CHAPTER XVII
ANSWERS TO OBJECTIONS.
WE believe that the system of chronologic prophecy which we have in the
foregoing pages to some extent expounded is a strictly biblical one, though
in no one passage or book of Scripture is it plainly set forth as a whole.
Its various parts are found in the Bible, embodied in Levitical ordinances,
involved in Old Testament histories and simple Gospel records, or revealed
in prophetic visions. It lies latent in the Bible, as all science lies
latent in nature, and can only be presented in a systematic form after
numerous observations of apparently disconnected phenomena have been combined
into wide generalizations. So this system, though not as a whole set forth
anywhere in Scripture, has its basis laid deep in the inspired writings,
and results from a careful comparison of Bible statements with each other,
with the facts of nature, and with the actual providence of God in history.
We do not assume that we have expounded or even discerned within perfect
accuracy all the features of this system, but believe, on the contrary,
that passing years will clear up many of its remaining obscurities, and
reveal more clearly the exactness of its adjustments. As the late Rev.
T. R. Birks wrote of our former work on this subject, so we feel as to
this one, though it is more exact and more thorough on this point than
its predecessor; it is "probably a penultimate and not an ultimate
arrangement of the times of sacred prophecy." We believe it to be
in advance of any previous exposition of the subject both in comprehensiveness
and in accuracy, but we do not claim for it that it is final. The unfoldings
of history within the next few years will do much to confirm or to shake
its credibility; and we are content that it should be judged in the light
of proximate events. But we are anxious to secure from all lovers of truth,
of whatever shade of opinion on these subjects, a candid examination of
the facts we have observed and here arranged, and in order to do this
must now remove out of the way certain stumbling-blocks which might hinder
some readers.
1. The first and main objection which will be felt by many is the apparently
strong and well-founded one that this exposition, and especially our remarks
on the future dates of the series-cautious and interrogative as they are-
come dangerously near an unjustifiable attempt to fix the time of the
second advent. It will be alleged that the clear, unambiguous statements
of Scripture prove that to do this is impossible, and even to attempt
it foolish and reprehensible for that it is evidently not the purpose
of God that the time of that supreme event should be known; that Christ
and His apostles founded their exhortations to constant watchfulness on
the ground of our ignorance of the time of His return that He used the
most emphatic expressions on the subject, saying, "Of that day and
that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither
the Son, but the Father"; and again, "Take ye heed, watch and
pray; for ye know not when the time is." [#Mark 13:32, 33.] It will
be urged that even after His resurrection He said, in reply to the question
of His disciples as to the time at which He would restore again the kingdom
to Israel, "It is not for you to know the times and the seasons,
which the Father hath put in His own power;" and that consequently
we must be wrong in attempting to indicate from the prophecies of Daniel
the chronologic date of the end of this age.
This objection appears at first sight so weighty and well grounded, that
unless we can completely remove it, and even draw from these very passages
an argument in defence of our position, we might as well refrain from
publishing this book. We could neither expect nor desire these solemn
statements to be lost sight of, nor the objection founded on them to be
waived. It must be met, and we need hardly add there is no difficulty
in its removal. Had it been otherwise this investigation would not have
been undertaken. Had it been true, as some assert, that in face of these
solemn and emphatic Scripture assertions we ought to be silent on this
question of the time of the end; had it been true, as is assumed in this
objection, that these statements apply as fully to the last as to the
first generation of the Christian Church; had it been true, as the objection
also implies, that the God who has given chronologic prophecy in Scripture
does not intend the gift ever to become of practical value to His people,
by permitting such prophecy to be understood; had these things been true,
we should never have undertaken the search of which the results are here
presented. That research was commenced and continued under a conviction
that the exact reverse is the truth; that so far from fearing to intrude
into forbidden regions by such sacred studies, we might look for Divine
light in pursuing them, seeing it is promised that in this "time
of the end" the saints shall understand, as previous generations
could not do, the chronologic predictions of Scripture.
We are the more careful to examine and remove this popular objection,
because its results are widespread and serious. On the one hand, it disinclines
many sober- minded Christians to study the subject at all, because they
conceive light on it to be unattainable; and on the other, it drives not
a few to the adoption of the futurist system of interpretation-a system
which we earnestly believe to be seriously injurious to the Church, as
depriving her of a much-needed bulwark to her own faith, and of an invaluable
advantage in the present conflict with infidelity, by robbing her of the
cogent and unanswerable argument of fulfilled and fulfilling prophecy.
Futurism, by insisting on the literality of the symbols of time employed
in symbolic prophecies, makes the predicted periods to be only a few years
in duration; and thus finds no difficulty in assigning them all to the
future, and in asserting that there are no chronologic prophecies relative
to the Christian dispensation, and that the Church is left in ignorance
as to her own present position in the stream of time. This is to rob the
"more sure word of prophecy" -that "light that shineth
in a dark place "-of some of its brightest rays, and to deprive this
incredulous age of the great and ever-present miracle, with which, by
the true, interpretation, it is confronted.
It should be recognised that this objection is of course a fundamental
one, and lies against all study of chronologic prophecy in the light of
history, independent of any specific results arrived at. If we are bound
to shrink with a religious horror from definite conclusions, we say not
as to the day or hour, but as to the general period of the second advent,
it were a clear folly to enter on investigations which must needs issue
in such conclusions. There can be no question that the great historical
predictions of Daniel lead up to the establishment of the kingdom of God
on earth, that is, to the end of all Gentile monarchy-including that of
antichrist; to the cleansing of the sanctuary, or Holy Land, from all
Gentile oppressors, to the first resurrection and to the era of blessedness:
in a word, to events which, as we learn from other Scriptures, are synchronous
with the second advent.
Now these predictions contain distinct chronologic statements; so that
the more closely we study and the more clearly we understand them, the
more nearly we must needs approximate to a knowledge of the position of
the second coming of Christ, not only in a series of historical events,
but in a definite period of time. Hence if such knowledge be dangerous,
such study should be avoided, for moral and mental danger must be shunned
as cautiously as physical risk. If the ice be thin, we must refrain from
going on it; if the vessel be unseaworthy, we ought not to embark. But
we are not at liberty to refrain from the study of chronological prophecy,
any more than from the study of any other part of Scripture. It is especially
commended to us as a subject to which we do well to take heed, as one
which both saints and angels in other days desired to look into, as one
which carries with it peculiar blessing; and it is one in connexion with
which there is the special promise that it shall be understood in this
"time of the end." It cannot therefore be a duty to neglect
it lest we should receive light, lest we should come to understand with
some clearness "what manner of time" the Spirit of God has signified
as the duration of this present Gentile age. There must be some explanation
of this seeming inconsistency!
It should moreover be remembered that our Lord Himself made use, not only
of the expressions on which the objection we are considering is founded,
but also made use of others which inculcate the opposite duty of observing
"the signs of the times," and of drawing from them the legitimate
conclusions as to the proximity of His return. He not only said, "Of
that day and that hour knoweth no man," but He also said, "When
ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors";
"when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom
of God is nigh at hand." Our Lord thus inculcated constant watchfulness
and hopeful expectation, on two distinct and contrasted grounds: first,
on that of His people’s ignorance of the exact time of His return;
and, secondly, on that of their knowledge, derived from fulfilled predictions,
that it must be close at hand. He said, "Ye know not," and He
said, "Know ye." He taught the same double truth in His parables.
On the one hand, it was uncertain whether it would be in the first, second,
or third watch of the night that the Lord of the servants would return
to his household; on the other, it was "after a long time" that
the master, who had taken his journey into a far country, came and reckoned
with his servants. Again, there would go forth the midnight cry, "Behold,
the Bridegroom cometh!" and then the indefinite waiting of the virgins
would give place to immediate expectation.
The real question is, Which of these two attitudes better becomes Christians
at the end of the nineteenth century? Should ours be merely the watchfulness
based on utter ignorance of the times, or should it not rather be the
earnest expectation and hope based on knowledge? Each in its season is
good and right, for each has been expressly commanded; but for which is
this the season? It is clear that the two states of mind cannot co-exist,
they mutually exclude each other. Surely the explanation of the apparent
inconsistency is, that the former style of watchfulness was adapted to
the first disciples of Christ and to the early Church, and the latter
to the Church of these last days. The statements about not knowing the
times and seasons are applicable to those who as a matter of fact did
not know them, but actually expected the return of Christ in their own
day; and the statements about knowing them, to those who have learned
by experience that a period of eighteen hundred years at least was appointed
in the councils of eternity to intervene between the departure of Christ
and His return in glory.
It is self-evident that in respect of their knowledge of the true length
of the Christian dispensation, these two classes, owing to the lapse of
time, occupy wholly different ground, and that, but for chronologic prophecy,
the Church of these last days would be exposed to fearful disadvantages
compared with the early Church. The true length of this age was of course
from the first known to God, but He did not reveal it to the early Church.
He gave them general promises, like, "Behold, I come quickly";
"Yet a little while, and the coming One shall come, and will not
tarry"; but He did not specify whether the interval was to be brief,
according to human reckoning, or only according to the Divine scale of
"one day is with the Lord as a thousand years." Did He therefore
deceive them? No; but He allowed them to remain in ignorance of things
it was better for them not to know, and that because He loved them, and
sought their comfort and sanctification. Had they been informed beforehand
of the predestined twelve centuries of apostasy and persecution, they
would have been deprived of the cheering hope that they might be of the
number who would be alive and remain at the second advent. What help would
it have been to the martyrs under pagan Rome to look down the long, dark
vista of ages, and behold the worse martyrdoms under Papal Rome? What
present influence could an advent promised at the end of well-nigh two
thousand years have had in cheering and strengthening and purifying the
early Church? None! The knowledge would have paralysed faith and hope
and courage. Their ignorance was best for them, and God, in mercy, did
not remove it.
But we of these last days are not ignorant of the facts of the case. A
strange and momentous historic drama of which they little dreamed, the
great apostasy of the Christian Church, the long ages of Papal usurpation,
corruption, and persecution, all lie open before our eyes on the page
of history.
"A knowledge of the limits of the great anti-Christian apostasy would
not now deprive us of hope, but the very contrary; in fact, we need some
such revelation to sustain our faith and hope to the end of the long delay;
without the chronological data afforded us by the prophecies of Daniel
and John, we should be in a position of fearful temptation to doubt and
despair. The early Church was entirely ignorant of the length of the interval
which we know to have occurred, and this knowledge absolutely prevents
the general promises of the nearness of the second advent from having
the same power over us that they had over it. Those statements cannot
convey to us, after a lapse of well-nigh two thousand years, the impressions
they conveyed to the primitive saints. They seemed to justify them in
expecting the coming of Christ in their own day; but each succeeding generation
would have less and less ground for such an expectation; and when the
promise was already one thousand years old, who could avoid the reflection,
‘Since it has included one thousand years, it may include another’?
We, after nearly two thousand years, could not, as we read the promise,
escape the conviction, that, having already included two thousand years,
it was perfectly possible that two thousand more were yet to come. Each
century of delay would thus increase the heart-sickness of hope deferred,
and the Church of these last days might well hang down her head in the
sorrowful but irresistible conviction that her redemption might still
be at an immeasurable distance; she could have no well grounded hope that
the Lord was, in any strict sense, ‘at hand.’
"Now one generation of His saints is as dear to God as another; we
may be sure He did not secure the holiness and happiness of the early
Church at the expense of ours, nor conceal what might be a blessing to
us, because the knowledge might not have been a blessing to them. No;
He provided some better thing for us, than that we should float uncertainly
on the stream of time, not knowing whether we were any nearer to the future
than to the past advent of Christ. He revealed, but revealed in a mystery,
all the main events of this dispensation, and nearly two-thirds of its
duration; He revealed them in just such a way, as best to secure a renewal
of hope that should give consolation, and revive in these last times a
‘patient waiting for Christ.’ Since continued ignorance of the
true nature and length of this dispensation, as determined beforehand
in the counsels of God, could have produced the very opposite effects
designed by the permission of temporary ignorance, we have every reason
to conclude that God would in due time replace this latter by knowledge,
and give a gradually increasing understanding of the inspired predictions."
[See "The Approaching End of the Age," p. 87.]
The change from utter ignorance to comparatively full knowledge on the
subject of the chronologic measures of this Gentile age has been, and
was doubtless intended to be, gradual and progressive through its entire
course. It has been secured by a gradually increasing comprehension of
the symbolic prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse. These have slowly
become clear in the light of history, and their true scale, suspected
and vaguely suggested, but always wrongly applied by earlier generations
of students, has since the Reformation been demonstrated with ever- increasing
distinctness. In the focussed light of all the facts mentioned in our
chronological chapter, our position in the time of the end seems indicated
with such a measure of exactness, that knowledge ought assuredly to be
to us a far mightier motive to patient waiting for Christ than ignorance.
We add on this point some of the weighty and last words of another, whose
cautions and reverent spirit, combined with clear, intelligent grasp of
these subjects, has never been excelled.
"We are often reminded that the secret things belong to the Lord
our God; and doubtless, even in searching God’s holy prophecies,
the spirit of that caution may be transgressed by a vain curiosity and
irreverent boldness. But when the words are perverted into an absolute
prohibition, the rest of the verse supplies a conclusive answer. The things
that are revealed belong to us and to our children. Surely every part
of God’s word is a revelation. To number it among the secret things
which are best honoured by neglect is really to fling back the Divine
gift in the face of Him who bestows it. He solemnly declares that all
inspired Scripture is profitable for us, and that whatever is written
therein is written for our learning. Who are we that we should pretend
to be wiser than God, or profess that some of His revealed sayings would
have been more wisely kept back from us? as if our neglect were to remedy
the unwise loquacity of the Spirit of God!"
Perhaps the most common objection to the study of chronologic prophecy
is based upon our Lord’s words, "It is not for you to know the
times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in His own power"
(#Acts 1:7).
"These words however, when searched narrowly, are a strong warrant
for an inquiry into the times and seasons of prophecy, while they suggest
a needful caution for its due exercise. The words are not general, as
our version seems to imply, but special. ‘It is not for you to know
the times or the seasons, which the Father bath reserved in His own power.’
There is here a direct allusion to a text familiar to the apostles, and
which explains the true meaning of the answer.
Daniel (#Dan 12) had heard two angels put the inquiry, ‘How long
shall it be to the end of these wonders?’ The Son of God replies
with a solemn oath, that ‘it shall be for a season, and seasons,
and half a season; and when He shall have accomplished to scatter the
power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.’ The
prophet then asks for further light, but receives the answer, ‘The
words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.’
"The answer then of our Lord to His apostles on earth is only the
echo of His reply to the prophet in the vision. The event spoken of is
clearly the same in both, the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, and
the end of the scattering of the holy people. The seasons of delay before
the event were sealed till the time of the end; until then the Father,
by the lips of the Covenant Angel, had expressly reserved them in His
own power. The disciples asked the time of that restoration. Our Lord,
as if pointing them to the words of Daniel, introduces the very term employed
in the vision, ‘It is not for you to know the times or the seasons,
which the Father hath put in His own power.’ As if He had said, ‘The
time of which you speak follows certain seasons of predicted delay; and
these seasons have been reserved at present from a complete revelation,
until the Father Himself, at the time of the end, shall begin to unseal
them.’
"We have thus a threefold and fourfold answer to the objection. First,
the words are not general as to all times, but refer specially to the
three times and a half which were to be sealed and closed until a later
period. Secondly, they are not general as to Christians, but relate with
a marked emphasis to the apostles themselves, and Christians in their
day. ‘ Such knowledge,’ our Lord implies, ‘may be hereafter
given to others, but it is not for you. Another work is assigned you,
to found the Church, and spread the gospel through the world.’ It
is only when the faith of the Gentiles begins to decay that the Father
will unseal the times of that blessed hope which will be as life from
the dead to the unbelieving world. And hence, further, they are a secret
assurance that there will be other Christians of a later age, to whom
these times will be unsealed, as those of Jeremiah were to Daniel himself,
shortly before their close.
"The words of Christ, ‘Of that day and that hour knoweth. no
man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father,’ are also viewed as a clear censure on all these inquiries.
How far the spirit of this caution extends may require much spiritual
wisdom to determine: but conclusions loosely and rashly drawn from it
have nothing to sustain them. First, the assertion is strictly true only
of the time when our Saviour spoke; for surely with regard to the Son
of God, they must have ceased to be true when He was risen and ascended
into glory. Our Lord Himself, since they were uttered, has received in
His human nature immeasurable wisdom and we may infer that His Church
also, though in measures infinitely short of His own, will receive from
age to age a like increase. Again, the words refer to the day and the
hour, not to the year, much less to the generation in which that great
event will occur. Minute conjectures on the time of the advent may still
he forbidden us, and the spirit of the caution may extend itself beyond
the strict letter; but still the spirit of the previous verse, ’When
ye shall see these things begin to come to pass, know that it is nigh,
even at the doors,’ has a voice not less plain, and speaks with the
same authority. The first generation of the Church there is made a precedent
for the last, and leads us to expect that Christians, whenever that generation
has come, will be able to ascertain it, and may know by clear signs that
the Lord is really near at hand." [Rev. T. R.. Birks: "Thoughts
on the Times and Seasons of Sacred Prophecy."]
2. The second obvious and easy objection which will be alleged against
our exposition is the repeated failures which have attended previous attempts
to demonstrate the limits of the prophetic periods and to indicate the
probable date of the end of this age. A little consideration will show
the baseless nature of this objection.
The frankly admitted fact that the study of chronologic prophecy has led
to premature anticipations of the end, is no more an objection to its
divinely intended use, than is the still more conspicuous fact that the
general promises of Scripture as to the coming of the Lord have done the
same. Not more than twenty generations have elapsed since the study of
chronologic prophecy began to be pursued; while sixty generations at least
have been exposed to erroneous anticipations based on non-chronologic
predictions. If we are justified in declining investigation of the revealed
"times and seasons," because such investigation has led to some
false anticipations, we should also be justified in paying no attention
to the general promises of Christ’s speedy advent which have thus
led to tenfold more numerous disappointments. The fact is, that such disappointments
are no argument against the value of either class of predictions, but
are, on the contrary, an intended and inevitable result of both the one
and the other.
It is perfectly evident from all the statements of the New Testament on
the subject that the Lord desired all the generations of His Church to
live in continual expectation of His return. It is equally certain that
in the Divine councils a period of about nineteen centuries was appointed
to elapse before that event should take place. What wonder then that promise
and prophecy were so bestowed as to secure the maintenance of watchfulness
through all the nineteen Christian centuries? That this is what has been
done is evident from the objection that premature and mistaken expectations
of the end have always prevailed in the Church. Such is the case, and
there are instances on record in which these expectations have done temporary
harm, by unsettling the minds of the weak and unstable, as in the Thessalonian
Church for instance, in very early days, and among the Millerites and
others in America in recent times. But such premature anticipations have
as a rule had, as they were designed to have, a beneficial effect on the
different sections of the Church in which they have prevailed. They have
tended to cheer and strengthen those who have sincerely entertained them;
to encourage separation from the world, study of Scripture, and practical
earnestness in the work of evangelization. These were the effects intended,
and history testifies that these have generally been the effects produced.
It must not be rashly and wrongly assumed that God has intentionally deceived
His people on this point. He has simply withheld from them, and for a
time, light which He might have given, but which it would have been injurious
for them to have received too soon. Tender seedling plants cannot bear
the blaze of the noonday sun, and a wise husbandman shields them from
it until it will be beneficial rather than harmful; in due time it will
be the best tonic they can have, and absolutely indispensable to the final
ripening of the fruit. So as to this truth of the appointed length of
the Christian dispensation. There was a time when the infant Church would
have withered and drooped under it; the fore-view of eighteen hundred
years of apostasy and persecution would have destroyed its hope, and have
been too severe a test of its faith. To the Church of these last days,
on the other hand, light as to the limits of this age of long suffering
with sin is not only good but indispensable. That such light should dawn
on the Church, and brighten gradually as needed, was by Divine wisdom
arranged for and secured by the use of two sorts of predictions: general
ones, adapted to earlier ages, and chronological ones, intended for the
last days. That the latter should not be prematurely understood was secured
by the use of symbols for the periods of time, as well as for the events.
Church history proves that this prevented premature discovery, and present
experience proves that it has secured the right reading of the mysterious
revelation by the light of its own fulfilment in these last days, when
its comprehension is a needful aid to faith and hope.
Why should we deem it unlikely that God should on this subject allow the
truth to be concealed for a time? How much scientific truth of immense
practical value to mankind did He permit to remain unknown until this
nineteenth century! It was reserved for this "time of the end"
for the wise to understand many things. What if early attempts to understand
chronologic prophecy were erroneous? Do we doubt and despise the conclusions
of astronomy because the astrologers of other days had erroneous notions?
Do we ridicule the early and clumsy attempts to adapt to each other steam-power
and machinery because they did not immediately produce such power-looms
and locomotives as those of our own day? Why then despise early and incorrect
attempts to read the riddle of prophetic chronology?
As this point is one of considerable importance, we will give a further
answer to the objection in the well-chosen words of the author previously
quoted.
" These successive anticipations are just what it was reasonable
to expect. Only by this gradual approach to a correct view of the times
and seasons could the two main purposes have been fulfilled-growing knowledge
of the prophecy, with a constant and unbroken expectation of the Lord’s
coming. The fact therefore is so far from refuting the theory, that it
might rather be viewed as a direct corollary from its truth. The objection,
in reality, assumes that the Church must either be in total ignorance
of the times, or vault at once unto the possession of exact and perfect
knowledge. Either she must entirely renounce the use of the prophetic
dates, as having no connexion with her past history, and float in a complete
uncertainty concerning her own place in the stream of providence, or else
may claim to decide with unerring exactness on the very year in which
particular events shall he fulfilled. Now this is a monstrous alternative
to propose; neither Scripture nor reason lend it the slightest warrant.
. .
"Let us now suppose that the year-day theory is the Divine instrument
for conveying to the Church this partial light. Every exposition based
on it must then partake of two opposite characters. Compared with the
exciting prospect of the instant coming of Christ, as entertained in the
Thessalonian Church, it would be a protraction; measured by the event,
or by a full and perfect knowledge, it would be an anticipation. It would
serve as ballast to those who were shaken in mind and troubled by a false
impression of the imminent nearness of the judgment; and it would be a
wholesome stimulus to the slothful servant who should say in his heart,
‘My Lord delayeth His coming.’ Now these, which are the very
marks of its practical worth, form the two counts of the inconsistent
indictment which has been laid against it. ‘It interferes with the
expectation of the advent.’ That is to say in reality, it serves
from age to age for a partial corrective of false anticipations, like
that of the Thessalonians. ‘It has repeatedly failed in its predictions,
ministered occasion to the scoffers, and thrown discredit on the study
of prophecy.’ In other words, it has not prematurely revealed the
whole interval while the end was still distant, nor given more light to
earlier generations of the Church than was profitable for them to receive.
It has ministered occasion to the scoffer, and in so doing has fulfilled
the prediction that none of the wicked shall understand; while, by the
gradual approaches to a just estimate of the times, it has fulfilled the
contrasted promise, that knowledge shall be increased, and that the wise
shall understand. The opposite objections urged against it are the very
proof of its adaptation to the wants of the Church. . .
" The successive failures, as they have been called, are no real
failures in a practical sense. They are only waymarks in the progress
of the Church from that entire ignorance of the times in which she was
purposely left in the apostolic age to the full and certain knowledge
that the Bridegroom is at hand, which shall prepare her, like the wise
virgins, to enter in with her Lord to the marriage feast."
But we must go further than this, and remind those who object on the ground
of false anticipations, that to the system here expounded may be traced
many true anticipations of a very remarkable character-anticipations which
can hardly be accounted for save on the ground of the truth of the system
which led to them. Some of these anticipations were absolutely correct;
others correct within a year or two; and it should be remembered that
the growth of light is always gradual, and that only within the last few
years has astronomy lent its aid to chronological calculations. In the
earliest ages of the Church chronologic prophecy was, as it was intended
to be, absolutely an enigma; Bible students felt it to be so, and only
occasionally hazarded remarks on the subject. Only in the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries did any real light begin to dawn. A great step was
made when the year- day principle of interpreting the periods was recognised;
though for some centuries they were dated from altogether wrong starting-points,
and attention was directed exclusively to the second half of the great
week, the dates of the captivity era never being used as starting-points,
nor the whole "seven times-" taken into account. The era of
the Reformation witnessed a great advance in prophetic interpretation,
as it was then that the true character of the Papal antichrist was first
generally recognised. Aritius, an expositor who died in 1574, saw and
taught the year-day theory, but dated the 1,260 years from Constantine’s
establishment of imperial Christianity, AD. 312 ; he consequently expected
the period to run out in his own days. David Chytræus, in 1571, suggested
that the period might perhaps be measured from Alaric’s destruction
of Rome, AD. 412, and so run out in AD. 1692; he thought it more likely
that it was dated from the edict of Phocas, 606, and hence that it would
run out in 1866. Pareus, writing in 1608, fixes on the same date, as did
also many later expositors; they were justified by the result, for the
four years 1866-70 were, as we have shown, critical and terminal in the
existence of the temporal power of the Papacy.
Robert Fleming, in his work on "The Rise and Fall of Rome Papal,"
published in the year 1701, anticipated the years 1794 and 1848 as great
crises in the downfall of the Papacy, even as we know they proved to be;
and he added, "Yet we are not to imagine these events will totally
destroy the Papacy, for we find it is still in being and alive when the
next vial is poured out." There were no signs when Fleming wrote
at the commencement of the eighteenth century, of the awful revolutionary
crisis that was to arise ore its close, still less of the events of the
revolutionary year 1848. He was led to select them solely by chronologic
prophecy; and so were the numerous writers who, long before the years
1866-70, pointed out that those years were destined to be most critical
ones in the downfall of despotic power and Papal usurpation, many of them
definitely predicting the cessation of the temporal power. Similarly the
date of the Greek insurrection, and of other stages in the fall of Turkey,
have been foreseen and indicated beforehand by students of the prophetic
word.
3. One objection likely to be raised against this whole exposition is,
that it deals with so large a number of events and of dates, and that
some of them do not seem to be of first rate importance. It will be said
that with three scales of measurements, and a variety of points to measure
from and to, it is easy to make out anything, and that the very multiplicity
of coincidences decreases confidence in the worth of any of them. Now
while such an impression may naturally arise from a first and perhaps
superficial survey of the subject, yet closer study and more careful examination
will turn it from an objection to a powerful corroboration. The best reply
is a glance at the diagram, which shows
I. That the still unfulfilled chronological periods announced in Scripture,
and here considered, are four, and four only.
i. The 2,520 years or "seven times," or great comprehensive
week of the prophetic calendar.
ii.Its latter half, the 1,260 years, or three and a half times of the
Papal and Mohammedan apostasies.
iii. The shortened form or the 2,300 years of the eastern sanctuary cycle
dating from the Persian restoration era.
iv. The final time of #Rev 10.
Hence there is no great multiplicity of periods. The other prophecies
alluded to, such as the sixty-five years to the fall of Ephraim, the seventy
years of Judah’s captivity, and the 490 from the Persian restoration
era to the Messianic era at the first advent, are all of course fulfilled
predictions, and bear on the question of the end of this age mainly as
affording lessons as to the style of fulfilment to be expected at the
close of the longer periods. It is from them we learn the two great principles:
that all the different astronomic measures of the year are employed in
chronologic prophecy; and that such predicted periods extend, not merely
between specific years, but also between eras of wider extent.
II. A glance at the diagram shows also that the commencing and closing
eras of these long periods, the briefest of which extends over more than
three centuries, are, though actually long, relatively very short. To
the periods themselves they bear just such a relation as infancy and old
age generally bear to mature life, such a relation as the growth and the
decay of an oak tree bear to its whole existence-in other words, a natural
relation. National changes are as a rule slow. Vast empires are not consolidated
in a year, and world-wide dominion does not suddenly collapse; the movements
of history are as gradual as are the processes of nature. It is difficult
to decide the year in which the youth stops growing, and "coming
of age" has to be fixed at an arbitrary point. So the rise and fall
of empires cannot be assigned to exact dates, but must needs occupy eras
more or less prolonged.
On the other hand, it is no less certain that in such eras several dates
will naturally stand out as critical, some more decidedly so than others
but many will mark stages of development and decay. Surely no objection
should lie against an exposition because it takes into account facts so
harmonious with the laws of nature! If it would be accepted as a proof
of Divine inspiration that a predicted period should prove to have elapsed
between any two given dates, is not the proof strengthened when it is
demonstrated that the same period similarly extends between all the corresponding
crises of the commencing and terminal eras? Not only did the seventy years
of the Babylonish captivity elapse between Nebuchadnezzar’s first
invasion of Judah, B.C. 605, and the decree of Cyrus, B.C. 536, they also
elapsed between the final destruction of Jerusalem, B.C. 587, and the
fourth year of Darius, B.C. 517. Not only did seventy weeks extend from
the edicts of Artaxerxes to the cutting off of "Messiah the Prince,"
but they also extended between the different crises of the Persian restoration
era and the Messianic era. This principle, proved by history to have governed
the accomplishments of the fulfilled predictions, we have applied to the
still partially unfulfilled predictions, and the result proves that it
holds good so far, leading to the anticipation that it will do so to the
close. As to the three astronomic scales, we know that they are all employed
both in human computations and in Divine predictions; that the two fulfilled
predictions to which we have just alluded were, for instance, actually
measured on both lunar and solar scales; hence we feel warranted in using
all three, and the result shows that they are intended to be so applied.
As regards the character of the events which we have pointed out in the
critical eras, it should be remembered that they are indicated only as
links in a chain; they must not be considered as isolated events, but
as units in a group, members of a series. Standing alone, some of them
might seem comparatively unimportant, but collectively they make up historical
movements whose critical nature cannot be questioned. Strike out half
the dates if you will, you cannot strike out the historical movement as
a whole; it is there, prominent in the records of history, conspicuous
as a fulfilment of prophecy. Each of its stages derives its importance
from its relation to all the rest. The abdication, for instance, of Charles
X. and of Louis Philippe, and the fall of Napoleon III., may not have
been occurrences of the first magnitude; but they were clearly links in
the chain of events which overthrew Papal supremacy in Europe, and that
overthrow is an event of supreme importance to the human race, and of
vital connexion with the themes of prophecy. So as to Kainardje, Carlowitz,
the Crimean War, and the Treaty of Berlin; looked at as standing alone,
they may rank as comparatively unimportant in their influence on the history
of the people of God; but looked at as stages of the overthrow of the
once mighty and dreaded anti-Christian Turkish empire, as the first fatal
blows to a power which still hinders the restoration of the Jews to Palestine,
their important relation to the prophetic programme cannot be fairly denied.
Each of the events of a series, if taken singly and separately, may lose
entirely the character it bears when regarded in all its connexions. A
destructive swarm of locusts, for instance, is no unusual occurrence in
Egypt, and an objector might well refuse to regard it as any special Divine
judgment. But when it occurs as one of ten plagues, which issue in a predicted
result so remarkable as the exodus of Israel from Egypt, who can refuse
to recognise its true character? So as to the various stages of the judgments
under which. the Papacy and Mohammedanism are perishing. They resemble
the plagues of Egypt in this respect, that they arc distinct and successive
inflictions, from no one of which is there any real recovery, whose effects
are consequently cumulative, though the end in view, the utter destruction
of the adverse power, is not accomplished exclusively by them, but by
direct Divine interference at last.
Moreover careful examination will show that these events, which fell out
at the various closes of the prophetic periods, as measured from their
successive starring- points, comprise really all the critical stages of
the movement in question which have happened so far. Will any one indicate
events haying a vital connexion with the fall of the Papacy and Mohammedanism,
other than those which sacred prophecy has thus indicated?
It may be said that we have not alluded to the Reformation, which has
the most important factor in the decay and the fall of the Papacy. That
is true; but the Reformation was a spiritual, and not a political movement.
The periods of Daniel start from and lead to political changes. The Reformation
changed the hearts of men and the creeds of Churches, and led in the end
to political changes also, but not at the commencement. It does not fall
within the chronological range of the "time of the end"; for
it is removed as we have seen by a whole prophetic "time" of
three hundred and sixty years. from the close of the "times of the
Gentiles"; and it is consequently made the subject of a separate
chronological prediction.
4. Some again may object to the system here developed, on the ground that
it is somewhat complicated, involving research and calculation, and lacking
in that notable characteristic of all truth, simplicity. It will be alleged
that it is the glory of both the moral law and the gospel that children
can understand and obey them, and that the ignorant and unlearned can
appreciate them; while neither of these classes could follow the reasonings
or grasp the conclusions of this investigation. The answer to this objection
is that Scripture avowedly contains, not only milk for babes, but solid
meat for those of mature intelligence; even those who by reason of use
have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
It is the same with nature; the fundamental and essential laws on which
existence depends lie on the surface, and commend themselves to the least
developed intelligence. But has nature no precious secrets which she yields
only to patient observation, earnest research, and continued meditation
and reflection? And are these long-ignored causes and unperceived laws
destitute therefore of practical importance? Let the discovery of steam
and electricity in the nineteenth century be a reply!
Could the science of geology have been understood and turned to account
by simply surveying the surface of the ground? Could the marvellously
complex laws of chemistry have been grasped by considering merely the
mechanical properties of matter? Can superficial and uncultivated readers
appreciate, or even perceive, the literary excellence of Dante or Shakespeare?
And are we to imagine that, while human compositions are adapted to the
highest intelligence, that the book of God can be fathomed with facility
by the weakest and most uncultivated minds? That were a conception altogether
derogatory to the dignity of inspiration! Ought we not rather to expect
in the oracles of God heights and depths of hidden wisdom which shall
utter themselves only to those who earnestly seek wisdom, "watching
daily at her gates, and waiting at the posts of her doors " ? Simplicity
of result in nature arises from arrangements of extreme complexity; as,
for instance, the movements of the moon or the planets. To calculate the
motions of only three bodies in space in accordance with the laws of gravitation
and motion is, as is well known, a problem passing human intelligence.
The result of the chronological calculations and historical adaptations
which we have endeavoured to indicate is simple enough, and may be expressed
in a sentence. It has pleased God to order the revolutions of history
in harmony with that law of completion in weeks, by which He has ordered
many of the revolutions of nature, and according to which He arranged
the typical ritual service of the Jewish people. The Gentile dispensation
of the four great empires, n-hose nature, course, and close is revealed
in Daniel, is a great week, beginning with the rise of the typical, and
ending with the fall of the anti-typical Babylon, and bisected by the
rise of the Papal and Mohammedan powers. This great dispensational week
and its sections are measured from the different crises of its commencing
era on the different natural scales, the longest of which, the solar,
alone is final. There is surely no great complexity in this result, though
to establish it requires study and research. Herein however the parallel
with nature is too exact to warrant objection.
Index Preface 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Appendix A Appendix B
