صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

that we do so for sufficient reasons. We are indebted mainly to Archbishop Usher, Prideaux, Josephus, Whiston, Townsend, and a few others, for our facts. We prefer to follow such profound men as these, to referring the reader to a host of almost irresponsible authorities. Whatever is excellent on the chronology of the eras reviewed, is embodied in the writings of these men. One thing we may be permitted to observe; that our chronology was not made to suit a theory, but, in the main, was decided upon before our theory was planned, and was, indeed, the very origin of it; but it is confirmed by the theory, and our theory is established by it.

SECTION II.

BEGINNING OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS.

1. Epoch of the Cyrus Decree.-The prophecy of the seventy weeks primarily designates the decree of Cyrus as their beginning epoch. In settling this point, we are necessarily governed by the strictest laws of just criticism, to avoid censure on the one part, and on the other to ascertain the truth. "To find the true sense of a written document, is often difficult and embarrassing, even when of recent date and in our own language, but the difficulty is greatly enhanced when it is of ancient date, and in a foreign tongue." Even the acts of our legislatures, framed with the most technical care, require judges of profound and discriminating learning to interpret them precisely. Yet there are rules of exposition which embody infallible principles of guidance to certainty; they are alike applicable to all species of writing, whether human or divine, and, if followed unvaryingly,

are certain to clear the meaning of the text of doubts, unless the composition be either ambiguous, or symbolic, or senseless. Two of these we introduce for our safeguards: the first is, that "the most simple and obvious sense of a passage is always its true one; " and the second is, that "no interpretation can be just which brings out of any passage a sense that is repugnant to the ascertained nature of things."-(Stewart, Horne, Buck, Bib. Rep.) In addition to these, another principle, of equal validity and importance, is, that every passage is to be taken in its literal sense, unless it be inconsistent with common sense to do so.

In applying these rules to Gabriel's annunciation to Daniel, it is at once obvious that if the words he uses are to be taken in their plain, obvious, and literal sense, that the decree of Cyrus, to restore and build Jerusalem, is that to which primary reference is had. Nothing can shake this position, unless it can be fully and unanswerably demonstrated, that, from the very nature of things, they can not by possibility apply to this decree.

In the first place, no one has ever yet attempted to deny this for any other reason than that, according to the common mode of interpreting the seventy weeks, they fail to equal the space of time between that decree and the death of Christ. But surely, every one can see that the simple and obvious meaning of the text can not be made to yield to a mere theory, however plausible. To allow this, is at once to abandon all hopes of arriving at the truth of any writing, and especially, to make the word of God of none effect. That it may be the more impressed upon the mind that the obvious import of the angel's message is a reference to the Cyrus decree, we would, secondly, place the case in its own simple light. More than one hundred and fifty years before the empire

*

of Cyrus, Isaiah prophesied, saying, "thus sayeth the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue the nations before him: I will loose the loins of kings to open before him the two-leaved gates, and the gates shall not be shut, * * that thou mayest know that I, the Lord, which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel. For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name." "That confirmeth the word of his servant, and performeth the counsel of his messengers; that sayeth to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Judah, Ye shall be built, and I will raise up the decayed places thereof. That sayeth to the deep Be dry, and I will dry up the rivers: that sayeth to Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem Thou shalt be built: and to the temple, Thy foundations shall be laid."-Is. xliv. xlv. Here is a plain statement, by God himself, that a great decree for the restoring and building of Jerusalem should be made by Cyrus: and the language is identical with that of Gabriel. Now, although there were three other decrees for the repairing of Jerusalem, yet none of them are rendered important by such preeminent prophetic emphasis as this of Cyrus.

Again; it is further evident, that this decree was to be given at the end of the seventy year's captivity; and for such a decree, Daniel was praying when Gabriel descended, as is evinced by the fact that he himself says, that he understood from Jeremiah, that at "the end of seventy years" the restoration of Israel should transpire; and he knew that it could not take place without an imperial decree to that effect. While praying, therefore, it is plain that he then expected the decree to be given by Cyrus, as he knew that the seventy years were about at

an end. That he was preparing for such a decree, is not only intimated in the language of answer to his prayer, sent through Gabriel; (for he says to him, "from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem, &c. ;") but it is as plain as need be, from the recorded portions of his supplications. Daniel knew, from the prophecy of Isaiah, that Cyrus was to give the desired command. Josephus, indeed, records that he showed that prophecy to Cyrus; and this is admitted by the learned. Everything conspires to show, that Daniel and Gabriel both referred to the same event. But, further, what great consolation could it be to Daniel, whom Gabriel came to comfort, to know that Gabriel had no reference to an immediate and anticipated decree, but spoke of some other one, to come eighty years after the captivity was to end. If Gabriel did not refer to the decree that Daniel did, it is plain that Daniel's prayer was not heard, which is contrary to the whole tenor of the angel's mission. The decree of Cyrus, recorded in the book of Ezra, was fully designed to embrace all that Daniel sought, and all that Isaiah foretold. But it is also clear, from history, that the Cyrus decree accomplished, ultimately, all that was predicted; this is allowed by Prideaux, who says that, "the publishing of the decree of Darius, A. A. C. 518, at Jerusalem, may be reckoned the thorough restoration of the Jewish state; and the people were in their cities, and the temple completed by A. A. C. 514." Had Gabriel appeared to Ezra, or Nehemiah, as he did to Daniel, there would be some propriety in limiting the weeks exclusively to their epochs; but as it is, there can be none. Besides these things, the decrees of Darius and Longimanus, were not for the restoring and building of Jerusalem, for Jerusalem was already built and restored; they were for carrying out

the original decree of Cyrus, and for reforming abuses; they were but codicils to the will of Cyrus, inspired by the eternal Spirit. The decree to Ezra, was, however, more of the nature of that of Cyrus than any other; and if use is to be made of it, as a starting point for the seventy weeks, it must be simply as the finishing of a decree period, extending from Cyrus to Ezra. But after all, it is fully admitted that the decree of Cyrus coincides with the revelation of Gabriel, in every point save one, and that it does not amply coincide with any other decree. But it is also admitted, that this one excepted point may also coincide. Now, it is infallibly true, that perfect coincidence is perfect fulfillment, and as the most perfect coincidences exist between the prophecy of Gabriel and the decree of Cyrus, we must admit that the seventy weeks were to begin with the decree of Cyrus, or that they never have been fulfilled. But none will be so mad as to take so absurd a position; hence, the unknown period of seventy weeks will properly be begun at the decree of Cyrus, and end with the crucifixion and the fall of Jewry. The reader will observe, that the seventy weeks must have a double ending, because the text affirms, that they were to end both at the crucifixion and at the fall of Jerusalem. The length of the period from the Cyrus decree to the invasion of Judea by Titus, was a little over 603 years; and from the decree to the crucifixion, was a little over 564 years. Now, the seventy weeks, if they are weeks of days, will make only 490 days; and if each of these days be taken for a solar year, it is plain that they will not coincide with either 564 years, or 603, and the text demands that they should coincide with both. There must, therefore, be some method of lengthening these wecks, so as to make them coincide with the above.

« السابقةمتابعة »