French Letter No. 144
Geneva – 15th September 1844
To Mr B R
Dear Brother
I have read your chart, on the words έπιφάλεια – epiphaleia, φαυερόω – phaueroa, άποκάλυψις – apokalupsis, with some attention. I have gone over your second chart on the gospels, and I seize a moment to say a word to you. But first, I will communicate to you my critical remarks on the words; I have made these after having examined all the passages anew.
… έπιφάλεια – epiphaleia (cf 1 Tim 6: 14; 2 Tim 1: 10; 2 Thess 2: 8) means appearing to me, not revelation, as if one went out of a place where one had been hidden beforehand. Without doubt, appearing is necessarily opposed to the idea of being hidden, but it is the fact of being seen or visible, of appearing, as the sun shines. He has appeared; He will appear anew. That is to say that there will be a state of things in which He will not be hidden, or as non-existent (save for faith), but where He will be apparent. It is not the act of coming out as [….Ω….][1]. But the state of shining so that He is visible. Without doubt, the thing will be true, as soon as His [….Ω….] and His [….Ω….] but it remains true afterwards.
… φαυερόω – phaueroo is in contrast with what He has been beforehand, to be hidden although existing, and of a known existence. This term only applies to us when our life has been presented as hidden with Christ in God (Col 3: 4[2]).
… άποκάλυψις – apokalupsi (cf Rom 8: 19; 1 Cor 1: 7; 1 Pet 1: 7[3]) is said more often of someone who has the right to appear in glory and who appears thus, to the confusion, indeed, of those who have not wanted to recognise the glory. And this term is applied either to judgment or to glory; it is something glorious which shines out.
… φαυερόω – phaueroo signifies putting on the record and is applied to sin (Eph 5: 13; 1 Cor 4: 5; Luke 8: 17; Mark 4: 22, etc.).
… αρουσία – arousia signifies presence in contrast with absence, and also the fact of becoming present after having been absent. (1 Cor 16: 17; 2 Cor 7: 6 present this latter sense, and Phil 2: 12; 2 Cor 10: 10 the former). This word evidently gives us the idea of His presence in the midst of the scene in which are our affections, our fears, our hopes, our joys, our sorrows, and where His presence or His absence can act on these things. So that the presence of Christ in the creation answers to the hopes and affections of the person who speaks of it. In a general way, it is His coming into the scene from which He is currently absent. If my soul is occupied with heavenly thoughts, it will meet Him in heaven; if on earthly things, it hails His coming into this world, so that this word applies to one and the other to His coming to receive the church in the air, and to His coming on the earth to accomplish the designs and the judgment of God there.
These remarks may bring some modification to the expression of someone with your ideas, but they are in general in accord with your chart and perhaps resolve some difficulties which remain on the word [….Ω….].
As to the marriage of the Lamb, it seems to me that it would be better not to put anything else, but to leave aside what concerns the Jews and the parables. I am totally in agreement with what you say on the marriage itself, but your interpretation of the parable of the virgins presents difficulties which, for me, are insurmountable. It would be necessary first that a remnant of the Jews should be with the Lord, as His friends, before the marriage. There is no bride here, because, in this case, Jerusalem on the earth will be the bride. I do not believe that it is a question of the marriage of the Lamb in Luke 12: 36; it is only a similitude of what the disciples would have to be as to their moral state.
As to Daniel 11, my present conviction is that from v 21 to 35 is history. The named person in these verses is not the last king, for historically it is not the case, but the last here (save at v 40) because it is him who has been the type of the Antichrist. At verses 36-39, it is the Antichrist himself. I have said, thinking of Daniel, that certain brethren considered verses 21-35 as speaking of the Antichrist, but that my conviction was what I have just said to you.
Having made these remarks in all liberty, so that you can use them as you wish, I can tell you that in general your chart has given me great pleasure and, if you put aside the explanation of the parables, I believe it would be profitable to the brethren. I do not impose all my thoughts on the parables but, in such a summary, this will lend more to controversy than to edification because the chart is presented to be consulted as a whole, and not as a treatise where the question would be debated. If you like to publish your thoughts under the form of a treatise, I do not see anything wrong at all, only I urge you to reconsider it first.
Greet all the brethren affectionately. May the peace of our God, His grace and mercy, be in abundance with you and all His dear children. In haste.
Your affectionate brother
Letter originally written in French, translated by Sosthenes, 2013
Click here for original – If you have any comments on the translation, feel free to let me know.
__________
[1] see the first note to the previous letter
[2] JND’s English and French Bibles have ‘manifested’ ; KJV has ‘shall appear’
[3] translated ‘revelation’ in JND’s English and French Bibles; KJV has ‘appear’ or ‘coming’
