insist upon the one hope of their calling, as it is disastrous to introduce

the hope of other callings into the dispensation of the Mystery'.  All that

Paul had hitherto taught concerning the Second Coming of Christ will be

surely fulfilled, even though consequent upon the failure of Israel and the

introduction of the Mystery, many new things have been revealed and other

phases of hope anticipated.  It is sometimes helpful in the endeavour to

discern things that differ, to use the process of elimination.  By this

process we can set aside whatever does not belong to the one hope of our

calling.  The hope of Matthew 24 with the sign of the Son of Man after the

great tribulation and after the setting up of the abomination of desolation,

is so evidently associated with Israel and the kingdom, that we have no need

to enter into details.  That phase of the Second Coming is not the hope of

the Mystery.

Passing to the Acts of the Apostles we discover that at the beginning

(Acts 1:6), at the end (Acts 28:20), and at intervals through the record

(Acts 3:19 -26; 26:6,7), the `one hope' is the hope of Israel.  This cannot

be the hope of the Mystery.  If we read the epistles of the same period we

find that 1 Thessalonians 4 associates the hope of that church with the

Archangel, and as the Archangel is Michael (Jude 9) and stands for the

children of Israel (Dan. 10:21; 12:1) we must not include 1 Thessalonians 4

in the Unity of the Spirit.  A reference to 2 Thessalonians 2, written to the

same church about the very subject of their hope, will show that it is

connected with the rise of the man of sin, and so separated from the

dispensation of the Mystery.  Romans 15:12,13 declares that the hope before

the church in the Acts was the rising of the root of Jesse to reign over the

Gentiles, a phase of hope quite foreign to the dispensation of the Mystery.

By the same token the teaching of Peter, James and John and the book of the

Revelation must be eliminated, as the `calling' of these epistles is most

definitely not that of the dispensation of the Mystery.  Throughout the

course of this investigation, one word has been in constant use in the

Scriptures quoted, the word parousia, translated `coming' 22 times and

`presence' twice.  This word parousia is found in Matthew 24:3,27,37,39; 1

Thessalonians 4:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; James 5:7; 2 Peter 1:16; and 1 John

2:28.  We are struck with the fact that while this one word is used in

Gospels and Epistles both of the Circumcision and of the Uncircumcision, it

is never used in the epistles of Paul written after Acts 28 with reference to

the hope.  If our profession of faith in the verbal inspiration of Scripture

be anything more than `profession' we shall see to it that we do not use this

word for the hope of the Body of Christ, and in keeping the sacred trust of

the Unity of the Spirit, we shall strenuously resist any attempt to introduce

that phase of hope where it has no rightful place.  If parousia is never

used, some word must take its place, and this we find to be the case.  In

Colossians 3 we have the word phaneroo `to manifest' or `to appear'.

`When Christ, Who is our life, shall be made manifest, then shall ye

also be made manifest with Him in glory' (Col. 3:4).

The word phaneroo is not limited to the hope of the Mystery, for

whenever and wherever the Lord `comes' or `is present' there will be an

`appearing'.  The two expressions come together in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 where

we have `the brightness of His coming' the epiphaneia of His parousia.  As

this is an exceptional manifestation of power and glory put forth at the

destruction of the Wicked one, no believer is likely to wish to intrude

there.  This, however, is the only occurrence of epiphaneia, or epiphaino in

any epistle except those written by Paul after Acts 28.  The occurrences of

epiphaneia are as follows: