There is no fact in history more clearly established than the fact of the “First Coming” of Christ. But as His “First Coming” did not fulfill all the prophecies associated with His “Coming,” it is evident that there must be another “Coming” to completely fulfill them. It was because the religious leaders of Christ’s day failed to distinguish between the prophecies that related to His “First Coming,” and those that related to His “Second Coming” that they rejected Him. Peter tells us (1 Pet. 1:10, 11) that the prophets themselves did not clearly perceive the difference between the “Sufferings” and “Glory” of Christ. That is, they did not see that there was a “TIME SPACE” between the “Cross” and the “Crown,” and that the “Cross” would precede the “Crown.” But we have no such excuse. We live on this side of the “Cross,” and we can readily pick out all the prophecies that were fulfilled at Christ’s “First Coming” and apply the remainder to His “Second Coming.” It is clear then that Christ’s “First Coming,” important as it was, is not the “doctrinal centre” of the Scriptures, that is, Christ’s “First Coming” was not the centre of a circle that contains all doctrine, but was one of the foci of on ellipse of which the other is the “SECOND COMING.”