CLICK HERE TO READ PDF FILE
OF ENTIRE BOOK
Dr. Josiah Litch, a 19th Century
physician and itinerant minister for the Methodist Episcopal
Church, accurately predicted two years in advance,
the fall of the Ottoman Empire in August of 1840 (a
formidable alliance of Arab nations governed from Turkey).
This was an exact fulfillment of Bible prophecy in
"Revelation" chapter nine. Continuing his research, two
months before the event he predicted the exact day,
August 11, 1840, and it was widely circulated in Christian
journals and newspapers.
A REVIEW OF ISRAEL WARREN'S PRETERIST BOOK:
A Critical Study of the Scripture Doctrines of
Christ's Second Coming, His Reign as King ; The Resurrection of the
Dead ; and the General Judgment
The work of Rev. Dr. Litch, meeting and
answering the arguments of " Parousia," by Rev. Dr. Warren,
we regard as timely and valuable. It is not a discussion
relating to a single book, or to the views of a single man.
The theory presented in "Parousia" is undoubtedly gaining a
wide currency ; and this work, with all respect to its
author, may be said to be a result rather than a cause. To
it belongs the honor of having condensed and crystallized
views that are held in solution by a multitude of minds.
Doubt is always restless till it has formulated itself into
a creed. Incredulity must put its denials into a theological
affirmation before it can be easy ; negations must become
assertions if one's orthodoxy is to be preserved.
And we regard " Parousia" as a clever exposition of the
latest current doubt upon the subject of Christ's Second
Advent. The grip of modern faith is inadequate to hold this
doctrine as it is taught by Christ and his apostles. The
stupendous facts of a future, literal advent of the Lord
from heaven ; of a veritable resurrection of mortal bodies
at the sound of the last trumpet, and of the rapture of the
church into the air to meet the descending King, are such as
require a very stalwart belief to hold them fast. Of course
the Liberal and Broad Church theology has long since let go
of such hard literalisms. And now the most orthodox theology
is following in the same course. We find in the church a
very widespread revolt against the doctrine of a literal
second advent of Christ and a literal resurrection of the
body. There is an awful deflniteness, a vivid realness, an
intense literalness about these truths that frightens a
timid and sentimental faith.
The craving is for something more vague
and nebulous, something about which men can dream
deliciously, without being startled with the possible
appearance of the literal, personal Christ, or the literal
risen body. "Behold, he cometh with clouds, and every eye
shall see him, and they also that pierced him," is, say what
we will, an awful declaration to many Christians, as well as
to unbelievers. But tell men that this is not the prediction
of a literal fact tell them that this event has already
taken place ; assuage the terror of the scene by obscuring
it in the dust and tumult of the siege of Titus, and ' drown
the sound of the last trumpet in the crash of the falling
city of Jerusalem, and a fearful strain of dread and
expectation has been lifted from the mind. We do not charge
the author of " Parousia" with catering to men's skepticism
and aversion on this matter. We only say that his theory is
one after which multitudes will " run greedily," since it so
happily puts behind them what they so dreaded as before
them. But this is not the gravest objection to the book. We
regard it as utterly untenable exegetically. It has
confounded the "ages" of which the New Testament speaks,
taking the end of the Jewish age for the end of the
Christian age. It is a style of exegesis which has no eye
for perspective. It has huddled distant events and near
events all into the foreground, and given us a Chinese
picture of the facts of eschatology, instead of conforming
the sketch to the rules of Christian art.
There is " the end of the age " which came at the
destruction of Jerusalem the termination of the Jewish
economy ; and there is "the end of the age " which is the
harvest, when " the Son of man shall send forth his angels,
and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that
offend," etc. the termination of the Christian economy. It
seems to us that these are so clearly distinguished and so
distinctly separated, that it is utterly impossible to
confound them. All our ordinances, all our commissions, all
our endowments as the Church of Christ, are timed and
terminated by the end of the age and the return of our Lord.
If the end of the age has come, and if Christ's advent has
really taken place, then these commissions have run out, and
these endowments are outlawed.
We were commanded to celebrate the Lord's
Supper " till he come." If he has come, we are as much at
fault in keeping up this commemoration as the Jewish
Christian was in holding on to circumcision after the age of
Judaism had terminated.
We have the Spirit given to the church as the third person
of the Trinity, the invisible manifestation of Christ among
his people, with the promise that he should abide with us "
forever." "For the age," or "unto the end of the age," is
the language of Scripture. If the age has terminated, and
Christ has come, we cannot see what right we have to claim
that the dispensation of the Spirit is still continued.
Indeed, there is nothing simpler than the Scripture
presentation of the ages or dispensations. These open out of
each other like the successive lengths of the barrel of a
telescope ; and looking through them we get a clear sight of
" the bright and morning Star." The work which we are
criticising "telescopes" the ages, shuts them all together,
and looking through them now we can see nothing definite or
clearly defined in the future we cannot fix our place in
hjstory because we have lost sight of the "day star."
But it was not our purpose to criticise " Parousia," but to
write a few lines of introduction to the able review of the
work herein presented by Dr. Litch. The critic we believe
has the best scholarship of the ages on his side. He is
simply defending the historic faith of the church.
When Dr. Whitby, the Arian, had published his "new
hypothesis," as he named it, which was the first formulated
presentation, so far as we have found, of
post-millenarianism the doctrine now generally in vogue in
the theological schools of this country a Bishop of the
English Church expressed his dissent from the hypothesis on
the ground that it tended to destroy the doctrine of the
resurrection by making the time of each man's death
equivalent to the coming of Christ and the day of
This tendency culminates we conceive in Dr. Warren's work.
In it death and resurrection have at last been reconciled.
To die is to rise from the dead : to lie
down in corruption is to put on incormption. Then waiting
for God's Son from heaven is a needless attitude and an
obsolete duty. The crown which belongs to Immanuel is put
upon the ghastly head of death and we are to wait for the
coming of death instead of watching for the coming of Christ
in glory. This teaching we do not charge exclusively,
however, upon "Parousia." It is in the air " Parousia" has
condensed it and put it into tangible shape. Those who feel
the untenableness of modern Post-millennialism will fly for
refuge to this theory. Those who wish to stand on the
securer foundation of the Pre-millennial faith, the
doctrine of the advent which even so prejudiced a witness as
Dr. Whitby himself admits passed unchallenged for the first
two hundred and fifty years of the church as the belief of
"all Christians who were exactly orthodox," will do well
to follow the lines of criticism which Dr. Litch has so ably
A. J. G. Boston, May, 1880.
As of liberty so of evangelical doctrine, its price is "
eternal vigilance." The tendency of human nature has always
been downward ; and Satan's tares are profusely scattered in
every field where the wheat of Christ is sown. After the
experience of Orthodoxy some fifty years ago, in its
struggle with Unitarianism, and the battles fought and
victories won by Drs. Griffin, Beecher, and their
associates, and the establishment of orthodox principles,
churches and schools over New England, there was good reason
to hope that at least for the nineteenth century the ground
would have been maintained and the work of God have been
carried on upon the same basis.
But such hopes have been doomed to
disappointment. A leading journalist, editor of a
professedly Orthodox periodical, the leader of the
denomination in a New England State, puts forth before
Christendom a labored work to prove that Jesus Christ is
never to return visibly in the clouds of heaven ; that
instead of the resurrection of the dead being (as the
Scriptures plainly teach) at the close of this dispensation,
when "the Lord himself shall descend from heaven," each
human being is resurrected at the moment of death, by an
elimination of a " non-atomic enswathement of the soul " ;
that instead of a day, or period, of general judgment, when
the human race shall be arraigned and judged each
receiving his final doom, the judgment is now ; and that
instead of the dissolution of the material world, the aerial
heavens and the earth, by the action of fire at "the day of
judgment and perdition of ungodly men," to give place to " a
new heaven and a new earth," as Peter wrote the, great
foretold change is to be brought about by human agency.
Had these utter perversions of God's most holy word been the
work of an open enemy, I had held my peace ; but when Christ
is thus betrayed and pierced in the house of his professed
friend, and the leaders of professed orthodoxy, from
professor's chair, press and pulpit, either pass lightly, or
else endorse and commend such betrayal of a sacred trust,
feeble though the effort may be, the reviewer of Dr.
Warren's PAROUSIA felt constrained to do what he could to
expose such heresy and neutralize the virus thus infused
into the sacred mystical body of Christ.
Let the principles of hermeneutics involved in Dr. Warren's
book be adopted and the Bible, as a standard of faith, is of
no value whatsoever. There is not a heterodox sentiment
extant but what may be sustained by it ; nor is there a
doctrine taught in its pages that is of any force whatever.
If the Book of God does not mean what its words express, who
is the pope that shall tell us authoritatively what it does
mean ? If the sin-sick soul cannot be assured that the Holy
Scriptures mean what the obvious import of the words
express, on what shall its confidence be based in order to
find peace and rest ? When Jesus Christ says to a sinful
world : " This is the will of the Father which sent me, that
every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him should
have everlasting life ; and I will raise him up at the last
day," if the last clause of the promise does not mean what
it says, what perishing, sinking soul will dare to risk his
eternal interests on the testimony of the first part of the
Believing most firmly as the reviewer does, that Dr.
Warren's PAROUSIA is jeopardizing immortal interests, and
undermining the faith of those who embrace his sentiments,
he has undertaken this review, and now sends it forth in
this form, in the. name of the Lord, on its mission of
protest, wherever it shall find a reader, against a system
of grievous and dangerous error. For Dr. Warren himself, the
author has only the kindest of feelings ; and only wishes
that his valuable talent might have been employed in a
better cause than thus shamefully perverting the word of
God, removing the old landmarks of the Church, and sowing
broadcast the seeds of Swedenborgianism over the land. To
one who carefully watched the downward course of that bright
star, as it waned into darkness the late Prof. Bush, the
course of Rev. I. P. Warren, D.D., can but seem full of
peril to himself and to those under his influence.
The Summary of Eschatology appended to the Review, the
author trusts may prove an assistance to inquirers after
truth, as opening to their minds the scheme of Redemption
and its final outcome.
In the Appendix will be found the author's Rejoinder to Dr.
Warren's Reply to the Review of his book. It will be found
to contain considerable repetition of what was said in the
Review,. But this is inevitable in such a work. Invoking the
divine blessing on this feeble effort to subserve the cause
of truth, the work is sent forth in this more permanent form
and respectfully dedicated to all evangelical churches in
APRIL 28, 1880.
Introduction .......... ill
Preface, . ...... vii
The Parousia of Christ, . ..... 13
Nature of the Parousia, ...... .18
Time of the Parousia, ....... 23
Christ's Testimony, ........ 23
The Kingdom of Heaven at hand, ..... 25
Christ's Coming in Glory to reward, ..... 27
The two Royal Advents, ....... 27
Parable of the Fig-tree ........ 32
The Conditional Reign, ...... 35
The Proffered Kingdom lost, . . . ' . . .36
Paul's testimony on the Time of the Advent, . .
The Parousia to come, ..... . 42
This Same Jesus, ........ 43
Scope of the Parousia, ....... 46
The Controversy ended, ....... 49
The Costume of the Parousia, ..... 51
Solution of the Question, ....... 51
This Period, ........ 64
Christ as King, 61
His accession to the Throne, ...... 62
Coining in his Kingdom, ...... 66
Date of the Apocalypse 71
Apocalyptic Exegesis, 73
The Dragon the Symbol of Satan, 76
The Millennial Reign, 78
The Judgment of the Dead, ...... 70
Two Orders of Judgment, 84
Descriptive and Chronological Orders, .... 88
The Millennium Ended, 89
The First Resurrection, 00
Doctrine of the Sadducees, 92
Anastasis Christ's use of the word 93
Paul's use of the word, 94
Natural and Spiritual Body, 96
Souls of the Beheaded, 98
The Time of the Resurrection, ..... 100
Argument from Science, . . .... 105
CHAPTER XI. "
The Age of Conquest," . ' 110
The Consummation " 121
Perpetuity of the Kingdom, 123 "
The End of the World," 124
When did the Mosaic Age end ? 126
Summary of Eschatology, 130
The Soul, 133
The Spirit, , 134
The Resurrection, 135
Union of Soul and Body, 136
The Resurrection Instantaneous, 137
Final Abode of the Saints, 137
Final Doom of the Wicked 139
Rejoinder to Dr. Warren's Reply, ..... 141 "
This Generation," 145,161
The Kingdom of Heaven, 150
The Second Royal Advent, 151
Matt. 16 : 27, 28 considered, .154 "
Joel 2 : 28-31 and Acts 2 : 17-20 considered,
Testimony of the- Apostles, 162
Testimony of the Apostolic Fathers, . . . .164
Costume of the Parousia, 174
The Man of Sin not Nero, 176
Dr. Warren's re-statement of his views, . . .
The Resurrection of the Body, '..... 181
The Better Resurrection, 187
"Another point in the foregoing
argument, as well as at different points throughout the
book, deserves notice. He speaks of " the fact that the
Parousia was near.'.' If, as the Doctor so strenuously
contends, parousia signifies "presence," not "coming"
what does he mean by " was near " ? Was there an
interval of some forty years after Christ left his
disciples on the mountain in Galilee, saying, "Lo, I am
with you alway, even unto the end of the world," to the
time of Jerusalem's overthrow, when Christ's presence
was not with them ? I press this point and urge an
answer. Was there forty years, more or less, when they
had to work without his omnipresence ? If there was not,
and the time of his presence was still future when Paul
wrote, where had been his omnipresence ? Either Dr.
Warren or his reviewer is confused in his mode of
apprehending and expressing this great theme. Does not
the word near imply not yet here but coming : and if
parousia is near, is it not coming ? How is this ?
That I do not misapprehend or misrepresent the Doctor's
language or sentiments will still further appear from
the following : "
Let the Parousia as a now existing fact be preached with
as much earnestness as they preached it as an
anticipated fact in other words, that Christ has come
and in now upon the throne of his kingdom, ruling,
judging and rewarding men according to their works,"
etc. Parousia, p. 55.
If this does not ignore Christ's presence with his
people, and make it, in the days of the apostles, a
still future event, and a coming, also, I confess I do
not know what it does teach." (pp. 41,42)
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY WIKIPEDIA
Dr. Josiah Litch (18091886) was a
Methodist Episcopal preacher in the New England region of
the United States, who was most well-known for his
connections with the Millerite movement, and for using Bible
prophecy to predict a loss of power for the Ottoman Empire.
In 1838, a friend asked Josiah Litch to read the writings of
William Miller. Litch at first was hostile to Miller's
prediction of the second coming of Jesus, but after reading
he was converted into the Millerite movement.
Litch then wrote his own book, The Probability of the Second
Coming of Christ About A.D. 1843. In a comment on Revelation
9, Litch predicted that the Ottoman Empire would lose power
in August 1840. When on August 11, 1840, the Ottoman Empire
accepted guarantees from the Great Powers, it was
interpreted as a fulfillment of Bible prophecy and Litch's
One of Litch's most notable converts was Charles Fitch, who
later became one of the foremost preachers in the Millerite
Around 1841, the Millerite movement requested Litch to
become the first general agent. Litch was granted release
from his pastoral duties, and became the first paid
Millerite worker. Litch was successful as a promoter and
secretary for the movement.
Another idea that Litch developed was the idea of a
pre-advent judgment. According to Litch, "no human tribunal
would think of executing judgment on a prisoner until after
his trial; much less God." He began to develop the idea in
1840, but didn't publish until 1841. After the Great
Disappointment, some Millerites applied Litch's pre-advent
judgment to October 22, 1844, the Millerites' predicted date
of Jesus' return (the Seventh-day Adventists later developed
this into the investigative judgment doctrine).
After the Great Disappointment, Litch joined William Miller
in setting dates, then waiting for the soon return of Jesus.
THE THREE WO TRUMPETS. WO! WO!! WO!!!
Fall of the Ottoman Empire,
or Ottoman Supremacy Departed, August 11, 1840
by Josiah Litch
The book of
Revelation has long been looked upon as a book of
inexplicable mysteries, altogether beyond the reach of the
comprehension of mortals. And this opinion has received too
much encouragement from professed teachers and expounders of
the word of God, many of them of eminent talents and various
learning. . .much evil has been done by their unguarded
remarks respecting the obscurity of unfulfilled prophecy in
general, and the book of Revelation in particular. . . .
The Holy Spirit is grieved, and the God of Revelation
slighted and insulted, by such insinuations and remarks. . .
. How differently has the author of the book expressed
himself in reference to it! He calls it, "The Book of the
Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him to show
unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass . .
If it is a
revelation, then it is not an inexplicable mystery, but the
mind of God made known to man. "Blessed," then "is he that
readeth, and they which hear the words of the prophecy of
this book." If God, then, has pronounced a blessing on the
reader of this book, who shall disannul it?
Rev. 8:13. "Wo
[sic], wo, wo to the inhabiters of the earth, by reason of
the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels which
are yet to sound."
Rev. 9:1. "And the
fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto
the earth; and to him was given the key of the bottomless
A star, in the
figurative language of Revelation, is a minister of
religion. See Rev. 1:20.... A fallen star, then would
signify a fallen or heretical minister of religion. This
was undoubtedly the Arabian imposter, Mahomet. [Mohammed]
There is so general an agreement among Christians,
especially protestant commentators, that the subject of this
prediction is Mahommedism [Islam], I shall not enter into
the argument at large to prove it; but in passing, shall
merely give a brief exposition of the emblems used, and
their application in the text.
Verse 2: "And he
opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of
the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and
the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit. . .
The smoke was the
cloud of errors which arose through his instrumentality,
darkening the sun, (gospel light,) and the air, (the
influence of Christianity on the minds of men.) In this
enterprise, he and his followers were so successful that the
light of Christianity almost disappeared wherever he gained
an influence; and the smoke of the pit produced nearly total
darkness throughout the eastern church.
Verse 3: "And there
came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth; and unto them
was given power as scorpions of the earth have power. . . .
That these locusts
were emblems of an army, is clear. . . : "And the shapes of
the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and
on their heads were crowns like gold, and their faces were
the faces of men. And they had hair like the hair of women,
and their teeth were as the teeth of lions," &c. . . .
Such is the description of a Mahommedan [Muslim] horseman
prepared for battle. A horse, a rider with a man's face,
long flowing beard, woman's hair, flowing or plaited, and
the head encircled with a yellow turban, like gold.
"Was given power, as
the scorpions of the earth have power. . . ." Martinicus
says, Scorpions have nippers, or pincers, with which they
keep hold of what they seize, after they have wounded it
with their sting.... "
Like the scorpion,
Mahomet stung the subjects of his proselytism, and infused
the poison of his doctrines, and continued to hold them by
the force of arms, until it had affected the whole man, and
the subject settled down in the belief of his delusive
errors. . . . Wherever his arms triumphed, there his
religion was imposed on men, whether they believed it or
not. . . .
"The successors of
the prophet propagated his faith and imitated his example;
and such was the rapidity of their progress, that in the
space of a century, Persia, Syria, Egypt, Africa, and Spain
had submitted to the victorious arms of the Arabian and
Saracen conquerors." Ruter
Verse 4: "And it was
commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the
earth neither any green thing, neither any tree [a direct
command found in the Koran]; but only those men which
have not the seal of God in their foreheads. "
"Grass, green thing,
and tree" are here put in opposition to those men who have
not the seal of God, &c. If so, they must mean those who
have the seal of God - his worshipers.
". . .Infidels, who
rejected the Christian religion, and also all idolaters,
they forced to receive the Mahommedan religion [Islam], upon
pain of death. But Jews and Christians, who had their
Bibles and their religion, they left to the enjoyment of
them, upon their paying large sums, which they exacted. But
where the payment of such sums was refused, they must either
embrace the new religion or die." Smiths Key to
Verse 5: "And to
them it was given that they should not kill them, but that
they should be tormented five months."
As the language thus
far has been figurative, so it must be here also. To kill,
signifies, a political death, or subjection. The nation of
Christians who were the subjects of this plague were to be
tormented five months, but not politically slain. Five
months is one hundred and fifty days; each day a full solar
year; the whole time, one hundred and fifty years.
Verse 6: "And in
those days men shall seek death, and shall not find it; and
shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them."
This, of course, is
the same death as that in verse 5, viz., political. Such
was the misery of the Greeks, occasioned by the wars in
which they were almost continually embroiled with the
Mahommedan powers, that very many would have preferred an
entire subjection of the empire to them, to the protracted
miseries the war occasioned. But this was not permitted;
political death fled from them.
TORMENTS THE GREEKS ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS
Verse 10: "Their
power was to hurt men five months. "
1. The question
arises. What men were they to hurt five months?
Undoubtedly the same they were afterwards to slay; (See
verse 15.) "The third part of the men," or third of the
Roman empire - the Greek division of it.
2. When were they to
begin their work of torment? The 11th verse answers the
question: "They had a king over them, which is the angel of
the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is
Abaddon, but in the Greek hath his name Apollyon [meaning
a. "They had a king
over them." From the death of Mahomet. . .the Mahommedans
were divided into various factions, under several leaders,
with no general civil government extending over them all.
Near the close of the 13th century, Othman founded a
government, which has since been known as the Ottoman
government, or empire, extending over all the principal
Mahommedan tribes, consolidating them into one grand
b. The character of
the king. "Which is the angel of the bottomless pit." An
angel signifies a messenger, or minister, either good or
bad; not always a spiritual being. "The angel of the
bottomless pit," or chief minister of the religion which
came from hence when it was opened. That religion is
Mahommedism [Islam], and the Sultan is its chief minister.
"The Sultan, or Grand
Signior, as he is indifferently called, is also Supreme
Caliph, or high priest, uniting in his person the highest
spiritual dignity with the supreme secular authority."
Perkins, "World as it is," p. 361. . . .
3. His name. In
Hebrew, "Abaddon," the destroyer; in Greek, "Apollyon,"
one that exterminates or destroys. Having two different
names in the two languages, it is evident that the character
rather than the name of the power is intended to be
represented. . . . Such has always been the character of
the Ottoman government. . . .
But when did Othman
make his first assault on the Greek empire? According to
Gibbon ("Decline & Fall," &c.) "Othman first entered the
territory of Nicomedia on the 27th day of July, 1299. . . ."
"And their power was
to torment men five months. . . ." Commencing July 27th,
1299, the one hundred and fifty years reach to 1449. During
that whole period the Turks were engaged in an almost
perpetual war with the Greek empire, but yet without
conquering it. They seized upon and held several of the
Greek provinces, but still Greek independence was maintained
in Constantinople. But in 1449, the termination of the one
hundred and fifty years, a change came. Before presenting
the history of that change, however, we will look at verses
12-15...: "One wo is past; and behold, there come two woes
more hereafter. And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a
voice, from the four horns of the golden alter which is
before. Saying to the sixth angel which had the trumpet,
Loose the four angels which are bound in the great river
Euphrates. And the four angels were loosed which were
prepared for an hour, a day, a month, and a year, for to
slay a third part of men."
The first wo was to
continue from the rise of Mahommedism until the end of the
five months. Then the first wo was to end, and the second
begin. And when the sixth angel sounded, it was commanded
to take off the restraints which had been imposed on the
nation, by which they were restricted to the work of
tormenting men, and their commission extended to slay the
third part of men. This command came from the four horns of
the golden altar which is before God. "The four angels,"
are the four principal sultanies of which the Ottoman empire
is composed, located in the country of the Euphrates. They
had been restrained; God commanded, and they were loosed.
In the year 1449,
John Paleologus, the Greek emperor, died, but left no
children to inherit his throne, and Constantine Deacozes
succeeded to it. But he would not venture to ascend the
throne without the consent of Amurath, the Turkish Sultan.
He therefore sent ambassadors to ask his consent, and
obtained it, before he presumed to call himself sovereign .
. . . Let this historical fact be carefully examined in
connection with the prediction above. This was not a
violent assault made on the Greeks, by which their empire
was overthrown and their independence taken away, but simply
a voluntary surrender of that independence into the hands of
the Turks, by saying, "I cannot reign unless you permit."
The four angels were
loosed for an hour, a day, a month, and a year, to slay the
third part of men. This period amounts to three hundred and
ninety-one years and fifteen days; during which Ottoman
supremacy was to exist in Constantinople.
Commencing when the
one hundred and fifty years ended, in 1449, the period would
end August 11th, 1840. Judging from the manner of
the commencement of the Ottoman supremacy, that it was by a
voluntary acknowledgment on the part of the Greek emperor
that he only reigned by permission of the Turkish Sultan, we
should naturally conclude that the fall or departure of
Ottoman independence would be brought about in the same way;
that at the end of the specified period, the Sultan would
voluntarily surrender his independence into the hands of the
Christian powers, from whom he received it.
When the foregoing
calculation was made, it was purely a matter of calculation
on the prophetic periods of Scripture. Now, however, the
time has passed by, and it is proper to inquire what the
result has been - whether it has corresponded with the
1. Has the ottoman
independence in Constantinople departed, and is it in
christian hands? Let the following testimony answer the
question. . . .
The London Morning
Herald, after the capture of St. Jean dAcre, speaking of the
state of things in the Ottoman empire, says: "We have
dissipated into thin air the prestige that lately invested
as with a halo the name of Mehemet Ali. We have in all
probability destroyed forever the power of that hitherto
successful ruler. But have we done aught to restore
strength to the Ottoman empire? we fear not. we fear that
the sultan has been reduced to the rank of a puppet; and
that the sources of the turkish empires strength are
"If the supremacy of
the Sultan is hereafter to be maintained in Egypt, it must
be maintained, we fear, by the unceasing intervention of
England and Russia . . . ."
2. When did
Mahommedan independence in Constantinople depart?
In order to answer
this question understandingly, it will be necessary to
review briefly the history of that power for a few years
For several years the
Sultan has been embroiled in war with Mehemet [Mohammed]
Ali, Pacha [sic] of Egypt. In 1838 there was a threatening
of war between the Sultan and his Egyptian vassal. Mehemet
Ali Pacha, in a note addressed to the foreign consuls,
declared that in the future, he would pay no tribute in the
Porte, and that he considered himself independent sovereign
of Egypt, Arabia, and Syria. . . . In 1839, hostilities
again commenced, and were prosecuted, until, in a general
battle between the armies of the Sultan and Mehemet, the
Sultans army was entirely cut up and destroyed, and his
fleet taken by Mehemet and carried into Egypt . . . . This
fleet Mehemet positively refused to give up and return to
the Sultan. . . . In 1840, England, Russia, Austria, and
Prussia, interposed, and determined on a settlement of the
difficulty; for it was evident, if let alone, Mehemet would
soon become master of the Sultans throne. . . .
The Sublime Porte,
with a view of putting a stop to the effusion of Mussulman
blood, and to the various evils which would arise from a
renewal of hostilities, accepted the intervention of the
Here was certainly a
voluntary surrender. . . ,[part of the official document
reads:] The powers have, together with the ottoman
plenipotentiary, drawn up and signed a treaty, whereby the
Sultan offers the Pacha, the hereditary government of Egypt,
and all that part of Syria extending from the gulf of Suez
to the lake of Tiberias, together with the province of Acre,
for life; the Pacha, on his part, evacuating all other parts
of the Sultans dominions now occupied by him, and returning
the Ottoman fleet. A certain space of time has been granted
him to accede to these terms; and, as the proposals of the
Sultan and his allies, the four powers, do not admit of any
change of qualification, if the Pacha refuse to accede to
them, it is evident that the evil consequences to fall upon
him will be attributable solely to his own fault.
Rifat Bey, Musleshar for foreign affairs, has been
despatched in a government steamer to Alexandria, to
communicate the ultimatum to the Pacha." [Moniteur
Ottoman, Aug. 22, 1840.]
The question now
comes up, when was that document put officially under the
control of mehemet ali?
"By the French
steamer of the 24th, we have advices from Egypt to the 16th.
. . . The Turkish government steamer, which had reached
alexandria on the 11th, with
the envoy rifat bey on board, had by his (the Pachas) orders
been placed in quarantine, and she was not released from it
till the 16th. . . however. . .on the
very day [August 11, 1840] on which he had been admitted to
pratique, the above named functionary had had an audience of
the Pacha, and had communicated to him the command of the
Sultan, with respect to the evacuation of the Syrian
province, appointing another audience for the next
day, when, in the presence of the consuls of the European
powers, he would receive from him his definite answer, and
inform him of the alternative of his refusing to obey;
giving him the ten days which have been allotted him by the
convention to decide on the course he should think fit to
adopt. . . ." The London Morning Chronicle, Sept. 18, 1840.
According to previous
calculation, therefore, ottoman supremacy did depart on the
eleventh of August [August 11, 1840] into the hands of the
great Christian powers of Europe.
Then the second wo is
past, and the sixth trumpet has ceased its sounding; and the
conclusion is now inevitable, because the word of God
affirms the fact in so many words, "Behold, the third wo