Matthew XXIV

7. SIGNS OF THE LORD'S COMING.

WE now come to the more direct answer to the question: "What shall be the sign of thy coming?" This answer is given in verse 29. This contains the most specific answer, though another class of signs have already been noticed, which are fulfilled in Modern Spiritualism. The close connection of the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, to the coming of Christ and events related to it, shows that here we have the answer to the question of the disciples. As we hold the advent of Christ to be a literal coming, so we hold that these signs are literal, according to the first and obvious meaning of the terms used.

1. There is no consistency in the view that they are figures or symbols. A teacher in a theological college in one of the "Western States" told us, when asked of what they were symbols, that the sun meant the civil power of the Jews; the moon, the ecclesiastical power; and the stars, the great men of that nation. This would make the Saviour say, in the year A. D. 29, under the reign of Tiberius and Pilate, that some time in the future, or when Jerusalem was destroyed in A. D. 70, the civil power of the Jews should be obscured or lost! The absurdity of this declaration it is difficult to equal, for every one must know they had not even a vestige of civil power at that time to lose. They had not power to punish one whom their highest tribunal had judged worthy of death, and they acknowledged Ceasar as their only king.

2. It has been urged by those holding the "Universalist view," that great signs were shown just before the capture and destruction of Jerusalem, and that these fulfilled this prophecy. Dr. Clarke mentions some in his notes on verses 6, 7. But so far from these being signs of his coming, or of the end, the Saviour distinctly says of them—"the end is not yet"—"these are the beginning of sorrows." The signs of verse 29 are closely related to his coming, and therefore here is found the answer to the question under consideration.

3. The signs here given are after the tribulation. If the coming of Christ referred to the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, and "that tribulation" also had reference to the same thing, as some—yes, many—affirm, then we must suppose that the Saviour said the signs of his coming would take place after his coming! But neither his coming nor that tribulation relate to the destruction of Jerusalem. The Scriptures are not so inconsistent as that view would make appear.

4. If it be indeed true that the signs of verse 29 are literal, that must decide the controversy; and that they are literal there is one point of proof which seems quite conclusive. In Luke 21:25 the same things are spoken of, in the following manner: "And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity." The signs in the sun, moon, and stars, are distinct from the things upon the earth—they are not fulfilled among the nations of the earth. Here is a fact the conclusion of which is unavoidable. Compare Acts 2:19, 20.

We will now notice the harmony of the literal view. (1.) Paul said there should come a great apostasy before the coming of the Lord. Christ said the same in Matt. 24. (2.) Paul said that at the coming of Christ the saints will be gathered together unto him. The Saviour said the same in Matt. 24. (3.) Paul said that when the Lord comes the holy angels shall come with him. 2 Thess. 1. The Saviour said the same thing in Matt. 24, and in 16:27, and in 25:31.

Again, in speaking of the apostasy and its fruits, Paul said that a great anti-Christian power should arise, which should continue till the time of the Lord's coming. Daniel speaks of the same power, gives it the same characteristics of self-exaltation and blasphemy, says it shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and practice and prosper till the time comes that the saints possess the kingdom. The Saviour speaks of the same persecution, the great tribulation upon "the elect," and says that the saints will possess the kingdom when he comes. Compare further Matt. 25:31-34, and 1 Cor. 49-53. The saints were not called to "inherit the kingdom" at the destruction of Jerusalem; "all nations" were not gathered at that time to have judgment passed upon them.

The signs in the heavens came after the tribulation. The greatest tribulation the saints of Christ ever suffered was under the Roman power. It was severe under pagan Rome, but far more terrible and destructive, as it was of longer continuance, under papal Rome. Under the influence of the German Reformation in the sixteenth century, this tribulation began to wane. It ceased early in the eighteenth century. In the latter part of the eighteenth, and early part of the nineteenth century, the signs in the heavens were fulfilled. They are not signs of the tribulation, nor is the tribulation connected with the coming of Christ. They are signs of his coming, and they stand between the tribulation and his coming. His coming is now near, for these signs are fulfilled.

8. THEIR FULFILLMENT.

1. The sun shall be darkened. We have but little to say on this point, not that there is not much to say, but that so much has already been said. "The dark day," is a common phrase to denote the 19th of May, 1780. A few are yet living who witnessed it. The writer well remembers that, in his boyhood, aged people made frequent mention of it in relating notable points in their experience. One testimony only we here give, from an authority of undisputed reliability. It is a publication of the American Tract Society, entitled, "Life of Edward Lee:"—

"In the month of May, 1780, there was a very terrific dark day in New England, when 'all faces seemed to gather blackness,' and the people were filled with fear. There was great distress in the village where Edward Lee lived; 'men's hearts failing them for fear' that the Judgment day was at hand, and the neighbors all flocked around the holy man; for his lamp was trimmed, and shining brighter than ever, amidst the unnatural darkness. Happy and joyful in God, he pointed them to their only refuge from the wrath to come, and spent the gloomy hours in earnest prayer for the distressed multitude."—Tract No. 379 of Am. Tract Society—Life of Edward Lee.

Had the author and publishers of this work intended to give a forcible illustration of the fulfillment of this prophecy, they could not better have chosen their language for that purpose. But they had no such intention—they had not this prophecy in view at all, which makes their testimony all the more emphatic as evidence on the question.

Some have questioned whether this was sufficient to fulfill the prophecy, admitting that it must be so fulfilled. Dr. Noah Webster, who was an eye witness of it, says the sun was darkened fourteen hours. Then it was darkened over fourteen twenty-fourths of the earth's surface, and particularly over that part where we believe the most important scenes of last-day prophecy are laid,—the continent of America.

2. The moon shall not give her light. It was well suggested by Dr. Henry, the commentator, that the moon would fail because the sun would shed no light on her, in the fulfillment of this prophecy. In New England, where the sun's darkening was most noted, the moon, though full, was totally obscured till midnight, when it came out with brilliancy. Here is the evidence that the sun was darkened fourteen hours—from 10, A. M., of the 19th, till the midnight following. Many descriptions have been given of the intense darkness of that night. One said if every luminous body had been struck out of existence he could not imagine that the darkness could have been more intense. It was startling, and over-powering, and even painful to the senses because of its intensity. And learned men say it cannot be explained or accounted for. We think it admits of just one explanation. The God of Heaven—the Ruler of Nature—hung out these signs in the heavens to teach the student of his word that the Son of God would soon make his second advent to this world. And we are thankful that the warning has not been in vain. The marked fulfillment of the prophecies has led thousands to look, to hope for, and to rejoice in the "blessed hope," of the coming of the dear Redeemer.

3. And the stars shall fall from heaven. We may be permitted to notice this more particularly, as efforts have been made to show that no past fulfillment can meet the requirements of this part of the prophecy. We believe that it was fulfilled in the fall of 1833.

And now arise the objectors—and some of them have been educated men—and say that stars did not fall in 1833; that they were only meteors; that their falling was merely an atmospheric phenomenon; and that ignorance alone leads any one to call them falling stars. We think it is not difficult to show that all the wisdom does not lie on the side of the objectors.

(1.) We readily admit that this prophecy could never be literally fulfilled as a sign of the Lord's coming, if the falling of the stars referred to the moving to this earth of any of its sister planets, or the more remote and larger stars in the heavens. Most of them are much larger than this earth, and the dashing of the smallest of them upon the earth would probably leave no one alive to note any future event.

(2.) We do not admit that the falling of the stars in 1833 was merely an atmospheric phenomenon, or that they were atmospheric lights. Prof. Olmstead, of Yale College said, and his testimony remains undisputed, that they were "visitants from the planetary voids;" that they came from a point far beyond our atmosphere; that "they appeared to emanate from a point in the constellation Leo, near a star called Gamma Leonis, in the bend of the sickle." He also called them falling stars,—just what they were. The Professor said they emanated from one point, but it did not so appear to the beholder, as we can testify. And his appearance of their coming from all parts of the heavens is proof that the "one point" from which they came must have been very remote.

(3.) Having thus disposed of that objection, we now say that if they had been atmospheric in their origin they might still have fulfilled this prophecy literally, for small—very small—lights within our atmosphere are called stars in the New Testament. Will the reader please turn to the second chapter of Matthew, and there read of a "star" which the wise men followed westward to Jerusalem. And when they had received the desired information the star "went before them" southward to Bethlehem, and when it had led them to Bethlehem "it came and stood over where the young child was." Let the sage objector consider how large or rather how small this star was. A comparison will help us. Our satellite, the moon, is 1000 miles less in diameter than the least of the planets of the solar system, but its diameter is over 2000 miles. Can any one imagine how a "star" no smaller than this could point out the place where the young child was, in the village of Bethlehem?

The reader may illustrate this point for himself. Let him take his watch in his hand with its open face upward. Now take his Bible and hold it over the watch so as to indicate the locality of the figure 12 (xii) on its face. You say at once it cannot be done, because the Bible is so large it far more than covers over the whole watch. Try a pencil point and it can readily be done. So with the star of Matt. 2. It was not only so small as to go before them and stand over Bethlehem, but it was so small that it could stand over one house in Bethlehem, and not stand over one on either side of that one. If it had covered half the village the wise men would not have known where to go to find the infant king. If left to their choice of many houses they would not likely have gone to a place where cattle were stalled to find such a personage. Thus it is shown beyond all chance for dispute, that a star, in the language of the "Gospel according to Matthew" may be a small—a very small—light, entirely within the atmosphere of this earth.

No objection remains against the literal fulfillment of the three signs of Matt. 24:29 in the past.