| |

|
|
CHRIST CAME AGAIN
The Parousia of Christ A Past Event
The Kingdom of Christ A Present Fact
With A Consistent Eschatology
William S. Urmy,
D.D.
(1900)
|
CLICK HERE FOR PDF FILE OF ENTIRE BOOK
"Hence in the
original this resurrection is denoted by a phraseology differing
from that which is applied to the resurrection of mankind in
general. "
This sitting on
thrones of those who were previously under the altar is called a
"resurrection" not because it is a rising from the graves of
bodies which had been dead. There is nothing said of the
resurrection of bodies. "This resurrection is to be explained as
a resurrection from Hades to heaven. Those who have suffered in
this world and have been slain ascend to their thrones in
heaven" (Professor Briggs). "The resurrection is ascribed to
these persons only in a figurative sense; that, namely, of a
transition into a new and glorious existence; as is indicated by
the expression This is the first resurrection' " (Hengstenberg).
Hence in the original this resurrection is denoted by a
phraseology differing from that which is applied to the
resurrection of mankind in general. It is lost sight of in our
English version, but it is a peculiarity of too much importance
to be rightfully disregarded. The latter is usually styled
simply the resurrection of the dead; that of
Christ and his martyrs, the
resurrection from or from out of the dead. So, in
the Vulgate, the resurrectio a or ex mortuis is
distinguished from the resurrectio mortuorum. (See Rom.
viii, 11; x, 7;
Eph. i, 20; Heb. xiii, 20; I Pet. i, 3, 21.) It implies that out
of the whole number of the departed there shall be those who
attain a peculiar honor, one which they do not share in common
with the rest.
"We
grant that a resurrection was to occur at the parousia, but deny
that it was to be visible to the eyes of mortals, and therefore
insist that it must have taken place just as the Scriptures
assert it did; and that, being thus an invisible transaction, it
may be still proceeding, as a legitimate part of the events
which mark the reign of the Lord Jesus Christ as the One who
sits on the throne of authority and power to judge and give
life—eternal life—with spiritual bodies to all who are believing
in him as the years roll on." |
|
"So when we read in Heb. ii, 14, 15, "that through death he
might bring to nought [destroy, in Authorized Version] him
that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and might
deliver all them who through fear of death were all their
lifetime subject to bondage," we are not to consider this to
be an annihilation of the devil, but merely a reference to
the cessation of his power over those in whom he had
produced this fear of death." (pp 146.147)
"We grant that a resurrection was to
occur at the parousia, but deny that it was to be visible to the eyes of
mortals, and therefore insist that it must have taken place just as the
Scriptures assert it did; and that, being thus an invisible transaction, it
may be still proceeding, as a legitimate part of the events which mark the
reign of the Lord Jesus Christ as the One who sits on the throne of
authority and power to judge and give life—eternal life—with spiritual
bodies to all who are believing in him as the years roll on."
(On II Tim. 2:16-18)
"There is a text in Second Timothy which may demand some attention here:
"But shun profane babblings: for they will proceed further in ungodliness,
and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenaeus and
Philetus; men who concerning the truth have erred [have missed the mark,
darc^ew], saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the
faith of some" (2 Tim. ii, 16-18). "The precise meaning of this expression
[the one italicized in the quotation] is by no means clearly ascertained;
the most general, and perhaps best founded, opinion is that they understood
the resurrection in a figurative sense of the great change produced by the
Gospel dispensation. . . . Now, as the doctrine of the resurrection of the
body was found to involve immense difficulties even in those early days
(Acts xvii, 32; I Cor. xv, 35), while, on the other hand, there was so great
a predisposition in the then current philosophy (not even extinct now) to
magnify the excellence of the soul above that of its earthly tabernacle, it
was at once the easier and more attractive course to insist upon and argue
from the force of those passages of Holy Scripture which enlarge upon the
glories of the spiritual life that now is, under Christ, and to pass over or
explain away allegorically all that refers to a future state in connection
with the resurrection of the body" (Mc- Clintock and Strong, art. "Hymenaeus").
This explanation being accepted, it is at once perceived that the error of
these men was not that there had been a resurrection of the body; and
therefore those who now maintain such a doctrine are not properly classed
with these heretics.
"Even if they had maintained that a resurrection of the body had taken
place, it is to be remembered that this was before the parousia of Christ,
and therefore such teaching might then have been erroneous, while now it may
be, and, as we believe, is, the only correct teaching, and such as should
not subject one to the spear of the heretic hunter.
The faith which was overthrown was doubtless a faith in an actual
resurrection of a body into the eternal life of the future. This the
upholders of our theory do not interfere with, but sustain with all their
powers; only it is maintained also that, this resurrection being necessarily
invisible to the bodily eye, it has already occurred, according to the plain
and incontestable teachings of Holy Writ." (pp 261-262)
"Our death is the immediate exchange of the visible physical for the
invisible physical like unto the ascension. Death is our assumption into the
invisible physics; the assumption is the service which death gives us; it is
instant on death, the spring of another existence without a wintry ghostly
interval. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, we repossess our body in
death; death is our ingression into the spiritual body without a leap or
break. 'To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.' We know that when our
earthly house of this temporal residence is dissolved we have—not shall have
—a building of God, a residence of eternal elements in the heavens."
(p. 284)
"So our hope in Christ is resplendent with the glories in store for us as
we look for our own immediate manifestation with him in the heavenly places
so soon as we cease to bear the image of the earthy and begin at once to
bear the image of the heavenly. " (p. 284)
(On the judgment)
"We therefore conclude that those who here appear before the throne of the
Son of man are the nations of Palestine, the individuals of which received
or rejected him in the person of his brethren, and that the rejecters stood
there to be judged and doomed, according to Matt. xxii, 6, 7, while the
receivers of his disciples entered into the kingdom. " (p. 94)
WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID
William Revell Moody (1900)
"In Christ Came Again
Dr. Urmy labors with zeal and diligence to
establish the old theory, discredited by every evangelical
creed, every catholic creed, and every generally
acknowledged exegete of Christendom, that Christ came before
the close of the apostolic age in a sense which completely
fulfilled all predictions concerning His parousia and
apokalupsis. His utter variance, not only from the
pre-millennial bat also from the post-millennial view of the
second advent, is fully confessed by himself. He says: "The
system of eschatology which this work presents requires that
certain changes be made not only in the current thought of
the day concerning the second coming of Christ, but in
creeds, articles of faith, rituals, and hymns, where they
refer to this and kindred eschatological subjects." We wish
Dr. Urmy joy of this task!" (Record of Christian work,
Volume 19, p. 381)
Bibliotheca Sacra
"Christ Came
Again: The Parousia of Christ a Past Event; The
Kingdom of Christ a Present Fact, with a Consistent
Eschatology. By
William
S.
Urmy, D.D. I2mo. Pp.
394. New York: Eaton & Mains; Cincinnati: Curts & Jennings.
1900. $1.25. An elaborate defense of the theory that
the second coming of Christ occurred in connection with the
destruction of Jerusalem. The book is likely to increase the
number of those holding this view." (Volume 57, p. 775)
Methodist Magazine
"This book discusses the second coining of our Lord, not as a future event, but
as one which did occur about thirty seven years after our Lord's ascension,
namely, at the fall of Jerusalem. This theory is supported by arguments on the
expectation of the apostles, upon the teachings of our Lord, and from the
Apocalypse of St. John. It presents, the author affirms, an eschatology
consistent itself with the Scripture and furnishes satisfactory adjustment of
the great doctrines of the Resurrection, the Judgment, the Millennium, and a
complete refutation of the errors of the Adventists and Millennialists. The
argument is very ingenious, but, to our mind, not conclusive." Volume 51, p.
483)
Francis Rufus
Bellamy
"Dr. Urmy's purpose is to substitute for the
prevailing notions of the second advent, borrowed from
Judaism as they are, a conception in better accord with the
New Testament reasonably interpreted, and with the spiritual
nature of Jesus' teachings. With his main positions, the
same as have been set forth by Mr. J. Stuart Russell, Dr. I.
P. Warren, and Dr. Whiton in well-known books, we heartily
concur, viz., that the promised return of Christ was to be
in spiritual power rather than in bodily form, ana that the
era of its commencement may be assigned to the time when his
throne as the spiritual Lawgiver displaced Moses's seat in
the fall of Jerusalem,
A.d. 70.
Also, that we must substitute for the notions of a general
resurrection and judgment the truth that resurrection and
judgment are for each at death. On the other hand, we
strongly dissent from his uncritical treatment of various
details. We cannot grant that Moses was translated, or that
the Apocalypse is a divine revelation of remote historical
events, or that St. Paul's phrase, " caught up in the clouds
to meet the Lord in the air," is to be understood as meaning
simply that the dying Christian goes, as we say, " to
heaven." (The Outlook, Volume 64, p. 740)










|
What do YOU think ?
Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
..Will Be Spam
Filtered and Posted Shortly..
Date: 11 May 2007 Time: 01:41:27
Comments:
I think you put a lot of time into this and are to be commended
for it. (Whatever we do for the Lord is not in vain, 1 Cor
15:58, Rom 14:5-8). I also think Mr. Urmy's view has some very
attractive features to it: Millennial reign of the Saints
manifestiing itself in the physical realm beginning with
Constantine's triumph over beastly Roman persecution - just as
Eusebius glowingly describes the epoch moment. My own view began
much akin to his but then had to adjust to the Biblical time
constraints set forth by the fact that the Christ's Return
triggers the First Resurrection, (the raising up of the Dead in
Christ, Rev 20:4-6 & 1 Thess 4:15-17). And that inaugural period
was foreseen & reported by John to terminate 1000 years later,
Rev 20:4-6. so basically, I just pick up J.S. Russell's approach
and boldly add the end date to his Millennium 1000 years after
its 70AD start: ergo, the 70-1070AD Millennium. Slightly
different dates, perhaps, but otherwise very similar to Mr.
Urmy's
May God bless you Mr. Dennis and all your readers with the
Spirit of wisdom & revelation in the knowledge of Jesus Christ,
(Ephesians 1:15-23).
John Riffe heavenlyjerusalem.net tulsapreterists.heavenlyjerusalem.net
|