Is it past, or is it still to come? This is a vital question
The favourite doctrine at this moment is, that it is past
centuries ago, and that no such dark night of suffering to the
saints of God can ever come again, as happened just before the
era of the Reformation. This is the cardinal principle of a work
that has just appeared, under the title of The Great Exodus,
which implies, that however much the truth may be assailed,
however much the saints of God may be threatened, however their
fears may be aroused, they have no real reason to fear, for that
the Red Sea will divide, the tribes of the Lord will pass through
dry shod, and all their enemies, like Pharaoh and his host, shall
sink in overwhelming ruin. If the doctrine maintained by many of
the soberest interpreters of Scripture for a century past,
including such names as Brown of Haddington, Thomas Scot, and
others, be well founded--viz, that the putting down of the
testimony of the witnesses is still to come, this theory must not
only be a delusion, but a delusion of most fatal tendency--a
delusion that by throwing professors off their guard, and giving
them an excuse for taking their ease, rather than standing in the
high places of the field, and bearing bold and unflinching
testimony for Christ, directly paves the way for that very
extinction of the testimony which is predicted. I enter not into
any historical disquisition as to the question, whether, as a
matter of fact, it was true that the witnesses were slain before
Luther appeared. Those who wish to see an historical argument on
the subject may see it in the Red Republic, which I venture to
think has not yet been answered. Neither do I think it worth
while particularly to examine the assumption of Dr. Wylie, and I
hold it to be a pure and gratuitous assumption, that the 1260
days during which the saints of God in Gospel times were to
suffer for righteousness' sake, has any relation whatever, as a
half period, to a whole, symbolised by the "Seven
times" that passed over Nebuchadnezzar when he was
suffering and chastened for his pride and blasphemy, as the
representative of the "world power."*1* *2*
But to this only I call the reader's attention, that even on the
theory of Dr. Wylie himself, the witnesses of Christ could not
possibly have finished their testimony before the Decree of the
Immaculate Conception came forth. The theory of Dr. Wylie, and
those who take the same general view as he, is, that the "finishing
of the testimony," means "completing the
elements" of the testimony, bearing a full and complete
testimony against the errors of Rome. Dr. Wylie himself admits
that "the dogma of the `Immaculate Conception' [which
was given forth only during the last few years] declares Mary
truly 'divine,' and places her upon the altars of Rome as
practically the sole and supreme object of worship"
(The Great Exodus, p. 109). This was NEVER done before, and
therefore the errors and blasphemies of Rome were not complete
until that decree had gone forth, if even then. Now, if the
corruption and blasphemy of Rome were "incomplete"
up to our own day, and if they have risen to a height which was
never witnessed before, as all men instinctively felt and
declared, when that decree was issued, how could the testimony of
the witnesses be "complete" before Luther's
day! It is nothing to say that the principle and the germ of this
decree were in operation long before. The same thing may be said
of all the leading errors of Rome long before Luther's day. They
were all in essence and substance very broadly developed, from
near the time when Gregory the Great commanded the image of the
Virgin to be carried forth in the processions that supplicated
the Most High to remove the pestilence from Rome, when it was
committing such havoc among its citizens. But that does in no
wise prove that they were "complete," or that
the witnesses of Christ could then "finish their
testimony" by bearing a full and "complete
testimony" against the errors and corruptions of the
Papacy. I submit this view of the matter to every intelligent
reader for his prayerful consideration. If we have not "understanding
of the times," it is vain to expect that we "shall
know what Israel ought to do." If we are saying "Peace
and safety," when trouble is at hand, or underrating
the nature of that trouble, we cannot be prepared for the grand
struggle when that struggle shall come.
[ Back ] [ Up ] [ Next ]
|
