These answers to the two chief difficulties associated with the interpretation here suggested of the thousand years may not be satisfactory to all; but it is submitted that they go far at least to meet them, and that in themselves they are neither unfair nor strained. Against one thing only must the author of this commentary enter his most decided protest,--the allegation that the interpretation here offered is gained by dispensing with textual criticism (?) and by sacrificing grammar to an idea. If there be one ground more than another upon which it rests, it is upon the strictest principles of historical interpretation. It ought only to be remembered that the idiosyncrasies of an author are as much a part of such interpretation as the literal meaning of his words; and that to that interpretation, if honestly and thoroughly conducted, the most deeply ingrained prejudices will in due time be compelled to submit. [549] Comp. Matt. xxii. 12. [550] Chap. xxi. 1. [551] Acts iii. 21. [552] 2 Pet. iii. 10, 13. [553] Rom. viii. 21-23. [554] 2 Cor. v. 4. [555] Comp. 1 Cor. xv. 44. [556] John iv. 24. [557] In connexion with the point here spoken of, reference may be made to an interesting and instructive paper by Canon Dale Stewart, Rector of Coulsdon, in _The Churchman_ for December, 1887. [558] Chap. xi. 18. [559] Matt. xi. 23, xvi. 18. [560] Isa. xxiv. 23. CHAPTER XVII. _THE NEW JERUSALEM._ REV. xxi. 1-xxii. 5. The first part of the final triumph of the Lamb has been accomplished, but the second has still to be unfolded. We are introduced to it by one of those preparatory or transition passages which have already frequently met us in the Apocalypse, and which connect themselves both with what precedes and with what follows:--