of the operations of nature as exhibited in the past history of our globe. I beg, however, that it may be distinctly understood, that I do not adduce this as evidence, but simply to show that so far from there being any primâ facie assumption against the view now maintained, there is, on the contrary, much in favour of it.

But a large amount of collateral evidence may be adduced from Scripture in favour of the theory now maintained, as to the connection between the present earth and that which is to succeed it, and which evidence is derivable from numerous passages in which that theory would seem to be necessarily involved; many of which have been already quoted. We may refer, e. g., to any of those in which the Messiah's reign is recognised as being upon EARTH, or, what amounts to the same thing, "upon the throne of David," and yet in which its perpetuity is declared. Take, for instance, Isa. ix. 7. "Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will per

form this." Here we have a state of things which is to prevail undoubtedly upon earth, and yet it is to go on for ever. No intimation is given of a change to another globe. The language is not consistent with such a view of the subject. In short, suppose we had not read of a "new earth as about to succeed the present one, we should certainly have said, that nothing could be more clear than that the Messiah's reign would be perpetuated for ever upon this. The whole phraseology seems to imply this. The perpetuity of the reign implies the perpetuity of its locality.

And in keeping with this is another fact, viz., that His future reign is always spoken of as but ONE. It is to commence at His advent, and from that time is to go on for ever. "I charge thee, therefore, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom." (2 Tim. iv. 1.) "And He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end." (Luke i. 33.) Throughout, the reign seems to have an essential It begins on earth

unity, as well as perpetuity.

and goes on on earth.

It commences at the advent

and goes on for evermore. It will certainly be divided into two periods, the millennial and the eternal, and yet it is uniformly spoken of as but one.

Now, it seems difficult to reconcile these things with the idea that this earth will be annihilated; but the difficulty is removed, if, instead of being annihilated, our globe will, on the contrary, be perpetuated in all its integrity, though in a renewed and glorified state.

All this is very important as serving to show, that the connection now maintained between our present globe and the future one would seem to be certainly involved in the general phraseology of Scripture, and is thus shown to be in perfect harmony with, and not in any way opposed to it.' This

ought to be the

case if the theory be true. It

66

What is said of Abraham and his prospects may also be referred to under this head. Take, for instance, the following:- By faith, Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; for he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." (Heb. xi. 8-10.) But in his lifetime upon earth Abraham did not possess a foot of the promised land (Acts vii. 5); and if his expectations be ever realised, therefore, they must be so after the resurrection, and "the land of promise," or something answering to it must be then in existence: and it must be remembered, that a portion of the surface of the "new earth" will correspond in point of locality or position with the literal Canaan as it now is. (See pp. 64, 65.)

would not be so if the theory were false. We need it as a synthetic application of that theory; and it is satisfactory to find that we have it. We do not rest our case upon it, but upon the direct testimony adduced; it is, however, confirmatory of that, as a synthetic supplement is to an analytic proof.,

PART II. SYNTHETIC.

be re

AND now this will lead us to what may garded as the second division of our subject. Until the last few paragraphs, we have been engaged in investigating the subject analytically, or inductively; we must now inquire how far the entire question will bear to be synthetically handled, and that, not merely in reference to portions of Scripture which directly refer either to the kingdom of the Messiah or the future inheritance of the saints, but to others also which contain, it may be, only a general promise to them, or denounce some evil that will hereafter overtake the ungodly. In short, we must now see whether we have arrived at such a generalization of the subject as will embrace the entire Scriptures. Here is a view, a theory, derived from a careful induction of various scriptural particulars derived from an analysis of its expressions and announcements, which, it must be remembered, are to us