struction of Jerusalem, allow me to refer you to the opinion of such men as Gill, A. Clarke, Cappe, Pearce, Hammond, Lightfoot, &c. &c. Archbishop Newcome says; "The destruction of Jerusalem by Titus is emphatically called the coming of Christ. The spirit of prophecy speaks particularly of this, because the city and temple were then destroyed, and the civil and ecclesiastical state of the Jews subverted. The Jews also suffered very great calamities under Adrian ; but not so great as those under Vespasian, and the desolation under Adrian is not so particularly foretold. But I think, that any signal interposition in behalf of his church, or in the destruction of his enemies, may be metaphorically called a coming of Christ." * Bishop Pearce, speaking on Matt. xiii. 14, says; "I have explained this and the foregoing verse, as relating not to the end of the world, but to that of the Jewish state, which was to be destroyed within forty years after Jesus' death; for the same manner of expression is made use of, when it is more certain, that not the time of the general judgment, but that of the visitation of the Jews is meant, viz. in Matt. xvi. 27, 28, where it is said, 'The Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily, I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.' This last verse, accomplished in one of the apostles at least, (I mean John,) plainly shows, that all the phrases used in the first verse were designed to express only the destruction that was to befall the Jewish state; at which time, the Christians, who endured to the end, were to be saved (Matt. x. 22, and xxiv. 13). These also are called the elect, in Matt. xxiv. 22, 24. And Ecclesiastical history informs us, that, by a divine admonition, the faithful Christians retired from Judea before the ruin of it by the Romans, and were preserved. (See Matt. iii. 12; xxiv. 22. Luke xxi. 18, 36.)” `Dr. Hammond says; "The only objection against this interpretation is, that this destruction being wrought by the Roman army, and those as much enemies of Christianity as any, and the very same people, that had joined with the Jews to put Christ to death, it doth thereupon appear strange, that either of those armies which are called abominable, should be called God's armies, or that Christ should be said to come, when in truth it was Vespasian and Titus, that thus came against this people. To this I answer, that it is ordinary with God, in the Old Testament, to call those Babylonish, Assyrian, heathen armies his, which did his work in punishing the Jews, when they rebelled against him. Christ is fitly said to come, when his ministers do come; that is, when either heathen men, or Satan himself, who are executioners of God's will, when they think not of it, are permitted by him to work destruction on his enemies." These quotations are a specimen of the general language of commentators on this subject. You see, therefore, that we are not alone in our views on this point; that, so far from this, we agree with the great body of the Christian church. I attach, however, infinitely more importance to the testimony of Jesus and his apostles, than to the opinion of men; and to their testimony I now invite your attention. In the 10th chapter of St. Matthew, we read as follows; "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves; be ye, therefore, wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. But beware of men; for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; and ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak; for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the spirit of your Father, which speaketh in you. And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child; and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake; but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another; for, verily, I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come." Matt. x. 16-23. Here we have the commission of the apostles; the cruel persecutions they would have to encounter; the course they should pursue under those persecutions; and the reward of their remaining faithful. Now, when would their persecutions end? and their reward be conferred? The answer is ready; When the Son of man should come. Then, of course, his coming must have been in their time, or else they could not have remained under persecution till his coming. Hence, he says, "When they persecute you in this city, flee into another; for verily I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come;" that is, you shall not have been driven by the hand of persecution through all the cities of Israel, before I will come and end your persecu tions. You cannot say, the cities of Israel mean the whole world; for the commission of the apostles was, "Go not in the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." After his resurrection, Christ gave them a different commission. Then he said, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." Hence the coming spoken of cannot be yet future, one which shall take place when the gospel shall have been preached throughout every nation; it was a coming in that age, and before his apostles should have gone through all the cities of Israel. In St. Matthew, xvi. 27, 28, we read, "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." This testimony is incontrovertible. A man may as well argue against the sun, as to say, that the coming here spoken of is yet future. Terms could not be employed, which could more clearly and positively confine it to the age of Christ, than those here used. Hear "There be some standing here, which it again, shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." In what way has Mr. Miller in his Lectures disposed of this text? You will naturally conclude, that he has offered some comment upon it; that he has attempted to reconcile it with his theory in some manner; that he has not passed it in entire silence. Well, strange as it may appear, he has passed it in silence. Yea, he has done worse than this; he has quoted one part, and left out the other part. Yes, the verse which says Christ shall come in the glory of his Father, with his holy angels, to reward every man according to his work, he has quoted; but that fixing the time of his coming, he has omitted. He has handled the text just as Dr. Beecher did in a discourse delivered in this town, to prove a future judgment. He gave the first verse, "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." So far all was well, and the proof to his mind satisfactory. He commenced on the next verse, and read, "Verily I say unto you, there be some- hem!" Here he stopped; it would not do to go further, and he sought to hide his dilemma by adding, "And another Evangelist says, 'Whosoever shall deny me, him will I also deny.' hem, - "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Christ, then, came at the destruction of Jerusalem. In St. Matthew, xxiv. 29-34, we have the following, respecting the coming of Christ. "Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall |