Meyer, although he makes τέλος in the 24th verse refer to the resurrection, nevertheless says¹ “That it is the constant doctrine of the New Testament (leaving the Apocalypse out of view), that with the coming of Christ the ‘finis hujus sæculi’ is connected, so that the Second Advent is the termination of the ante-messianic, and the commencement of the future world-period.”

Luthardt says,² “Then, not before the resurrection, … comes the end; the end, not of the resurrection, that is the resurrection of others than believers, but the absolute end; the end of history.” Whether the end of all things is to follow the resurrection of believers immediately, or long afterwards, is, in his view, a different question. He admits that the common view is that the coming of Christ, the general resurrection of the dead, the general judgment, the end of the world, and the new heavens and new earth, are to occur contemporaneously. His own view is different.

That the New Testament does teach that the general resurrection is to occur at the time of the Second Advent appears: —

1. From such passages as the following; In the passage in Daniel, quoted above, it is said, that the righteous and the wicked are to rise together; the one to life, the other to shame and everlasting contempt. This passage our Lord reiterates, saying that “the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” (John v. 28, 29.) In Matthew xxv. 31, 32, it is said, that when the Son of Man shall appear in his glory all nations shall stand before him. The same is said in Revelation xx. 12, 13. In 2 Thessalonians i. 7-10, it is taught that when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, it will be to take vengeance on those who obey not the Gospel, and to be glorified in all them that believe. In all these passages the resurrection of the righteous is declared to be contemporaneous with that of the wicked.

2. There is another class of passages which teach that the resurrection of the righteous is to take place at “the last day,” and, therefore, not a thousand years before that event. Thus Martha, speaking of her brother Lazarus, said, “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” (John xi. 24.) Our Lord, in John vi. 39, says that it is the Father’s will “that of all which He hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” This declaration is repeated in verses 40, 44, 54, comp. xii. 48: “The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” It is true that the expressions “the last time,” “the last day,” “the end of days,” “the end of the world,” are often used very indefinitely in Scripture. They often mean nothing more than “hereafter.” But this is not true with the phrase ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ as used in these passages. “In the last day,” is a known and definite period. It is to be remembered also that what is predicted to happen on “the last day,” is elsewhere said to take place when Christ shall appear in his glory.

3. A third class of passages teach that the resurrection of the saints is to take place at the day of judgment and in connection with that event. According to the common representations of Scripture, when Christ shall come the second time, the dead are to rise, all nations are to be judged, and the present order of things is to cease. The heavens are to retain Christ, “until the time of restitution of all things.” (Acts iii. 21.) This ἀποκατάστασις “die Wiederherstellung aller Dinge in ihren frühern vollkommnern Zustand,”³ the restoration of all things to their original perfect condition. “This consummation may be called a ‘restitution,’ in allusion to a circle which returns into itself, or more probably because it really involves the healing of all curable disorder and the restoration to communion with the Deity of all that He has chosen to be so restored. Till this great cycle has achieved its revolution, and this great remedial process has accomplished its design, the glorified body of the risen and ascended Christ not only may, but must, as an appointed means of that accomplishment, be resident in heaven, and not on earth.”⁴

The general resurrection is represented as connected with the final judgment, in Matthew xxiv. 30, 31, and xxv. 31-46, 2 Thessalonians i. 7-10, and elsewhere. On this point Dr. Julius Müller says: “It is the plain doctrine of Scripture that the general resurrection of the dead contemporaneous with the transfiguration of believers then living on earth is to occur at the end of the world (or of history), at the reappearance of Christ for judgment and for the glorification of his kingdom… . . With this consummation of Christ’s kingdom, and the therewith connected ἀπολύτρωσις τοῦ σώματος ἡμῶν ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς, the Apostle, in the profound passage, Romans viii. 19-23, sets forth, as also connected with these events, the renovation of the nature of the earth and its exaltation to a participation in the glory of the children of God. As the body of man stands in intimate relation with nature, … . it is scarcely possible to form any idea of the resurrection of the body … . without assuming a corresponding exaltation of the external world as the theatre of his new life. This renovation of nature, the new heavens and the new earth, takes for granted, according to the Apostle, the destruction of the world as it now is.”⁵ With these views, which accord with the common doctrine of the Church, Lange avows his entire agreement.⁶

The only passage which seems to teach that there is to be a first and second resurrection of the body, the former being confined to martyrs and more or fewer of the saints, and the latter including “the rest of the dead,” is Revelation xx. 4-6. It must be admitted that that passage, taken by itself, does seem to teach the doctrine founded upon it. But —

1. it is a sound rule in the interpretation of Scripture that obscure passages should be so explained as to make them agree with those that are plain. It is unreasonable to make the symbolic and figurative language of prophecy and poetry the rule by which to explain the simple didactic prose language of the Bible. It is no less unreasonable that a multitude of passages should be taken out of their natural sense to make them accord with a single passage of doubtful import.

2. It is conceded that the Apocalypse is an obscure book. This almost every reader knows from his own experience; and it is proved to be true, the few who imagine it to be plain to the contrary notwithstanding, by the endless diversity of interpretations to which it has been subjected. This diversity exists not only between commentators of different classes, as rationalistic and orthodox, but between those of the same class, and even of the same school. This remark, which applies to the whole book, applies with special force to the passage under consideration.

3. The Bible speaks of a spiritual, or figurative, as well as of a literal resurrection. This figure is used both in reference to individuals and in reference to communities. The sinner, dead in trespasses and sins, is said to be quickened and raised again in Christ Jesus. (Rom. vi. and Eph. ii.) Whole communities when elevated from a state of depression and misery, are in prophetic language said to be raised from the dead. (Rom. xi. 15; Is. xxvi. 19.) “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.” (Ez. xxxvii. 12.) “I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.” More than this, Elias is said to have lived again in John the Baptist; and, according to a common interpretation, the two witnesses spoken of in the Apocalypse are Moses and Elias, who are to rise not in person, but as represented by men filled with the same spirit, endued with similar gifts, and called to exercise the same offices. It would, therefore, not be inconsistent with the analogy of prophecy if we should understand the Apostle as here predicting that a new race of men were to arise filled with the spirit of the martyrs, and were to live and reign with Christ a thousand years. According to Hengstenberg, the Apostle saw the souls of the martyrs in heaven. There they were enthroned. This was their first resurrection. “There can be no doubt,” he says, “that by the first resurrection we are here primarily to understand that first stage of blessedness.”⁷

4. John does not say that the bodies of the martyrs are to be raised from the dead. He says: “I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus.” The resurrection of the dead is never thus spoken of in Scripture. There is a sense in which the martyrs are said to live again, but nothing is said of their rising again from their graves. The first resurrection may be spiritual, and the second literal. There may be a time of great prosperity in the Church, in which it will be a great blessing to participate. It is said that there is no force in this argument, as the Apostle does not speak of a resurrection of souls. He simply says he saw the souls of the martyrs; as in chapter vi. 9, it is said: “I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God.” The prophet, according to xx. 4, first saw the martyrs in the state of the dead, and then he saw them alive. The argument, however, is not founded merely on the use of the word “souls,” but on the fact that the resurrection of the dead is never spoken of in the Scriptures in the way in which the living again of the martyrs is here described.

5. The common millenarian doctrine is, that there is to be a literal resurrection when Christ shall come to reign in person upon the earth, a thousand years before the end of the world, and that the risen saints are to dwell here and share with Christ in the glories of his reign. But this seems to be inconsistent with what is taught in 1 Corinthians xv. 50. Paul there says: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” It is here expressly asserted that our bodies as now constituted are not adapted to the state of things which shall exist when the kingdom of God is inaugurated. We must all be changed. From this it follows that the spiritual body is not adapted to our present mode of existence; that is, it is not suited or designed for an earthly kingdom. Luthardt admits this. He admits that the renovated, or transfigured, body of necessity supposes a renovated earth. He admits also that when the bodies of believers are thus changed they are to be caught up from the earth, and are to dwell with Christ in heaven. When Christ appears, his people are to appear with Him in glory. Bengel, and after him others, endeavour to reconcile these admissions with the theory of an earthly kingdom of glory, by assuming that risen saints are, to rule this kingdom, not from the literal Jerusalem, but from heaven. This, however, is to introduce an extra-scriptural and conjectural idea.

6. It has already been said, when speaking of the restoration of the Jews to their own land, that this whole theory of a splendid earthly kingdom is a relic of Judaism, and out of keeping with the spirituality of the Gospel.⁸

All this is said with diffidence and submission. The interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy experience teaches is exceedingly precarious. There is every reason to believe that the predictions concerning the second advent of Christ, and the events which are to attend and follow it, will disappoint the expectations of commentators, as the expectations of the Jews were disappointed in the manner in which the prophecies concerning the first advent were accomplished.

---

← The Concomitants of the Second Advent · Contents · The Concomitants of the Second Advent, § 2. The Final Judgment →

Footnotes

1. Commentar über das Neue Testament, 2d edit., Göttingen, 1849, vol. v. p. 323. ↩

2. Lehre von den letzten Dingen, Leipzig, 1861, p. 127. ↩

3. De Wette, Exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Leipzig, 1845, vol. i. part 4, p. 48. ↩

4. The Acts of the Apostles Explained. By Joseph Addison Alexander. New York. 1857, vol. i. p. 118. ↩

5. Studien und Kritiken, 1835, pp. 783-785. ↩

6. Lehre von den letzten Dingen, Meurs, 1841, pp. 246, 247. ↩

7. The Revelation of St. John Expounded, edit. Edinburgh, 1852, vol. ii. p. 281. ↩

8. The interpretation of this whole passage (Rev. xx. 1-6) is thoroughly discussed in the very able work of the Rev. David Brown, of St. James’ Free Church, Glasgow, entitled Christ’s Second Coming: Will it be Pre-Millenial? chapter x. edit. New York, 1851, p. 218 ff. ↩