On the other side, no doubt, must be set the fact that in the apostolic circle the belief in the near- ness of the Second Coudng Wius almost universal (1 Th 4""', 1 Co 7-'»ii 10-», 2 Co &a, Ko 1:5" '-. Pli 4', 1 P4', 1 .In 2'», Uev 1^ 2-Ji" etc.). The obvious conclusion to draw from this would be that the belief had a common root in the teaching of Christ Himself.
And in favour of that conclusion miglit be c|Uiile<l the language of 1 Th 4'\ though it may be i|uestioned how nuich of this is a "word of the Lord,' and how much the construction put upon it by St. Paul. The ease with which the ajiostles postponed their exivctation under the teaching of events woidd tell against the supposition that the words of Christ had been precise on the subject; and when we come to look into the (losjiels there are many hint.s that the time of the Second Coming could not be lixcd )uecisely and might be distant (.\It 21'"-"ll •25'"-'^- '*). These pas.sages are indeed so clear that they may be fairly said to neutralize those which ate quoted on the other side, and to
heighten the probability that the apparent defi- niteness of tlie.se other passages is due to the dis- ciples rather than to the Master.
But another hypothesis has been put forward to remove the difliculty. It has been supposed that the Coming of the Son of -Man in the places where it is spoken of as near at hand refers, not to the linal coming, but to another kind of coming in the great events of history. The prologue of St. .John's Gospel appears to jioint to such repeated comings (Jn V); and if any event deserves the name, it might well be given to the Destruction of .Jerusalem, which wa.s certaiidy one of the turning- points of history, and had a momentous influence upon the fortunes of Christianity. There is no doubt that our i>ord directly predicted this cata- strophe ; and it might well seem that the pas- sages which apparently speak of the final coming as near were due to a confusitm in the minds of the disciples between the two events regarded as ' Comings.'
It is, however, a question whether this idea of repeated coming can be made good. Most recent writers are inclined to set it down as a modernism (Schwart/.ko])ff, IVeiaxrir/inir/en Ji'su Christi, etc. p. 155; Holtzniann, Xentest. Thi-ol. i. 315). It is also very doubtful whether it has any real support in OT. What the prophets looked forward to was ^ the day of the Lord' — a single great intervention of God — not a day or succession of days.
On this puint ttu- writer i.s p\aA to bo ablu to refer to a note wliich he has recetvetl froui Dr. Driver : * The usual c.vpression Is " the (lay of J ' " : in Is 'i", however, it is in.lef. (" for there is a (lay f(ir," etc., or ".J" hath a day ") ; Zee 14' has also ** a day " ; K/,k :JU^ is lit. '• For near is a day. and near is a day for J "" ; IsJM* " For there is a day of vengeance for J" (or "'j" hath"), a year of recompense for," etc. : also " his days" in apparently the same sense, .lob '24'. Hut these hardly (lifTer e.xcept form- ally from the nstial "day of.!"." I do not Ihinic that a succes- sion of jud^'inents is representeii under this tlffure — except, of course, in so far as what tlie prophet pictured as taking place in a siri^de day was in reality ertected f,'radually.'
Another hypothesis, however, also appears de- serving of consideration. The strongest of all the passages which would make our Lord expressly predict His own Second Coming within the apos- tolic age itself is Mt 10-* ' Verily I say unto you. There be some of them that stand here which shall in no wise ta.ste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.' 15ut when we compare this with the parallels, Mk !)' = I^k 0'-' it is clear that the words Son of Man are intrusive, and that the clause really runs, ' till they see the kingdom of God come with power ' (om. ' with power," Lk). It is not the 'Son of Man coming in his kingdom,' but the 'kingdom' itself which comes.
What is meant by the kingdom here ? Is it not a very n.atural interpretation to explain it of that great intervention of the Spirit of (iod in the world, that great inHux of Divine powers and energies which dates from Pentecost? In other words, is it not natural to equate it with the promise of the Paraclete in the Fourth (Jospel, where it is implied that the coming of the Para- clete is eiiuivaleut to the coming of Christ Him- self ? (.In I !"-'»).
The teaching of the Fourth Gospel respecting the Paraclete is already strongly conlirmed by the part assigned to the Holy Spirit by St. Paul; and if the explanation just suggested • holds good, it would be also confirmed from another and unex- pected quarter.
Tliere has tMH^n m eonsideniblo tendeiicr In the ailvanc^l lihernl camp to i;et rid entirely of the npi>ealypt)c and escltnto- ioL'tcal element In the teaching of our I.onl. The chief means thriMlk'li which this Is done has l>oen the snp|H)MMl discovery