accord with the time specified, provided the designation of this time be interpreted by the common laws of exegesis?

The facts are these. In the year 168 before Christ, (usually designated by B. C.), in the month of May, Antiochus Epiphanes was on his way to attack Egypt, and he detached Apollonius, one of his military confidants, with 22,000 soldiers, in order to subdue and plunder Jerusalem. The mission was executed with entire success. A terrible slaughter was made of the men at Jerusalem, and a large portion of the women and children, being made captives, were sold and treated as slaves. The services of the temple were interrupted, and its joyful feasts were turned into mourning, 1 Macc. 1: 37–39. Soon after this the Jews in general were compelled to eat swine's flesh, and to sacrifice to idols. In December of that same year, the temple was profaned by introducing the statue of Jupiter Olympius; and on the 25th of that month, sacrifices were offered to that idol on the altar of Jehovah. Just three years after this last event, viz. December 25th, 165 B. C., the temple was expurgated by Judas Maccabaeus, and the worship of Jehovah restored. Thus three years and a half, or almost exactly this period, passed away, while Antiochus had complete possession and control of every thing in and around Jerusalem and the temple. It may be noted, also, that just three years passed, from the time when the profanation of the temple was carried to its greatest height, viz., by sacrificing to the statue of Jupiter Olympius upon the altar of Jehovah, down to the time when Judas renewed the regular worship.

I mention this last circumstance in order to account for the three years of Antiochus' profanations, which are nam

near the close of this volume, in connection with the discussion respecting Gog and Magog, and the events which will follow their development.

ed as the period of them in Josephus, Antiq. XII. 7. § 6. This period tallies exactly with the time during which the profanation as consummated was carried on, if we reckon down to the period when the temple worship was restored by Judas Maccabaeus. But in Prooem. ad Bell. Jud. § 7, and Bell. Jud. I. 1. § 1, Josephus reckons 3 years as the period during which Antiochus ravaged Jerusalem and Judea. There is no contradiction in this writer, however, in case we refer each period to the occurrences which it was designed to mark.

After all, we are not confined to his authority for the facts stated. The reader will find many authors referred to, in Usher's Annals, year 168 et seq. B. C.; in Froelich's Annales Regum Syriae, chap. on Antioch. Epiphanes, (an admirable work); in Jahn's Hebrew Commonwealth, and in Prideaux's Connection, etc., under the appropriate head in each. To save time and to avoid repetition, I refer the reader to these sources of information, and to the ancient histories cited in them; most of which may be procured with little trouble, and also are of easy access. And in like manner, to save repetition, would I here make a reference to the same sources, as to subsequent historical facts which will be stated in the course of this investigation respecting the book of Daniel.

No one can reasonably expect, then, a more exact fulfilment of the time specified in Dan 7: 25, than that which history here presents.

Another passage, parallel to Dan. 7: 25 which we have just examined, is Dan. 12: 7, where the same limitation of time occurs, and in connection (for this I cannot doubt) with the same individual, i. e. with Antiochus Epiphanes. As in many other cases, particularly in Isaiah and Daniel, an unfortunate division has been made by chapters which greatly obscures the sense of the original Scripture, so

here there is an instance of the like mistake, which is much to be regretted. It is quite plain that Dan. x1. and XII. are closely and inseparably connected, as one continued series of predictions, closing with some inquiries and answers, the object of which is to throw light on those predictions. That Antiochus Epiphanes is described in 11: 21-45, is past all question. The graphic historical correctness and minuteness of the description here, is even such as can be found no where else in the whole Bible. Porphyry, in the latter part of the third century, charged this composition with being a prophecy post eventum; and it must be acknowleged that it is difficult, at the present time, when one compares other prophecies, not to feel moved in some measure to entertain a similar view. The reason is, that, in point of minuteness and exactness of specification, nothing elsewhere in the whole Scripture can be found to compare with it; so exactly, and at so great length, does it give the history of Antiochus.

That the beginning of chap. XII. is only a continuation of the angel's address to Daniel, is plain from a mere glance. This address ends with v. 4; and then commences a colloquy between two angels, designed to cast further light on what had been said. One angel inquires of the other: "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" v. 6. The answer, introduced by an appeal to Heaven for confirmation of its truth, is, that "it shall be for a time, and times, and a half; and when he shall have entirely completed the dashing in pieces (72) of the power of the holy people, all these things shall be accomplished." That is, the time when Antiochus will cease from persecuting the Jews and profaning the temple, or the end of the wonderful things that have been foretold, will be 3 years from the commencement of his most violent course; and when he shall have been destroyed and his power over the Jews

shall have come to an end, then will have been fulfilled the things of which the angel had been giving information to Daniel. In other words; Dan. 12:7 marks the terminus ad quem of the predictions which immediately precede it. And that the dashing in pieces, i. e. utterly destroying or suppressing the power of the Jews, is to be referred altogether to Antiochus, no one who reads Dan. 7: 25, and 11: 21-45, and makes comparison of them with the annunciation here, can well doubt. Verses 30-35 of chap. XI. show fully what is meant in 12: 7, by dashing in pieces the power of the holy people; and the whole shows that the outrages of Antiochus, i. e. his final and most bitter persecution of the Jews, with their complete subjugation, is designed to be characterized here. And this, as we have already seen, p. 89 above, lasted for a period of 31 years.

We see, then, an entire coincidence of manner and matter between Dan. 7: 25 and 12: 7. The same time is designated by both in the same way, and the same person and same events are referred to in both. Of course we do not need a re-investigation here of facts in the history of Antiochus. The correspondence of prediction and history is even so striking, that none can refuse to perceive it. The only difficult question that will arise here for the interpreter, is Whether 12: 1-3 is to be interpreted so as to refer it to the troubles which Judea experienced shortly before the great victory under Judas Maccabaeus which ended in the restoration of liberty to the Hebrews, and also to the blessings consequent on their renewed liberty, thus making it parallel with Ezek. 37: 1-14; or whether the short passage here interposed looks forward to the more distant future—the Messianic period and final resurrection. Into this question I cannot enter here; nor is it important to the object which I have in view. The passage in 12: 7,

undoubtedly refers to the leading and prominent part of the prophecy which precedes; and this plainly has respect to Antiochus.

I am aware that some have found a vлóvoa in 7: 25, and also in 12:7; i. e. they have interpreted both passages as having reference to Antichrist in their secondary sense, or to the beast which is described in Rev. XIII. and the sequel. But how this can be brought about, in the present case, I do not perceive. In regard to the passages in Daniel, so far as they respect Antiochus, no more than 3 years literally understood can possibly be meant. The utter absurdity of supposing Daniel to predict, that Antiochus himself in person should persecute the Jews for 1260 years, needs no exposure. But how 3 literal years can be meant in the type, (as they speak), and yet this same identical period amount to 1260 years in the antitype, i. e. Antichrist, is a problem in exegesis, that has yet received no solution, and surely admits of no satisfactory one. The bare statement of the whole matter is a complete refutation of the exegesis put upon the passages in question.

I have only one more remark to make, before I proceed to the examination of other passages. This is, that the reader should well note here the general nature of the limitation of time. It is not specifically designated by years, or months, or days, but it is expressed in general language, viz., "time, times, and a half." The very manner of the expression indicates, of course, that it was not the design of the speaker or writer to be exact to a day or an hour, A little more or a little less than 3 years would, as every reasonable interpreter must acknowledge, accord perfectly well with the general designation here, where plainly the aim is not statistical exactness, but a mere general characterizing of the period in question. We shall see reason to