The very advocates of the doctrine are convinced of this. Hence they have framed various and contradictory systems to explain the above descriptions. One has asserted that the earth will at that period _be rolled out_ of her orbit, and that this motion will cause an appearance as if the heavens passed away. Another has enveloped the world in a thick mist, by which the light of the moon, being changed, will appear of a red color. A third has appointed a comet, which in its passage to or from the sun, will approach this earth and involve it in flames. All have seen the difficulties, and all have attempted to overcome them by explanations; yet, after all, the task remains as arduous as ever. If we will, in despite of reason, found a doctrine on the literal meaning of the texts, we must adhere to that meaning; for to depart from it, is to confess its insufficiency: and if, on the other hand, we resolve to reject the literal sense in _one part_, we then acknowledge that it is not the true one, and that another must be sought for. If we are obliged to give up a literal falling of stars to the earth, and a literal appearance in the clouds of the air, then we must give up also, a literal burning and destruction of the universe; for if one part of the sentence is to be understood figuratively, so is the other. And that such destruction is a spiritual event, and not a natural one, will appear still further from the following observation. When two prophecies are found, couched in the same language, and nearly in the same words, one of which prophecies has been fulfilled, while the other yet remains to be accomplished; the manner in which the latter will be fulfilled must be determined by the previous fulfillment of the former.