The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser. (Upper Marlborough, Md.) 1882-1925, 1918-04-19

stone, but anything upon WHICH lle al
fections have been set. The order
here is worthy Of noting. 1t is not
from idols to God, but to God from
idols. This is significant, because it IS
when one turns to God that he gets the
power from God to turn from idols.
The third step was the one of serv7
ice; "to serve the living and true God"
Such should be the step taken by eV-
cry child of God, for while not saved
by works, we are saved to work. The
last and fourth step in their experience
was "to wait for his Son from heaven
And should not this be our attitude
too, if we are following in the steps
of these Thessalonica Christians?
Expecting Jesus.
Evidently from their attitude, these
early Christians believed that Jesus
was to return from heaven. The back
ground of their belief was the fact that
God had raised his Son, even Jesus
from the dead. To them the resurrec-
ton meant more than the continued
existence of the personality of Jesus
after his death it meant his bodily
resurrection, and coupled with this was
their belief in his bodily ascension into
heaven. 1t is not difficult to see how
to believe in the return to this earth
Of their risen and assembled Lord.
Were they in their faith mistaken?
There is only one place for us to go
to find out and that is to the Bible.
Those who have taken the pains to
count, tell us that there are in the
New Testament alone, 31S references
to the second coming Of Christ. This
shows the large place that this subject
holds in these Scriptures, not to say
anything about the reference to it in
the Old Testament.
Not Death.
But are We not to understand by
these references to the second coming
of Christ, the death of the believer?
Many have so taught, but that. such
teaching is incorrect is evident, if we
take the passages in which these ref
erences occur and substitute the word
death for the word or words which
text, which would then read, "to wait
for death from heaven, even death
whom he raised from the dead" This
is so absurd that we see at once that
by the second coming of Christ is not
meant the death of the believer.
But does it not mean the coming Of
the Holy Spirit? This teaching is far
r,1a ha
said, and his saying is true in sense,
"the Holy Spirit is Christ's other self"
Yet it is evident that we must not con-
fuse the Lord Jesus Christ with the
Holy Spirit. Jesus himself is careful
in making the distinction and speaks
of the Holy Spirit as another COM
forter whom will send unto you, even
the Spirit of truth" Clearly by this
statement he does not mean himself
any more than when he speaks of his
own coming he means the Holy Spirit.
Manifestly only by the most severe
straining of the Scriptures could the
second coming of Christ be interpreted
to mean the coming of the Holy Spirit.
Try the same test used to prove that
by the second coming of Christ death
is not meant and substitute for the
word or words referring to the Holy
Spirit, word or words referring to
Christ and the absurdity is just as ap-
parent. AS for example, in the passage
quoted above; it is impossible. as you
will See, to make this substitution and
have any sense whatever left. Try it,
and you will be convinced that by the
second coming of Christ is not meant
the coming Of the Holy Spirit.
Not Destruction of Jerusalem.