their exegesis, And how long will Messiah's "Day" last? Heaven only knows: it may only be a little while - three and a half years or seven years, or seventy, but Anderson insists that the Scripture will still harmonize if the period lasts for a thousand! And the effect of Messiah's Day? Christians as the salt and light of society are withdrawn from the world, Antichrist arises and comes to his triumph; Israel suffers as she has never suffered before. This is no caricature, but a statement of the case. One must sorrowfully remark that the defense of these false theories throws up sophistry that can give points and a beating to the Rabbis in Israel; there is an unwillingness to accept the plain facts of a text like 1 Corinthians 1:7, and scores of others. For the infatuated, there are always three ways out of every difficulty: "Messiah's Day" applies to the Day of the Lord; does that embarrass? Then apply it to the Rapture several years or decades before; does that still embarrass? Make it a bridge spanning both. This is what is being done with Parousia, Appearing, Revelation[24] and Day. They are pushed and pulled to make them say the very opposite of what they say in Scripture. Everything, anything is preferable to the withering of a gourd of men's planting.