secution and flight from place to place; and "pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day;" i. e., that the persecution may not be permitted to rage with such fury as to allow you no respite from trouble, or time for rest; "for then shall be great tribulation [to the church,] such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, [how true,] no, nor ever shall be;" such a time of trouble to the church is never to return. "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved," i. e., none of the church; "but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." The severity of that tribulation began to be broken before the 1260 days or years expired that the church was to remain in the "mountains," i. e., "wilderness," [see Rev. xii. 6;] the kings began to make war on that desolating power [see Rev. xvii. 16] 200 years before the whole period allotted to it had expired, and the "Reformation" commenced about the same time; and thus the days, in the violence of the persecution, were "shortened," and for the sake of the "elect," the church.

Verse 23: "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not."- "Then." When? Under this papal abomination. The Pope has claimed to be Christ's vicegerent; i. e., to be intrusted with Christ's power to pardon sins, and has "exalted himself above all that is called God." See 2 Thess. ii. 4.

Verse 24: "For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch, that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Compare this with the Papal Beast, Rev. xiii. 13: "He doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by those miracles which he had power to do." See also Rev. xvii. 8: "They that dwell on the earth shall wonder [whose names were not written in the book of life," not "the elect,"] "when they behold the beast," &c. Papacy has shown, or pretended to show,

great signs and wonders," so that some of the "elect" have been deceived by it, I have no doubt; for it must be true that there have been true Christians in that wicked church, though they would not have remained in it if they had not been deceived, any more than they would remain in any other church that lords it over God's heritage.

Verse 26: "Wherefore, if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert"—in places of seclusion from the world—" go not forth: Behold, he is in the secret chambers "—convents—nunneries—" believe it not.

The 27th verse teaches us that when Christ comes, it will be in such a manner we shall none of us have occasion to doubt on the subject, for his coming will be as the lightning—sudden, and visible to all.

Verse 28: "For wheresoever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together."—This verse may refer to the bloodthirsty character of the Papal power. See Job xxxix. 27—30: Papacy, like the eagle, "seeketh her prey, and her eyes behold afar off;" her devotees "suck up" "the "blood" of the saints; and "where the slain are there is she," carrying on bloody persecutions.

If this interpretation does not satisfy, take another. The eagle is led to her prey by her appetite; so when Christ comes, as the lightning, men will be divided according as their affections are on things above or things on earth. If their hearts are on Christ they will fly up to meet him, as the prophet Isaiah saith, xl. 31: "They that wait upon the Lord shall mount up with wings as eagles," while the wicked shall remain to burned up with the objects of their affections, i. e., earthly things.

To the interpretation I have given of the 15th to the 28th verse, the 21st of Luke, 20th—24th verses, may be urged as an objection. It will be seen that Mark uses nearly the same language as Matthew. Luke wrote after, and his gospel records points omitted by the other evangelists. Now, admitting that our

Lord did speak of Jerusalem's destruction, as recorded by Luke xxi. 20, I conceive it does not affect my argument on Matthew; for it will be seen that the language differs from both Matthew and Mark; the latter having called attention to the "abomination of desolation," which is no other than the papal abomination. My own opinion is, that Luke records an expression of our Lord omitted by the other evangelists, which may refer to old Jerusalem or it may not; if it does, it is only by glancing over it to the main object, the desolations of his church under the abomination of desolation; for the testimony of two witnesses settles the point that it was that abomination, and not the "daily" abomination: nor yet are both abominations included: for our Lord uses the singular, abomination, and designates which one he is speaking of, and enforces it with an emphatic "Whoso readeth let him understand." By Jerusalem, then, in Luke, I understand the same that Paul, in 2 Thess. ii. 4, calls "the temple of God," i. e., the church of God. By its being "compassed about with armies," [not army,] I understand the civil power, in the hands of Papacy, wielding the sword, hunting the church, the true children of God, to put them to death. As though our Lord had said, "The abomination of desolation will stand up in the church and possess power to command kings and their armies: and when you see him thus stand in the church, know that the desolation thereof is nigh—then flee—yea, depart out of it, for she has then become Babylon; then come out of her, my people, and let none enter into it."

The "wrath upon this people," I understand not the wrath of God, for the wrath was upon the fleeing people, and of course was the wrath of the persecuting power, or the abomination of desolation, Papacy; before this power they fell "by the sword, and " were "led away captive," &c. This exactly agrees with what we are told, Daniel xi. 33, should befall Christians under the papal abomination, i. e., "They shall fall by the sword, by flame, and by captivity, and by spoil

many days." Thus we see Luke and Daniel agree perfectly. Again: Luke says, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." The Revelator says, Rev. xi. 2, "The holy city shall they "[the Gentiles] TREAD Here we

UNDER FOOT FORTY AND TWO MONTHS.

have the time of the treading under foot specified; and the language so exactly corresponds with Luke, that the one explains the other, and without this explanation the "times of the Gentiles," in Luke, would seem to be an indefinite expression. Further, Christians were to "flee to the mountains," according to Luke. The church was to "fly into the wilderness," according to the Revelator. Again I ask, What Christians were to be benefited by the directions to flee, if old Jerusalem was the subject of discourse?—surely but a mere moiety of the whole church in the world at that time. We know not that any of the apostles were there, and but comparatively few Christians. But, says the objector, "All the Christians did flee out of Jerusalem before it was destroyed." And who is their authority for this assertion? Why, "Josephus." And how did Josephus know that "all the Christians fled" at that time? Strange, that Josephus had so much knowledge as to know every individual Christian in Jerusalem, and know they all fled!!—he must have been almost omniscient. I strongly suspect it was the "little horn that had eyes," spoken of by Daniel the prophet," that saw all the Christians "fleeing out of Jerusalem;" and that it saw that just as it has seen "Antiochus Epiphanes" as the little horn; i. e., Papacy must find something to which to apply the "abomination of desolation" of which our Saviour spake, Matt, xxiv., and it conjured up old Jerusalem, and Christians fleeing out of it, to turn eyes off from itself; and Protestants have been deceived by it, just as they have about Antiochus, and with just as good evidence, in my judgment.⁕

Since writing the above a friend has informed me that Pres. Wilbur Fisk stated, that, in his visit to Rome, which

Verse 26: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days," &c. Mark says, "In those days, after that tribulation," &c., "shall the sun be darkened," &c. I understand this to be a literal event, or sign of Christ's coming. How exactly does the history agree with the prophecy! "In those days," i. the 1260 allotted to the "abomination of desolation," and yet after the tribulation of the church, from that power, had passed, the sun was literally darkened. In 1780, May 19, the sun rose clear—at ten o'clock, the horizon began to be darkened, and at twelve people had to light candles to dine—laborers left the fieldsthe fowls retired to roost—and a feeling that the judgment day had come rested upon many minds.

"The moon shall not give her light." The darkness not only continued through the day, but the night following till past midnight, though the moon was at the full. "Such was the darkness, that a sheet of white paper, held within a few inches of the eyes, was equally invisible as the blackest velvet." An eye-witness says, that when the moon first became visible, it had precisely the appearance of "blood." The prophet Joel, ii. 30, 31, says, "I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come." We have seen that this prophecy has been fulfilled so far as the sun and moon are concerned. If it be said, "This darkness can be accounted for upon natural principles," I reply -it never has been done; but if it could be, it does not alter the fact. Our Saviour said it should take place, but did not say it could not be accounted for upon natural principles. It has taken place as he said: nor is there any evidence that such an event ever transpired before, since the crucifixion, till 1780. was a short time before his death, he found, at the Vatican, the oldest copy of Josephus that is known; he also said that in that copy there is no mention made of the Christians fleeing out of Jerusalem at its destruction.