principal thing which the scriptures inform us the Father hath concealed, and kept in his own power. "Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only." Mat. xxiv. 36. Mark xiii. 32. Many of the important events which shall take place in this world are clearly revealed; but the times of their occurrence the Father hath reserved to himself as his own secret. The times and seasons are the secret things which belong to the Lord our God, but the events, are the revealed things, which belong to us, and to our children for ever. Deut. xxix. 29.

Mede, Bishop Newton, Cunninghame, Faber, Frere, and others have called days years, as if it were self evident that in prophecy days invariably signified years, I acknowledge the above are reckoned great authorities, but Daniel and John are far greater, and they teach no such doctrine. I suppose the advocates of this system will reply, "If they do not, Moses and Ezekiel do." This is begging the question. Let it first be satisfactorily proved, then it may be boldly asserted. Moses first delivered his prophecy in years, saying, "Your children shall wander in the wilderness 40 years." The spies had just returned from searching the land 40 days, and as their evil report was the cause of the 40 years punishment, it was natural for Moses

to notice it, which he did by adding, "After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even 40 days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even 40 years." Num. xiv. 34. But let it never be forgotten that the prophecy was first given in years. Therefore there is no analogy to those prophecies which are only given in days and never given in years.

Now let us examine the other passage adduced in support of the day-year interpretation. Ezek. iv. 6. Here it is evident that the whole of this prophecy is given in type, and the various parts of the type are given in miniature. The city is portrayed on a tile, the "siege," the "fort," the "mount," the "camp," "the battering rams, and the iron pan for a wall," were all in miniature: and when the whole of the arrangements were completed, the city was declared to be "besieged." The import of this symbolic representation is explicitly stated, "This shall be a sign to the house of Israel." Then to make the whole type homogeneous, the time must be in miniature as well as the city and the siege; therefore days are put to represent years. And to prevent the possibility of a mistake, the Lord says "I have appointed thee each day for a year." But that these two passages should be adduced as standing rules for interpreting other prophecies which are so

perfectly dissimilar, appears to me an outrage upon sober interpretation: for neither Moses nor Ezekiel give the least intimation, that when they or any other prophets foretold events that should continue for a certain number of days, that they should be reckoned years. Not only so, but in both cases the signs were given in common days, and the things signified in common years, and we are directed so to understand them in these two places and no other. Daniel and John mention various prophetic numbers, and among them we find 1260 days, 1290 days, 1335 days, and 2300 days, without the slightest intimation that a day is put for a year. Besides, this fanciful interpretation deprives the language of prophecy of one of the most. important divisions of time, and makes weeks and months uncertain. Many prophecies have been given in days, and in days they have been fulfilled, and why should not others? "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up again." John ii. 19—21. Here the word Temple is used in a figurative sense, and therefore is explained by the Evangelist, "He spake of the temple of his body.' But the three days though prophetic, are used in their proper and literal sense: therefore they are left unexplained. See other similar passages in Table II.

Here, however, I think proper to confess

that I followed the day-year multitude for nearly half a century, without questioning the propriety of it: though I never had any confidence in their calculations, yet I have in a few lines in my "Inquiry after Prophetic Truth" aided the delusion, which I now sincerely regret, and earnestly call upon every student of prophecy to examine the matter for himself.

The Rev. Dr. Keith has published an excellent work entitled "Evidence of the truth of the Christian religion, derived from the literal fulfilment of Prophecy." In which he has proved to demonstration the literal accomplishment of the predictions relative to Jesus Christ-his birth-miracles-sufferings- -death and resurrection: and also the literal fulfilment of the prophecies relative to various cities and countries, such as Babylon, Nineveh, Tyre, Jerusalem, &c. and also concerning Judea, Ammon, Moab, Idumea, Philistia and Egypt: and he has boldly challenged the Infidel to disprove his statements; yea he has proved from the testimony of Infidels themselves, that the prophecies have been literally fulfilled; and therefore, that those who foretold these things must have been inspired. But neither he nor any other man has adduced the fulfilment of the Apocalypse as a proof of its inspiration, although many writers say that it is nearly all fulfilled.

1

If they had, the Infidel would with propriety reply, "Your witnesses of these things are not agreed among themselves, we cannot admit such contradictory evidence," for it is a notorious fact, that no two of the greatest writers on the Apocalypse are agreed among themselves. This is an irrefragable proof that not more than one can be right, and a strong presumptive proof that they are all wrong, and that the predictions are as yet unfulfilled.