Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "undefined".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    LETTER II

    DEAR BROTHER HIMES: — I am aware, if the professor was the only person I expected to benefit by my remarks, I should not trouble myself to write nor others to read what I have to present. If it was only to gain the mastery over Professor Stuart, I am not so visionary as to suppose, that, in the eyes of the world, I could have the most distant prospect of succeeding. It is a well known fact that the fashionable world do give to the men of letters what the ancients did to the priests of their idol gods — an implicit confidence in all they utter. The world, therefore, will laugh at my foolish daring, and my friends, if I have any, will stand aghast at my temerity in attacking this bearded lion in his den.MRSH 32.1

    I have nothing, therefore, to expect from the world; and, if I fall, to hope for from my friends. One thing I ask, and that I shall expect to have, the prayers of all, that truth may triumph in the earth, and error be exposed, however plausible it may appear. I will not have it said in the great day, that truth had no advocates in this day of tribulation, for fear of men. Therefore, my whole strength and dependence being put in God, I will try, by his assistance, to undo the awful effects of the doctrine of peace and safety by this learned author.MRSH 32.2

    And first, HIS VIEWS OF THE LITTLE HORN in Daniel 7:25: “And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand, until a time and times and the dividing of time.” Page 83: “The first passage in Daniel 7:25, is so clear as to leave no room for a reasonable doubt. In verse 24 the rise of Antiochus Epiphanes is described; for the fourth beast in Daniel 7:7, 8, 11, 19 to 26, as all must concede, is the divided Grecian dominion which succeeded the reign of Alexander the Great. From this dynasty springs Antiochus, verse 24, who is most graphically described, in verse 25, as one who shall speak great words against the Most High, and wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand, until a time and times and the dividing of time.”MRSH 33.1

    In this vision of Daniel’s we have brought into view, by the representation of four great beasts, four great kingdoms. Daniel 7:3: “And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse from one another.” Now read Daniel 7:17: “These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth:” and verse 23: “Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.” Can it be possible that this learned man can call this fourth beast Antiochus? How can the Syrian kingdom be called “diverse from all kingdoms?” It arose in the same manner as the other three, out of Alexander’s kingdom. Antiochus never added either of the other three kingdoms to his; although he calculated to unite Egypt with his own; yet the Romans prevented it. [Rol., Book 18, chap. 2, sec. 2.] “And shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and shall break it in pieces.”MRSH 33.2

    Thus far, it is very certain we cannot apply this prophecy to Antiochus; and the professor knows that not one jot or tittle of God’s word will fail, and therefore he passed over this in perfect silence. Where was his ‘Bible exegesis’ then? It is very certain that Antiochus never came up among ten kings, neither did he have ten horns. If he, as the professor says, is the little horn of the fourth kingdom, then he must have come up among ten, and taken away three; this fact his exegesis treats in silence, and I say cannot be applied to Antiochus.MRSH 34.1

    Again: Daniel says, verses 9, 10: “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened;” and this too in the lifetime of the little horn; for verse 11 — “I beheld then, because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake; I beheld, even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame” — declares his death. “I beheld even till this beast was slain:” this was not true according to the professor’s own statement; for he says this beast died with the cholera, as the professor supposes. “His body destroyed.” Herein, too, Daniel was mistaken, for Rollin says his body was carried to Antioch, his capital. “And given to the burning flame.” It is all different from the history. How mistaken Daniel must have been!MRSH 34.2

    But this is not all. What else did Daniel see take place? Verse 13: “I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.” Can this be true? Did this all happen, and no history extant to give us an account — not even a tradition? Cannot our author contrive something to get us out of this difficulty? What do you say to a “Sibylline oracle,” as in the case of Nero, and so have Antiochus rise up and defile the temple, when Matthew 26:64 — “Jesus saith unto him, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” — shall come to pass? Again: Daniel 7:14: “And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” Can this mean the Jews? Were they called “all people, nations, languages?” also, “an everlasting kingdom, which shall not pass away?” And yet in less than two hundred years it was taken away from the saints. Acts 1:6: “When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” I do not understand all these things. Why did not our good professor enlighten us? Why leave the whole of this chapter, from the 7th to the 27th verse, all in the dark?MRSH 35.1

    Now, sir, we will tell you what the rational, independent class of people believe about this vision: they believe that Daniel was a historical prophet; that he has given us a history of four great monarchies, which carries us to the end of all earthly powers, in the last of which (the Roman) they believe has arisen a power, combining in one blasphemous head (the pope) two pretended powers, civil and ecclesiastical, which by craft rule over kings, and pretend to have the power of God. They believe that his power is to continue three and a half times, forty-two months, or 1260 days. They know this power has come; they have felt its effects; they have suffered under its laws; they have heard, and do hear, its great blasphemous words. In this you cannot deceive them.MRSH 36.1

    They believe — for why should they not? — that Daniel has, in his vision, numbered the time; and if we should understand it literally, they know that this power has already exercised the same, 360 times its literal number. Then what shall we do? Shall we carry it back on to Antiochus? No. Why not? Because it will not apply to him, without making things figurative which God has not made figurative, and thus involve ourselves in darkness, and doubts, and inconsistencies. What then? Let us examine and see if time is not used in a figurative sense. If so, all may be harmonized. They examine and find, according to the professor’s own concessions, two places, Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, where a day was used as a figure of a year. They apply it then to Daniel, and first to the seventy weeks. It measures exactly. They now believe, for they remember that the seventy weeks were to seal up (prove, or make sure, as a man’s will is made sure, when the seal of the court is affixed) the vision and prophecy. This is common sense, that all can understand. We need not go to the schools of criticism and skepticism to learn to “doubt,” and “cavil,” and “wrest” God’s word, to understand it.MRSH 36.2

    But why, say you, did not God reveal these things in a plain, literal sense? Let Christ answer. Matthew 11:25: “At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.” Read the context: he is talking of the judgment day. Compare Luke 10:21; also Daniel 12:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:3, 4. But has God in all cases revealed the time, having reference to the end of the world, in types and figures? I answer, yes. Why not then keep it from us? Because he has said, (Amos 3:7,)MRSH 37.1

    “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants, the prophets.” And it is to be as it was in the days of Noah. Was it in a symbol, then? I answer, it was. See Genesis 6:3: “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.”MRSH 38.1

    Now we suppose Noah began to preach that God would destroy the world in one hundred and twenty years. The professors, skeptics, and critics come around him and say, where is your proof? He refers them to the word of God, which I have quoted. “Ah,” says the critic, “that does not say a word about drowning the world now; it only means that man’s life shall be shortened to one hundred and twenty years.” Noah replies to them as in Genesis 6:7: “And the Lord said, I will destroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth; both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air: for it repenteth me that I have made them.” “O yes, we believe that: but God does not tell us how nor when, in this place.” Then he declares God’s purpose, verse 17: “And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die.” “Yes, we admit that: but he does not tell us when: not at least until he destroys the earth; as he himself has expressly declared: ‘The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them: and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.’ And we know God will not destroy the earth, until ‘the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head,’ and that is not done yet. And another argument, too; the world is in its infancy yet — not all inhabited. And we know God told our first parents to go forth and multiply, and replenish the earth. This command is not fulfilled. No danger; we understand our duty. Do you think, Noah, we can be scared by your humbugs? God has not revealed the time.” Yet he did reveal it, as Professor Stuart now acknowledges. But if that scene was now to be acted over again, do you think he would own it? Never. It is now acting again, and he wants to have it revealed in plain terms.MRSH 38.2

    When God sees best, for wise purposes, to reveal himself in parables and dark sayings — (Psalm 78:2: “I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old;” Luke 8:10: “And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; but to others in parables: that seeing they might not see, and hearing, they might not understand,”) — we have no right to complain. The reason is obvious; if it had been revealed in plain terms, sinners would have more abused God’s mercies; and if it had been revealed any plainer than it is, how could scoffers say, “Where is the promise of his coming?” and at the same time be in the church? God’s word must and will be fulfilled. It is evident that he did mean we should know when it would be near, even at the door. Matthew 24:33: “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the door.” But it is just as evident that those who vainly imagine themselves to have the key of knowledge, and boast of their Hebrew, and Greek, and Scripture exegesis, will not understand Matthew 13:10-16, Mark 4:33, 34, Luke 11:52.MRSH 39.1

    If, then, this fourth kingdom in Daniel 7:7, etc., is the Roman empire, then the little horn can only apply to papacy, and the 1260 days in this vision, or “time, times, and a half,” must be, of necessity, understood as symbolical days. We know that papacy has had “eyes like the eyes of man,” more than three years and a half. But we may inquire what the eyes mean? I answer, they are like man’s eyes. And what are man’s eyes? Proverbs 27:20: “Hell and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied.” Daniel had just told us about a “horn between two eyes,” which we all agree means the man Alexander. The eyes of Alexander were upon the kingdoms of the earth; he could not be satisfied until he had conquered the whole world; and then wept because there was not another for him to conquer. So would this horn seek for, and not be satisfied, until it had obtained universal power over the earth. Herein we have a clue to know when this horn began; when the pope began to desire and to seek after universal power over the saints, or the church, as in verse 21: “I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them.” “And a mouth speaking great things.” This is certainly as applicable to the pope as to any power ever known on earth, and has proved to a demonstration the prophecy of Daniel and of John to be of divine origin.MRSH 40.1

    Then, from the 9th to the 14th verse, is a description of the judgment day, the second advent of Christ, the reward of the righteous in the glorified kingdom of God forever and ever. How could the professor pass over all this grand and sublime description of the judgment, the glorious scenes of the revelation of the Ancient of days, (the great God,) and the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven, (Jesus Christ,) and receiving a kingdom which will be eternal? How could he treat all this with perfect silence? Surely his conscience must have felt a little sting. I ask every candid reader, where have we any clearer description of a judgment than here? If this passage does not describe the last judgment, then no man by the Bible can prove one. “The judgment was set, and the books were opened.” Again: “Judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.”MRSH 41.1

    Is not this the kingdom spoken of in Matthew 25:34: “Then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world?” Surely this is an eternal kingdom, — “but the righteous into life eternal.” And in Daniel it is an everlasting kingdom. “But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever;” 18th verse. Can it be possible that the Jews took possession of this kingdom in the days of Antiochus? Can there be two eternal kingdoms? I am convinced, that if our learned author understandsMRSH 41.2

    Bible exegesis, and this is a sample of his explanation of Scripture, I shall forever have occasion to be thankful that I did not so learn to understand Christ.MRSH 42.1

    Again. He says (page 86): “Another parallel passage to Daniel 7:25, which we have just examined, is Daniel 12:7, where the same limitation occurs, and in connection (for this I cannot doubt) with the same individual, i.e. with Antiochus Epiphanes.” What evidence has he brought that this time was limited to Antiochus? I answer, none; or at least none satisfactory to my mind. He asserts that Daniel 11:21-45, and 12. wholly, are concerning Antiochus. All was fulfilled under this petty king of Syria, in about six years’ time. This is an instruction of the angel Gabriel, who came to inform Daniel what should befall the people of God in the latter days; and the time appointed was long, so Daniel says, (10:1, 14,) or for many days. It is very evident, by this expression of Daniel, that he did not even suppose that it would be accomplished in six years. And we do know that it was not. For instance. Daniel 12:1: “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.” At what time? At the time when Antiochus came to his end, the professor must say, to be consistent. “And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time.” What! At the time when “Judas Maccabeus had become everywhere victorious; the sanctuary was now cleansed of its pollution, pure worship was restored, and the Hebrews had every prospect of independence and happiness?” as says our learned professor, page 92. Surely that cannot be true; but let us hear more: “And at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one of them that shall be found written in the book.” Is this to be understood of the Jews, and them only? Why say “every one written in the book?” What are they delivered from, — the tyrant’s power and captivity, slavery and bondage? Short time of trouble, methinks; only three and a half years! If slaves in America could have been liberated every three and a half years, many human beings would have suffered much less misery. I ask what book is this spoken of? Surely one of those spoken of, Daniel 7:10; and can mean no less than the Lamb’s book of life. But the angel himself has told us who they are that were delivered; from what, and whence they are. Daniel 12:2, 3: “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars forever and ever.”MRSH 42.2

    It is as evident as the light, to every unprejudiced mind, that the time of trouble here spoken of, is the destruction of the wicked at the coming of Christ, the deliverance of the saints, the resurrection from the grave unto immortality and eternal life, and their glorified state in the kingdom of God. We cannot be mistaken concerning this. But let us see what the learned professor says on this point. Pages 87,88. “The only difficult question that will arise here for the interpreter is, whether Daniel 12:1-3 is to be interpreted so as to refer it to the troubles which Judea experienced shortly before the great victory under Judas Maccabeus, which ended in the restoration of liberty to the Hebrews, and also to the blessings consequent on their renewed liberty, thus making it parallel with Ezekiel 37:1-14; or whether the passage looks forward to the Messianic (why not say Messiah’s kingdom?) period and final resurrection. Into this question I cannot enter here; nor is it important to the object which I have in view.” But I say it is important; for if this has a direct reference to the judgment day, then it harmonizes with the 7th chapter of Daniel, has a strong bearing on the question and answer in Daniel 12:6, 7, and is a conclusive argument against the professor’s supposition, that chap 11:21-45, and 12. are a prophecy fulfilled under or by Antiochus, and shows that “people and saints,” spoken of in this prophecy, cannot apply to the Jews exclusively; but to all saints, whether Jews or Gentiles; and he has said there can be no double meaning in Scripture, and has admitted that this passage may apply to the resurrection, and has brought no proof that it can be applied to the time of Antiochus. I cannot see why, as an honest man, he ought not to yield the ground he has assumed. I have not time to go into the 11th chapter, and show that what he calls Antiochus is a prophetic history of the Roman kingdom, from the time of the “league” with the Jews to the end of the world.MRSH 43.1

    But now let us examine his text. Daniel 12:6, 7. The man standing upon the waters, clothed in linen, must be the Lord Jesus Christ, the same as is called Michael in verse 1. Compare Revelation 10:1-5. In both places it is the same person, and both represent the same time. In Daniel he designates the end of time by three and a half times, carrying us to the end of these wonders, i.e. the resurrection of the dead, and shows that the seven times twice three and a half (having given the other three and a half, chapter 7:25) will be finished, as prophesied of in Leviticus 26:24-35; Daniel 4:27-30; 28:64. Jeremiah 15:4-7; 9:16; 10:21; Ezekiel 12:10-16.MRSH 44.1

    Many more texts might be brought to prove that the people of God were to be scattered and torn by the kingdoms of the world, until seven times of captivity should pass over them, and then his people would be delivered into the glorious liberty of the children of God. This doctrine is not only taught by prophecy, but is also made known in types and allegories; Deuteronomy 15:1; Jeremiah 34:8-14; Daniel 4:25. Also Colossians 2:16, 17. I know our learned professor and his coadjutors will laugh and sport at the idea of types and allegories; but it is their turn to laugh now, and mine to weep and mourn; but soon God will laugh at their calamity, and mock when their fear cometh. It must be so, or the allegory would not hold good. Daniel 4:6, 7. I have seen holy things turned to ridicule and reproach by these pretended servants of God. I expect them to employ ridicule where they cannot bring reason or truth. The people have, by their charity, raised up many a ‘viper’ to sting them, their benefactors, when they have been nourished and warmed in the bosom of their benevolence. And when these dominators over the minds and thoughts and tongues of their fellow-men have served their turn with us, they turn and call us poor, ignorant fanatics, who never ought to think or speak until we have learned of them what their most excellent worshipfuls please to grant us, poor plebeians, to think or say. But, blessed be our heavenly Father, when we have passed the furnace of affliction, seven times hotter than it was wont to be heated, we shall come forth like gold seven times purified. When we shall have been seven years in bondage to the kings and kingdoms of this world, we shall come to the year of release; and when the great men of the earth shall be beating and bruising their fellow-beings, and promising themselves peace and safety a long while yet to come, and eating and drinking out of the vessels of the house of the Lord; then will be seen the fingers of a man’s hand (what a feeble instrument!) writing on the walls of the now kingdoms of the earth, “mene, mene tekel.” That will be the period of the “end of these wonders,” and not till that shall come. This must be evident to every Bible student who is humble enough to believe God’s word.MRSH 45.1

    You will ask me, where is my rule for understanding the word of God thus? I answer, Luke 8:10; Mark 4:10-13; 1 Corinthians 10:6, 11; 2 Peter 2:1-6. It is as plain that the time in Daniel 12:7, 13, carries us to the resurrection, as any truth revealed in the word of God. And when we see our teachers of theology wresting these plain passages of Scripture from their obvious meaning, it is high time for the church to awake out of sleep, and an evident token that God’s righteous judgment is at the door; and soon the angel will lift his hand and swear that “time shall be no longer,” and the mystery of God shall be finished as he hath declared to his servants, the prophets. Revelation 10:7.MRSH 46.1

    “And when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.” Can it be in the power of a sane mind to believe that God did accomplish and finish the scattering of the Jews in the days of Antiochus? They were scattered by the Romans 270 years afterwards, and have never been a collected people since. It is self-evident that the scattering of the Jews, — or dashing of them, as he is pleased to translate it, — was not accomplished or finished then; and yet all these things were to be “finished.” For myself, I believe the “holy people” in this text means the Christian church, both Jews and Gentiles, who will all be gathered when the fulness of this time comes, and when the mystery of God is finished. Ephesians 1:9, 10: “Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself: that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, even in him.” Also let the reader compare Ephesians 3:3-9 with Revelation 10:5-7, and Daniel 12:7. If I am not very much deceived, no unprejudiced mind can be at a loss one moment where to apply this text. Suppose Professor Stuart had been a believingMRSH 47.1

    Jew, and lived in the time of Antiochus, and had been of the same mind he is now, or says he is, and one of his brother Jews had come along and prophesied or preached that the Jews were to be a scattered and a peeled people, dashed and scattered among all nations, more than 2000 years, then to come; and suppose the professor had been then an expounder of the law and the prophets, and was called upon to explain this text as being then fulfilled, — what would he say to his brother Jew, the prophet? He would say, as any man must say by him: “Sir, you are a false prophet; for God has told us plainly, in this very text, that when this three and a half years are fulfilled under which we are now groaning, then our scattering or dashing will be accomplished — yes, and finished too. So says the word. Therefore do you keep away from my flock of Pharisees, for I do not want my people excited by your false, alarming doctrine. Do you not see that, at the end of 1335 days, Daniel will stand in his lot? And do you not see, sir, that his standing in his lot means the resurrection? Read the first three verses of this chapter.” “Ah,” says the prophet, “that does not mean the resurrection: but—” “But what?” says the professor. “O, I do not know — difficult to understand,” says the prophet. “I see,” says the professor, “you are a Sadducee: you do not understand either the Hebrew or the Chaldaic, or the exegesis of the Scriptures. How dare you prophesy evil of this nation, when God hath spoken peace after these days? I say you are a Sadducee; I will have no fellowship with you. You must not come into my synagogue.”MRSH 48.1

    Would not this be the natural result of such a case? I leave it for the reader to judge.MRSH 49.1

    Or if we suppose another case: that the professor was now in controversy with a Jew, a Sadducee, and was under the necessity of proving the doctrine of the resurrection by the Old Testament; would he not put into requisition this very text, and prove by the same a resurrection unto eternal life; and if he did not believe such plain and positive proofs as these texts would be, would he not consider him a poor, blinded Sadducee? Let us be careful that our own mouths do not condemn us.MRSH 49.2

    If then these days can only end with the resurrection, it is impossible that these Scriptures can apply to Antiochus. And as the rules which he has given us in his Hints, are the same in substance, which I was forced to adopt more than twenty years ago, I cannot believe that Antiochus Epiphanes is even hinted at from Daniel 11:14, to the end of the 12th chapter. And if the prophecy does not belong to Antiochus, then he must acknowledge that the little horn can apply only to the papal power; and must agree with nearly all protestant writers, that time, times and an half, are, together with the other numbers in this chapter, to be understood in a symbolical sense. And our question cannot be settled on any other basis so fair and conclusive as this, and with me it is a matter of unshaken faith.MRSH 49.3

    And now, my kind reader, you must judge; and I hope, for the benefit of your own soul, you will judge righteously. I know brother Stuart has much on his side: he has talent, learning, popularity, public opinion, and the carnal heart to uphold him; he will have all the Catholics, all the Universalists, all the skeptics, three-fourths of the Orthodox, nearly all of other sects, Mormons not excepted. He will no doubt claim all the learning, and wisdom of the men of this age. But he has not compared Scripture with Scripture, nor has he all of the arguments on the subject; nor has he made all men feel so much peace and safety as he desired. Men’s hearts are yet failing them for fear, and the midnight cry is yet being made. He may have made some few lay down their watch, and some scoffers to scoff louder; he may have some applause from the fearful and unbelieving: but he will hear dreadful imprecations in the day of retribution, if he is in an error. I hope, almost against hope, that he may see, and renounce his errors before it is forever too late. I beg of him, in the name of Jesus, to stop, and consider what he has done, if the views I advocate should be true. And if I am not correct, the perversion of Scripture was uncalled for, and was not needed: for the excitement will be sooner allayed by waiting for the event a few months, than by thus presenting such doubtful constructions of the prophecies as this book contains; and which must, if there is any honesty in the Orthodox ministry, call forth some warm debate; for one or two of the pillars of Orthodoxy are thrown down by this champion of Puseyism among New England Congregationalists; for if he is correct, I see no occasion for any division with the Romanists. If they are not the antichrist, which for centuries we have been taught by his sect to believe, then that church of Rome has been vilified, defamed, and wantonly abused in the pulpit and by the press of this pretended Orthodox sect. I shall, therefore, if they are honest, look for a confession, or a disclaimer from some one of the class to which Professor Stuart belongs. Either let them confess, and go back to the mother church, or show that they have just cause for their denunciation of her abominations.MRSH 49.4

    His doctrine on Revelation will be taken up next. Yours, in the truth, WM. MILLER.MRSH 51.1

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents