he author
stated that in an early Greek manuscript, he had in his possession, it
was rendered in the nominative case, "_teen basileian ho Theos kai
Pater_." This would reverse the present translation, and cause it to
read--"_Then cometh the end when God even the Father shall deliver to
him (Christ) the kingdom_." The writer however argued, that as the
chapter referred to the general resurrection at the end of time, it
seemed to read far better as Christ's mediatoriol kingdom would then
terminate. This is mere assertion founded upon preconceived opinions.

I will, however, produce direct authority to support my views. I will
here present the reader with Wakefield's translation of this passage,
whose scholarship will be doubted by none:

"_Then will the end be, when God the Father delivereth up the kingdom
to him, during which he will destroy all dominion, and all authority
and power; for he will reign till he hath put every enemy under his
feet; and so the enemy death will be destroyed at last_."

Here, then, we perceive that instead of its referring to the end of
time, and to the Son's delivering up the kingdom to the Father, it
simply refers to the end of the Jewish dispensation, when the Father
delivered to his Son a kingdom, and when he _commenced_ his reign.
This gives harmony, strength and consistency, to the whole connection
closing with the 28th verse, and is in perfect agreement with the
whole tenor of revelation, which no where speaks of the end of time.
But according to the received translation, he first delivers up the
kingdom to God, then commences his reign, subdues all things, destroys
death, and is then subject to the Father! Let it be distinctly noticed
that this "_end_" is at Christ's coming. But where, I again ask, is
revealed a _third_ coming of our Saviour?

But again--The Ethiopic version also supports this rendering of the
above passage, in agreement with Wakefield, which I consider as
sufficient authority to settle the question, at least in my own mind.
But even were there no other authority, than the general tenor of
revelation, I should feel justified in my present exposition. To
contend for a _general_ resurrection, we are in the same predicament
with the orthodox in contending for a _general_ judgment.

The above harmonizes (in my apprehension) with every other part of
divine revelation, which embraces the testimony of the prophets, and
of Jesus Christ and his apostles, who all speak of t