The Fayette falcon. (Somerville, Tenn.) 190?-current, 1918-04-12

stOne, Dut unylhlng upon winch the al
fections have been set. The order
here is worthy Of noting. 1t is not
from idols to God, hut to God from
idols.
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; 1t meant-his bodily
resurrection, and coupled with this was
their belief in his bodily ascension into
heaven. 1t is not difficult to see how
with such a faith, 1t was easy for them
to believe in the return TO this earth
Of their risen and assembled Lord.
Were they In their faith mistakeni
There is only n 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, 318 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 1t 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 believer2
Many have so taught, but that such
teaching Is incorrect is evident, IL we
take the passages in which these ref
erences occur and substitute the word
death for the word or words which
refer to Christ, as, for example, in our
text, which would then read, ito walt
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 1t not mean the coming Of
the Holy Spirit? This teaching is far
more plausible, for as some one has
said, and his saying is true in a sense,
"the Holy Spirit is Christ's other SELF"
Yet IL 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 l will send uHto 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 APP
parent. As for example. In the passage
quoted above; II is impossible, as you
viii see, to make this substitution and
have any sense whatever left. Try 1t,
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.
But may Ii not mean the destruction
of Jerusalem by Titus in A. ID. 20? By
no means, for In the Revelation. chap
ter q. verse 20. is the last promise Of
our risen Lord given long after the de-
struction of Jerusalem to John, the
aged. on the island Of Patmos: Sure
ly, I come quickly" And In response,
the old apostle lifts bis voice and
cries, "Amen. ever so, come Lord
Jesus" This makes It very evident
that by the second coming OF Christ
Is not meant the destruction Of Jeru-
salem.
Well. what Is meantf Just precisely
what the Scriptures teach; that Jesus
/ rkwI-& A. -Nuou mgnnwanA mlo~fanH