Refutation of the Doctrine Called The Age to Come

INTRODUCTION

It has been well remarked that much of the controversy amongst men arises from a misunderstanding of each other’s language, or a misapprehension of terms. This is the first difficulty. Beyond this, a pride of opinion and love of triumph prevent many from acknowledging the plainest principles of reasoning. With such it is no use to reason. They will yield to other influences, but not to reason. No matter how plainly a point is proved, the further we argue with them, the more confusion will be the result. RDAC 7.1

Thus, if I affirm that a sheet of paper is white, and another declares that it is black, it is evident that our opinions of color are so different that we could come to no satisfactory conclusions by examining a hundred other articles. We should only increase the difference between us a hundred-fold. RDAC 7.2

Again, if I affirm that two and two make four, and another denies it, and insists that two and two make five, it will do us no good to engage in a strife of arithmetical calculations, as an agreement in the result would be impossible. We must first agree on elementary truths, or first principles. RDAC 7.3

Many try to evade a difficulty without correcting it. It is of no use to admit that two halves are equal to the whole, unless we apply the principle in all our calculations. No matter how learned a man may be, he can never demonstrate a proposition if he loses sight of elementary truths. It is just as necessary for the teacher of algebra to add two and three correctly, as it is for the small scholar in the first arithmetic. These plain principles, if applied to questions of faith and morality, would prevent confusion, and tend to bring the children of God to “the unity of the faith.” RDAC 7.4

The principles of Christian liberty are but little understood. As there is a great difference between liberty and licentiousness, so there is a just medium between tyranny and anarchy; between oppressive strictness and confusion. He who is restive under just restraint, knows nothing of true freedom. The questions will then arise, What is true Christian liberty? How far may we think as we please? And what restraint shall be placed on our faith? RDAC 8.1

(1.) We may entertain our own faith without regard to the will of our fellow-men, whether they appear as popes, kings, councils, inquisitors, or church committees; that is, it is not for them to regulate our faith, or determine what we may or may not believe. The highest office of the servants of God is that of “ambassadors for Christ;” they are not legislators, judges, nor executioners. RDAC 8.2

(2.) We may not entertain any faith contrary to God’s revelation. Though man has no right to control our faith, God has: for “he that believeth not God hath made him a liar” (1 John 5:10), for which offense he will be held to an account. If this were not so, and if God had given to all the right and privilege to think and believe what they pleased, he would be unjust in punishing unbelief, as it would only be the exercise of a given right. As he will punish unbelief, he has a right to guide our faith; and as his word is truth, and does not teach yea and nay, he has a right to require that we should all be one-speak the same thing-be of one mind-come to the unity of the faith, and keep the unity of the Spirit. RDAC 8.3

Then the oft-repeated difficulties—“we can’t all see alike; every man has a right to his own opinion; learned men disagree,” etc,—have their origin in unbelief and self-will, and are a libel on the gospel, and a special plea for infidelity. RDAC 9.1

But can these principles be so applied as to settle the controversy in the theological world on the fulfillment of prophecy? I should say, Yes! without any hesitation; but the plainest principles will settle no controversy if not acknowledged and applied. General terms must be explained by those more particular, and the indefinite must be made to harmonize with the definite. Oh every Bible doctrine, Bible expressions may be found in plain, direct terms; that is, such as contain no symbols or figures, or only such figures and forms of speech as are of common use, and easily understood. These are decisive; and all our interpretations of prophecy must harmonize with them. This is “true literalism,” and may not be dispensed with, for any consideration. By these principles and this rule we shall endeavor to abide in our investigations in the following pages. RDAC 9.2

In order to bring the subject before the mind at once, so that we may take a comprehensive view of the whole field, I will present three questions, correct answers to which will settle the whole controversy. RDAC 9.3

1. Do the Scriptures teach that the world will be converted, and that a majority of mankind will be saved? Or, do they teach that the world will grow worse and worse, and that in numbers the saved will be to the lost as the few to the many? RDAC 10.1

2. Do the Scriptures teach that only two classes will exist at the coming of Christ, the righteous and the wicked, one to be saved and the other destroyed? Or, do they teach the existence of a third class, neither righteous nor wicked, justified nor condemned, subjects of neither law nor grace, who will have no interest in the events of that day? RDAC 10.2

3. Do the Scriptures teach the pre-eminence of the Jews, and their exclusive right to certain promises in the New Covenant? Or, do they teach the unity of the household of faith, and a perfect equality in respect to God’s promises in the New Covenant, and that all special privileges and promises to the Jews belonged to the old covenant now done away? RDAC 10.3