66

when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets." When the sixth trumpet hath ceased to sound, the seventh begins, and "in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall BEGIN to sound, the mystery of God [or dispensation of grace] shall be finished." It would appear from this, that upon the fall of the Turkish empire, which will take place on the closing up of the "sixth vial" and trumpet," ," that the day of probation will close. Again, Rev. xi. 15: "And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ; and he shall reign forever and ever." This most certainly closes up the gospel dispensation, and brings us to the glorified state; for we are to "reign forever and ever." This will take place when the seventh angel shall sound. Here we have this most solemn and momentous subject, as brought to view in the book of Revelation. There is one other passage that we quote, which has an important bearing upon this subject. Matt. xxv. 10-12: "And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage; and the DOOR WAS SHUT." We learn that the preparation was made by the wise when the midnight cry was given: but the foolish deferred the matter until it was too late; for while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, "and the door was shut." "Afterwards, the foolish virgins came, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily, I say unto you, I know you not." This is the time referred to in Rev. xxii. 11: "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still; and he that is holy, let him be holy still."

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. He which testifieth these things saith, SURELY, 1 come quickly; Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.""

BY REV. GEORGE BUSH,

PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND ORIENTAL LITERATURE IN THE
NEW YORK CITY UNIVERSITY;

WITH

MR. MILLER'S REPLY.

ALSO,

AN ARGUMENT FROM PROFESSOR BUSH

ON PROPHETIC TIME.

BOSTON:

PUBLISHED BY JOSHUA V. HIMES,

14 Devonshire Street.

PREFACE.

As candid and rational beings, it becomes us to weigh well all the arguments which can be adduced against the immediate coming of Christ; for if any valid objections could be urged, their full weight is to be taken into the consideration of this question. It is well known that one great reason of our confidence in the evidence by which our views are sustained, is owing to the absence of sound argument against us, and to the ease with which all arguments, thus far adduced, have been shown to be fallacious.

Professor Bush is of the opinion that a considerable portion of the Christian world "may find their own sentiments accurately represented" in his. This, to a great extent, is, doubtless, true; and a still greater portion of the nominal church are fast leaving the old land-marks and long established principles of prophetical interpretation, and embracing similar views. We have, therefore, attached sufficient importance to his letter, as an embodyment of the faith of many in the church, and as an illustration of the arguments by which those of like faith reject the Advent doctrine, to give it in a number of the Library, with the reply of Mr. Miller, that it may be seen on how broken a reed men can rely in questions of such awful magnitude.

We have also given an extract from a letter of Prof. Bush to Prof. Stuart, in which our views of PROPHETIC TIME are triumphantly vindicated. The contrast in the force and logic of his reasoning when defending the time, and when opposing the event, is evidence that, on the latter question, he is deficient in arguments to sustain his position.

J. V. HIMES.

Boston, April 15, 1844,

PROF. BUSH TO WM. MILLER.

DEAR SIR:-In casting my eyes over the last number of the "Advent Herald," (late "Signs of the Times,") I noticed a letter under your signature, headed, "An Address to the Believers in Christ, of all Denominations," and containing an earnest protest against the virulent denunciations from the pulpit and the press, to which the advocates of your peculiar views of prophecy have been subjected. You demand a statement of the grounds on which you, and those holding your views, are virtually excluded from the pale of Christian fellowship, and ask whether it is to be charged upon you as a crime or a heresy, that you believe the prophecies of the Old and New Testament to be true, and that you think you understand them, and are endeavoring to govern yourselves accordingly. You enquire, moreover, whether you are to be treated as heretics because you believe Christ will come this year, when he has, himself, commanded all "to watch;" and the duty of watching necessarily implies the " expectation of the object for which we watch." The letter before me teems with various other queries, of a similar strain, carrying with them a burden of serious remonstrance against the course generally pursued, as you allege, by the mass of the Christian community towards yourself, and those who sympathize with your prophetic theories.

Now, for myself, while I am ready to admit that you are entitled to a fair and argumentative consideration of what is seriously and argumentatively proposed on the authority of the divine oracles, yet I cannot con

ceive that you have any just cause for wonder, even if the reception of your doctrines has been as uncourteous as you contend. You will scarcely deny that there has been no small measure of denunciation on the other side, which has had little tendency to conciliate, especially as it has often gone on the ground of charging that a dissent from your views was identical with a total neglect or utter ignorance of the whole subject of prophecy. I will not here adduce specimens of the language which I have often seen employed in Second Advent publications, (of which I have been a pretty diligent reader,) and some even from your own pen, which certainly dealt in very wholesale condemnation of the rejecters of your opinions. I repeat, then, that although it is very possible that your interpretations may not have received all the respectful attention which they deserve, yet the fact that they have been somewhat severely treated, does not present a problem very difficult to be solved.

Still I am not aware, notwithstanding all the provocation of which they have been conscious, to hard speech, that the evangelical churches in our land have regarded your peculiar views so much in the light of a dangerous heresy, as of an unhappy delusion. They have not, I believe, felt called upon to form any definite judgment as to the degree in which your sentiments were consistent or inconsistent with an honest and cordial belief in the leading doctrines of the Gospel. But they have been satisfied that the confidence with which they have been broached, rested upon no adequate basis of sound exposition, and therefore they could not be insensible to the pernicious effects arising from a system that claims to speak with infallible certainty upon points which the soberest minds are compelled to regard as doubtful. Here, I apprehend, is the true source of that decided rejection of your sentiments, of which you speak, as if it were a breach of Christian charity, and a hating without a cause. The usual style in which that class of tenets usually denominated Millerism"-(I do not use the term opprobri