CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.
Mr. Miller is not the first expounder of
prophecy that has attempted dogmatically to decide upon the very year of the coming of
Christ. I will not occupy these pages by relating the individual histories of the
wise and positive interpreters of prophetic times, who have preceded Mr. Miller in fixing
the year of the Judgment. Their histories were all alike. They succeeded as
Mr. M. has, in awakening a degree of alarm in the bosoms of some simple people, who forgot
that Christ has said "of that day and hour knoweth no man" -- the time
drew on -- the year passed by, and the prophet and his doctrine were forgotten.
One great evil, however,
resulted from these presumptuous speculations. Many would identify the correctness
and veracity of these prophets with the truth of the scriptures themselves; because, like
Mr. M., they professed to build their calculations upon the Bible. Hence, when the
appointed year passed by, and no unusual event occurred, many would reject at once the
pretensions of the man who had deceived them, and the claims of the Bible upon which he
professed to base his calculations, and thus a new impulse was given to the cause of
infidelity. It is impossible to calculate how widely Mr. M's lectures may contribute
to the spread of infidelity (though undesigned on his part) unless their inconsistency
with the Bible is exposed. This is the chief reason why I felt it my duty to show
that Mr. M. is not sustained by the Bible in his calculations, and that he has entirely
mistaken or perverted the meaning of the prophecies, upon which he builds his
theory. Let not the advocates of infidelity triumph, though time should speedily
expose (as it undoubtedly will) the absurdity of Mr. Miller's waking dreams.
Some readers of the
following pages, after being informed of the gross inconsistencies and egregious
blunders, to be found in Mr. M.'s lectures, may be disposed to question the necessity of
replying to a book, which it is plain, to every person acquainted with history, confutes
itself by its own absurdity. Though it would be sufficient to reply to this
objection that all persons are not acquainted with history, I would remind such of the
anecdote of Christopher Columbus challenging his friends to make an egg stand on its end;
the moral of which is, that it is very easy to do any thing when another has shown us
how. Many -- deceived by the boldness with which Mr. M.
challenges a reply, and says he has done so for seventeen years -- declare the
work to be unanswerable.
Mr. M. enters into an explanation of various prophetical periods
which in his view point to the end of the world, all of which he makes to fall in with his
doctrine of the coming of Christ in 1843. The reader but partially acquainted with the
history of the world, and not aware of the manner in which Mr. M. continues to make
his calculations all meet in the year 1843, thinks upon perusing the book that there are,
to say the least, some very striking coincidences, and feels considerably staggered, if
not convinced. The writer of these pages is not unwilling to allow that such an
effect might as probably have been produced upon his own mind, as upon those of others,
had he not been prepared to see, at once, the absurdity of Mr. M.'s starting point (viz.
the argument drawn from a comparison of the eighth and ninth chapters of Daniel) by having
twice in the course of his ministry (once in Newport, R.I. and once in the city of
New-York) delivered a course of lectures upon the prophecies of Daniel, and consequently
been compelled to bestow a somewhat minute attention both upon the prophecies themselves,
and upon the history and chronology of the great events which they so remarkably foretell.
In reference to the prophecy of the 2300 days, or years,
as Mr. M. understands them, which is the foundation of his whole system, I have presented
rather a full and minute exposition. It has been my aim to present, not merely a
confutation of Mr. M.'s theory, but a correct exposition of the principal prophecies
examined in the work, to the best of my ability, and to render this exposition as instructive
and interesting to the general reader, as the nature of the subject will admit,
so that the present work might retain its value even when time shall have shown the
falsehood of Mr. M.'s doctrine.
I cannot concur with those who seem to think that the lash of
satire, or the sting of ridicule, is the best weapon with which to assail the doctrine
advocated by Mr. M. This will not relieve the mind of the honest inquirer after
truth, who has felt perplexed by what appeared to him the plausible statements and
singular coincidences in Mr. M.'s book. It is necessary to use argument and fact to
knock down the foundation upon which his theory is based, and nothing else will satisfy a
candid and inquisitive mind. Besides, the doctrine of Mr. M., that in less than four
years "every eye shall see" the Judge seated on his "great white
throne," (however weakly supported,) is too solemn a subject to be trifled with;
hence it becomes us to approach it with feelings of seriousness and solemnity.
The truth or falsity of this doctrine is a consideration in which
the enjoyments, the hopes, the fears, and the prospects of the whole human family are most
deeply involved. An intelligent and pious member of my church lately remarked to me,
"Sir, if this doctrine is true, we certainly ought to know it; and to whom are the
Christian community to look for instruction on this subject, but to those who are
appointed as watchmen upon the walls of Zion, to sound the note of alarm when the day of
evil approaches, and to blow the blast of triumph when the glorious Jubilee dawns.
Were the doctrine of Mr. M. established upon evidence satisfactory to my own mind, I
would not rest till I had published in the streets and proclaimed in the ears of my fellow
townsmen and especially of my beloved flock,
'THE DAY OF THE LORD
IS AT HAND!'
Build no more houses! plant no more fields and gardens! forsake
your shops, and farms, and all secular pursuits, and give every moment to preparation for
this great event! for in three short years this earth shall be burned up, and Christ shall
come in the clouds, awake the sleeping dead, and call all the living before his dread
tribunal."
It is not, therefore, in a captious spirit that the following
pages are sent into the world, but in order to vindicate myself, as a Minster of the
gospel, from what would be a most criminal neglect in not sounding such an ALARM,
were this doctrine true; to counteract the tendency which Mr. M.'s book possesses (in the
way I have named) to promote the cause of infidelity, by showing that the truth of the
Bible is not identified with the truth of his theory; and because I believe that the
tendency of all error, especially upon a subject of such vast importance, is to
destroy the happiness, paralyze the moral strength, and abridge the usefulness of such as
imbibe it. I do not believe this doctrine. It is based upon shadows.
And therefore duty commands me to show its absurdity.
CHAPTER II.
THE PRINCIPAL
GROUNDS OF
MR. MILLER'S BELIEF.
Mr. M.'s first proof. --
A comparison of the prophecy of 70 weeks, and the prophecy of 2300 days.
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.
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to
restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks,
and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in
troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off.
-- Daniel, 9 : 24, 25, 26.
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 and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be
cleansed.
-- Daniel, 8 : 13, 14.
The former of these passages declares that seventy weeks of years,
or 290 years, reckoning a day for a year, shall elapse from the time of the going forth of
the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, which was then in ruins, in consequence
of its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, till the cutting off of the expected Messiah, which,
says Mr. Miller, was exactly fulfilled; that command having been issued B.C. 457, and
Christ having been crucified at the age of 33, which numbers added together, make 490.
The latter passage declares that 2300 days, that is, as Mr. M.
supposes, 2300 years, should elapse between the commencement of certain calamities
expressed by giving "the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot," and
the termination of those calamities, promised in the words, "then shall the sanctuary
be cleansed."
Mr. Miller believes that both of these prophetic periods begin at
the same time, that is, that the commencement of the 490 years is identical with the
commencement of the 2300 years. He has consequently, upon this supposition (which is
shown in the following work to be entirely erroneous) nothing to do but to subtract 490
from 2300 to know the date of the completion of the 2300 years.
Thus,
2300, whole duration of the prophecy,
490, before the crucifixion of Christ,
-------
leaving
1810, after the event;
to which add
33, the age of Christ when crucified.
--------
Making
1843,
the year when Mr. Miller thinks the prophecy is completed, and which he consequently
believes will be the year in which Christ will come to judgment.
The above appears to be the foundation stone upon which Mr. M.'s
doctrine is based. How firm that foundation is, will be seen when we come to examine
the passages from the prophet Daniel, above quoted.
As my design, for the present, is merely to state the grounds of
Mr. M.'s belief, I shall proceed to mention
Mr. Miller's second proof. -- The punishment of seven times.
And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk
contrary unto me; Then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven
times for your sins.
-- Leviticus, 26 : 23, 24.
His argument is as follows:
The "seven times," mentioned in the above text, are to be
understood as seven prophetic years. Alluding to Nebuchadnezzar's being driven among
the beasts of the field, Mr. M. says (page 261)
That being a matter of history and of sample only, was fulfilled in
seven years; but this, being a prophecy, will be only fulfilled in seven prophetic times,
which will be seven times 360 years, which will make 2520 years.
Fixing the commencement of this punishment of seven times in the year BC 677,
when Manasseh, one of the kings of Judah, was taken captive, he proceeds as before, and
subtracting 677 from the whole number, 2520, brings us again to the year 1843.
Seven prophetic times,
2520 years.
Manasseh's captivity,
677 BC.
------
Leaving, as in the former case,
1843
as the date of the accomplishment of this prophecy. Mr. M. believes that
when these seven times are accomplished, Christ will come to judgment. His own words
are (page 262)
Take 677, which were before Christ, from 2520 years, which includes the
whole "seven times," or "seven years"prophetic, and the remainder will
be 1843 after Christ, showing that the people of God will be gathered from all nations,
and the kingdom and the greatness of the kingdom will be given to the saints of the Most
High; mystical Babylon will be destroyed by the brightness of his coming; and sin, and
suffering for sin will be finished to those who look for his coming.
Mr. Miller's third proof. -- The three prophetical periods --
1260, 1290, and 1335.
And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was
upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these
wonders? And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of
the river, when he held upon his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by
him that liveth for ever, that it shall be for a time, times, and a half; and
when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things
shall be finished.
And from the time that the daily
sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there
shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that
waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.
-- Daniel, 12 : 6, 7, 11, 12.
Mr. Miller concludes from verse seven, above, that the "time, times, and
half a time" denote the 1260 years of the continuance of the Papal power, which so
far is the opinion of most of the commentators. He supposes the 1290 days or years,
in the eleventh verse, to end at the same time as the 1260 years, by beginning 30 years
sooner; that this time was completed in the year 1798, when the Pope was conquered by
Napoleon Bonaparte, and by reckoning back 1260 years before 1798, he concludes that
"the little horn," or Popery, began his reign in the year AD 538, and that the
1290 years commenced in 508. From the 12th verse, "Blessed is he that waiteth,
and cometh to the thousand, three hundred and thirty five days," he concludes that
the second coming of Christ will take place 45 years (the difference between 1335 and
1290) after the fall of Antichrist, in
1798,
add the difference of the two numbers,
45,
-------
which brings us to the same date as before, 1843.
Mr. Miller's fourth proof.
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 and
six.
-- Rev. 13 : 18.
If Mr. Miller can establish one of his dates above mentioned, he of course
confirms the others. Hence from this text, he attempts to establish the above date,
508, as the time when Paganism ceased, which is what he understands by the commencement of
the 1290 years in Daniel, 12 : 11, "The time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken
away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up.
This he attempts to accomplish by the following singular process:
The "beast" he concludes to be the Roman government; the year 508,
one of the dates in the last calculation, the time of its dissolution; and by reckoning
back, the year 158 BC as the year of its commencement. If this date is
established, he has only to add to
508
The difference between the two numbers,
30
The time, times and half a time,
1260
The 45 years to follow the fall of Babylon,
45
------
As before,
1843
The above are Mr. M.'s principal reasons for fixing the end of the world in the
year 1843. It is the intention of the writer to devote one chapter of the following
work to an examination of each of the above supposed proofs of Mr. M.'s theory.
Mr. M. imagines, indeed, that he can discover a confirmation of his doctrine,
in the epistles to the seven Churches in Asia, which he considers prophetical of the the
state of the church in seven different periods; and also in the parable of the ten
virgins, which he also regards as a prophecy of the state of the world and the church in
the last days.
He fixes the commencement of what he terms the Laodicean state of the
church, in 1798, and says it will continue 45 years, till 1843. But inasmuch as he
does not pretend that either the seven epistles, or the parable of the Virgins, furnish
him with any dates in confirmation of this theory, though he himself supplies them, these
two particulars will be but briefly noticed.
CHAPTER III.
EXAMINATION OF THE
FIRST PROOF, VIZ.:
The Comparison of the Prophecy
of the Seventy Weeks
and the 2300 days.
Every reader of Mr. Miller's book has doubtless noticed the stress which he lays
upon his interpretation and comparison of the visions of the 70 weeks, and of the 2300
days. This is the key to all his other dates. From the strange supposition
that these are two prophetic periods which begin at one and the same date he
fixes upon the year 1843 as the end of the world. Having obtained this date, nothing
is easier than to fix the time of his other prophetic periods, by simple subtraction or
addition.
This is the foundation of the whole system; and Mr. M. himself seems so to
regard it. Accordingly, in his closing lecture (page 297), referring to his
exposition of these two visions in former lectures, he says,
Then I inquired, if 490 years of the 2300 was fulfilled when our Saviour
was crucified, how much of the vision remained after his death? I answered, 1810
years. I then inquired what year after his birth that would be; and the answer was
in the year 1843. I then begged the privilege, and do so now, for any person to
show me any failure of proof on this point, or where, possibly, according to
Scripture, there may be a failure in the calculation I have made on this vision. I
have not yet, by seventeen years' study, been able to discover where I might
fail.
I shall endeavor to comply with this request of Mr. M., and to show his "failure
of proof" on this point. And as it is only necessary to expose the
weakness of a foundation, in order to prove that of the superstructure raised upon it, I
shall enter into the examination of this principal prop of Mr. Miller's theory much more
minutely and at length than any one of his other positions.
I shall divide this chapter into seven sections.
First, the vision of the seventy weeks.
-- Dan. 9 : 24.
Second, the vision of the ram and he-goat.
-- Dan. chap. 8.
Third, the little horn. -- Dan. 8 : 9, &c.
Fourth, proofs that the little horn referred to Antiochus Epiphanes;
with a narrative
of the cruelties and death of that violent persecutor of the Jews.
Fifth, meaning of the 2300 days, or evenings and mornings.
-- Dan. 8 : 14.
Sixth, this time shown to have been literally fulfilled, in the
duration of the taking away the daily sacrifices by Antiochus Epiphanes.
Seventh, examination of Mr. Miller's date for the commencement of the
2300 days, or, as he understands them, 2300 years.
SECTION 1. -- The Vision of the Seventy Weeks.
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 anoint the Most Holy.
-- Daniel, 9 : 24.
[ I omit this section in its entirety inasmuch as Dowling is here
in agreement with his opponent. He and Miller both believe that
the 70 Weeks began with the decree of Artaxerxes, in the year
BC 457. --ed. ]
SECTION 2. -- The vision of the Ram and He-Goat. -- Dan. chap.
viii.
The vision of the ram and he-goat contained in the eighth chapter of Daniel,
was seen by the prophet in the third year of Belshazzar, the last king of Babylon, about
14 or 15 years previous to the vision of the seventy weeks.
Relating this vision, the prophet says (verses 3 and 4)
Then I lifted up mine eyes and saw, and behold, there stood before the
river a ram, which had two horns, and the two horns were high;
but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. I saw the
ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before
him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did
according to his will and became great.
We are not left to conjecture the meaning of this part of the vision, for
Daniel was informed by the angel (verse 20)
The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and
Persia
and every reader will immediately recognise the description as a most graphic
delineation of the renowned Cyrus and his successors.
As the prophet was considering (verses 5, 6, 7)
A he-goat came from the west, on the face of the whole earth, and
touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the
river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto the
ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns;
and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground,
and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
In the 21st verse the angel says,
The rough goat is the king (or kingdom) of Grecia, and the great horn
that is between his eyes is the first king.
If, however, the angel had not so plainly explained this vision, the mere tyro
in history would at once perceive in this description the remarkable history of the
Grecian conqueror Alexander the Great, and his rapid career of conquest issuing in the
overthrow of the Medo-Persian empire, and the death of Darius, the last king, in the year
BC 331.
I wish the reader to take particular notice that the kingdom of the he-goat,
that is to say, the Grecian empire, was founded by Alexander the Great not until the
year before Christ THREE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-ONE; because
this one simple historical fact, in its influence upon the explanation of the remainder of
this prophecy, is sufficient of itself (as we shall presently perceive) to overturn Mr.
Miller's entire theory of the coming of Christ to judgment, in the year 1843.
The vision proceeds (v. 8)
Therefore the he-goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the
great horn was broken; and for it, came up four notable ones towards the four winds of
heaven.
In explanation of this, the angel says (v. 21, 22)
The great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now
that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kings shall stand up out of the
nation but not in his power.
Alexander by his victories became very great. By the breaking of the
great horn is to be understood the death of Alexander, which occurred in the flower of his
age, and in the midst of his conquests. By the coming up, in the place of the great
horn, four notable ones towards the four winds of heaven, we are to understand the vision
of Alexander's kingdom among four of his captains after his death, viz.:
1. Cassander in Greece and the west.
2. Lysimachus in Thrace and the north.
3. Ptolemy in Egypt and the south.
4. Seleucus in Syria and the east.
Mr. Miller mentions Persia (p. 49) as one of the four divisions. This is
entirely erroneous, for all the conquered territories to the east of Syria, as far as the
river Indus, which of course included Persia, were comprised in what was called the
kingdom of Syria, and which fell to the share of Seleucus.
This error, whether it spring from ignorance of inadvertence, is not of any
very great importance. It may, however, be worthy of remark that a man who
undertakes to explain prophecy by history should be very careful of the accuracy of his
historical facts.
SECTION 3. -- The Little Horn.
After having thus shown the divisions of Alexander's dominions into four parts,
the prophecy proceeds to say that out of one of these four kingdoms (v. 9 to 14)
came forth a little horn which waxed exceeding great, toward the south,
and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. And it waxed great, even
to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the
ground, and stamped upon them. Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince
of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his
sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily
sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and
it practised, and prospered. 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 and three hundred days: then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The angel explains the meaning of this little horn in v. 23, 24, 25.
In the latter time of their kingdoms [that is, of the four kingdoms
which succeeded Alexander's] when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce
countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. And his power shall
be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper
and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his
policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in
his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the prince of
princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
It is evident the power here spoken of was to arise out of one of the four
kingdoms above mentioned, and that the calamities and persecutions which he should bring
upon "the holy people" were to continue for the time mentioned in the 11th
verse, viz. 2300 days. Various have been the solutions which have been given to the
problem -- who or what are we to understand by this little horn? Those most
worthy of attention and study are the following three.
1. Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of Syria, and cruel persecutor of the
Jews.
2. Others have considered this little horn to be Pagan and afterwards
Papal Rome. This is the opinion adopted by Mr. Miller.
3. Others within the last century have supposed that it refers to the
Mohammedan delusion.
SECTION 4. -- Proofs that Antiochus Epiphanes was the little horn.
That Antiochus Epiphanes, that cruel tyrant and persecutor of the Jews, was
intended by the little horn, appears to me by far the most probable supposition of the
three above named.
Let any one read the explanation of the angel (v. 22, 23)
Four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation;
and in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the
full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences,
shall stand up
and then decide whether it is not at least probable that this KING
was a person, and not a government. It is true that in some places the word king is
put for kingdom, but in this place it seems to mean an individual monarch. The four
horns which stood up in the place of that which was broken, says the angel, are "four
kingdoms,"and "in the latter time of their kingdom, shall stand
up," not another kingdom, but a "king of fierce countenance.
That this little horn which "waxed great," and by which "the
daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary cast down," this
"king of fierce countenance, who should destroy wonderfully, and prosper, and
practise, and destroy the mighty and the holy people"; but should be broken without
hand was, in truth, this same Antiochus Epiphanes, I think will be evident to all who
peruse the following brief account of the cruelties and death of this tyrant.
NARRATIVE OF THE CRUELTIES AND DEATH
OF ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES.
Antiochus, who assumed the title of Epiphanes, or the illustrious,
but who, as many have remarked, was more worthy the title of Epimanes, that is, the
raging madman, which some people gave him, succeeded his brother Seleucus on the
throne of Syria in the year BC 175. At that time the good Onias was high priest at
Jerusalem. Scarcely was Antiochus seated on the throne, when the profligate Jason
formed a design to supplant his brother Onias in the office of the high priesthood, which
at that time was one of great dignity and emolument. With this view, Jason offered
Antiochus about half a million of dollars. He succeeded in his negotiation, and was
appointed high priest; but Menelaus offering a higher price, Jason was afterwards deposed,
and the former appointed in his place. The scandalous ambition of these Jews, was
the commencement of those calamities with which Antiochus overwhelmed their unhappy
nation.
While Antiochus was besieging Alexandria, in Egypt, where he was making rapid
and extensive conquests, a false report was spread of his death. Jason, the deposed
high priest, thought this a favorable opportunity to recover his lost authority, marched
with rather more than 1000 men to Jerusalem, drove out Menelaus, and made himself master
of the city.
When Antioch head of this, he concluded that the Jews had made a general
insurrection, and highly exasperated at the great rejoicings of which he heard among the
Jews at Jerusalem, upon the report of his death, he hastened to take vengeance upon their
devoted city. He besieged Jerusalem, took the city by storm, abandoned it for three days
to the unbridled fury of his soldiers, and caused 80,000 men to be inhumanly murdered.
Not content with these barbarities, he added sacrilege to massacre; forcibly
entered into the temple, and even polluted by his presence the most holy place. He
also plundered the temple, of golden candlestick with seven branches, the altar of
incense, table for the shew bread, and several other utensils, vases, and gifts of kings,
all of gold. This horrible massacre and profanation of the temple took place in the
year BC 170.
Two years afterwards, Antiochus, baffled in his ambitious designs against Egypt
by the power and firmness of the Romans, wreaked his vengeance once more against the
defenseless Jews. He sent his general, Apollonius, with 22,000 men, with orders to
destroy the city of Jerusalem, and to massacre all the men, and sell the women as
slaves. These cruel orders were too faithfully executed. On the Sabbath day,
while the people were assembled, peacefully, in their synagogues, all the adult men were
most cruelly butchered, so that the streets literally streamed with blood. After
setting fire to several parts of the city, they placed a strong garrison of solders in the
holy temple itself, to awe the whole Jewish nation. This garrison fell on all who
came to worship Jehovah in their venerated temple, and shed their blood on every part of
the sanctuary itself, and polluted it by all possible methods.
A stop was thus put to the "daily sacrifices," which had been offered
by the Jews every morning and evening in the temple, as none of the servants of God dared
to come to adore him in that sacred, but now polluted place.
While in these mournful circumstances the author of the Maccabees thus
plaintively describes the condition of the holy city.
Now Jerusalem lay void as a wilderness, there was none of her children
that went in or out: the sanctuary, also, was trodden down, and aliens kept the strong
hold: the heathen had their habitation in that place: and joy was taken from Jacob, and
the pipe with the harp ceased.
(1 Mac. 3 : 45)
Antiochus, soon after, issued an edict, commanding all the nations subject to
him, to renounce all their ancient religious ceremonies, and to worship the same gods, and
in the same manner that he did. This decree, though expressed in general terms, was
aimed principally at the Jews, whose religion he had determined to extirpate. In
pursuance of this determination, he suppressed all the observances of the Jewish law;
polluted the temple in such a manner that it was no longer fit for the service of God;
burnt all the copies of the sacred scriptures that could be found; and even set up the
statue of the god Jupiter upon the very altar of the temple. Thus, the abomination
of desolation was seen in the temple of God, and the daily sacrifice was taken away.
These events took place in the year BC 168. Now, let us read the words of this
remarkable prophecy, delivered 385 years before, that is, in the year BC 553, and I think
we shall not only be satisfied to whom this description of the little horn applies, but
shall perceive in the remarkable fulfillment of the prophecy a striking proof of the
divine inspiration of the scriptures.
But this application is still further confirmed by the intimation of the death
of this "king of fierce countenance," contained in the emphatic expression
(verse 25) "but he shall be broken without hand." This expression seems to
denote that he should come to his end without the intervention of the hand of man, but by
the immediate judgment of God. How well does this agree with the awful end of this
monster of cruelty! He had gone to Elymais, in Persia, for the purpose of levying
the tribute imposed upon that portion of his dominions. While at Ecbatana, a
neighboring city, he heard of the defeat of his generals Nicanor and Timotheus, by the
brave and patriotic Judas Maccabaeus, and resolved to set out immediately for Jerusalem,
in order to make the nation of the Jews feel the dreadful effects of his wrath. It
was while on this journey that he came to a miserable end, which is described in the
following words by the historian Rollin.
In the violence of his rage, he set out with all possible expedition,
venting nothing but menaces in his march, and breathing only final ruin and destruction.
At the news of the defeat of his general Lysias, which reached him on the way, his
fury increased. Immediately he commanded his charioteer to drive with the utmost
speed, in order that he might sooner have an opportunity of fully satiating his vengeance;
threatening to make Jerusalem the burying place of the whole Jewish nation, and not to
leave one single inhabitant in it.
He had scarcely uttered that blasphemous
expression, when he was struck by the hand of God. He was seized with incredible
pains in his bowels, and the most excessive pains of the colic. But still his pride
was not abated by this first shock; so far from it, that suffering himself to be hurried
away by the wild transports of his fury, and breathing nothing but vengeance against the
Jews, he gave orders for proceeding with all possible speed in the journey. But as
his horses were running forward impetuously, he fell from his chariot, and thereby bruised
in a grievous manner every part of his body; so that his attendants were forced to put him
in a litter, where he suffered inexpressible torments. Worms crawled from every part
of him; his flesh fell away piecemeal; and the stench was so great that it became
intolerable to all; being himself unable to bear it.
At length he acknowledged that it was the
hand of the God of Israel that struck him because of the calamities he had brought upon
Jerusalem. In order to calm the wrath of the Almighty, he promised to exert the
utmost liberality towards his chosen people; to enrich with precious gifts the holy temple
at Jerusalem, which he had plundered; to furnish from his revenues the sums to purchase
the sacrifices; and even to turn Jew himself, and to travel every part of the world to
publish the power of the Almighty. But it was now too late. Says the author of
the Maccabees, "this wicked person vowed unto the Lord, who now, no more would have
mercy on him."
Thus miserably did Antiochus perish by
the immediate judgment of an insulted God. Thus was this "king of a fierce
countenance broken without hand."
He died BC 164.
SECTION 5. -- Meaning of the two thousand three hundred
evenings and mornings.
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
and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
-- Dan. 8 : 13, 14.
With this narrative fresh in our minds, let us turn our attention to the above
question: "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?" In the original, there is no such word as "concerning,"
as the reader may see by its being in italics, and Mr. Lowth rightly observes that the
words may be rendered more agreeably to the Hebrew thus: "For how long a time
shall the vision last, the daily sacrifice be taken away, and the transgression of
desolation continue, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?"
In the same manner is the question translated in the Arabic version, the Septuagint, and
the Vulgate Latin. The answer to this question is "Unto two thousand and three
hundred days."
It would seem scarcely necessary to add, after what we have seen of the
sufferings of the Jews at Jerusalem, under Antiochus, that the meaning of this answer
evidently is, that the taking away of the daily, that is, the evening and
morning sacrifice, and the profanation of the temple, should continue so
long a time as is indicated by this reply when properly understood. Mr. Miller
contends that we are to understand in this place 2300 years, a day for a year.
Doubtless, we are sometimes to understand in prophetic language, a day for a
year. I am willing to admit that we are so to interpret the seventy weeks, the forty
and two months, or 1260 days of the Revelations, and probably the other periods named in
the last chapter of Daniel. But I shall be asked, If you thus explain a prophetical
day in those passages, why not in this? This is a fair question and deserves a fair
and candid answer. I reply, then, that I have come to this conclusion, not from any
difficulty on any other hypothesis, but simply from noticing the peculiarity of language
employed in the original Hebrew of this term 2300 days. It would be rendered
literally 2300 evenings-mornings (Heb. a-rav bo-ker). Thus in the
Geneva version, deus mille et trois cents soirs et matins; (i.e.) 2300 mornings
and evenings; and still more to my satisfaction in the Latin version of Junius and
Tremellius, usque ad vespertina matutinaque tempora bis mille trecenta; (i.e.)
unto 2300 morning and evening seasons. Now it does not appear to me that this
compound Hebrew word evening-morning, ever means a prophetic day, (i.e.) a year,
but from the very nature and form of the word must be confined to a natural day. I
have examined the Hebrew of each of the other passages where it is admitted we are to
understand a prophetical day, or year. In Ezekiel, 4 : 6, "I have appointed
thee each day for a year," the word is yom (day); and in Dan. 12 : 11,
"a thousand two hundred and ninety days"; and verse 12, the thousand
three hundred and five and thirty days," the word is yamim (days),
plural of yom, used in Ezekiel.
Now it seems to me that the Holy Spirit had some design in avoiding this word
in the prediction of the 2300 days, and using the emphatic compound word a-rav bo-ker,
(i.e.) evening-morning, and that this design was expressly to confine the meaning
to natural days; alluding to the two divisions of evening and morning, and also alluding
to the evening and morning daily sacrifices. Bishop Newton says:
In the original it is "Unto two thousand and three hundred
evenings and mornings"; and in allusion to this expression, it is said
afterwards (v. 26), "The vision of the evening and the morning is true."
In order to understand the meaning of the question to which these words are the
answer, we are to remember that for many hundred years the Jews had offered up a burnt
offering, consisting of a lamb, every morning, at the third hour, and every evening, at
the ninth hour; and this was called the perpetual or daily sacrifice.
Now the question was, "For how long a time shall the vision last, the
daily sacrifice be taken away," &c.? (Lowth's translation.) The
answer was, "Unto two thousand three hundred mornings and evenings."
I understand the reply to allude to the number of daily burnt offerings,
including both morning and evening sacrifices, which should be omitted through the
violence and cruelty of this "king of fierce countenance," Antiochus
Epiphanes. As there were two sacrifices on each day, the number of days would be
1150 days, or three years and nearly two months.
SECTION 6. -- This time fulfilled in the duration of the
persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, at Jerusalem.
Now let us inquire whether the time during which the daily sacrifices were
taken away did actually agree with this prediction.
Dr. Prideaux informs us that in the year BC 168, when Antiochus had issued a
decree commanding all his subjects to conform to his own religion,
He sent into Judea and Samaria, one Athenaeus, an old man, who being
well versed in all the rites of the Grecian idolatry, was thought a very proper person to
initiate those people into the observance of them. On his coming to Jerusalem, and
there executing his commission, all sacrifices to the God of Israel were made to cease,
all the observances of the Jewish religion were suppressed, and the temple itself was
polluted and made unfit for God's worship. The Syrian soldiers under this overseer
were the chief missionaries, and by them this conversion of the Jews to the king's
religion was effected. Having thus expelled the Jewish worship out of the temple,
they introduced thither the heathen in its stead, and consecrated the temple to the
worship of the chief of their false gods, Jupiter Olympus, erected his image upon one part
of the altar of holocaust, and upon another part, just in front of the image, built
another lesser altar, whereon they sacrificed to him.
This image was erected on the 15th day of the month Casleu (answering partly to
November and partly to December), and on the 25th of the same month they there began their
sacrifices to Jupiter. (See Maccabees, 1 : 54, 59.)
Exactly three yeas from this time, when Judas Maccabaeus had conquered
and expelled the soldiers of Antiochus, the pious Jews having purified the temple, and
made a new altar of incense, solemnly dedicated the temple anew to the worship of Jehovah,
on the 25th of the month Casleu (see I Mac. 4 : 52), the very same day on which three
years before the sacrifices to Jupiter had commenced.
The half of 2300 days, as we have seen, is three years and 55 days. We
are not informed by any historian exactly how many days elapsed between the time when
Athenaeus stopped the daily sacrifices, and the 25th of the month Casleu, when Jupiter was
worshipped in the temple. Had we been thus informed, I have no doubt that we should
find that time to be exactly 55 days; and thus that "the daily sacrifice was taken
away" for 2300 evening and morning offerings, and the worship of Jehovah in his
temple abolished for 1150 days, or three years and 55 days.
The account given by the author of the Maccabees of the feelings of the
patriotic Jewish army, when, after their victory, they beheld their much loved temple, is
beautiful and affecting.
Then said Judas and his brethren, behold our enemies are discomfited:
let us go up to cleanse and dedicate the sanctuary. Upon this all the host assembled
themselves together, and went up into mount Zion. And when they saw the sanctuary
desolate, and the altar profaned, and the gates burnt up, and shrubs growing in the courts
as in a forest, or in one of the mountains, yea, and the priests' chambers pulled down;
they rent their clothes and made great lamentation, and cast ashes upon their heads, and
fell down flat to the ground upon their faces.
(I Maccabees, 4 : 36)
Their patriotic and pious joy when they re-dedicated the house of their God, is
no less beautifully described (verses 52 to 58).
Now on the five and twentieth day of the ninth month, which is called
the month Casleu, they rose up betimes in the morning, and offered sacrifices, according
to the law, upon the new altar of burnt-offerings which they had made. Look! at what
time, and what day the heathen had profaned it, even in that was it dedicated with songs,
and anthems, and harps, and cymbals. Then all the people fell upon their faces
worshipping and praising the God of heaven, who had given them good success. And so
they kept the dedication of the altar eight days, and offered burnt offerings with
gladness, and sacrificed the sacrifice of deliverance and praise. They decked also
the forefront of the temple with crowns of gold, and with shields; and the gates and the
chambers they renewed, and hanged doors upon them. Thus was there very great
gladness among the people, for that the reproach of the heathen was put away.
After reading the above account, it will not appear surprising that Josephus,
the Jewish historian, should say in his Antiquities of the Jews (Book X, chap.
11, sec. 7), after mentioning this prophecy of Daniel's about the little horn,
And indeed, so it came to pass, that our nation suffered these things
under Antiochus Epiphanes, according to Daniel's vision, and what he wrote many years
before they came to pass.
SECTION 7. -- Examination of Mr. Miller's date for the commencement of the
2300 days or years.
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
and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
-- Dan. 8 : 13, 14.
It has already been remarked that the foundation stone of Mr. Miller's doctrine
of the coming of Christ in the year 1843 is his placing the commencement of the 2300 days,
which he considers to mean 2300 years, at the same time with the commencement of Daniel's
70 weeks, or 490 years.
He then brings us to the year 1843 by a very easy process, thus:
Whole time of the prophecy,
2300 years.
Prophecy commences before the crucifixion
490 years.
-------
1810
Age of Jesus Christ at the crucifixion,
33 years.
-------
Bringing us to the year AD
1843
as the date of the completion of the prophecy, which Mr. Miller supposes will be the year
of Christ's coming to judgment.
The reader is already aware that I do not regard the "two thousand three
hundred evenings and mornings" as prophetical days or years. As, however, some
of my readers may suppose that years are possibly intended by the 2300 days, I shall
proceed to show that even upon the supposition that this is the case, Mr. Miller
is still egregiously in error, in the date of their commencement, and consequently, in
that of their termination.
Let it be remembered that Mr. Miller acknowledges (p. 49) that the kingdom of
the he-goat (Dan. 8 : 8) means the establishment of the Grecian empire under Alexander the
Great, and that this event occurred in the year BC 331.
Let the reader also remember that Mr. M. acknowledges in the same page, that by
the four notable horns explained by the angel (v. 22) as meaning four kingdoms, we are to
understand the division of Alexander's dominions into four kingdoms under four of his
principal captains, and that this division took place BC 301. Now the prophecy says
(v. 23) that in the latter time of their kingdom, a king of fierce countenance
shall arise, &c. By him (v. 11, 12) "the daily sacrifice was to be taken
away, &c. In the 13th verse, it is asked, for how long a time this vision shall
last, and the daily sacrifice be taken away, &c., and the answer is, "Unto two
thousand and three hundred days."
Now let the reader observe that notwithstanding the above admission, Mr. M.
places the commencement of these 2300 days (years) in the year BC 457, that is, more than
a century before the he-goat or the four notable horns or the little horn had any
existence! Is it not the very height of absurdity to fix the date of the beginning
of these calamities (which the prophecy says were to occur in the latter time of
the four kingdoms which sprung from Alexander's) more than a century before Alexander was
born, and 126 years before the establishment of Alexander's Grecian empire? To
express this in the symbolical language of the prophecy, Is it not somewhat extraordinary
that this "little horn" (whatever was meant by it) should spring out of one of
the four horns upon the head of the goat, more than a century before the goat had any
existence?
And yet this is the absurdity upon which Mr. M. builds his whole theory of the
coming of Christ in 1843.
But the reader who has not read Mr. M.'s book will inquire, Does he place the
date so far back without a shadow of a reason?
I reply, I have read his third lecture very carefully, to discover whether he
has any reason whatever, for placing the commencement of the 2300 years at the same time
as the commencement of the 70 weeks; and I can discover none, except a most singular
inference he draws from the words in Daniel, 8th chap., 21st verse, "the man Gabriel
whom I had seen in the vision, at the beginning touched me, &c."
The inference Mr. Miller draws from the expression in this verse, "the
vision," which, for the sake of emphasis, he has printed in italics seven times
in one page (page 57) is that the vision of the 70 weeks, and the vision of the 2300 days,
are only one vision, and that the former vision of 490 years is a part of the
latter. But lest I should be supposed incorrectly to charge Mr. M. with an
absurdity, which he does not maintain, I will give his own words to show that I do not
misrepresent his views. On page 57, Mr. M. says,
We learn by the instruction of Gabriel that the seventy weeks were a
part of the vision.
And again,
We think the proof is strong that the vision of Daniel begins
457 years before Christ; take which from 2300, leaves 1843, when the vision must
be finished.
And again,
Do you believe the Bible is true? [he asks the objector]. We
do. Then if the Bible is true, Daniel's 70 weeks are a part of the vision,
and 490 years were accomplished when the Messiah was cut off; then 1810 years afterwards, the
vision is completed, which would be fulfilled in 1843.
To these sage reasonings about THE vision, it is only necessary
to remark, firstly, that the vision of the 2300 days, and the vision of the 70
weeks, were seen by Daniel at two separate times, 15 or 16 years apart; that they refer to
entirely different events, and are therefore, not two parts of THE same
vision, but two distinct visions; and secondly, that this emphatic THE,
upon which so much dependence is placed, is not in the Hebrew. It is in the
original merely "the angel Gabriel whom I had seen in vision (Heb.
be-cha-zon), at the beginning, &c." The Hebrew article hai (THE)
is not there.
If I were to bring forward any other argument to refute this absurd idea, I
fear my readers would think me like the lawyer who, in undertaking to prove that a certain
deed had not been signed by a designated individual, began by stating that he had fifteen
reasons to allege why the man in question had not signed the deed, and promising to state
them in order, began by saying, "My first reason is the fact that the man
was dead before the deed was written; my second --" "Stop,"
said the judge. "If you can prove that, you may spare yourself the trouble of
enumerating your remaining fourteen reasons.
The reader of the foregoing remarks will, I think, be satisfied that there are,
at least, very strong grounds for believing that the "little horn" means
Antiochus Epiphanes.
Mr. M. supposes it to mean Pagan and Papal Rome. After quoting Rev. 11 :
2, "the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months," he adds,
This last text only has reference to the Papal beast, which was the
image of the Pagan, but the text in consideration (viz.: Dan. 8 : 13, 14) has reference to
both Pagan and Papal.
He explains the question, "How long shall be the vision, concerning the
daily sacrifice?" by the following words:
That is, how long shall the Pagan transgression and the Papal
transgression tread under foot the sanctuary and the host? This [says he] must
be the true and literal meaning of our text.
Now supposing it were granted that the "little horn" is the Roman
government, still there is no reason for placing the commencement of these calamities in
the year BC 457.
Upon the above supposition, we cannot suppose the Roman power to spring up from
the head of the he-goat, or from Alexander's Grecian empire, before the latter was in
existence. The Roman power could only, in any sense, be regarded as a horn springing
from the head of the goat, when it should succeed to at least a portion of the dominions
of the four kingdoms into which Alexander's was divided. This took place when the
Romans at Pydna, in Macedonia, obtained a decisive victory over Perseus, the last king of
Greece and the west, and reduced that kingdom, which was one of the four that sprung from
Alexander's, to the condition of a Roman province.
So that if Mr. M. is right, in supposing the 2300 days to mean 2300 years, and
the little horn to mean the Roman power; still, the commencement cannot be dated before
the Roman power became a horn of the he-goat, or in other words, a branch of Alexander's
Grecian empire, by the conquest of Greece, BC 168.
Before passing to Mr. Miller's next position, I would remark that the
commencement of the 70 weeks, and that of the 2300 days, cannot be identical, because the
former commences at an event among the most joyful in the history of the
Jewish nation, viz.: "the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build
Jerusalem," after their long and weary captivity in Babylon should have ended; and the
latter commences at an event among the most painful and calamitous in their
history, viz.: "the taking away of the daily sacrifice, setting up the abomination of
desolation, and giving the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot."
This was an event calling for mourning and lamentation and tears, but that
was an occasion of heartfelt joy to the pious and patriotic Jews, as all will confess, who
peruse the account of its fulfillment in the seventh chapter of Ezra, verses 6 to 10.
In the reign of Artaxerxes, king of Persia, Ezra went up from Babylon:
and he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lord God of Israel had given: and
the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the Lord his God upon him.
And there went up some of the children of Israel, and of the priests, and the
Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, unto Jerusalem, in the
seventh year of Artaxerxes the king. And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month,
which was in the seventh year of the king. For upon the first day of the first month
began he to go up from Babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month came he to
Jerusalem, according to the good hand of his God upon him. For Ezra had prepared his
heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and
judgments.
The commandment or decree of Artaxerxes "to restore and to build
Jerusalem," predicted by Daniel, and recorded by Ezra, was an instance of special
favor towards the Jews, such as they have too seldom experienced from the kings of the
earth. He not only permitted them to return to the much-loved city of their fathers,
and encouraged them to raise from its ruins the temple of Jehovah, but also furnished them
with silver and gold, exempted from tribute the Levites, singers, porters, and others
connected with the service of the temple, and recommended them to the especial favor of
the surrounding nations.
After recording this memorable decree, the pious Ezra bursts forth in the
joyful language of grateful thanksgiving:
Blessed be the Lord God of our fathers which hath put such a thing as
this in the king's heart . . .
I need scarcely inquire of the attentive reader, after perusing Ezra's account
of this most joyful event in the history of the Jews, from which the prophecy of the
seventy weeks is to be dated -- Can this be the date of the beginning of those
dreadful calamities predicted in the vision of the 2300 days, when the daily sacrifice was
to be taken away, the abomination of desolation to be set up, and the sanctuary and host
to be trodden under foot?
The fact that the two visions predict events entirely opposite in their
character is of itself a proof abundantly sufficient that the date of the vision of the
2300 days does not begin in the same as that of the 70 weeks. As this is the one
single assumption upon which Mr. Miller's theory of the end of the world in 1843 is
founded, it must be evident that with the failure of this proof his whole system falls to
the ground.
Every intelligent reader of Mr. Miller's book will perceive that the
commencement of his other prophetic periods is obtained simply by subtracting them from
this one, to ascertain the date of their commencement; consequently the disproof of this
is the refutation of all the rest. As this fact, however, is not mentioned by Mr.
Miller, and as many may be struck with the apparent singular coincidences arising from our
author's making other supposed prophetic periods, besides the 2300 days, end in the same
year 1843, I shall proceed in the ensuing chapters to examine his remaining imaginary
proofs of the coming of Christ in that year.
CHAPTER IV.
THE PUNISHMENT OF
SEVEN TIMES
And if you will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk
contrary unto me, then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven
times for your sins.
-- Lev. 26 : 23, 24.
Let the reader peruse this passage and the chapter from which it is taken, and
then imagine, if he can, by what stretch of ingenuity Mr. M. draws from it a proof of the
coming of Christ to judgment in 1843. That I may not be suspected of
misrepresentation, I will state the process by which he performs this most singular
operation in his own words.
He has chosen these verses as the text of his 17th lecture. He proposes
to show,
First -- For what the people of God are punished.
Second -- Show how they are punished.
Third -- Show the time they will be punished.
Passing over his observations upon his two first heads of discourse, in which
there are some good pious remarks, let us examine what he says upon the third part of his
subject, where he proposes "to show what is meant by 'seven times' in the
text."
Seven times [says our author], in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, was fulfilled
in seven years. Nebuchadnezzar, for his pride and arrogancy against God, was driven
among the beasts of the field, and was made to eat grass as oxen, until seven times
passed over him, and until he learned that the most high ruled in the kingdom of men, and
gave it to whomsoever he would. This being a matter of history, and as an allegory
or sample to the people of God for their pride and arrogancy, in refusing to be reformed
by God, and claiming the power and will to do these things themselves -- they
too, like Nebuchadnezzar, must be driven among the beasts of the field, meaning the
kingdoms of this world (!), until they learn the sovereignty of God, and that he dispenses
his favors to whomsoever he will. That being a matter of history, and a sample only,
was fulfilled in seven years; but this being a prophecy will be fulfilled only in seven
prophetic times, which will be seven times 360 years; which will make 2520 years.
A little farther on, he remarks --
Therefore, the sum and substance of the whole is, that the people of God
would be among the beasts, or kings of the earth, seven times, i.e. 2520 years.
Having decided by this singular process of reasoning that the people of God
shall be punished 2520 years -- which period, to make it agree with his previous
conclusion, fixed upon by comparing the 2300 days and the 70 weeks, must end in the year
1843 -- our author has nothing to do but to subtract one number from the other,
to fix the time of the commencement of this punishment.
Thus,
2520, whole period.
1843 after Christ.
--------
677 before Christ.
He then looks into his Bible chronology, and finds that in the year BC 677 one of the
kings of Judah, named Manasseh, was carried a prisoner to Babylon. Here, then, says
Mr. M., must begin this punishment of seven times.
It would have answered his purpose, doubtless, much better had this subtraction
happened to have brought out the number 606 BC, the date of the commencement of the 70
years captivity of the Israelites in Babylon; but figures will not bend, and therefore,
for want of a better, this date of Manasseh's being taken prisoner is adopted, though it
was the mere captivity of an individual king, and not of the Jewish people, as the
Babylonish captivity was, 71 years after.
Mr. Miller does not inform us of this mode of calculating backwards to
ascertain the commencement of his 2520 years.
He tells us this punishment or captivity took place in the year BC 677, and
then bids us take that number from the whole number of the years,
2520
677
--------
1843
Remarkable coincidence! some may exclaim. We have arrived again at the very same
date! But does not any person of reflection perceive that the number 677 was
obtained by Mr. Miller by calculating backward, as I have before stated?
And of course he understood subtraction well enough to know that if 1843 taken from 2520
left 677, then 677 taken from the same number would leave 1843. Surely there can be
no mystery, nothing wonderful in this.
That he did not select the number 677 BC from choice, but from necessity, is
very evident from the fact that it was not a national captivity, but only of a single
king, who, after a period of imprisonment, was restored again to his throne. Besides
this, the removal of such a king, who was a most wicked and cruel tyrant, even causing
"his children to pass through the fire to Moloch," must have been a blessing to
his subjects rather than a punishment.
Mr. Miller says (page 262), in reference to his 2520 years,
The proper question would now be, when did those years begin? I
answer, they must have begun with the first captivity of the tribe of Judah, the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, in Babylon.
He then quotes Jer. 15 : 4 --
And I will cause them to remove into all the kingdoms of the earth,
because of Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, king of Judah for that which he did in
Jerusalem.
He adds, just after,
Then if Babylon was the nation which was to scatter the people of God,
and this, too, in the days of Manasseh, I ask, when was this captivity? I
answer, in the year 677 before Christ; see 2 Chron. 33 : 9 to 13, and see also
the Bible chronology of that event.
In the above extract, a passage from Jeremiah, the prophet, is quoted, in which
God says, "I will cause them to be removed into all kingdoms of the earth, because
of Manasseh," &c., to prove that this captivity was to take place, to use
Mr. Miller's own words, "in the days of Manasseh."
I cannot believe that Mr. Miller would be guilty of deception, even to
establish a favorite date. I must conclude, therefore, that when he wrote the words
above he was ignorant of a fact of which almost any Sunday school scholar wold inform him,
viz. : that Jeremiah wrote that prophecy long after Manasseh was dead!
Jeremiah did not begin to prophesy, as any person may see by turning
to Jer. 1 : 3, till the thirteenth year of king Josiah, who was the grandson of
Manasseh, and consequently fifteen years after the death of Manasseh, who died BC 643.
Jeremiah began to prophesy fourteen or fifteen years from this date, or at the
earliest, BC 629. This time, when Jeremiah began his prophecies, was
therefore 48 years after the captivity of Manasseh in 677; and yet, who would
believe it! this writer, who tells us, more than once, how many years he has spent in
studying the prophecies, is found applying a prediction of Jeremiah, "I will
remove them," &c., to an event which took place BC 677, and consequently 48 years
before he prophesied at all, and probably many years before he was born! for Jeremiah,
when he began to prophesy, was but young in years; he said (ch. 1 : 6) "Oh, Lord God!
behold I cannot speak, for I am a child."
In the prophecy of Jeremiah under consideration, the prophet certainly did
allude to "the first captivity of the tribe of Judah, the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
in Babylon," as Mr. Miller says; but unfortunately for Mr. Miller's dates and theory,
this did not occur in the year BC 677, when Manasseh was made prisoner, for the
inhabitants of Jerusalem were not carried captive with him; but in the year BC 606, twenty-three
years after Jeremiah began to prophesy, and not, as Mr. M. makes out, forty-eight
years before.
But Mr. M. finds this wonderful period of "seven years," or
"times," or 2520 years, not only in Leviticus, but in Ezekiel, in the following
words, which are found in chap. 39th, 9th verse: --
And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth and shall set
on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows,
and the handstaves and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years.
"Ezekiel here gives us to understand," says Mr. M.,
that by means of the people of God being driven out of their cities, and
by the word of God, they would be enabled to destroy, or be destroying their enemies, and
to spoil those who had been spoiling them, and rob those who had robbed them; and this
too, would take seven years or 2520 days; and Ezekiel being commanded to reckon each day
for a year (4th chapter, 4th to 6th verse) then it would be 2520 years. The proper
question would now be -- When did those years begin?
Mr. M. then goes on to answer -- in the year BC 677, as before, the
date of Manasseh's captivity.
Here again our astonishment must be excited, as Mr. M is ignorant of the fact
that Ezekiel delivered this prophecy long after Manasseh was carried into Babylon, and
half a century after Manasseh was dead! Ezekiel was not called to the
prophetical office till BC 594, in the fifth year of Jehoiachin's captivity. (See
chap. 1 : 2.) This was 83 years after Mr. M.'s commencement of his pretended
"seven times" or 2520 years. If Mr. M. did not know that Jeremiah
and Ezekiel wrote their prophecies long after the time of Manasseh, he should not have
undertaken to expound prophecy.
If he did know this fact, and yet applied these predictions:
"I will remove them, &c." -- (Jer.)
"They shall go forth" &c. -- (Ezek.)
to an event already past, as though that event were yet future when these
prophets wrote, then Mr. M. must have been guilty of a most unwarrantable perversion of
scripture, merely to serve a purpose, and establish a date. My charity forbids me to
take the latter horn of this dilemma. But whichever is true, Mr. M. cannot be a safe
guide in the interpretation of prophecy. No one should undertake to expound prophecy
by history who does not possess an acquaintance with even the alphabet of Bible
chronology. I have merely pointed out these gross and palpable blunders as instances
of the abundant proofs found in almost every page of Miller's book of his want of that
kind of knowledge essential to one who undertakes to expound the prophecies.
But there is another absurdity attached to this strange exposition of Mr.
M. Let the reader turn to the passage in the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus, and
read from v. 18 to v. 28, beginning v. 18, "And if ye will not for all this hearken
unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins,"
&c. Before he has read the verses, he has doubtless discovered what I charitably
hope escaped the notice of Mr. M., as he does not mention it, and it would destroy his
strange exposition altogether; namely, that this "seven times" is to be repeated
four times over (see verses 18, 21, 24, 28); so that if "seven times" means,
according to Mr. M. 2520 years, then the whole period must be over ten thousand
years. I leave it to Mr. M. to fix the date of its commencement, so as to bring the
termination of these ten thousand years to his favorite date of 1843.
And are these the sort of arguments by which wondering crowds of
people in their proper senses have been drawn together, and the minds of many have been
shaken or troubled as though the day of the Lord were at hand? The bare statement of
these absurd suppositions, to an intelligent person conversant with the history of the
world, would be a sufficient refutation of them; and while I write, their absurdity
appears so glaring that I am almost ashamed to employ my pen in reply to them. To
some persons, however, positive assertions, such as Mr. Miller indulges in, are mistaken
for arguments, and though their minds are not convinced by the soundness of the reasons
advanced, they are awed into submission by the confident tone assumed by the
theorist. I have adopted as my motto the words of the apostle --
"Prove all things,
hold fast that which is good."
If everybody would rigidly observe this rule, when novel theories are presented
for their consideration, there would be vastly less error in the world; and the present
reply to such a mass of error as is contained in Mr. Miller's book would have been
needless.
CHAPTER V.
THE THREE PROPHETICAL
PERIODS.
Twelve hundred and sixty days;
Twelve hundred and ninety;
Thirteen hundred and thirty-five.
SECTION 1. -- The three periods compared.
And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of
the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
-- Dan. 12 : 6.
And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the
river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that
liveth for ever, that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he
shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be
finished.
-- v. 7.
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the
abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and
ninety days.
-- v. 11.
Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred
and five and thirty days.
-- v. 12.
Here are three distinct prophetical periods.
1. In verse seventh; a time, times, and a half, meaning says
Miller, three and a half prophetical years, or three and a half times 360, making 1260
prophetical days, that is years.
2. In verse eleventh, twelve hundred and ninety days.
3. In verse twelfth, thirteen hundred and thirty-five days.
Mr. Miller understand the last of these three periods to end at the same time
as his 2300 years, viz.: in 1843, and the other two periods to end 45 years before, viz.:
in 1798. This 45 years is merely the difference of the two numbers, 1290 and 1335.
He has nothing now to do but to reckon back, by subtracting 1335 from
1843, to find out the beginning of this period.
1843
1335
--------
508
Mr. M. supposes that in the year AD 508, obtained by the above easy process, "the
pagan abomination" was to come to an end. Because there is a difference of 30
years between the two numbers 1290 and 1260, he concludes that "The Papal abomination
will be set up 30 years after 508, viz.: in AD 538." To effect this, Mr. M.
decides, not, as would be most natural, that the two periods 1260 and 1290 end 30
years apart, but that they begin thirty years apart, and end together.
SECTION 2. -- The 1260 days.
And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out
the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given
into his hand, until a time, and times and the dividing of a time. ( 3 1/2
times 360 or 126 years.)
-- Daniel 7 : 25.
It shall be for a time, times and a half; and when he shall
have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be
finished.
-- Daniel 12 : 7.
But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not,
for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty-two
months. (30 times 42 is 1260 days or years.)
-- Revelation 11 : 2.
And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy, a
thousand, two hundred and three score days, clothed in sackcloth.
-- Revelation 11 : 3.
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared
of God, that they should feed her there a thousand, two hundred and three-score days.
-- Revelation 12 : 6.
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.
(1260 years)
-- Revelation 13 : 5.
I am happy to express my general concurrence with Mr. M. in the application of
these passages to the papal antichrist, who has for so many centuries "spoken great
words against the Most High," and "worn out the saints of the Most High."
Did it consist with the plan I have marked out, I should point out many places
in his explanations of the above texts where I think he has manifested great inaccuracy
and want of judgment, especially in his fanciful explanation of the two witnesses in his
13th lecture, in which he strives to show that the two witnesses who were "to be
killed," and "whose dead bodies were to lie in the street of the great
city," were the Old and New Testaments!
As my intentions, however, to confine myself chiefly to an exposure of the
total inaccuracy of the dates he has chosen, as the completion of his various prophetic
periods, I shall leave unnoticed most of what Mr. M. has said upon the above passages of
scripture, as irrelevant to my argument, and proceed to examine his opinion of the
completion and of the commencement of the period of 1260 years, so often referred to in
the above cited passages of scripture.
I believe, as Mr. Miller does, and indeed most Protestant commentators, that
the 1260 years denote the duration of the dominion of the papal antichrist. After
comparing these passages, and the entire prophecies to which they belong, with the history
and character of popery, I cannot doubt that this is the mystical Babylon, whose name is
written in Rev. 17 : 5, and that when the 1260 years are accomplished, then
"shall the great city Babylon be thrown down, and SHALL BE
FOUND NO MORE AT ALL!" --
Rev. 18 : 21.
Mr. Miller supposes that these 1260 years were completed in 1798, having before
obtained this date, as we have seen in the last section, by subtracting 45 from his first
discovered number 1843. Of course this will give 538 as the date of the rise and
establishment of the Papal Antichristian dominion.
1798
1260
--------
508
Now let us proceed to inquire whether the language of prophecy and the voice of history
will give their testimony in favor of this, as the true date of the establishment of the
Papal power.
In Mr. Miller's attempts to establish this date, he has manifested a most
superficial acquaintance with ecclesiastical history.
On page 274, he says:
Some have fixed the time of the church entering into her wilderness
state as early as AD 534, when the great controversy between the orthodox and arians, in
the days of Justinian, shook the religious world into two great divisions.
And again just after,
Other writers say that it was as late as AD 606, when the pope obtained
civil and ecclesiastical power, and that he came out publicly wearing two swords.
Between these two points, I believe all writers fix the time of the church
entering into her wilderness state, "a place prepared of God, that they should feed
her there 1260 days."
Now every one who is acquainted with ecclesiastical history knows that "the
great controversy between the orthodox and the arians" took place, not in 534,
but between the years 320 and 400.
The following are the dates of the principal events in this celebrated
controversy:
325 The Arians were condemned at the
Council
of Nice, under the emperor
Constantine.
326 Athanasius chosen bishop of Alexandria.
335 Synod at Tyre in reference to Athanasius,
who
is banished to Treves.
337 Death of Constantine the Great.
Arianism
triumphs under his son
Constantius,
from 337 to 361.
355 Athanasius, the orthodox bishop of
Alexandria,
is driven from Alexandria
by
Constantius, who appoints an Arian,
named
George, in his stead.
363 Athanasius returns to Alexandria, upon
the
accession of Jovian to the empire.
370 The emperor Valens destroys eighty
ministers,
by burning a vessel.
381 The Council of Constantinople confirms
the
Nicene creed.
It is true that in the beginning of the sixth century the Arian cause was
maintained by the Vandals in Africa, and the Goths and some other nations. "The
triumphs of Arianism were, however," says Mosheim,
and its prosperous days were entirely eclipsed, when the Vandals were
driven out of Africa, and the Goths out of Italy, by the arms of Justinian. One
thing is certain, that from this period the Arian sect declined apace, and could never
after recover any considerable degree of stability and consistence.
This conquest of the Vandals, and consequent overthrow of Arianism, took place
about the date above named in the extract from Mr. Miller's book. Of course I shall
not be expected, orthodox as I claim to be, to admit that the overthrow of
Arianism was the establishment of antichrist!
Nor, indeed, does Mr. M. quite fall into this absurdity; he places the latter
event four years afterwards, viz. AD 538. It will be remembered that Mr. Miller had
before fixed upon this date as the commencement of the 1260 years, to make it agree with
his year 1843; that is, with the addition of the 45 years that he supposes are to follow
the downfall of antichrist, thus,
Rise of the
papal antichrist,
538
Prophetic period,
1260
Between the downfall of
Popery
and the end of the world, 45
--------
1843
To establish this latter date, therefore, he must find some event to
correspond with 538, which he may explain as the commencement of the dominion of this
Antichristian power; when, as we learn from the passages of scripture at the head of this
section, "the saints were to be given into his hand for a time and times and the
dividing of time," the true church should fly from his persecutions into the
wilderness for "a thousand, two hundred and three-score days," and power should
be given unto him, to continue forty and two month." Now I should be willing to
challenge the ingenuity of any one of my historical readers to guess the event which Mr.
M. has selected as the fulfillment of these prophecies, the commencement of the 1260 years
and the persecution of the true church.
What do my readers imagine is this event? It is the establishment of the
Emperor Justinian's celebrated code of civil law to regulate the jurisprudence of his
empire ! ! !
Even this did not occur just at the date required, viz. : 538, but in
534. There is however, no other event so near to 538, by several years, as this is,
which can by any possibility be made to serve the purpose; and therefore, for want of a
better, this must do.
Let not the reader who is acquainted with history suppose that this notion is
too absurd to proceed even from the fruitful mind of Mr. Miller! Here are
his words (page 276),
We find that Justinian, emperor of Constantinople, formed a code of laws
about AD 534, which were published and sanctioned, in the Western Empire (!) at
Rome, about four yeas afterwards; on which code of laws the Pope has claimed his
authority (!!) to rule over kings and punish heretics with confiscation of their
goods, imprisonment or torture of body, and even death.
Upon this strange statement, which ever person but moderately acquainted with
history will perceive to be the very essence of absurdity, I have only to remark, first,
that the Western Empire ceased to exist in the year 475, more than half a century
before the code of Justinian was ever framed, upon the conquest of Rome by Odoacer, king
of the Heruli, and the deposition of Augustulus, the last of the Western Emperors; and secondly,
this said code had nothing whatever to do with the Pope's ruling over kings and punishing
heretics. This celebrated Justinian code of laws was nothing more nor less
than a digest of the numerous works on Roman jurisprudence which had appeared before the
age of Justinian. It was drawn up by the learned civilian, Tribonian, himself, as
was supposed, a heathen, and nine associates; and it settled the civil and criminal law of
the empire, pointed out the relations between fathers and children, husbands and wives,
guardians and wards, &c., established laws in relation to property, inheritance, and
succession, legacies, trusts, interest of money, &c., and settled what crimes should
be punished with death, &c.
At the time this code was published, the city of Rome was in the power of the
Ostrogoths. Two years (Not "about four") afterwards, viz. : in
536, Belisarius, the general of Justinian, took the city of Rome, and added it to the
empire of his master Justinian, when as a matter of course it was governed, as all the
rest of the empire was, by the Justinian code of laws. But what has all this to do
with the establishment of the papal dominion? "The magistrates appointed by the
Justinian code were not subject to the authority of the church," as we are informed
by the historian Gibbon (vol. 4, page 137). The pope, who was at that time only a
bishop, upon the approach of Belisarius to the walls of the city, humbly proffered his
voluntary allegiance to Justinian, the emperor, his master. Surely this was not the
time when "POWER was given unto him that he should
continue forty and two months"!
In the extract before quoted from page 274 of Mr. M.'s book, after mentioning
the year 534, he proceeds to inform us that some writers place the establishment of the
Papal dominion "as late as AD 606, when the Pope attained civil and
ecclesiastical power, and came out publicly wearing the two swords."
This again is incorrect. The Pope had for many years before 606 been
adding to his ecclesiastical power, which was finally established in that year;
but it was many years after this, not indeed till 755, or at the earliest, in 727, that he
obtained civil power, or became a temporal prince.
It is true the year 606 is a remarkable era in the history of Papacy, and one
which many judicious expositors fix as the commencement of the 1260 years.
In that year the Emperor Phocas, one of the most wicked men and cruel tyrants
that ever swayed a scepter, bestowed upon Pope Boniface III the title of Universal
Bishop, and thus constituted him the supreme earthly head of the universal
church. This title had been assumed by John, bishop of Constantinople, in 588.
In consequence of this assumption, a fierce contention arose between the rival sees of
Rome and Constantinople, which should be the greatest.
This quarrel was decided as above stated by the Emperor Phocas; and "when
the bishops of Constantinople maintained," as we are informed by an ancient writer,
"that their church was not only equal in dignity and authority to that of Rome, but
also the head of all the Christian churches, this tyrant opposed their pretensions, and
granted the pre-eminence to the church of Rome." Thus was established the
supreme ecclesiastical dominion of Papal Rome.
In proof of the above facts, and in disproof of Mr. Miller's assertion that the
Pope obtained his civil power, as well as his ecclesiastical power, in the year
606, the reader is referred to Mosheim, Milner, Jones, and all the respectable writers on
ecclesiastical history.
Immediately after the words from Mr. M.'s book, last quoted, he adds (page
275),
Between these two points (that is between 534 and 606) I believe
ALL writers fix the time of the church entering into the wilderness state,
"a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there 1260 days."
Now let the reader peruse the following extracts from such well known writers
as Scott, and Adam Clarke, the commentators, Milner, the ecclesiastical history, and
Newton, the author of the dissertations on the prophecies (to which many more might be
added), and then compare them with this assertion of Mr. Miller, and decide for themselves
whether he is a man of such extensive reading as to be qualified to publish to the world
what ALL writers say on this subject.
FIRST EXTRACT. -- (Scott's Notes upon Rev. 11 :
2.) --
The pope became universal bishop, AD 606, and was fully established as a
temporal prince AD 756. (Mosheim says, 755.) . . . The beginning of these
years (the 1260 years) cannot well be fixed sooner than AD 606, nor later than AD 756.
SECOND EXTRACT. -- The learned Dr. Adam Clarke, in his
commentary on Dan. 7 : 25, where it is said of the papal Antichrist, "he
shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most
High, and think to change times and laws; and they shall be given into his hand, until a
time, and times, and the dividing of a time," remarks,
In prophetic language a time signifies a year, and a prophetic
year has a year for each day. Three years and a half, a day standing for a year,
will amount to 1260 years, if we reckon thirty days to each month, as the Jews
do.
In his introductory remarks at the head of the same chapter, he says,
It will be proper to remark that the period of a time, times and a
half, mentioned in the 25th verse as the duration of the dominion of the little horn
that made war with the saints (generally supposed to be a symbolical representation of the
papal power) had most probably its commencement in AD 755 or 756, when Pepin, king of
France, invested the Pope with temporal power. This hypothesis will bring the
conclusion of the period to about the year of Christ 2000, a time fixed by Jews and
Christians for some remarkable revolution, when the world (as they suppose) will be
renewed, the wicked cease from troubling the church, and the saints of the Most High have
dominion over the whole habitable globe.
THIRD EXTRACT. -- (Dr. Milner's church history,
vol. 1, p. 557.) --
From the year 727 to about the year 2000 (calculating exactly it would
be 1987) we have the dominion of the beast, and the prophesying of the people in
sackcloth, which was to continue 1260 years. We must now look for the real church,
either in distinct individual saints, who, in the midst of popery, were preserved by
effectual grace in vital union with the son of God, or in associations of true Christians,
formed in different regions, which were in a state of persecution and much affliction.
FOURTH EXTRACT. -- (Newton's dissertations, p.
617.) --
In the year 727, the pope and people of Rome revolted from the exarch of
Ravenna, and shook off their allegiance to the Greek emperor. In the year 755, the
pope obtained the exarchate of Ravenna for himself, and thenceforward acted as an absolute
temporal prince. In the year 774, the pope, by the assistance of Charles the Great
(Charlemagne), became possessed of the kingdom of the Lombards. In the year 787, the
worship of images was fully established, and the supremacy of the pope acknowledged by the
second council of Nice. From one or other of these transactions, it is probable that
the beginning of the reign of Antichrist is to be dated. What appears to be most
probable is, that it is to be dated from the year 727, when, as Sigonius says, "Rome
and the Roman dukedom came from the Greeks to the Roman pontiff." Hereby he
became in some measure a horn or temporal prince (see Dan. 7 :
8, 20, 21, 24, 25), though his power was not fully established till some years
afterwards. Before he was a horn at all, he could not answer the character
of the little horn. If, then, the beginning of the 1260 years of the reign
of Antichrist is to be dated from the year 727, their end will fall near the year 2000.
I have quoted the above extract at length from Bishop Newton partly because it is an
instance of that modesty which will ever characterize a truly learned man, and
partly because it expresses nearly my own views on the commencement of the 1260 years.
I think, with Newton, that one of the above dates is the true era of the
establishment of the Papal power. I prefer, however, though without professing any
certainty on the subject, the year 755, which is the true date of the Pope's becoming
fully a horn or temporal prince, to the year 727 which seems to be preferred by
Newton and also by Milner.
As I select the year 755, when the Pope became a temporal sovereign, as the
most probable commencement of the 1260 years, it may be expected that I should state the
circumstances which led to this memorable event. These circumstances were as
follows. In the year 751, while Childeric II was seated upon the throne of France,
the celebrated Pepin, son of the great conqueror Charles Martel, was mayor of the palace
to Childeric, and possessed of more real power than his royal master. Having
conceived the design of deposing Childeric, and establishing himself on the throne, Pepin
sent ambassadors to the Pope of Rome, with the inquiry, "Whether the divine law did
not permit a valiant and warlike people to dethrone a monarch, who was incapable of
discharging any of the functions of royalty and to substitute in his place one more worthy
to rule, and who had already rendered most important services to the state?"
Pope Zachary, with the hope of securing the protection of the powerful Pepin, and by his
means enlarging his own power, readily gave an answer in the affirmative.
When this favorable decision of the Roman pontiff was known in France, Pepin
found no difficulty in dethroning Childeric, and seizing upon the throne without the
smallest resistance. Pope Stephen II, the successor of Zachary who died after the
above event, solemnly confirmed this decision; and though Pepin had been anointed king by
Boniface, the Pope's legate, yet desiring that this unction should be again administered
by the Pope himself, Stephen traveled into France, and anointed and crowned Pepin a second
time.
Favors like these were not to pass unrewarded. In the year 755,
Aistulphus a bitter enemy of the Pope, having been entirely conquered by Pepin, a
territory in the north of Italy, called the Exarchate of Ravenna, was taken away from
Aistulphus, together with Pentapolis, and different cities, castles, and territories in
the Roman dukedom, and delivered up to the Pope of Rome. Thus, in the year 755, the
Pope became, bona fide, a temporal prince.
I have come to the conclusion that this is, most probably, the true
commencement of the 1260 years, not to support any preconceived scheme, but simply from
the terms of the prophecies.
I have attempted to prove that Mr. M. has erred in fixing the commencement
of the 1260 years in 538. I shall now endeavor to show that the close of this period
to which his calculations bring him, viz. 1798, is no less inconsistent with historical
facts.
In the year 1798, Mr. M. tells us, "the Pope lost his power to reign over
the kings of the earth, &c. by being deprived of his civil power by
Bonaparte." It is true that in that year Bonaparte triumphed over the
Pope. This then, according to Mr. Miller, is the death of the papal antichrist, the
downfall of this mystical Babylon. Now let the reader keep in mind that in 1814 the
Pope was re-established in his temporal power, and that he continues to occupy "the
seat of the beast," and to wear his triple crown, and then let him peruse the
triumphal song over the fall of Babylon in the 18th chapter of Revelations, and decide
whether it can apply to the temporary interruption of the papal government in 1798.
And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having
great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he cried mightily with
a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the
habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and the cage of every unclean and
hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her
fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her . . .
For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she
shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord god who judgeth her. And
the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her,
shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city
Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come. . . . And a mighty
angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with
violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and SHALL BE
FOUND NO MORE AT ALL. And the
voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard
NO MORE AT ALL in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he
be, shall be found ANY MORE in thee; and the sound of a
millstone shall be heard NO MORE AT ALL in
thee; and the light of a candle shall shine NO MORE AT
ALL in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and the bride shall be heard
NO MORE AT ALL in thee . . .
The application which Mr. M. makes of prophecies in the 11th chapter of Daniel
to Bonaparte and the Holy Alliance (!) is so exceedingly puerile that I cannot
bring myself to waste time and paper in seriously exposing its absurdity. It must
certainly be seen by all. I did not promise to follow Mr. M. through all his
misinterpretations of prophecies, but only those which, in his view, go to establish his
final date of 1843.
CHAPTER VI.
THE NUMBER OF THE
BEAST.
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.
-- Rev. 13 : 18.
Mr. Miller commences his lecture on this passage by telling us that
Rivers of ink have been shed 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.
All this is, doubtless, in a great measure, correct, but we should hardly
expect the writer to have proceeded immediately to increase these "rivers of
ink," by writing and adding another to the many solutions which have been given,
which in point of "absurdity," in the opinion of many, is more than a match for
most of its predecessors. Just afterwards, Mr. M. remarks,
I hope, my dear hearers, that you have learned that if there is any
mystery of God not explained by the bible, it is not for us to understand.
Therefore, in treating upon this subject, I shall endeavor to present the scripture on the
point, and then leave you to judge whether we have light or not.
Would any one suppose, after having read the explanations given by Mr. Miller
of the mystery of the "punishment of seven times," from the books of Leviticus
and Ezekiel, landing us in the year 1843, that the above wise observation, printed in
italics, could have proceeded from him? Yet it is even so. Such is the
inconsistency of man. Mr. Miller then proceeds, in order to make good his promise,
"to present the scripture on the point," to quote a number of passages of
scripture in relation to the kind of wisdom spoken of it in the text.
And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of
man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.
-- I Cor. 2 : 4.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual,
-- v. 13.
and a number of kindred passages, beautiful and instructive indeed, but
entirely irrelevant to the explanation which he gives of "the number of the
beast."
The reader will, doubtless, remember that Mr. M., by placing the commencement
of the 1290 years (mentioned in Daniel, 12 : 11) thirty years before the
beginning of the 1260 years, brings the commencement of the 1290 to 508; which he has
before explained to be the year of the downfall of Pagan Rome.
Understanding therefore "the number of the beast" to signify in this
place the lifetime of Pagan Rome, he proceeds to show when it commenced, and when it
ended. "Let a wise Daniel," says he (page 82),
or him that hath the wisdom of God like a Daniel, or let him
that hath understanding in the word of God, or him that will compare scripture with
scripture, count the number of the beast, or the number of his name.
In pursuance of his design to perform this task, and to "count the number
of the beast," Mr. M. adds (page 83),
This power (Rome Pagan) would be taken away when his six hundred and
sixty-six prophetic days should end; and this brings us to show when those days began, and
of course, when they ended.
He had before placed the downfall of Pagan Rome in 508, in order to make it
agree with his other calculations in relation to the year 1843. He has now therefore
nothing to do but to subtract one number from the other, to obtain the year before Christ
when his Pagan Rome began, and he finds this to be BC 158. Thus
666
508 after Christ.
-------
158 before Christ.
Mr. Miller does not tell us that he has obtained this number by his art of "reckoning
backward," but well knowing that this must be the date to commence his number 666, in
order to end it AD 508, he decides that the lifetime of Pagan Rome began BC 158.
Everybody knows that Rome was founded nearly six centuries before this, viz. : in the year
BC 753, and that it was "Pagan" from the commencement of its existence.
It is not so slight a circumstance, however, as six centuries, that will drive
our author from a necessary date. The year 158 is wanted, and it must be had.
Mr. M. finds that in this year the Jews, harassed by the Greeks, sought protection of the
Romans, and concluded with them a treaty. In consequence of this Mr. M. sagely
concludes that this is the commencement of "the number of the beast," or the
beginning of Pagan Rome!
His own words are (page 84),
Then if this be correct, that Pagan Rome began his power in the
year before Christ 158, and was to continue 666 years -- take 158 from 666, and
you will have 508. Then in the year AD 508, Paganism ceased.
What will the historian say to this? "Pagan Rome began his
power in the year BC 158!" Had Pagan Rome no power in the days of Cincinnatus
and Camillus centuries before? or in the days of the great Fabius who, sixty years
previous to this date, had triumphed over the mighty Carthaginian conqueror, Hannibal,
beneath the walls of Cannae? or in the days of the great Scipio, the hero of the second
Punic War, who, forty-four years before, had carried the war into Africa, and humbled the
pride of Carthage on the plains of Zama?
"The league between the Romans and the Jews," Mr. M. says,
was ratified and carried into effect when the Greeks, under
Bacchides, left besieging Jerusalem upon the command of the Romans, and as Josephus
and Maccabees tell us, never returned to trouble the Jews any more. This league
then took effect when the third kingdom in Daniel's vision (i.e. the Grecian) ceased
harassing the Jews, and the fourth kingdom (i.e. the Roman) began its rule over the
Jews and the world.
For proof of this he refers us to 1 Maccabees, chapters 8, 9.
Here too, Mr. M. displays his usual inaccuracy. It is not a fact that in
158 the Grecian kingdom "ceased harassing the Jews," and never returned to
trouble them any more. Nor does the chapter in Maccabees say so.
He [ that is, Bacchides] returned and went his way into his own land,
neither came he any more into their borders.
It is true that this one general, Bacchides, gave them no more trouble, but
after his death, the Greeks under their kings Demetrius Nicator, Antiochus Sidetes, and
others of the successors of Antiochus Epiphanes, did "return to trouble and harass
the Jews"; and any one may read in Prideaux's Connections (vol. 2, page 197)
that 23 years after 158, that is, in the year BC 135, Antiochus Sidetes came against the
Jews and besieged and shut them up in Jerusalem, as his great uncle, the cruel Antiochus
Epiphanes had done thirty-five years before. So much for Mr. M.'s historical
accuracy.
The truth is, the interpretation of the verse given by Mr. M.,
that "the number of his name," 666, denotes the duration of
Pagan Rome, is a most farfetched and improbable supposition,
and can in no way be reconciled with truth. Were the date of its commencement, given
by Mr. M., (viz. : 158) correct, still the end would fall at the wrong time, for Pagan
Rome ceased, not in 508, but nearly two hundred years before, at the conversion to
Christianity of the emperor, Constantine the Great, or at the latest, at the death of
Julian the apostate, in 363.
I will not imitate Mr. M., by adding another to the many inter- pretations of
this text, which have been assigned. The passage is confessedly difficult, and where
so many wiser men than Mr. Miller or myself have erred, it becomes us to exercise
humility and modesty.
CHAPTER VII.
THE SEVEN EPISTLES,
AND THE PARABLE
OF THE TEN VIRGINS.
SECTION
1. -- The
seven epistles. -- Rev. chap. 2, 3.
Mr. Miller regards these interesting and instructive epistles to the seven
churches in Asia, "Unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto
Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea," not as
addressed to churches then in being, but as prophetical of successive periods in the
history of the church. Mr. M. has two whole lectures devoted to the seven epistles,
in which he endeavors to establish this fanciful idea. His principal reason is,
because the book of Revelations is called a "prophecy," and because
(ch. 1 : 1) it is said to be a revelation of things "which must shortly come to
pass." "Not," says Mr. M., "thing that have been."
In reply to this I wold simply ask, did Mr. M. overlook the natural division of
this book into three parts, in ch. 1 : 19, where the evangelist John is directed to
"write the things thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the
things which shall be hereafter?"
1. The things which thou hast seen; that is, the wonderful
vision which he saw of Christ in ch. 1.
2. The things which are; consisting of the seen epistles to the
seen churches in Asia, in ch. 2, 3. These churches were then in being, and
as pastor of the first named of them, the church at Ephesus, the venerable John, after his
return from Patmos, spent the close of his long and useful life.
3. The things which shall be hereafter; that is, all the events,
then future, which shall be found contained in the book.
Another reason which Mr. M. gives for explaining these epistles as prophetical
of seven different periods is a correspondence which he fancies he discovers between the
signification of the names of these cities, and the state of the church in different ages.
For instance, he tells us that the word Ephesus signifies desirable chief;
and he thinks this describes the state of the church in the apostles' days! He tells
us again, the word Smyrna signifies myrrh, and he thinks the next age of the
church might be compared to myrrh ! !
I will not try the patience of my readers by exposing these strange conceits
(for certainly there can be no need of it), or by following him through the remainder of
his ninth and tenth lectures, which are occupied in discussing this subject.
The last of these churches, that of Laodicea, Mr. M. tells us, represents the
state of the church in the latter days. The Laodicean state he says began
in 1798 and will continue till 1843, a period of 45 years.
On page 155, Mr. M. says,
This Laodicean church began about AD 1798, and will last forty-five
years. When this dispensation will close, the judgment will set, and the books will
be opened; the hypocrites be spued out of the church, and the sanctuary be cleansed.
I will not waste time in exposing the extravagance and presumption exhibited in
the preceding extract, by Mr. M., or any uninspired man, in presuming to fix the
commencement, duration, and continuance of a prophetical period, when the prophecy itself
(admitting it to be a prophecy) says not one word on the Subject. If this is not being
wise above what is written, I know not what is.
But I would ask the reader, Does the present state of the Christian church
since 1798 correspond to the dark picture presented in the above verses? This
epistle to the church at Laodicea has in it more of censure, and less of commendation,
than any other one of the seven.
Is it true then, that in this age of Bible societies, Sabbath schools, and
missions, the church of Christ is in a worse state than at any former period? The
idea is too absurd to need refutation. Let the reader judge how consistent this
representation of our author is, with what he says of the present age of the church in
other parts of book, and particularly in his fanciful explanation of the parable of the
ten virgins, to which we will now proceed.
SECTION 2. -- The Parable of the Ten Virgins.
Then shall the kingdom
of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the
bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They
that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took
oil in their vessels with their lamps.
While the bridegroom tarried, they all
slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom
cometh; go ye out to meet him.
Then all those virgins arose and trimmed
their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps
are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not
enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
And while they went to buy, the
bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage; and the door
was shut.
Afterward came also the other virgins,
saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I
know you not.
Watch therefore, for ye know neither the
day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
-- Matthew, 25 : 1-13.
Mr. Miller brings in this solemn and instructive parable to confirm his
favorite doctrine. He represents it as a prophecy leading us down to the present
time, and to his time of the end, when Christ shall come the second time.
He explains the "virgins trimming their lamps" to be a prophecy of
the great diligence and wonderful success of Missionary Societies, Sabbath Schools, Tract
Societies, Temperance Societies, &c. in these latter times !
!
I cannot but feel pleased with the favorable manner in which Mr. M. speaks of
these noble institutions of Christian philanthropy. But I would ask -- Can
he really imagine, in his sober senses, that this parable is a prophecy of the
establishment of those societies, &c.? To show that I do not misrepresent, I
quote a few sentences from the sixteenth lecture.
The time of the fulfillment of this parable is evidently come, in part
at least. The world for a number of years have been trimming their lamps, and the
wise and foolish have been engaged in translating the word of God, into almost every
language. (Page 243.)
What of our Bible Societies? are not these trimming the
lamp for millions of human beings? (Page 244)
On the next page, after speaking of Missionary Societies, he asks --
Who, then, can doubt but that the virgins, in this sense have, and are
trimming their lamps, and the bride is making herself ready?
The Sabbath Schools and
Bible Classes are but a part of the fulfillment of the parable, yet clearly an evidence
that the virgins are now trimming their lamps.
Tract Societies are of
much use, and are an efficient means to help trim the lamps; like snuffers that take away
the preventions to the light, so are tracts.
Temperance
Societies. These serve one purpose in trimming the lamps and preparing the way for
the virgins to go out and meet the bridegroom. Perhaps this temperance society is
the virgins' last resort. The Judge stands at the door; go ye out to meet him.
I make no comment upon the above singular interpretation of this beautiful
parable, and strange perversion of its evident meaning. It would be an insult to the
understandings of my readers to suppose, for a moment, they needed any argument to show
that such an explanation is incorrect.
I will dismiss the subject by requesting the reader to remember what Mr. M.
says about the present dark and dreadful Laodicean state of the church, and these
various societies "trimming the lamps" (to borrow his own words), and then
reconcile these two very different descriptions of the present state of the church if he
can.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
I have now gone through with all that I consider worthy of attention in Mr. M.'s
book, in confirmation of his doctrine of the end of the world in 1843. I have passed
over many things because I considered them too puerile or too irrelevant to the subject to
deserve any notice whatever, and in one or two instances, because time had shown the
incorrectness of his calculations. It is true that in a note on the last page he
corrects a date which the lapse of time has proved he had fixed too soon, and intimates
that we are not to expect in the year 1839, as he before predicted, but in 1840, the
overthrow of the Turkish empire, and the persecutions of "Christians unto death,
when dens and caves of the earth will be their retreat," &c. (p. 109). This
is an easy way of surmounting a difficulty, and it would be equally easy, about the close
of 1843, when time has shown him his error, for Mr. M. to make a similar discovery, that
he had fixed his date too soon.
x
[This is precisely what happened: Miller and his followers pushed everything
forward from the failed year of 1843 to the spring of 1844; --and when that
failed, yet again forward, to the autumn of 1844.
x
His prediction that the Turkish empire would be overthrown in 1840 likewise proved to be a
non-success. The Turkish empire didn't fall until the end of the World War I, in
1918.
x
--ed.]
x
The year 1840 has come, though it has not passed away, and blessed be God! that
so far from this prediction of Mr. M. being fulfilled, about "the persecutions of
Christians, and their being driven into dens and caves of the earth" in the present
year, Christianity never enjoyed mightier triumphs than in this very year 1840.
I now take my leave of Mr. M., and in doing so, I can say with confidence that
in the preceding pages I have endeavored to treat him with candor and fairness; to express
all his sentiments, just as it appeared to me he meant them, and generally in his own
words.
The cause of truth and the danger of error has been my propelling motive; and
if in any case my language may have the appearance of sarcastic severity, it has arisen
not from unkindness of feelings, but from the impossibility of exposing a system of
egregious error without presenting in a strong point of light the weakness of its
author. My aim has been to elicit truth, not to obtain victory, for I should think
it about as rational to triumph for a victory over arguments like Mr. M.'s as to
boast of my strength for demolishing a paper castle.
I have frequently been asked if I believe Mr. Miller to be sincere. I
have invariably answered in the affirmative. I cannot but suppose that Mr. M. is a
pious, well-meaning man. I would advise him, in conclusion, if he would escape the
distress I know it would cause him in his old age to have been unintentionally
instrumental in the spread of infidelity, to go home and preach Christ crucified to
perishing sinners, which I have no doubt he is qualified to do, and to waste no more of a
life which might be valuable if rightly spent, in vainly attempting to make known those
times and seasons which God hath wisely concealed from the ken of mortals, and "put
into His own power."
# #
Editor's
Note.
Dowling supplements his book with an essay on the Millennium
and some appendices on the history of the Papacy. Most of this material I found of
little moment. But two items I thought worth rescuing and so give them here.
ITEM 1. -- The Return of the Jews.
Dowling points out that many OT passages prophesy the return of the Jews to
their homeland, and that this event has not yet occurred. These prophecies should
have clued Miller that the Second Coming was further down the line than his calculations
indicated.
These prophecies should also have clued the visionary E. G. White that her
visions -- which repeatedly claimed that the Second Coming could occur at any
time because all the prophetic conditions had now been fulfilled -- were not in
accord with scripture and were therefore not from God.
ITEM 2. -- The Rise of the Pope's Supremacy.
Dowling gives a lengthy excerpt from Jones's Church History, showing
how the bishop in Rome achieved supremacy in 606, the interesting part of which is as
follows.
In the year 588 -- half a century after the pope of Rome, according to
Miller, had achieved supremacy -- John the Faster, patriarch of the church in
Constantinople, assumed the title of Universal Bishop and was confirmed in this
title by a council. This move was opposed by Pelagius II, then bishop of Rome, who
called it execrable, profane, and diabolical. But his invectives were
disregarded. (So much for him being supreme.)
In the year 560 Pelagius was succeeded by Gregory the Great, a voluminous
writer whose works are still extant and in high reputation with Catholics. Gregory
wrote a letter to the emperor, complaining of the claim to supremacy by John the
Faster. Peter, he says, was given the keys of heaven, and the power of binding and
loosing;
yet he is not called Universal Apostle -- though this holy man,
John, my fellow priest, labors to be called Universal Bishop!
Further on in his letter he writes:
But, far from
Christians be this blasphemous name, by which all honor is taken from all other priests,
while it is foolishly arrogated by one. It was offered to the bishop of Rome by the
reverend council of Chalcedon, in honor of St. Peter, prince of the apostles; but none of
them either assumed or consented to use it, lest, while this privilege should be given to
one, all others should be deprived of that honor which is due unto them. Why should
WE refuse this title when it was offered, and another assume it without any
offer at all? This man [John the Faster], contemning obedience to the canons, should
be humbled by the command of our most pious sovereign. He should be chastised who
does an injury to the holy catholic church! whose heart is puffed, who seeks to
please himself by a name of singularity . . . In case he submits to your most just
sentence, or your favorable admonitions, we will give thanks to Almighty God, and rejoice
for the peace of the church, procured by your clemency. But if he persist in this
contention, we shall hold the saying to be most true, "Every one that exalteth
himself shall be abased." And again it is written, "Pride goeth before
destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."
In obedience to my sovereign, I
have written to my brother priest both gently and humbly, urging him to desist from this
vainglory. If he gives ear unto me, he hath a brother devoted unto him, but if he
continue in his pride, I foresee what will befall him -- he will make himself His
enemy of whom it is written, "God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the
humble."
The letter seems to have produced no effect. John soon afterwards died;
but Cynacus, who succeeded him, adopted the same title.
All of which puts a telling light on Miller's requirement that the bishop of
Rome became supreme in 538.
Pope Gregory, in a later letter, complained to the emperor about Cynacus.
Even more than his earlier letter it would have provided William Miller with some
interesting reading in view of his supposed papal chronology. Gregory writes:
I am bold to say that whoever adopts, or affects the title of
UNIVERSAL BISHOP, has the pride and
character of Antichrist, and is in some manner his forerunner in this haughty quality
of elevating himself above the rest of his order. And, indeed, both the one and the
other seem to split upon the same rock; for, as pride makes Antichrist strain his
pretensions up to Godhead, so whoever is ambitious to be called the only or Universal
Prelate arrogates to himself a distinguished superiority, and rises, as it were, upon the
ruins of the rest.
Jones, whom Dowling quotes, comments that:
It is worthy of notice that a Pope held in so high estimation as Gregory
the Great should pronounce
a decision which so plainly stamps his successors
with the character of Antichrist, as do the last two sentences of this epistle,
which was written by Pope Gregory only a few years before the title in dispute, viz.: that
of UNIVERSAL BISHOP was
solicited and obtained by Boniface III.
Another writer quoted by Dowling adds that although Gregory disclaimed the
title of Universal Bishop, he was
succeeded by Pope Boniface III, who had no scruples about adopting this
proud title. He readily accepted,
or rather importunately begged it from the emperor Phocas, with the privilege also
of transmitting it to all his successors. The profligate emperor, to gratify the
inordinate ambition of this court sycophant, deprived the bishop of Constantinople of the
title which he had hitherto borne, and conferred it upon Boniface, at the same time
declaring the church of Rome to be the head of all other churches. [The year was] AD
606.
606 makes a far stronger showing for when the pope attained supremacy than the
year required by William Miller.
What is shown here for the date 538 holds for the rest. Miller claimed
that although many had attacked his ideas, no one could ever prove him wrong. And
Ellen White, despite her claims to inspiration, believed this claim. Indeed she
adopted into her own writings many of his dates (508, 538, 1798, 1843/44) and
theories. But the fact is that William Miller's exposition of the prophecies, the
product of many years' effort by this self-taught man, went wrong at every point.
If that is so (and a book much larger than Dowling's could be written to show
at great length that it is), then I would leave you with this question. If Miller
and 1844 go, how do they not take the inspiration of E. G. White and the pretensions of
the SDA movement with them?