GENERAL REMARKS
The time in which we live appears to be rife with inventions. The rage for novelty
is unbounded. We marvel that Mohammed, aided by the sword, succeeded in converting
so many to his doctrine. But Mohammed acknowledged certain fundamental truths; and,
to use a nautical phrase, from them he took his departure. He took advantage of the
popular belief in Judaism and Christianity, and molded that belief into such shape as
answered his purpose. If a man heard the alarm of fire, and became convinced that a
conflagration was raging in some part of the city, it might be easy for an impostor to
persuade him that the house of Mr. A, Mr. B, or Mr. C, was burning, and even that one of
the tenant's family had perished in the flames. Convince a countryman that
the smallpox is raging in Boston, and you may locate the disorder in any part of the city
which suits your convenience.
The skeptic believes nothing, and is not deceived by false prophets. He rejects
the premises, and the argument falls to the ground. The true believer must watch, or
he will fall into error. The skeptic is a ship becalmed; the believer is a ship
under full headway: the helm must be nicely watched, or the vessel will run upon the
rocks. The Saviour told his church to beware of the lo heres and lo theres. No
such caution was necessary for the unbelieving Jews.
This is the day of strange things. We have phrenology, animal magnetism, sleeping
preaching, political crises, and the end of the world. Many modern inventions are
truly useful, for science pursues her steady and onward march; but science is always
followed by her shadow, which some mistake for the substance. The same may be said
of religion. The benign effects of Christianity upon the world, since its
first introduction by the blessed Redeemer, may be traced in all our social institutions;
but there is a shade even to this picture, for the recipients of religion are but men.
Hence we have to mourn over the consequences of bigotry, intolerance, and
fanaticism. Many deceivers have crept under the sacred mantle of religion, and Mr.
William Miller is one of them. Whether he has been first himself deceived, or
whether he is wittingly practising a pious fraud, is known to the Searcher of
hearts. I have but to point out sundry errors and weak places in his book;
sufficient, however to destroy his credibility, but not to prove that the end of the word
is distant; for "of that day knoweth no man"; and we are told that it is even
hidden from the angels.
If a man were to prophesy that, on a certain day during the next year, Washington city
would be destroyed by an earthquake, who could positively declare the contrary? I
pretend not to know that the world will survive the year 1843; but I think that Mr.
William Miller knows as little about it as I do.
Predictions similar to that which we are noticing have been made at various times.
About forty years ago it was currently reported, among a certain class of the
community, that a child, on first coming into the world, miraculously spoke, and declared
that, on a certain day, the consummation of all things would take place. A Mr.
Edwards, of New York, fixed upon a certain day in the year 1812 for that important event.
He published it through a speaking-trumpet about the streets, and many weak men and
women believed the report. The day came, and with it a tempest. In the country
many trees were blown down, and large hailstones smote the earth. Many fell on their
knees and prayed for mercy. The storm passed by, and their fears were at an
end. But it would be just to conclude that the effect of those fears was far from
salutary, and that they were calculated to work much mischief upon persons in delicate
health. The Almighty has wisely hidden that day from us. Let the man who would
rashly essay to raise the veil, ponder well upon the responsibility he assumes. Let
him not imagine that he does God service by terrifying the weak, and, in this way, driving
them into the church. Such was not the policy of the apostle, who cautioned the
flock not to be terrified by word or by epistle, as if the great day of the Lord was at
hand. Let those clergymen who willfully encourage Miller's imposture bear in mind
that the cause of truth can never be aided by deception; and that, if they should now
gain a few converts through his instrumentality, their loss will eventually be greater
than their gain. That portion of their wall which is built with his untempered
mortar will, when it fall, carry with it some of the more sound mason-work, and
"great will be the fall thereof." Those who are driven into the church by
groundless fears will prove sad converts when those fears are removed by the disgraceful
exposure of their prophet. A sectarian triumph of three years will hardly compensate
them for the reproof of their own consciences, and for making merchandise of men by
feigned words, or by withholding sound ones. Suppose that Christ had not risen from
the dead; then would the apostle's faith have been in vain; and how can it be expected
that those who have embraced religion on the credit of Mr. Miller's prediction will remain
firm in the faith after the imposture is exposed?
If Miller is desirous of making money, it appears to me that he might have chosen some
more harmless species of charlatanry than wandering about the country and frightening the
simple inhabitants. His manner of dealing with his subject is reprehensible.
He not only strains the meaning of the text, gives forced and unnatural constructions, but
also abounds in palpable falsehoods, and evinces a vindictive and intolerant spirit,
better becoming an imp of Satan than a follower of Jesus Christ our Lord.
I believe the man is a farmer; and he is doubtless very conversant with cattle of all
kinds; and therefore handles calves, rams, and horned beasts generally, like one who has
been brought up to the business. He frequently takes "a slide" from the
tip of one horn to the root of another, and, indeed, moves among them so recklessly as to
in manifest danger of impalement.
It must be a matter of surprise to those who have been seduced by the ravings of this
man, that no commentator, no learned or erudite man, since the establishment of
Christianity, has come to the same conclusions with himself. The truth is, that no
man of name and influence has yet had the presumption to point out that "day for
which all other days were made." It remained for this famous revivalist
to make the grand discovery, and that by the force of mathematical reasoning. It is
remarkable that none of the learned Jews, who are so conversant with the Old Scriptures,
that none of the apostles, fathers, or modern divines, have been beforehand with the
gentleman from Hampton. Of course, he proscribes all the parsons and priests of
modern date, and pronounces the D.D.'s a set of ambitious, skeptical, and avaricious
ignoramuses. Nothing is more useless than a liberal education, in the eyes of those
who never enjoyed its advantages. It is evident, however, that the gentleman is very
partial to arithmetic.
If Miller's calculations are correct, it is very evident that he is wiser than the
angels, the prophets, the apostles, and the saints. It was an angel who was
commanded to make Daniel understand the vision. Now, if that angel showed the
prophet that the world would be destroyed in 2300 years, then is it not true, as Christ
declared, that "of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels
which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."
We are also informed that, "In such an hour as you think not, the Son of man
cometh;" which will not be the case with the Millerites, if his prediction
shall be fulfilled.
The author of this work, in replying to William Miller, is principally actuated by a
desire to set truth in the foremost rank; and, in so doing, he feels called upon to answer
him in the plainest and simplest manner, without evasion or compromise.
Consequently, this work cannot be sectarian. Plain truth will do justice to all
sects, without favor or partiality. I feel myself the opponent of Miller's theory;
and, if he does injustice to any unpopular class of the community, and thus strengthens
his argument by appealing to common prejudice, even at the risk of being considered
partial to such injured class of the community. But this work is not written for the
purpose of building up any particular creed; and I hope its effect -- if it have
any effect -- will be rather to sink arbitrary distinctions, and establish that
universal charity which becomes us as brethren of the same great family.
As I have brought my labors to a conclusion in less that two weeks from the time when I
first saw Miller's book; and as I had previously no knowledge whatever of the ground he
took, or the arguments he used, it can occasion no surprise if my answer lacks the
completeness or finish which, under other circumstances, I should have regarded as
indispensable.
I saw this wolf ravaging the flock; I saw weak men and timid women turning pale at the
name of this ferocious animal, dismayed at his howlings, and yet following him in his
track: there was no time to select a patent rifle, and to cast the nicely-rounded
ball. I snatched down the rusty musket from over the mantle, and, thrusting in a
handful of slugs, pursued him to his den. Whether my shot has taken effect or not,
the public must judge.
Boston,
February, 1840.
MILLER OVERTHROWN.
-------------------------------
CHAPTER I.
The first lecture in Miller's book appears designed to prove that there will be a day of
judgment and resurrection of the dead, when the world will be destroyed by fire. In
this point, our author does not differ from many other professing Christians; and I shall
not examine his doctrines, only in so far as they are peculiar to himself. Yet, even
in the first lecture, there are some things worthy of notice. He states that,
"at the destined hour," all things on earth shall be purged and cleansed by
fire; that the earth shall rise from its ashes pure and sanctified, and that here
the Lord Jesus shall reign in person, and all his holy saints with him. At this
time, the wicked will be destroyed, together with the "antichristian beast,"
whose civil power, he says, is already destroyed, but which shall now be burned with fire,
and her flesh given to the dogs. Our author gloats over the reeking limbs of this
beast very much as if he were one of those devouring dogs himself; and certainly no
animal, either human or bestial, ever betrayed the same exulting ferocity over a fallen
enemy which this man does in the prospect of witnessing the destruction and utter despair
of our Catholic neighbors. It is to be feared that he knows not what manner of
spirit he is of.
As a sample of the general unfairness which characterizes Miller's work, let the reader
take the following: In his very first lecture, he speaks of Christ's prophecy respecting
the destruction of the temple, and quotes largely from the 24th chapter of Matthew, to
prove that his views of a final day of judgment are orthodox. After giving us all
which he thinks will strengthen his argument, he carefully omits the 36th verse:
But of that day and hour knoweth no man; no, not the angels of heaven, but my
Father only.
Why does this great advocate of the Bible so lightly skip over the above verse?
It came directly in his way, and required an explanation. He is continually bawling
about the importance of those texts which he imagines to be favorable to his own views,
but brushes away the others as if unworthy of his notice. Does not this prove that
the man is going about to establish his own doctrines, and not the doctrines which are
taught in holy Scripture? What confidence can be placed in so uncandid a
commentator? Has he ever read that "the Scripture is of no private
interpretation?" If so, how dare he thus pick and cull in order to make it bend
to his individual opinions? Is this the course of an honest man?
In this lecture there are many texts brought from the Old Testament which evidently
have no allusion to the last day; but they are all worked in, and harnessed to his team,
without regard to reason or propriety. What does the reader think of the following
texts? They are unceremoniously applied to the day of final judgment:
Balaam was constrained to admit, "Out of Jacob shall he that shall have
dominion, and shall destroy him that remaineth of the city," plainly referring to the
judgment day; for he says, "Alas! who shall live when God doeth this?"
Our author says,
And Moses as plainly refers to this day in Deut. xxxii. 43: "Rejoice, O ye
nations, with his people; for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render
vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful to his land and to his people."
Such texts are brought forward in support of the belief in a general judgment, and the
destruction of this globe by fire.
It is plain that the gentleman belongs to the old school of theologians who thrived in
Scotland in the time of Oliver Cromwell. One of those worthies preached with great
zeal against gayety of apparel and personal decorations. It was at that time common
with the bucks or dandies to wear a bunch of hair on top of the forehead, which they
styled the top-knot. The preacher gave out his text: "Let him that is on the
house-top not come down." He then expressed his intention of improving on the
latter part of the text, and immediately vociferated, in tones of thunder, "Top-not,
come down!" From this portion of Scripture he proved, to the satisfaction of
the brethren, that the Saviour had always held top-knots in great detestation, and that
all who were found with those crowns of Satan on their heads at the great day of
vengeance, would be burnt up like stubble.
Who can fail to trace the resemblance between the anti-top-knot preacher and the
gentleman from Hampton when he reads the following text, brought forward in support of the
doctrine of a general judgment, and the destruction of the world by fire, (Mal. iv. 2):
But unto you that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing
in his wings, and ye shall go forth and grow up as calves of the stall.
It is certainly very difficult to understand this passage as our author does, unless we
infer from it the destruction of the world on the ground that calves are fatted for the
slaughter.
Before concluding the lecture, our author warns his readers against the sin of unbelief
-- the sin of disbelieving him. He evidently regards himself as
one of the watchmen, now commissioned to give the midnight cry, "Behold, the
bridegroom cometh!" Eternal punishment is threatened against those who
disregard the warning voice of Mr. Miller, and those who will not adopt his
interpretations of the prophecies! Presently we shall hear him storming about the
infallibility of the pope; whereas it is notorious that no pope ever presumed to name the
day on which the world should be destroyed. But all men are menaced with eternal
damnation who do not acknowledge the infallibility of Mr. William Miller, the arithmetical
prophet!
This lecture concludes with an earnest exhortation to the sinner to repent; and, in
short, the strain of the whole book will lead many to believe that the writer has been set
on by certain mercenary sectarians, to get up an excitement and fill their meeting-houses.
There is quite as much fraud as fanaticism in this business.
CHAPTER II.
In his second lecture the impostor undertakes to explain "the first
resurrection." He incorrectly states that "the word resurrection is
nowhere used in a figurative sense." How does he understand the following:
I am the resurrection and the life: if a man believe in me, though he were dead,
yet shall he live.
Does our author infer that Jesus had already risen from the dead, or that those who do
not believe in Christ will be annihilated? Is not the life here spoken of a
spiritual one; and does not the Saviour mean to say that he is the sovereign power which
animates those who are dead in trespasses and sins? Read John iii. 36.
"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth
not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
I cannot believe that Miller has accidentally overlooked these texts; but I am
persuaded that he is determined to build up a theory, in defiance both of Scripture and
common sense. Now when a man does this, he places himself above the Scripture,
subjecting revelation to his own private judgment. He places himself above all
that is called God, and, sitting in the temple of God, does, in effect, give out that he
is God.
The arrogant assumptions of this man are beyond parallel. He commands all men to
believe him, on pain of damnation, and triumphs over the prospective wailings of sinners,
as if he expected to be clad in a fire-proof jacket when the immense bonfire should take
place.
That being raised into newness of life is figuratively spoken of as a resurrection,
must be evident to every reader who will turn to Rom. vi. 4-13:
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was
raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness
of life. For, if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we
shall also in the likeness of his resurrection. Knowing this, that our old
man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we
should not serve sin; for he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with
Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him; knowing that Christ, being raised
from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him: for in that he died,
he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye
also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus
Christ our Lord. Let not sin, therefore, reign in your mortal body, that ye should
obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from
the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
Here we perceive that Christ declared himself to be "the resurrection and the
life," and Paul illustrates and explains the figure. But this would not suit
Mr. Miller's theory; therefore plain Scripture testimony must be thrust aside to make way
for 1843.
After saying that the righteous will be raised a thousand years before the wicked, and
that they will live a thousand years upon the earth in a happy and holy state, he quotes
from Rev. xx. 1. He says that the angel who came down from heaven and bound Satan a
thousand years was the Lord Jesus himself. We object to this, on the ground
that all the angels are but ministers of Christ. He now describes the reign of the
saints on earth after the world has been purified by fire, and the devil pinioned.
Here we have Miller's first resurrection. He continues:
Then comes in our text, which has and will be explained in the lecture, 7th
verse: "And, when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his
prison."
He adds:
We may reasonably expect that, when Satan is let loose, all the damned spirits
are let loose with him; and it has been strongly implied they were to live again in the
body at the end of the thousand years, 8th verse: "And shall go out," that is,
Satan, "to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth."
In order to show that, at the time of loosing Satan, there were none but holy saints
upon the earth, our author finds it necessary to let loose all the damned spirits with
him. However necessary this may be to prove Miller's theory, we find no such thing
in the Scriptures; but we do read, in the last chapter of Revelations, 18th verse
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this
book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are
written in this book.
Concerning the enlargement of Satan, the Scripture saith, verses 7, 8,
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his
prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four
quarters of the earth, Gog and Mogog, to gather them together to battle; the number of
whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up the breadth of the earth, and
compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city, &c.
Here we are distinctly taught that the saints will not inhabit the whole earth, and
that the whole earth will not be pure and regenerated; for all save the city is inhabited
by the wicked nations. But these wicked insurgents are slain by fire from heaven;
and this is what our author terms "the second death;" for he states that what
follows is only another view of the same things. So far from that, what follows is a
continuation of the vision; and it is not until after the general resurrection of the dead
that the second death occurs, as the apostle testifies, verse 14: "And death and hell
were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."
A more willful perversion of Scripture can hardly be conceived. The text says
that fire came down from heaven and devoured the belligerent sinners, and immediately
continues:
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and
brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented
day and night forever and forever.
On the strength of this, our dishonest commentator adds:
In this verse the final condemnation of the wicked, soul and body, is
given, and the last that God has seen fit to reveal concerning them to us, that they are
cast into everlasting torment.
Not a syllable is here said about casting the wicked into everlasting
torment. We learn that the wicked nations were devoured by fire from heaven;
but that Satan, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone.
Here is not, therefore, the judgment of the wicked; and the apostle goes on to speak of
the final judgment. Our author follows the apostle through what he terms his second
vision, until the sea has given up her dead, and death and hell have surrendered up their
inhabitants to be judged; and then says:
I conclude the apostle, after he had seen the righteous dead raised, small and
great, and stand before God, and saw the book of life open to justify them, and saw them
judged and rewarded, he then GLIDES down to the end of the thousand
years, and beheld the wicked dead given up by those elements and places wherein they had
been confined, during the millennial period, to be judged in the flesh, every man
according to his works.
Had the apostle been as slippery a sinner as himself, he might have glided
through a thousand years in this manner, and have kept his own counsel in the mean
time. The gentleman is very sensible of the difficulty into which he has plunged
himself, and adds:
This only can reconcile some of those conflicting passages (or seemingly so to
us) concerning the resurrection; and I cannot see any impropriety in thus understanding
these prophecies, for it is the common manner of the prophets, here a little and there a
little.
It is certainly the common manner of Mr. Miller to pick out "here a little
and there a little," in order to build up a theory which the whole tenor of Scripture
absolutely condemns; and, when he speaks of "conflicting passages," the reader
must see that this chapter contains passages which conflict with nothing but chimerical
theories like that under examination. Hence the necessity of gliding over a
thousand years, as well as a thousand passages, in order to establish the crude system of
Miller.
Our author shows a most indecent haste to have the "antichristian beast"
destroyed, and all the wicked safely housed in hell. We cannot avoid applying to him
the words of Capt. Thornton to Baillie Nicoll Jarvie, who counseled the immediate
execution of the Highland scout: "Be patient, sir; for, when it comes your own turn
to be hanged, you will be in no such ------ hurry!"
Our author regales himself with the following comfortable reflections:
Here the children of the kingdom are persecuted, tormented, perplexed, cast
down; but, in the kingdom of God, their enemies are all slain; they are comforted,
glorified, justified, exalted, and not a dog to move his tongue.
Our author doubtless expects to take his stand among the happy hosts: his skill in
arithmetic alone ought to entitle him to that distinction; while his intense hatred of
sinners and ten-horned animals gives evidence that he has triumphed over human nature.
I hazard the opinion that when it shall please God to plunge sinners into the gulf of
eternal woe, he can do it without any of Mr. Miller's assistance; and the extreme
officiousness of that gentleman, in this respect, would lead a stranger to mistake him for
one of the tormenting imps of the lower regions, instead of an angel of the heavenly
kingdom. There are in this lecture some rare commentaries on passages of holy writ;
but I cannot now pause to edify the reader with gleanings. The harvest is so rich,
that we can well spare those precious droppings of the wheat sheaves.
I would here remark that nothing is more easy than the founding of a plausible theory
from the Scriptures, so that you exercise a little ingenuity. By choosing such texts
as suit your purposes, explaining some of them literally, and others figuratively, now and
then appealing to the prejudices of the community, and anon exciting their fears, you may
hammer out a system as unlike the truth as possible; yet which; although full of holes,
like the cobweb, may yet entangle such flies as have not the strength of wing to force a
passage through it.
CHAPTER III.
We are now to examine Mr. Miller as an arithmetician; and, although the sum which he
compasses, and proves to his own satisfaction, is a very simple one, yet let it be
remembered that the attraction of gravitation was discovered by so simple a circumstance
as the fall of a ripe apple; and that apples have fallen ever since the world was
created. This old earth has been careering through the fields of ether some six
thousand years; yet she has, until now, been without a navigator to keep her reckoning,
and admonish the crew and passengers when she had nearly arrived at the end of her voyage.
The gentleman introduces his third lecture with the following text:
Dan. viii. 13, 14. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said
unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily
sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to
be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand three hundred days:
then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
Our author adds, "or, justified, as it might have been translated."
Our author begins to explain what is meant in the text by "the daily
sacrifice." He says,
It is very evident, when we carefully examine our text, that it is to be
understood as referring to pagan and papal rites; for it stands coupled with "the
abomination of desolation," and performs the same acts, such as are ascribed to the
papal abomination -- "to give both the sanctuary and host to be trodden
under foot."
He says,
See also Rev. xi. 2 : "But the court which is without the temple leave out,
and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles; and the holly city shall they tread
under foot forty and two months." This last text only has reference to the
papal beast, which was the image of the pagan.
It is well to state here that we are rather diffident about defining the meaning of the
Scripture texts: it will be perceived that our author has no scruples on that head.
He has a perfect knowledge of the Bible, and has ciphered it all out.
Our author says that by the sanctuary we must understand the temple at
Jerusalem, and those who worshipped therein; and that by the host we must
understand the Christian church, "who worship in the outer court," and are said
to be strangers and pilgrims on the earth, having no continual places, &c.
This is certainly figurative enough; and it is in this way that the Bible may be made
to mean anything. At the time that Daniel saw this vision, he was a captive in
Babylon. He was concerned about his own people and their worship, and inquired, with
the very natural anxiety of a pious young man, how long the sanctuary should be violated;
and he was answered, two thousand and three hundred days, which was the whole time in
which Antiochus persecuted his people, he being cut off by death at the end of six years
and nearly four months from the time that he commenced his persecutions. With
respect to the word host, it is no more allusion to the Christians than it has to
Jefferson's gun-boats, and is sometimes translated the strength. Some zealous men,
in their eagerness to prove the divine mission of the Messiah, would make it appear that
the Jewish prophets knew more about the future condition of the Christian church than did
the apostles themselves.
But it is needful that our author should give a peculiar meaning to the text --
otherwise 2300 days could not stand for 2300 years -- and fix the time for the
resurrection in 1843.
Nevertheless, we ought to be very cautious about disputing Mr. Miller, when he brings
forward such powerful proofs as the following:
What must we understand by days? In the prophecy of Daniel, it is
invariably to be reckoned years; for God hath so ordered the prophets to reckon
days. Num. xiv. 34. "After the number of days in which you searched the
land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall you bear your iniquities, even forty
years." Ezek. iv. 5,6. "For I have laid upon thee the years of their
iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days; so shalt
thou bear the iniquity of the house of Israel. And when thou hast accomplished them,
lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty
days: I have appointed thee each day for a year." In these passages we prove
the command of God. We will also show that it was so called in the days of Jacob,
when he served for Rachel. Gen. xxix. 27. "Fulfill her week, (seven
days,) and we will give thee this also, for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet
other seven years."
After this, who can entertain a doubt that Jonah was three years in the whale's
belly? By that time, he must have been in a fine condition for gliding and
sliding. The people of Ninevah took time by the forelock in performing their works
of penance, seeing that the term of safety extended to forty years. Our author
might, in order to prove some other point, quote from the scriptures, 2 Pet. iii. 8:
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day with the Lord as a
thousand years, and a thousand years as one day:" and this declaration is made by St.
Peter immediately after affirming that the heavens and the earth were "reserved unto
fire against the day of judgment and perdition of unholy men."
Our author, however, is resolved that one day shall invariably mean one year. On
such brittle premises does Mr. Miller build up his system, and, with no better seal to his
mission, wanders about the country, alarming the weak, and disgusting the wise.
But he says that "the daily sacrifice" applies to pagan and papal rites; for
it stands coupled with "the abomination of desolation." The latter phrase
may be applied to more than one event; such as that under Antiochus; also when the Jewish
temple was razed by the Romans; and also anti-Christ, who, it is supposed, will come at
some future day, near the consummation of all things: but if the "Roman beast' was
anti-Christ, then should the world have been destroyed a thousand years ago. There
are no Papal rites to which the term "daily sacrifice" could allude. It
can be applied only to a custom among pagans and Jews.
The text from Revelations was of course written by St. John, while on the island of
Patmos, whither he had been banished; and it probably alludes to the fact than the pagan
persecutors always surrounded the true worshippers, who were obliged to secrete themselves
in sepulchers, caves, and other secret places, where they reared their altars and attended
to their religious duties; but of this there is no certainty.
Our author next slides into the vision of Nebuchadnezzar's image, and then the vision
of the four beasts. The latter beast probably means pagan Rome; and the text which
Miller quotes from Dan. vii. 21, 22, probably alludes to the downfall of the pagan power,
and the triumph of Christianity under Constantine:
I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against
them, until the Ancient of days came, [i.e. God arose for their deliverance,] and judgment
was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the
kingdom.
This will be more apparent when we reflect that the prophet is speaking of one of the
kingdoms of this world, and not of an immortal and supernatural existence. It is not
probable that these prophesies have any allusion to the sins of the Christians, as our
author, in the plenitude of his sectarianism, would have us believe.
Our author mentions the seventy weeks, previous to the cutting off of the Messiah, each
day counting one year; and he argues from this that the 2300 days should be reckoned 2300
years. But the former prophesy alluded to a distant event, and an event of great and
surpassing importance; while the latter was one in which Daniel was peculiarly interested,
as an Israelite. I will illustrate this: The angel might have used the term seventy
weeks -- one day for a year -- when speaking of the Messiah; but if Daniel
had asked him how long it would be before he heard from Jerusalem and from his relatives
there, he would have been answered in a more familiar style. In speaking of a young
man recently deceased, we might say, "he was cut off in the morning of life,"
thus applying phrase proper to the early part of the day to a term of years; but if it was
a colt that had died, we should say, "he was two years old." The more
important the prophecy, the more likely would the angel be to speak in mystical terms.
Being willing to assist our author all we can, we will mention in passing, a discovery
of our own, although he may have already found it out. According to his calculation,
there were just as many weeks of years before the birth of Christ as there will be months
of years when the world is destroyed. If there were 534 years from the time that the
angel gave his last instructions to Daniel, up to the birth of Christ, there were 76 weeks
and a fraction inclusive. Now 2300 years from the time that Daniel held his
conversation with the angel are 76 months of years and a fraction inclusive. This is
a coincidence which the Millerites may not all have noticed.
But let us see if we cannot find another coincidence, which will serve to show that Mr.
Miller might have explained the vision, without burning us all up in 1843. We have
said that if the 2300 days were understood literally, it would make six years and nearly
four months -- the term of Antiochus's persecutions. But, if we reckon them
2300 weeks, it will make 44 years, the period when "the sanctuary was cleansed,"
and when, according to Mr. Miller's own showing, Ezra had liberty to build
Jerusalem. To use our author's words, -- "Here, then, we find the
fulfillment of what the angel told Daniel would be done under the command that would begin
the seventy weeks, and which is the same thing, the vision."
Let us examine this point a little. The angel tells Daniel that seventy weeks (of
years) after the order goes forth to build Jerusalem, the death of Christ would be
consummated. But Daniel had desired to know how long Jerusalem should be in the
power of the foe, and her sanctuary profaned. He is answered, 2300 days --
not of years but of weeks -- and in just 44 years after this conversation, the
decree is accordingly given to rebuild Jerusalem, to purify the sanctuary, and restore the
true worship. This is one theory, and I think it is a much more easy and natural one
than that of the gentlemen from Hampton; but neither of us may be right. Let the
reader turn to chapter and verse, and compare what is here written with Scripture itself.
After a great deal of senseless and incoherent raving about horns, images, and beasts,
which serves but to show the acrimony of the author's zeal, and the ferociousness of his
disposition, the third lecture closes with an address to the sinner. I close this
chapter by an address to the arithmetical saint himself. Go home, sir, to your
closet, fall on your knees, pray God to forgive you for all that you have charged upon
better men than yourself; and, above all, seek to obtain a clean heart, purged from
rancorous sectarianism, falsehood, and fiend-like enmity. You are, at present, in
the gall of bitterness, and the bond of iniquity.
CHAPTER IV.
Mr. Miller commences his fourth lecture with the following text:
Dan. ix. 24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy
holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make
reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the
vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.
Our author goes on to say, that
This text furnished Simeon, Anna, Nathaniel, and others, with a strong faith
that they should see the consolation of Israel.
Whether it was this text or the Holy Ghost which enabled those faithful ones to discern
the Messiah in Jesus of Nazareth, I will not pretend to decide; but it is most singular
that neither of them, nor of the disciples, nor of the scribes or Pharisees, nor of the
early promulgators of the gospel, understood the "cleansing of the sanctuary" in
2300 days to mean the destruction of the world and the resurrection in 1843. It is
plain that the disciples understood no such thing, although they were conversant with the
Jewish scriptures, and with the prophet Daniel in an especial manner. They demanded
of Christ when the end of the world should come. In speaking of the destruction of
Jerusalem, the Saviour says:
But when you shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the
prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them
that be in Judea flee to the mountains.
Of course this alludes to the Roman devastations, and has nothing to do with the end of
the world; and the "abominations of desolation" implies the heathen sacrilege,
or desecration of the holy temple and the holy city, which they utterly destroyed.
The Saviour then goes on -- as Mr. Miller believes -- to describe the
consummation of all terrestrial things, and adds: "But of that day and that hour
knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father." It therefore appears that, however the good men and women may have
been enlightened by Daniel's vision, with respect to the time of the Savior's appearance
on earth, neither they nor any other person -- not even the angels -- could
draw from that vision, any information touching the time when the world should be
destroyed. But if the angels knew not, as Christ expressly says, how then could the
angels have revealed the secret to Daniel? All this our author passes by in silence;
and pronounces the sentence of endless damnation on such as prefer the testimony of the
Scripture to his own revival-hatching opinion. I have heard of popes who
excommunicated men for denying the faith of many centuries; but this modern pope would
send us all to perdition for differing from him in his private interpretation of
the Scriptures; and I have not a shadow of doubt, that, if he possessed the power, he
would imprison and burn all such as disputed the orthodoxy invented by himself.
The holy and inspired apostles did not pretend to know when the resurrection would take
place. How unfortunate that they had not the key to the old Scriptures, which has
since been found by William Miller of Hampton! St. Paul says, in writing to the
Thessalonians,
But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto
you, for yourselves know perfectly, that the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the
night, to him and to all.
Consequently he knew nothing of the time when he should come. He had never ciphered
out Daniel's vision. Again, Paul writes:
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by our
gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither
by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
Why, what an oversight in Paul! Did he not know that this was the way to throw
cold water upon revivals, and to quiet people's minds, when they ought to be stirred up by
impending horrors? Ah! but Paul knew nothing of Mr. Miller's 2300 days; he was very
dull at figures, because he had not all the light which the thousand and one sects of this
day enjoy.
The most holy St. Peter says, in his second General Epistle:
But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store,
reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But,
beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand
years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise
as some count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should
perish, but that all should come to repentance. (Chap. iii. 7-9.)
Who can gather from the above, that St. Peter entertained any opinion with regard to
the time? In fact, this was hidden even from the inspired apostles, and they were
left to form their own conjectures. From men and angels, as Christ says, that day
was hidden. The holy apostles were taught by the Holy Ghost all that was needful for
them and the church in that day; and they neither wrote nor asserted any thing contrary to
the truth; but it was not given them to know when the world would be
destroyed. Even the Son of man received not that from his Father, as one of the
truths to be communicated to us. In the bosom of that eternal Being, whose fiat
spoke myriad's of worlds into existence, reposes the dread secret; and neither apostle,
nor angel, nor martyr, nor saint, was ever intrusted with its keeping -- known only
to God. But William Miller has ferreted it out: he has done it by figures.
Everyone knows that "figures never lie" -- consequently the 2300 days
must inevitably stand for 2300 years; and "cleansing the sanctuary" at Jerusalem
must imply the burning up of the world, and a grand auto de fe of all who do
not believe in the infallibility of William Miller, the revivalist.
Our author says it was by this text -- the one quoted in the beginning of this
chapter -- that Caiaphas, the high-priest, knew it was expedient for Jesus to die.
And one of them named Caiaphas, being high-priest that same year, said unto
them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us that one man should
die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. (John xi. 49, 50.)
What shall we say to this abominable profanation of holy Scripture! Here we are
told by Mr. Miller that the high-priest put to death the Lord of life and glory, knowing
him to be the Messiah, the Prince of peace, the promised Shiloh ! ! Thus has this
desperate commentator made the Jews the willful murderer of their Messiah, and branded the
Son of God on the cross with falsehood; for he expressly says in his intercession
for them, "They know not what they do."
The prophecy of Daniel concerning Christ is so full, that no one could have mistaken
the true character of Jesus Christ, had he supposed those passages to apply to him.
Now Miller says that Jesus was cut off by the Jews, when the Jews knew that he was
their Messiah and the Holy One of God! Monstrous thought! The Jews did not
believe that Christ Jesus was the person spoken of by the prophet, and they put him to
death for professing to be the Son of God and the king of the Jews. We might almost
expect this commentator, in the next place, to fling the ear of the high-priest's
servant into our teeth, as scriptural proof that the wicked are to be cut off in
1843.
After a little more wrestling of Scripture, and bold assertion, the gentleman closes
his fourth lecture, as usual, by warning sinners of the approach of the great day.
This, like a woman's postscript, is always meant to be the most important and effectual
part of the lecture -- the grand finale -- and sufficiently explains the
object of the writer in putting together such a mass of blasphemy and nonsense.
CHAPTER V.
The fifth lecture commences with this text:
Rev. xiii. 18. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count
the number of the beast; for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred
three score and six.
Our author then goes on as follows:
This text has caused as much speculation as any text in the whole Bible; rivers
of ink have been shed in trying to explain its meaning; brains have been addled in trying
to find some great mystery which the wisdom of this world, as was supposed, could only
discover; and, in trying to be wise above what was written, men have lost their balance,
and fell into absurdities too ridiculous to mention.
You need not mention them; for your illustration is sufficiently ample without notes or
appenda; if, indeed, there may not be more fraud than fanaticism in your attempts
to disturb the public mind. It must be conceded that this lecture smacks more
strongly of the former ingredient than of the latter one.
In the plenitude of his egregious egotism, he proposes,
1. To show what wisdom it is
of which the text speaks.
2. To speak of the beast num-
bered, and show what beast.
3. The number, and what we
may understand by it.
First, -- he says that the wisdom here spoken of is not the wisdom of men, and
proves by several texts that human wisdom is of small value, when brought to bear upon
religious matters. From all of this, we may conclude that he regards arithmetic as a
divine science.
Secondly, -- the beast numbered in the text. He here says that it is the
first beast, mentioned in the fore part of the same chapter. He says, --
See our context, 12th verse: "And he exerciseth all the power of the first
beast before him;" that is, the beast which John saw come up out of the sea, (the
Roman government,) "having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns,
and upon his head the name of blasphemy; and the beast which I saw was like unto a
leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion;
and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority." By this
beast, I understand the same as Daniel's fourth kingdom, the Roman government; by
"names of blasphemy," I understand a mode of worship which would be idolatrous
or blasphemous; by the dragon, we must understand the civil power of the same government
giving its power to the ecclesiastical beast, whether pagan or papal. 3d verse:
"And I saw one of his heads of [blasphemy, pagan] as it were wounded to death; and
his deadly wound was healed, [by the substitution of the papal blasphemous head,] and all
the world wondered after the beast."
Here we perceive that a wounded head may be healed by the substitution of another
head. If our author has really the skill to do this thing, what a capital surgeon he
would have been in France, at the time the guillotine was doing its work!
It was necessary for our author to identify the beast numbered with the first beast, in
order that he might apply a verse to him which speaks of the first beast.
Accordingly, he slides over the second beast, and does not stop until he gets back
to the tenth verse:
He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity;
he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the
faith and patience of the saints.
On the strength of this, our author says of the first beast:
In the tenth verse, he shows us how this civil power should be destroyed, by
captivity and the sword; and this was fulfilled in 1798, when the pope was carried a
captive into France, and the states of Italy were conquered by the sword of the French
army.
A mighty event, truly, to make so much ado about! It is true that all Europe felt
the edge of Napoleon's sword; but I do not know why the war in Italy should have
particularly engaged the attention of the evangelist. But any thing answers our
author's purpose.
There is great incongruity in our author's explanations here. He not only slides,
but seems to perform that evolution which the lads term cutting a pigeon-wing, on
skates.
The gentleman states that when the beast received the second head, and his wounded one
was thus made whole, the Roman government became papal; and that it was subsequently
visited by the sword and captivity. The second beast is next spoken of by the
apostle, and the chapter ends with the text in the beginning of this chapter. This
text he carries back to the first beast, and applies it to him, with his old head on his
shoulders, in order to show that it means pagan Rome, and that her number was 666.
He then goes on to prove that the last vestige of paganism vanished from the Roman
empire 666 years from the period when the Romans became connected with the Jews, and, by
becoming connected with them, fell under the eye of prophecy. Had the number fallen
short of 666, Miller would have shown us that the beast was to remain that number of years
after John had the vision, or after some other time convenient for his purpose. But
this is most lame; for if this number alludes to the number of years which the beast with
ten horns and seven heads should reign or exist, how can the mere wounding of
one of his heads, which wound was healed, be the exit or downfall of the whole beast,
with seven heads? What if one man should say that the number of another man's years
was forty, when it could be proved that he had merely bruised one of his limbs at the age
of forty years, and that limb had been healed again, and he had lived afterward to the age
of seventy?
In this lecture we find little said about the second beast with horns like a
lamb. It appears, however, that the first beast is living, and in good case, while
the second beast is making an image to him -- to "the beast which had the
wound by a sword and did live." If so, we have popery and paganism both
existing at once; but we learn that paganism was put to death, and died in earnest, in the
year 508. So says our author. And he endeavors to make this consistent, by
bringing up the last verse of the chapter. We learn that the wounded head was truly healed,
and that the first beast lived. Now our gentleman knows that paganism did not live;
so he tries to kill him with the last verse. But, if the last verse applies to the
length of time which the beast actually lived, why does our author pretend that it applies
to the time which he had lived previous to receiving the wound?
Indeed, here is something incomprehensible. He says that one of the beast's heads
was wounded to death, and that this wound was inflicted on paganism. Now the apostle
tells us that "his deadly wound was healed"; not that another head was
substituted. Our author confounds the wound in this head with the death of the
beast; but the beast recovered, and did not die. Our author, in speaking of the
wound inflicted on one of the beast's heads, says:
And that in the year 496, Clovis, king of France, was converted and baptized
into the Christian faith, and that the remainder of these kings (pagan kings) embraced the
religion of Christ shortly after, the last of which was christianized in the year 508, and
of course paganism ceased, having lost its head by the power of the sword, or kings who
wield the sword.
This, he says, makes up the 666 years since pagan Rome had made her league with the
Jews; and this is the number of the first beast, or the term of her existence since the
league.
Now let us read the testimony of Scripture on this subject, and see whether the number
of the first beast was 666 years or not, according to the author's calculation:
And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death: and his deadly wound was
healed; and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon
which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto
the beast? Who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a
mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty
and two months.
Now Miller says that the end of this beast was in AD 508; but the Scripture says he had
power to continue forty-two months; and Miller says that forty-two months stand for 1260
years. Miller also says, as quoted above, that paganism ceased in 508, having lost
its head. But the Scripture says its head was healed.
He also says that the forty-two months applies to the image beast; but so
strange an assertion can best be answered by requesting the reader to turn to the chapter
itself. It is plain that the first beast is alive through all the operations of the
second beast.
Even admitting that the last verse in the chapter applies to the first beast, it cannot
be intended to define the number of years that he lived; because the beast lived after
receiving the wound, at which period the 666 years came to an end. Indeed, our
author himself says that "the deadly wound was healed, [by the substitution of the
papal blasphemous head,] and all the world wondered after the beast." What has
the substitution of this new head to do with the lifetime of the beast -- the
number of his years? The Scripture says that the beast continued to live, and
"his deadly wound was healed"; so that 666 years were not the number of his
years, nor anything like it. It may be doubted whether this number of 666 alludes to
years at all. The words of Scripture are, --
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the
beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath
understanding count the number of the beast; for it is the number of a man; and his number
is six hundred three-score and six.
The "number of the beast" probably refers the number of his name as it were
upon a roll with other names, and numbered from the top of the roll. Such number
would be "the number of the beast."
I again quote from the fifth lecture:
Rev. xviii. 7: "And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou
marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth
her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. The beast that thou sawest was, and
is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition; and they that
dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names are not written in the book of life from the
foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet
is."
"That was," pagan Rome before John saw his vision; "and is
not," yet in its last stage of papal Rome; "and yet is," in the same
spirit; for papal Rome is but an image of paganism, as says the apostle, 2 Thess. ii. 6,7:
"And now ye know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time, for the
mystery of iniquity doth already work." And 1 John ii. 18: "Little
children, it is the last time, and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now
are there many antichrists, whereby we know it is the last time."
Thus far we have followed our author. Now let us examine his positions.
The apostle had just been speaking of Babylon, for such was the figurative name applied
to pagan Rome, from her resemblance to ancient Babylon. It appears to me that, in
order to carry out and explain this figure, he says the beast "that was,"
meaning old Babylon, which was at that time a heap of ruins; "and is not, because she
had been many years a desolate place; "and yet is," which means that she had
revived in her prototype, pagan and persecuting Rome. Far be it from me to explain
the book of Revelations; which book, according to one of the ancient fathers,
"contains almost as many mysteries as words"; but which is, nevertheless,
perfectly intelligible to every ranting revivalist of the present day. But I think
that my explanation will hold quite as well as that of Miller.
But now let us present one striking example of Mr. Miller's disingenuousness. He
says "Papal Rome is but an image of paganism, as saith the apostle." He
then quotes from Paul, and then from John, thus: "Little children, it is the last
time; and, as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many
antichrists, whereby we know it is the last time."
We can understand this declaration of the apostle but in one way. The last day
was hidden from the apostles, as was elsewhere observed; and they were left to their own
conjectures respecting it. But one thing they were assured of, to wit, that
antichrist should come before the consummation of all things. They believed that
immediately after he came the world would be destroyed. Such, at least, appears to
have been the opinion of St. John. Also St. Paul, in writing to the Thessalonians,
tells them not to be deceived in regard to the second coming of Christ, as the man of sin
must be revealed before he comes. St. John, adopting this view of the subject, says
that the last time has arrived, for there are already many antichrists. But what is
his definition of antichrist? Did he, as our author contends, mean to say that papal
Rome was antichrist? If so, he had a singular way of expressing it. Let us now
give the whole of St. John's idea on this subject, instead of one verse. He says,
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes,
and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world
passeth away, and the lust thereof; but he that doeth the will of God abideth
forever. Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that the
antichrist shall come, [before the last time,] even now are there many antichrists,
whereby we know that it is the last time.
The apostle then goes on to describe these antichrists:
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they
would, no doubt, have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made
manifest that they were not all of us.
Thus far, we understand that those antichrists went out from the visible church;
which cannot be said of the papal church, as it is only said of her that she has become corrupted;
and this charge of corruption comes from those who have gone out from her.
But let us follow the apostle still farther, and see what are the peculiar
characteristics of these antichrists:
But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. [This a
general epistle to the whole church.] I have not written to you [the whole church]
because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the
truth. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is
antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. Whoever denieth the Son, the
same hath not the Father; but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
Now what could be Mr. Miller's inducement to apply the verse from St. John to papal
Rome? Does the church say that Jesus is not the Christ? Does she deny the
Father or the Son? But, lest Mr. Miller should endeavor to figure away these express
declarations of the apostle with regard to antichrists, let us hear what the same apostle
says elsewhere on the same subject; and let it be borne in mind that we are quoting from
the writer of the Revelations.
In his second Epistle, St. John says,
For many deceivers are entered in to the world, who confess not that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
I think it unnecessary to say more in evidence that St. John could not have meant to
apply the term of antichrist to the papal church.
The following is another precious sample of our author's reasoning:
"And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the
whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and cut her flesh, and burn her with
fire."
He then says,
This text has been literally accomplished within a
few years; and those kingdoms which were of the ten kingdoms which first gave power
to the beast, have,
of late, persecuted and destroyed her who is the abomination of the whole
earth. Witness the trans- actions of Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal,
Austria, Naples, and Tuscany, the seven kingdoms which were not plucked up by the little
horn: each of these nations have, in their turn, resisted the power and pretensions of the
pope of Rome, until his civil authority is reduced to a cipher in all these
kingdoms. "For God hath put it into their hearts to fulfill his will, and to
agree and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be
fulfilled,"
-- when, our author says, the papal beast will be sunk in the deep forever and
ever.
Here our author quotes Scripture to prove that these kings will give their kingdom to
the beast, "until the words of God shall be fulfilled"; that is, until
the beast shall be smitten and destroyed by the breath of Christ in his second
coming. Nevertheless, he has thought proper to tell us that, instead of giving their
kingdom to the Roman beast, or civil power, they have persecuted and destroyed him.
The Scripture says also that these kings should "burn her with fire."
Pagan Rome was, indeed, burned; but this has not happened to papal Rome. Neither
could it be said with propriety that papal Rome was the abomination of the whole earth,
when France and England, at different times persecuted her. But it might have been
said of pagan Rome. In these latter days, we comprise the populous country of China,
together with North America, under the denomination of the whole earth. It is true,
that Bonaparte persecuted the pope; but he was afterward chained to a rock, and France
went back into the old track, while England assisted in restoring the old order of things
in Italy.
CHAPTER VI.
The following text commences the sixth lecture:
Dan. x. 14. Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy
people in the latter days; for yet the vision is for many days.
We must here observe that the angel has come to tell Daniel what shall befall his
people (the Jews) in the latter days. Mr. Miller chooses to apply the prophecies to
the world at large, and to nations that sprung up after the Jews had been scattered over
the world by the destruction of Jerusalem. Our author makes the text bend to such
circumstances as he chooses, in order to pave the way for the destruction of the world in
1843. In this way, one might easily build up a thousand theories. But some of
our author's explanations are absolutely ridiculous; insomuch so, that one can scarcely
believe him to be in earnest. To follow him, step by step, from the commencement to
the close of this lecture, would be a dizzying task. So much marching and counter
marching, doubling and turning, bolting and whirling, as we should be obliged to put in
practice, if we kept constantly at his heels, would rather have a tendency to bewilder the
common reader than to enlighten him. It shall therefore be our aim to expose his
principle absurdities; which may be done in a few words. This lecture is
sophistry sophisticated; it is darkness painted black; it is the crookedness of
error, pregnant with a knot of serpents; it is madness and folly brayed together in a
mortar, until they seem to form but one ingredient.
Beginning at the eleventh chapter of Daniel, our author goes through it, up to the
fortieth verse applying the prophecies, verse after verse, to such persons and events as
he sees fit to drag into his service. Of course, some generally-acknowledged truths
are here told; for it was impossible for him to avoid it. Alexander, Cleopatra, and
others are treated with decency, and generally put into their proper places. But he
sees fit to give Antiochus the go-by, and to place others in his stead who are not even
hinted at in the vision. The angel came to show Daniel what should befall his
people in the latter days, and our author suddenly drags in the pope of Rome and
Bonaparte, to enact their several parts in company with Antiochus, Cleopatra, Alexander,
and the king of Egypt. Let the reader turn to Maccabees, and make himself familiar
with the history of Antiochus, who ordered the idol of Jupiter Olympus to be set up in the
sanctuary of the Jewish temple, and then judge whether the following verse does not apply
to him, (Dan. xi. 31) :
And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of
strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination
that maketh desolate.
Again, Dan. xi. 28: "Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his
heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own
land."
This is probably Antiochus; but, in order to accommodate the text to Octavius Caesar,
the author says, --
Then Octavius returned to Rome. And the next exploit (!) that this fourth
kingdom would do, would be against the holy covenant. They, by their authority,
crucified our Saviour, persecuted the saints, and destroyed Jerusalem; and this fills up
the acts of this pagan history until towards the close of the reign of the pagan beast.
So these are the exploits of Octavius Caesar, for only one person is spoken of
in the text; and, in order to make these exploits as imposing as possible, it is necessary
to term the crucifixion of the Saviour an exploit, and to lay the act at the door
of Octavius Caesar, or the Roman emperor at least. This is too much: this is too
great an insult to the understanding of the reader. Jesus Christ was crucified under
the authority of Pontius Pilate, but sorely against the wishes of the governor, and
because he was compelled to assent by the Jews. But is this brought in proof that
the heart of Octavius Caesar was against the holy covenant? It is true, that at a
subsequent day, Jerusalem was besieged and finally destroyed by the Romans; but what has
all this to do with Octavius Caesar, or with the text? And is this the way that the
destruction of the world in 1843 is to be proved? But the very next verse says:
"At the time appointed, he shall return and come toward the south; but it shall not
be as the former, or as the latter."
The latter part of this verse has been translated, -- "But the latter time
shall not be as the former;" and this verse is evidently a continuation of the
history of the same man -- Antiochus; and this last verse alludes to the fact that
the Roman ambassadors, with Popilius, came in galleys, and obliged him to depart out of
Egypt. But our author takes a slide, or a stride, and suddenly places
us at the end of the 666 years. Hear this outrageous man:
He shall return, and come towards the south, "not as the former or the
latter." Not Romans going into Egypt, the latter; nor the Syrians going into
Egypt, the former; but Italy must take her turn to be overrun by the northern
barbarians.
The reader will agree with me, that our author might well hang up his fiddle on this
peg; as the world is safe from this moment. But he has gone farther, and we
must follow him. But how has he come to the sage conclusion noticed above? It
is built upon the simple fact that the verse commences with these words, --
"At the time appointed."
Of course this means that, at the appointed time, this victorious tyrant should receive
a check. But our gentleman has a certain theory to establish, and "Fortune
favors those who dare." A more daring commentator has not risen up in these
latter days; for he places common sense at defiance.
This jump has brought our author directly into St. Peter's chair at Rome. I
am not surprised at this great hurry to get there: His claim of infallibility entitles him
to the seat.
Verse 30. For the ships of Chittim shall come against him; therefore he
shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he
do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.
Now this is elsewhere written, -- "And the galleys and the Romans shall
come upon him"; alluding to the fact that Antiochus was compelled to leave Egypt by
the Roman ambassadors, who came in galleys. But, in pursuance with his plan, our
author places these transactions in the year 447 after Christ, and makes the latter part
of this verse to allude to the persecution of the Christians by the Roman emperors!
Next follows, verse 31, -- "And arms shall stand on his part," &c.
As I have elsewhere said, he carries this verse up to the papal beast.
Our author says:
But the reign of papacy would not be set up until AD 538, and would end us in
the same year, AD 1798, being 1260. This, then, is the history the angel will give
us next. Verse 32: "And such as do wickedness against the covenant shall be
corrupted by flatterers; but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do
exploits."
The reader will observe, that, although our author places these events after the coming
of Christ, nothing is said by the angel of the new dispensation, or of a new religion of
the Jews and the worship of Israel's God, without relation to the Mediator. He
explains the last verse which I have quoted:
The ecclesiastical historians tell us that, in the beginning of the sixth
century, about AD 538, a number of writers in that day undertook to prove that the papal
chair, together with councils of his approval, were infallible, and their laws were
binding on the whole church. Those writers were highly honored, and flattered with
promotion by the reigning powers. While, on the other hand, there were many who
opposed this power of the pope and clergy, who were denounced as schismatics and Arians,
and driven out of the kingdoms under the control of the Romish church.
We beg the reader first to read the verse, and then his explanation, and see if ten
thousand better ones could not be invented. But we have some observations to
make on Miller's last quoted words.
There were, indeed, several writers in the Christian church about the time mentioned by
Miler; but the honors and rewards that they obtained were few and far between. That
writers flourished any more in or very near the year 538 than they had done long before
and long after, and indeed throughout all the early ages of the church, is a mere
pretense; and all the members of the church who did write, of course upheld the doctrines
of their church against the various opinions which were continually broached by
surrounding controversialists. For instance, about the year 510, Fulgentius wrote a
confutation of Arianism. He also wrote against the Pelagians and Nestorians; and
such was the character of the works put forth in those days, works which we make no doubt
Mr. M. would himself have approved. But it is surprising -- if, indeed, any
thing could surprise us when coming from him -- that he should pretend the councils
were not regarded as infallible until about the year 538. All this is said in order
to make his figures come out right, and to make it appear that the papal beast did not
begin to roar until such a time as he is ready to exhibit him. How can he pretend
that the authority of these councils was not acknowledged till 538, when the council of
Nice was held in A. D. 325, and promulgated the famous Nicene Creed, without which
promulgation, and its reception by the church, Mr. Miller himself might have been a
Unitarian?
Nor need we stop at the Nicene council of 325. We read, Acts xv. of the first
general council in the church, and that council was regarded as infallible; or if it was
not so, then Mr. Miller must not take the Bible for his rule of faith. We find, in
chap. xv. that Paul and Barnabus disputed with certain Jewish interlopers who contended
for circumcision. The brethren were divided in their minds, and did not surrender up
their right of private judgment even to the inspired St. Paul. Therefore Paul and
Barnabus were sent up to Jerusalem to hold a council with the apostles and elders.
No sooner had they reached Jerusalem, than there rose up certain believing Pharisees, who
contended with them as the people at Antioch had done, saying it was necessary for the
Gentiles to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses. So we read that "the
apostles and elders came together to consider this matter." After there had
been much disputing, Peter arose and gave his opinion, in general terms, that the Gentiles
should not be burdened with the yoke which neither themselves nor their fathers had been
able to bear. Then Barnabus and Paul gave an account of their labors among the
Gentiles; and James, referring to the opinion of Peter, draws up a particular form of
expression to be adopted by the council. It received their approval, and they
accordingly wrote to the brethren at Antioch, saying, "For it seemed good to the Holy
Ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things,"
&c.
At this council were assembled several of the inspired apostles, and a greater number
of the elders and brethren, who had been converted by their preaching, and their decision
was the decision of the church and of the Holy Ghost. Yet Mr. Miller pretends that
these councils commenced in 538, in order to make his reckoning good.
He goes on as far as the 39th verse, applying this part of the chapter, which alludes
to Antiochus Epiphanes, to the papal beast; and the manner in which he finds out
resemblances would be extremely edifying in a buffoon, but is a criminal burlesque on holy
Scripture, and stamps the author a man run mad with bigotry.
Where it is said of Antiochus that "he shall speak marvelous things against the
god of gods" -- meaning by this last term the God of Israel -- our
author applies the prophecy to papal Rome; whereas it is notorious that blasphemy against
the Supreme Being, or even against the apostles or saints, is regarded with horror by that
people.
Where it says, "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers," meaning that
Antiochus should even lack heathen piety, and should assume to introduce new gods, our
author applies it to the Catholics who do not regard the pagan deities, for he says the
pagans were their fathers!
He says the pope of Rome claims to be "God on earth"; which pope, as is well
known, during some parts of the service smites his breast, and calls on God to be merciful
to him a sinner, and asks the prayers of the people that he may be saved from his
sins. In a letter to Bonaparte, in reply to some offers of favor from that emperor,
the pope wrote: "As for myself, I am but dust and ashes; but the religion which I
profess will exist and prosper when you are lying low in your grave," or words to
that effect.
When it is said of Antiochus that he should honor the God of forces -- meaning
the god Maozim, who was the god of forces or strong-holds -- our author
brings the expression to bear upon the fact that the pope has a guard, in his capacity of
temporal prince, or, in other words, that he upholds civil institutions and the
laws. He also states that the pope has had, for ages past, large armies at his
command.
And a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and
precious stones, and pleasant things.
This is spoken literally of Antiochus's fathers; but our author goes back some
centuries to pagan Rome, to find the fathers of the Christian Romans among the pagans; and
this god that they worship turns out to be the virgin Mary, or rather the images of
Christ, apostles, virgin Mary, and canonized saints. It appears, then, that this god
must be not only a trinity, but must be composed of a thousand persons, all in one.
Whoever looks on the statue of Washington in the state-house must be callous indeed, if
some interesting recollections, some patriotic emotions, are not awakened by the sight of
it; and whoever can look on a picture or collection of statues representing some
interesting portion of Scripture history and does not feel a still more sacred emotion, is
either a stupid fellow, destitute of all taste for the fine arts, or one who cannot be
interested by reading of the same thing in the Bible. Pictures and statues impress
the mind more powerfully than printed books, and are excellent aids to piety.
Whoever reads an account of the crucifixion of our Saviour, immediately forms a picture of
the scene in mind; else he could not form an idea of the facts related. A skillful
and devout men of genius may draw a still better picture than that which he had formed in
his mind. If he reverences the Bible which relates the story, he must reverence the
picture or statues which relate the same story. But let us illustrate this in
another way. Suppose that the reader should see St. Paul as live and in the body;
would he look upon the man with veneration? You answer, yes. But why
should you do so? For that which you see is not his soul; it is mere perishable dust
and ashes, and no better than wood or stone. But you look upon his outward form with
reverence on account of the soul connected with it. Even so you may look upon images
or pictures with reverence on account of the sacred idea connected with them; and not
because you venerate the paint, the canvass, the wood, or the stone. This is the
whole secret of that image worship about which the wretched persecutors of
modern times are bawling at their revival meetings and elsewhere.
So much for the strange god of Mr. Miller.
I have not noticed all the objectionable parts of the lecture, nor is it my object to
do so; nor is it necessary; for, if it can be shown that the author is at fault in his
calculations, it may suffice to preserve the senses of some luckless being who might
otherwise be deluded by him.
CHAPTER VII.
The seventh lecture opens with the following text:
Dan. xii. 8. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord,
what shall be the end of these things?
It is a singular fact that some men prefer intricate error to plain truth: they are
determined to make mysteries where all is simple and easy. The term mystery
Babylon may well be applied to this strange author. We have seen, in the
preceding lecture, how he has endeavored to apply the prophecy which gives the history of
one man, in the most regular and consecutive manner, to a multitude of events with which
the text has no natural connection. Such is still the plan which he is pursuing in
the present lecture. We shall remark upon this in place, but must now follow the
author into the twelfth chapter, whither he has gone on an expedition to bring up one of
his arguments.
After quoting the verse at the head of this chapter, in which we learn that Daniel
declared his inability to understand the vision, Mr. Miller undertakes to give us the
reason that Daniel could not understand it. He says:
Previous to Daniel's asking the question contained in our text, he had been
taught, as we have seen in our former lecture, not only the history of future events as
they would succeed each other down to the end of the world, (!) but he had the regular
order of time specified in the duration of the little horn, -- 'time, times, and
a half,' as in Dan. vii. 25, and xii. 7. But he had been informed of many events
which should transpire after his 'time, times, and a half' should be finished, and,
not having the length of the pagan beast or daily abominations given to him at all, he
could not tell or understand whereabouts in his great number of 2300 days the end of the
civil power of the little horn, or papal Rome, carried him. There was no rule given
Daniel yet by which he could tell when or how long after the crucifixion of the Messiah
before the daily sacrifice abomination would be taken out of the way, and the power of the
little horn be established, and the abomination of desolation set up. Be sure,
Daniel had heard the whole history down to the resurrection, and had the whole vision
specified in his 2300 days. But as he saw there were evidently three divisions of
the time after the crucifixion or cutting off of the Messiah at the fulfillment of his 490
years, which would be the remainder of his total number of 2300 years after his 70 weeks
should be fulfilled. And having only 1260 of those years accounted for by the reign
of his little horn, leaving 550 years to be applied on the pagan beast and for the events
which we are to attend to after the papal beast lost his civil power.
Therefore the propriety of Daniel's saying in our text, "Then I heard, but I
understood not." He understood not how this time was divided, and especially
how much time would be taken up in the last division of the angel's history, beginning
with the fortieth verse of the 11th chapter, where our last lecture ended, and finishing
with the context of the 12th chapter, and the verse previous to our text.
The reader will now perceive how our author has divided the time; that is, the whole
2300 years which transpired after the order was given to build Jerusalem. As a maker
of almanacs, Mr. Miller would be preeminent; but, as a commentator, he is woefully at
fault, being led more by his passions and prejudices than by reason and candor. The
reader now knows the reason that Daniel did not understand the vision; and it must be
confessed that no man with less intellect and ingenuity than our author could possibly
have understood it as he does.
Whether Mr. Miller's calculations are correct or not depends wholly upon the propriety
of his divisions, and on the correctness of his application of the prophecies. We
are soon to see poor Napoleon stretched upon his rack and brutally murdered; torn joint by
joint, in order to accommodate him to Scripture -- a most unscriptural character,
truly, to be served up in this way.
With regard to this division of time I shall have to request the reader to turn to the
11th chapter of Daniel, and the 21st verse, commencing, "And in his estate shall
stand up a vile person." With this verse commences the future history of Antiochus
Epiphanes, and his history is continued regularly to the end of the chapter. Yet
our author attributes a part of his exploits to the pagan Romans, a part of them to papal
Rome, and a part of them to Bonaparte. It is necessary to point out where these
divisions are made, that the reader may see there is no such change of characters and
scenery in the history itself, and that the whole is meant to apply to but one
individual. We will just notice, however, the places across which Miller builds his
Virginia fences.
Verse 21. And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they
shall not give the honor of his kingdom; but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the
kingdom by flatteries.
Verse 22. And with the arms of a flood shall they be overthrown from
before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
Thus the reader will find, by reference to the chapter, that the narrative goes on
until we arrive at the 28th verse:
Then shall he return into his land with great riches, and his heart shall be
against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.
Verse 29. At the time appointed he shall return and come toward the south;
but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.
This last clause, of course, means that now he shall not carry everything before him,
as he has done, but that he shall meet with a check. Hence the verse begins,
"at the appointed time," i.e. the item to change his successes into defeats.
But our author draws a line between the 28th and 29th verses.
The first part of the 28th verse he applies to Octavius Caesar; but, being in a hurry
to build his fence, makes the rest of the verse apply to all the acts of pagan Rome, until
the end of the 666 years. Therefore here is one of his divisions. Here is the
end of pagan Rome. Then he takes up the 29th verse, evidently applying to the same
individual whose history has been delineated, and says, verse 29, "He shall return
and come towards the south, not as the former or the latter." And here he
continues his explanation, that Italy herself is to be overrun. He now sets up the
papal beast. Let us point out the line of demarcation:
Verse 31. And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the
sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the
abomination that maketh desolate.
Verse 32. And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall be corrupt by
flatteries; but the people that so know their God shall be strong and do exploits.
Our author ends the reign of the pagan beast at the close of the 31st verse; and,
between the 31st and the 32d he places thirty years, in order to bring in some writers
who, he says, flattered the pope and clergy about the year 538. Of course, the
passage means nothing of the kind; but 538 is the number which he stands in need of, in
order to make his reckoning good. He says that the last of the ten horns was
converted to Christianity in 508; but that, if he could end the pagan beast there, it will
not reconcile the two statements respecting the taking away the daily abomination and
setting up the abomination which maketh desolate, and that the time in which the savage
beast should continue to reign, unless he allows an interim of 30 years. No one will
object to that; for, after the pagan best is dead, it must require some time to take off
his hide and cut him up.
We are now prepared for the bringing in of Napoleon. We left off at the 32d verse
of the chapter, which chapter goes on to describe the history of one individual; and we
have read that "at the time appointed," he met with a reverse, and was obliged
to return from Egypt, and he now stirs himself up against the holy covenant, profanes the
temple at Jerusalem, and persecutes the faithful, and then we arrive at the 35th verse:
And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to
make them white, even to the time of the end; because it is yet for a time appointed.
This is in the time appointed; but we find there is to be a "time of the
end," when he shall be prostrate, and shall perish miserably.
The prophecy continues on to the 39th verse:
Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall
acknowledge and increase with glory; and he shall acknowledge and increase with glory; and
he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.
Verse 40. And at the time of the end, shall the king of the south push at
him; and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and
with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the co