THE HERALD
of Christ's Kingdom
VOL. VIII. August 1-15, 1925 Nos. 15-16
Table of Contents
"WATCHMAN WHAT OF THE
NIGHT? THE MORNING COMETH"
KINGDOM
OF BABYLON REIGNS 70 YEARS COVERS PERIOD OF JUDAH'S SERVITUDE
THE
SEVENTY YEARS DESOLATION AND SABBATH-KEEPING A DIFFERENT PERIOD
THE
"SEVEN TIMES" AND THE TIMES OF THE GENTILES
ISRAEL'S
"DOUBLE" AND THE "PARALLEL DISPENSATIONS"
ISRAEL'S JUBILEE YEAR
THE HARVEST OF THE GOSPEL AGE
"THOUGH IT TARRY, WAIT FOR
IT"
VOL. VIII. August 1-15, 1925 Nos. 15-16
EXHAUSTIVE
RESEARCH AND EXAMINATION OF PROPHETIC AND HISTORIC TESTIMONY
RELATING TO THE DIVINE TIMES AND SEASONS
"Ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day
should overtake you as a thief. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others: but let us watch
and be sober."-1 Thess. 5:5,6.
NO QUESTION can be of more
absorbing and thrilling interest to the time of the complete and permanent overthrow of
the empire of evil on earth and the full and lasting establishment of the kingdom of
righteousness, justice, and peace. Having been clearly informed in the holy Scriptures
that the establishment of that great empire of justice and truth will mean a thorough
vindication of the character of God and of all those who throughout the ages have stood in
defense of His holy name, and that it will signify additionally the crushing of evil, and
the removal of sorrow, suffering, and death from the earth, what child of faith would not
realize every fiber of his soul stirred within him on being brought face to face with the
facts and evidences showing that the "time is at hand" for the "night of
weeping" to pass, and the "morning of joy" to dawn. Such has been the happy
experience of the watching and waiting people of God in these last times as they have
continued to pray, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done." It has been the joyful
privilege of these to realize the fulfilment of the message of St. Paul: "But of the
times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. . . . But ye,
brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all
the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of
darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober."
(1 Thess. 5:1,4-6.) Again the thrill and rapture of joy experienced by this class was well
described by the Prophet Daniel: "Oh, the blessedness of him that waiteth earnestly,
and cometh," etc. (Dan. 12:12.) The heavens, as it were, have been opened unto them,
and like the Seer of Patmos, it is as if they were transported to a great and high
mountain from where they have been privileged to behold the wealth of the New Jerusalem
and the glory of the world to come.
But this cup of blessedness, like
that of which the faithful of the past have supped, has not been without its mixture of
myrrh and wormwood; for in addition to the suffering incidental to the fulfillment of
their consecration, and in addition to the perils and fiery trials of these days, the
Lord's people have been permitted to feel keenly the bitterness of disappointment with
regard to some of their cherished hopes and expectations and a wise Providence has seen
fit to allow those circumstances to obtain that tend to disturb and perplex and that give
rise to doubts and fears, making it necessary for those who would hold fast to their faith
and hope to earnestly seek the light of the Lord's countenance, the reflection of His Word
and Spirit. Such in the past as have humbly and with their whole heart sought Him have not
been turned away empty, nor been left in hopeless solitude, but have been made to drink
abundantly of the springs of His truth and grace by which they have been enabled to press
on with refreshment and renewed vigor to the end of their journey.
Amongst the illustrious examples
of the Bible is that of the Prophet Daniel, who, out of intense anxiety for the
deliverance of God's people, sought the face of the Lord with his whole heart: "In
those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came
flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks
were fulfilled." In response a special messenger was sent from the Lord to enlighten
and comfort him: "And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand
the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent. And when
he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling. Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel
for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten
thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words." (Dan.
10:2,3,11,12.) And Daniel was made to understand concerning the matter that lay near to
his heart, and he was given the honor of recording one of the most significant prophecies
of the Bible.
Nor will those who now, out of
humility and full consecration, seek the face of the Lord and guidance by His Spirit be
left comfortless with regard to the important matters that lie near to their hearts, and
with regard to the great issues in which the spiritual interests of all the Lord's people
are wrapped up. Thus it is our firm conviction, based upon the sure promises of the Divine
Word, that the Lord will grant unto His people such vision and such comprehension of the
wisdom from above that they need not remain in doubt and perplexity with regard to the
things in which they have been hoping and trusting.
Ever since this association of
Bible students, known as the "Pastoral Bible Institute," was called into
existence, over seven years ago, the brethren to whom the interests of this ministry have
been committed have been appealed to by other brethren from nearly all parts of the earth
who have experienced deep perplexity as to many of the existing conditions, and as to the
seeming failure of much that was hoped for and expected would be realized by the Lord's
people by this time. During these days of waiting many of the brethren have very properly
been making inquiry into the causes of the seeming delay of the fulfillment of our hopes.
Some have asked, Why has not the Church realized her final deliverance and reward by this
time? Considering the views we have entertained for a number of years on the subject of
chronology, as to where we are on the stream of time, and as to the end of the
"six-thousand-year period" and the "times of the Gentiles," etc., why
is not the time of trouble over with by now--why has not the old order of things passed
away, and why has not the Kingdom been established in power before this? Is it not
possible that there may be an error in the chronology? None can dispute that these are
questions entirely proper for consideration, and on which we may reasonably seek
assistance from the Word of the Lord. And yet, considering the responsibility of touching
things that involve so much, and remembering the divinely solemn instruction, "Be not
rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God,"
it has been with much hesitation that decision is reached to speak with regard to these
matters; but surely it is proper for us to speak where the Word of the Lord speaks, and
likewise, we trust to remain silent where that Word is silent.
The earnest inquiries and
heartfelt appeals from the brethren during these days have caused much earnest and
prayerful thought and seeking the Lord and His Word for the wisdom from above. We have
humbly acknowledged to Him our utter incompetence to know or to accomplish anything of
ourselves, and that our every confidence is in Him; that we are sure that, as in the past,
He is still able to use very weak vessels in His service to honor His name. We have
therefore asked that if it were His good pleasure, we might be blessed with such
understanding of His Word and will as would enable us to counsel others wisely and in a
manner that would honor His name and cause. And it is concerning some of these vitally and
deeply important things that have perplexed the brethren, that we have undertaken to
submit the general examination that follows in this issue.
All the readers of this journal
well know that we have not used these columns to promulgate any vain imaginations or
fanciful theories of our own. All can surely attest that the most conservative policy has
been adhered to and rigidly followed out, to the extent of apparently being an annoyance
to some. It has not seemed to us to be the Lord's will, nor have we had any desire, to
place before the brethren something new or our own manufacture with which to fascinate and
startle others or to satisfy idle curiosity. Nor do we now have any intention of departing
from the policy and custom practiced from the beginning of this movement. We will not
launch out into the field of wild speculation and idle guessing; but while endeavoring
always to exercise that sobriety and conservatism becoming to all ambassadors of Christ,
we purpose to maintain that alertness and watchfulness as to the signs of the times and
the fulfillment of the "more sure word of prophecy" that we may discern the will
of our God and thus be enabled to stand and to assist others to maintain faith, fortitude,
and courage in this very trying time.
We submit what is given herein
only after the most careful and prayerful search of the Scriptures, and only after
reaching the conclusion that it is well sustained by the infallible Word of the Lord. As
our own hearts and heads have been greatly refreshed and blessed in the examination of
these matters and in the conclusions reached, we believe that a responsibility rests with
us to make known these things to others. We urge nothing upon any. We would say nothing to
coerce any to see the situation as we do. We merely say to all that these things look most
reasonable and Scriptural to us and we are convinced that they are true. We only ask that
careful and earnest attention be given to the matters that we here review, believing that
a rich blessing will be realized therefrom, as we ourselves have experienced.
All who are acquainted with the
writings of Brother Russell are well aware of the fact that it was his conviction up to
within a short time before October, 1914, based upon his study of the chronology of the
seven times (2520 years) of the Gentiles, that that date would witness the complete
overthrow of the Gentile nations--indeed, the utter collapse of the present order of
things, civil, ecclesiastical and social, and the full
establishment of God's Kingdom, which last event of course would necessitate the change of
all the Kingdom class to the glory and honor of the Divine nature. We cite a few of the
many statements of this character:
"In view of this strong
Bible evidence concerning the times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth
that the final end of the kingdoms of this
world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of AD 1914. Then
the prayer of the Church, ever since her Lord took His departure--,Thy Kingdom come'--will
be answered; and under that wise and just administration, the whole earth will be filled
with the glory of the Lord." "The ,Gentile times' prove that the present
governments must all be overturned before the close of AD 1914; and the Parallelism above
shows that this period corresponds exactly with the year AD 70, which witnessed the completion of the downfall of the Jewish
polity."
Referring to the sixth
vial-plague, which Brother Russell believed had been in process of fulfillment for some
years past, he said: ",The battle of the great day of God Almighty' (Rev. 16:14), which will end in AD 1914 with the complete
overthrow of earth's present rulership, is [was at the time he wrote] already
commenced."
Three of the most stupendous
events of Scripture prophecy were thus expected by us to occur in October, 1914. First,
the utter collapse of what is generally termed Christendom, which comprehends both the
nominal Christian system or temple, and the so-called Christian civilization, as also the
other Gentile powers. The event in Jewish history which corresponded or paralleled this
great catastrophe was that of the overthrow of Jerusalem and the destruction of its temple
in Zedekiah's day, and the same event in 70 AD. The parallel event did not eventuate in October, 1914, nor has it
yet, as all are now aware. The second event that was to occur was the end of the battle of the great day of God
Almighty. Neither did this take place. The third event is that of the "full"
establishment of the Kingdom of God, which, as is also plainly apparent, has not yet
occurred.
In view of the utter failure to
date of the three propositions above mentioned, as well as others, what would seem to be
the proper course dictated by the spirit of a sound mind? One method would be to blindly
close our eyes to the facts and say that somehow we must have been right in our former
convictions regarding events, times, and seasons, anyway,
and then enter into a scheme of theorizing and twisting the Scriptures to force them to
fit our former calculations. Another method would be to say that since so many of us for
so long a time held the convictions that we did, it would not be wise policy for us to now
question anything or make any investigation, but to just remain silent and quiet on the
subject. Neither of the above methods appeals to us as representing the part of wisdom or
the spirit of the Lord. Rather we are deeply impressed by the attitude taken and the
course adopted by Brother Russell during his last hours. And what were his latest
utterances in regard to these matters? How did he account for the manifest failure of our
expectations? We reply: In 1916, he said along this line:
"Some of us were quite
strongly convinced that the Harvest would be ended by now, but our expectations must not be allowed to weigh
anything as against the facts. The fact is that the Harvest work is going grandly on.
. . . At first we were inclined to surmise that the Harvest proper had closed in October,
1914, and that the work since going on was a gleaning work; but the facts seem not to bear
this out."
In other words, since the facts
are that some things we expected have not been realized, we must not insist that our
expectations were right anyway, but should accept the facts and recognize the failure up
to date of our expectations.
Again, about two months before
his death Brother Russell expressed his convictions; and concerning Gentile times he
frankly admitted mistaken calculations, and stated that instead of expecting the complete
collapse of Gentile kingdoms, etc., in 1914 we should have expected a simple running out
of the lease of power to the Gentile nations; in other words, that the Divine decree,
giving the dominion of the world to Babylon and the empires succeeding Babylon, which was
for a period of "seven times" (2520 years), ran out then, October, 1914, and
that the complete collapse would be due to occur in a few years from the time he wrote, in
1916. He, however, fixed no date. His words to this effect are: "The Gentile nations
were guaranteed a certain amount of possession and control for a certain period of time.
That time having expired, dispossession proceedings are now in process. . . . We see no
reason for doubting, therefore, that the times of the Gentiles [i.e., their lease of
power] ended in October, 1914; and that a few more years will witness their utter collapse
and the full establishment of God's Kingdom in the hands of Messiah."
The statement here cannot
possibly be misunderstood, and is briefly this: that the date 1914 ended the 2520 years of
lease of power to the Gentiles. This would of course make this lease of power to begin 606
BC.
Again, with regard to the
parallels and the Harvest, he said:
"We imagined that the
Harvest work of gathering the Church would be accomplished before the end of the Gentile
times; but nothing in the Bible so said. Our
thought was purely an inference, and now we see that it was an unjustified one."
It is evident from the statements
made by Brother Russell in September, 1916, that he looked forward to 1918 as possibly
marking the utter collapse and end of the present order. But now we are moving rapidly
away from and beyond that date with the Gentiles still in power and the present order of
things intact. What would now appear to be our course of wisdom? Again we ask the reader
to weigh and ponder carefully our Brother's advice published in 1914, for we consider it
most significant and the very essence of wisdom.
"If October, 1915, should
pass, and we should find ourselves still here and matters going on very much as they are
at present, and the world apparently making progress in the way of settling disputes, and
there were no time of trouble in sight, and the nominal Church were not yet federated,
etc., we would say that evidently we have been
out somewhere in our reckoning. In that event we would look over the prophecies further,
to see if we could find an error. And then we would think, have we been expecting the
wrong thing at the right time? The Lord's will might permit this."
Surely what Brother Russell said
he would do in the event that matters were going on much the same several years beyond
1915, cannot be unreasonable or improper for us to do now, that we "find ourselves
still here, and matters going much the same," namely to go back over the prophecies
"to see if we have been looking for the wrong thing at the right time."
How frequently has it been the
case with the Lord's people in their investigation to discover the time for important
events in connection with the unfolding of the Lord's great plans and purposes, that they
have made the mistake of looking for the wrong thing at the right time. In connection with
the most important event of human history--the First Advent of the Redeemer--the nation of
Israel, who had been so long looking for their Messiah, and who were accustomed to having
the Scriptures relating to that event read publicly in their hearing every Sabbath day,
made the most serious mistake in expecting that their Messiah at His First Advent was
coming to reign, instead of to suffer and die; overlooking or failing to give heed to the
fact that those predictions taught that He must first suffer before He would enter into
His glory. This was true not only of the nation as a whole, but even many of the disciples
made the same mistake. In their cases, however, because of their being true disciples,
their disappointment was overruled for their eternal good; and not only so, but the Savior
revealed to them later the Divine Plan more fully.
Not understanding the nature of
our Lord, the manner of His Second Advent, nor the object to be accomplished by the
Advent, and because of a too hasty conclusion concerning the nature of the events that
were to mark the end of certain prophetic periods, Mr. Miller, in 1844, a most godly
disciple of Christ, and his associates, made the same mistake, and looked for the Lord to
come in a body of flesh, to literally burn the world and purify it by the fires thereof to
become the eternal home of all the saved.
Would it not be possible for the
Lord's people who have gained a very much clearer and more consistent and Scriptural
knowledge of the manner and object of the Second Advent to make a similar mistake in their
fixing time for events to take place when certain prophetic periods seem to have run their
course? May not this be true concerning the prophetic period of the "seven
times" of the Gentiles? We have found that one of the wise servants of God, one much
used of the Lord, acknowledged just before he finished his course in death, certain
mistaken calculations with relation to the forty-year Harvest parallels. Would it not be
best, in view of this, for the Lord's people to give heed to his words uttered in 1914
concerning what he would do if he found himself living beyond 1915 and certain things did
not eventuate? And now that eleven years have passed since these words were uttered, and
nearly ten since his death, would it not be the much wiser course for us to pursue to
receive his words of advice, instead of trying to reconcile what he acknowledged himself
were mere inferences and have been proved such. Would it not be much wiser to follow his
suggestion and look very closely to those Scriptures that mark the beginning of Gentile
times, particularly that feature of the same which we and he failed to see until after
1915 and 1918 passed meant the cessation of a lease of power instead of an overthrow and
destruction of the Gentile nations and apostate Christianity? Would it not be more
consistent and a better exhibition of the spirit of a sound mind, more pleasing to our
Divine Lord, to examine and discover where the mistake is, than to do as many have been
doing, building up theories based upon that which he himself acknowledged was wrong, only
to be disappointed again later? We certainly believe it would be prudent to proceed to
investigate as he said he would do.
Be our sentiments what they may,
we are now confronted with certain facts which outweigh all past considerations, and as
students of the sure Word, we want our feet on as firm foundation as possible. Though all
the expectations relative to the year 1914 did not mature, the Lord was very gracious in
permitting just sufficient events of a certain character to transpire to sustain the faith
and hopes of His dear children, who have been "kept by the power of God through faith
unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." And His goodness will continue
even now in affording a further view into His chronological arrangements, revealing that
everything is occurring exactly on time as He had intended, and showing approximately at
least the location of some future events of great importance in the outworking of His
Plan.
In the course of this
investigation there has been located, we believe, the point of difficulty or discrepancy
in what we have considered our great chain of chronology. It is found to be in connection
with the commencement of the "times of the Gentiles"; that designation, as we
have seen, having reference to the sole or world dominion given to the Gentiles at the
conclusion of Israel's kingdom, which dominion continues to control the nations of the
earth. Concerning the fact that this lease of power began 606 BC, there is scarcely a
dissenting voice amongst Bible expositors who have given the matter attention;
furthermore, it is agreed that this lease of power began 70 years before 536 BC.
Concerning these two items both historical and chronological writers are in perfect
agreement. One of these writers has expressed the very general thought concerning the
significance of this date 606 BC, and its great importance as a chronological date:
"It has been justly termed the point of contact between sacred and profane history;
and its importance in the sacred chronology is immense on account of its being the
[beginning] epoch of the [70 years] servitude of Judah to Babylon." This latter
period mentioned, the 70 years of Judah's servitude to the kingdom of Babylon, enters into
the point of difficulty in a very important sense.
In the development of this
investigation it will be well to have before us briefly the table of chronology as we have
heretofore understood it:
From the Creation
of Adam Years
To the end of the flood 1,656
Thence to the covenant with Abraham 427
Thence to the Exodus and the giving of the Law 430
Thence to the division of Canaan 46
The period of the Judges 450
The period of the Kings 513
The period of the desolation 70
Thence to AD 1 536
Thence to AD 1873 1,872
Total 6,000
These time periods are elaborated
in "The Time is at Hand," pages 43 to 51. So far as we are able to know, all the
conclusions are correct with the exception of one point, which constitutes the crux of our
presentation, and which we feel is the solution of our difficulties. The question at issue
is concerning the beginning of the 70 years called "the period of desolation."
This period of 70 years, ending at 536 BC, will be seen to be more properly called the
"70 years of servitude." Heretofore we have begun this period with the
destruction of Jerusalem at the end of Zedekiah's reign thus forcing 70 years from
Zedekiah's overthrow to 536 BC; whereas careful investigation now reveals that this era of
70 years really began 18-19 years earlier--about the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim,
with the first year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. And this conclusion
compels a discrepancy or difference of 19 years in the ultimate outcome of the chronology,
though it will be seen, we believe, to sustain an arrangement in the whole system of
prophetic time measurements that is harmonious.
It has surely occurred to all
students of chronology that we are absolutely dependent upon secular history for our
chronological measurements from the year 536 BC onward; that Bible chronology stops with
the 70-year period ending at the beginning of the reign of King Cyrus, the Persian, and
that the inspired Word has brought us forward only so far as necessary, from which point
we will be able to search out the truth from such sources as are at hand, and which are
considered to be quite reliable. Now, what are the facts at hand concerning secular
testimony covering the period in question? We find a very general agreement that the reign
of King Cyrus began in the year 536 BC, and as this is the date we have already settled
upon, no discussion is necessary, believing that it should stand. If the 70 years ended in
536, then they began in 606. There is no occasion for changing that date either. The
following diagram will serve to illustrate how we have reckoned the 70-year period
heretofore, but which we believe was erroneous:
Now here comes the test. If the
seventy years began with the close of the reign of Zedekiah, then Zedekiah's reign ended
in the year 606, and this is what we have believed, but there is not a secular authority of any
reliability which places the close of Zedekiah's reign so far back. The only authority
(if such it may be called) we have ever heard of which so presents the matter is Josephus,
but it is generally known that he is inconsistent with himself and unreliable. All the
great authorities found in our libraries, without exception place the date of Zedekiah's
overthrow from 589 to 586. We believe the correct date is 588 BC, as that is the one which
sustains harmony in all the time prophecies and is the date given by the following
authorities:
The American
Encyclopedia (under "Babylonian Exile");
Appleton's New Practical Encyclopedia (Page 409, under "Jews");
Chamber's Encyclopedia (Page 393 under
"Jews");
Usher; Hawes; Blair.
The question before us is, What
Bible statement is there to show that Zedekiah was overthrown and Jerusalem destroyed in
606 BC? None whatever nor is there even an inference to that effect. Why then have we in
the past believed that these events took place in 606 BC? Answer: Because we read various
statements about a period of 70 years in that connection--of how the Jews were to serve
the king of Babylon 70 years, etc. These years we saw ended 536 BC, when Cyrus issued a
proclamation of freedom. All was right thus far, but we too hastily concluded that those
70 years started with Zedekiah's overthrow, which of course would put that event at 606
BC. We overlooked a number of facts, both Scriptural and historical, which it is our
purpose to present at this time. These facts clearly show that those 70 years of servitude
had been running for about 19 years when Zedekiah as a vassal king was removed and the
temple destroyed; and that consequently it was 588 BC when those events took place, and
but 51 years remained from that point to 536 BC instead of 70 years.
First of all we would call forth
the testimony that it was approximately 606 BC that the Divine decree giving the lease of
power to the Gentiles was issued to Nebuchadnezzar and had its beginning. This lease of
power signified the "times of the Gentiles" or universal rule of Gentile
dominion over all nations, and thus commenced the prophetic "seven times" of
2520 years.
The important question before us
then is, What events in connection with Gentile and Jewish history mark the date of the
Divine decree and the commencement of the rule over the Jews and all nations? We read:
"In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar [king of Babylon], Nebuchadnezzar
dreamed dreams." The particular dream referred to is that of the great metallic
image. (Dan. 2:1,31-35.) This great image is universally believed by Bible students to be
descriptive of the outline of Gentile dominion as represented in the four great empires of
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome and division of the last. The young Prophet Daniel,
who had been a captive in Babylon for about three years, was called upon to interpret this
dream, and in his interpretation, which was divinely given him, he states that the
beginning of Gentile dominion or lease of power had at this time, the second year of
Nebuchadnezzar, already begun. We quote: "Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the
God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power,
and strength and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field
and the fowls of heaven hath He given into
thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou [thy kingdom] art this head of gold." (Dan 2:37,38.) The
question then is answered--the event in Gentile history that marked the beginning of the
Divine lease of power was at that time a matter of history, and was that of the accession
of Nebuchadnezzar to the throne of Babylon.
Let the reader remember in this
connection that it was in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar and in the eleventh year
of Zedekiah that the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple occurred (Jer. 52:1-12);
therefore, about nineteen years after the Divine lease of power was given; and during all
those years the Jewish nation and its kings, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah, were
subject to the king of Babylon by Divine decree. They were merely vassal kings, and made
themselves liable to Divine penalty if disobedient.--See Jer. 27:11-13.
We next inquire, What event of
Jewish history marked the beginning of Israel's servitude and the beginning of Gentile
dominion or Gentile lease of power? We turn to the Scriptures for an answer and read:
"In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim
. . . king of Judah, came this word unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Thus saith the
Lord [hath the Lord said--margin] to me: Make thee bonds and yokes, and put them upon thy
neck, and send them to the king of Edom. . . . I have made the earth, the man, and the
beast that are upon the ground. . . . And now I have given all these lands into the hand
of Nebuchad-nezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant . . . And all nations shall serve him,
and his son, and his son's son, until the very time of his land come: and then many
nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him. And it shall come to pass, that the
nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, and
that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I
punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence,
until I have consumed them by his hand."--Jer. 27:1-8.
Let the reader note that this
Divine decree constituting a lease of power to the Gentiles was made in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, king of
Judah. Jehoiakim reigned about eleven years; Jehoiachin, three months; and Zedekiah, about
eleven years.
The next inquiry is, When did
this decree begin to be enforced on the Jewish nation? Again, we let the Scriptures
answer: "In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, came
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave
Jehoiakim, king of Judah, into his hand." (Dan. 1:1,2; see also 2 Kings 24:1; 2
Chron. 36:6.) It was at this same time, the third year of Jehoiakim, that certain of the
children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes, amongst whom was Daniel
and his companions, were carried captives to Babylon. (Dan. 1:3-6.) It was therefore at this time that the servitude of Judah to Babylon
began; some serving in Babylon, others in their own land; the whole nation, however,
serving the king of the kingdom of Babylon, and their kings were Nebuchadnezzar's vassals.
This servitude lasted throughout the whole length of the Babylonian Empire, and ended with
the decree of Cyrus 536 BC, about two years after Babylon's fall.
Proceeding with the investigation
we discover that the reign of Babylon over all nations, including the Jewish, therefore,
lasted 70 years--certainly no longer, which is a very important matter to keep in mind
when calculating the length of Gentile times. What say the Scriptures?
We begin with Jeremiah 25:11,
which reads as follows: "And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an
astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years."
Here is the initial declaration
of Jeremiah concerning a certain period of seventy years, another reference to the same
period immediately following in the next verse. Considering verse 11 with its context, we
note, first of all, that the statement is made that "this whole land shall be a
desolation and an astonishment," which statement refers to the land of Israel, but
the same was to be true also of the "nations round about," as we read in verse
9, and also in the further statement of verse 11, that "these nations [the nations
round about Israel] shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years." Notice that the
direct statement is that those nations (which would also include Israel) should serve the king of Babylon seventy years. Verse 1
of the chapter reveals that these words were spoken in the fourth year of Jehoiakim.
Certain portions of the 27th,
28th, and 29th chapters of Jeremiah favor the thought that these seventy years were in
effect several years before the overthrow of Zedekiah and the complete desolation of
Jerusalem. As a matter of fact, both Bible and profane history show that the nations
mentioned came under the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning of his reign,
though at no time were all the people completely subjugated. Not until the Fifth Universal
Empire of earth shall become established will every knee bow for the first time.
Nevertheless, the subjugating process commenced when Nebuchad-nezzar began his invasion
during the third year of Jehoiakim. (Dan. 1:1.) Then it was that the nations began to
serve the king of Babylon, though of course not willingly.
It is evident that the
announcement of Jeremiah concerning the ascendancy of Babylon was first proclaimed about
the very time when King Nebuchadnezzar was carrying out his memorable campaign, and then
his message was repeated during the first years in particular of the reign of Zedekiah.
Let us note chapter 27:4-17, which seems to have been first proclaimed in the reign of
Jehoiakim and then again in the fourth year of Zedekiah. "Thus saith the Lord of
hosts, the God of Israel . . . I have made the earth, the man, and the beast that are upon
the ground, by My great power and by My outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it
seemed meet unto Me. And now have I given all these
lands unto the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, My servant; and the beasts of the field have I
given him also to serve him. And all nations shall serve him, and his son [Evil-merodach], and his
son's son [Nabonadius--Belshazzar], until the very time of his land come; and then many
nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him [appropriate his kingdom unto
themselves]. And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve
[but start a rebellion] the same Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, and that will not
put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon [will not submit to the universal
empire], that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the famine,
and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand. Therefore hearken not ye
to your prophets, nor to your diviners, . . . saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon [the first fourteen
verses of chapter 28 give an example of these false prophets, and show that the nations
had already come under the yoke; that the
thought, therefore, is that of continuing to
serve the king of Babylon--not a matter of beginning to serve at some future date] for
they prophesy a lie unto you, to remove you far from your land and that I should drive you
out, and ye should perish. But the nations that bring their neck under the yoke of the
king of Babylon [submit and do not rebel], and serve
him, those will I let remain still in their own
land, saith the Lord; and they shall till it, and dwell therein [showing that those nations might remain in their own lands, and thus serve Nebuchadnezzar seventy years, but
rebellion would cause them to be removed; and Jehovah foreknew and foretold that they
would rebel].
"I spake also to Zedekiah
king of Judah according to all these words, saying, Bring your necks under the yoke of the
king of Babylon [submit to him], and serve
him and his people, and live [in your own land during the seventy years of servitude]. Why
will ye die, thou and thy people, by the sword, by the famine, and by the pestilence, as
the Lord hath spoken against the nation that will not serve the king of Babylon? Therefore hearken not
unto the words of the prophets that speak unto you, saying, ye shall not serve the king of Babylon; for they prophesy a lie
unto you."
The incident of Hananiah, the
false prophet, is set forth in the first fourteen verses of chapter 28. We quote verses
10-14, which show unmistakably that the nations had already come under the yoke of
Nebuchadnezzar several years in advance of Zedekiah's overthrow; hence that the seventy
years began to run before that event.
"Then Hananiah the prophet
took the yoke from off the Prophet Jereimiah's neck, and brake it. And Hananiah spake in
the presence of all the people, saying, thus saith the Lord, even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon from the neck of all nations
within the space of two full years [showing very plainly that the yoke had already been placed upon them]. . . . thus saith
the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel [through Jeremiah this time], I have put a yoke of iron upon the neck of all these nations, that they may serve Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and they
shall serve him [continue under the yoke]; and I have given him the beasts of the field
also."
Thus the evidence seems clear and
strong that so far as Jehovah God was concerned, He had placed a yoke upon all of those
nations, even that of Nebuchadnezzar, His servant, and that the seventy years of service
had commenced. But there is still further evidence. Let us note carefully the testimony of
chapter 29. Verse 10 reads as follows:
"For thus saith the Lord,
that after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform My good
word toward you, in causing you to return to this place."
Verse 1 of the chapter shows that
this message was sent to "the residue of the elders which were carried away captives,
and to the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people whom Nebuchadnezzar had
carried away captive from Jerusalem" and the next verse clearly shows which of the
captives are meant, or which particular captivity it is in connection with: "After
that Jeconiah the king, and the queen, and the eunuchs, the princes of Judah and
Jerusalem, and the carpenters and the smiths, were departed from Jerusalem." Then by
reference to 2 Kings 24:8-16 we see that this occurred in the eighth year of the reign of
Nebuchadnezzar, which was eleven years in advance of the destruction of Jerusalem at the
close of Zedekiah's reign. The promise to these captives was that after seventy years be
accomplished at Babylon the Lord would visit them and cause them to return to the land of
Palestine. But are we to understand that they were to wait eleven years before this
promise concerning the seventy years would be effective; that, as a matter of fact, they
would be at Babylon eighty-one years before the
Lord would remember them? Is it not more reasonable to understand that the seventy years
had already begun to run, even eight years
before they (these particular captives) had been taken to Babylon? Surely from God's
standpoint those seventy years must have begun at the time the beloved Daniel and others
(including princes or elders) were taken captives to Babylon in the third year of
Jehoiakim (Dan. 1:1-3) when he was made a vassal king and came under the yoke of the king
of Babylon, which was Nebuchadnezzar's first year--the time when he was told that all
nations were put under him.
At this point we remind the
reader that the period of the servitude of Judah must not be confounded with the
captivities and the period of desolation, as it generally is. The captivity and desolation
that came later is a separate matter and has nothing whatever to do with the original
decree that Israel and all nations should be brought into bondage to the king of Babylon
in Nebuchadnezzar's first year. Nor would bondage or slavery to the kingdom of Babylon
necessarily signify that the Jews or any other nation would need to be carried away
captive and their lands be left desolate. Let this point be clearly seen, therefore, that
it was rebellion against the Divine decree (which decree made the kings and people of
Judah and their land subject to Babylon) that brought upon the Jews and their king
Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) the further judgment of a national deportation to Babylon in the
eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar; and the still more terrible punishment of the
"desolations," and captivity of Zedekiah and the nation in the nineteenth year
of Nebuchadnezzar. It is unquestionable that it was in connection with this latter
invasion of the land in Zedekiah's time that the desolations occurred, and the land began
to enjoy her sabbaths to fulfil 70 years. However, this seventy-year sabbath-keeping and
desolation, and its ending, etc., we will discuss fully later on.
Our present object is to
establish when the lease of power to the Gentiles began. The Scriptures that we have
already considered thus far make this event to synchronize with the first year of
Nebuchadnezzar, which was the third year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and both these
events synchronize with the beginning of the 70 years of servitude, which end with the
first year of Cyrus, 536 BC. Seventy years prior to 536 brings us to 606 BC, thus making
the point where sacred chronology unites with profane chronology, the first year of Nebuchadnezzar instead of the nineteenth, as we previously supposed, and with
the third year of Jehoiakim instead of the eleventh of Zedekiah, as we also supposed,
which was about nineteen years later. If we allow that there was a period of 70 years
beginning with Zedekiah's overthrow in Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year to 536 BC, would
it not make the era of servitude 89 years instead of 70, as the Scriptures make it? Still
further, if we reckon the 70 years of servitude as beginning in Nebuchadnezzar's
nineteenth year would it not make the reign of the empire of Babylon 89 years instead of
70, as the Bible plainly declares it to be, and incidentally secular history also states
it to be? For Jehovah had declared through the Prophet Jeremiah that after the 70 years
elapsed (not after 89 years had elapsed) His people in Babylon would call upon Him to
fulfil His promise and restore them to their land and then He would hear and answer them.
We read Jehovah's words to this effect: "That after seventy years1 be
accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing
you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the
Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. Then shall ye call
upon Me, and ye shall go and pray unto Me, and I will hearken unto you. And ye shall seek
Me, and find Me, when ye shall search for Me with all your heart."--Jer. 29:10-13. Do
we have in Scripture recorded that any of His people did call upon Him after the 70 years
of servitude ended, and that He responded to their call? "In the first year of
Darius, the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm
of the Chaldeans [Babylonians]; in the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by
books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the Prophet,
that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem . . . And I prayed
unto the Lord my God . . . O Lord according to all Thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let
Thine anger and Thy fury be turned away from Thy city Jerusalem, Thy holy
mountain."--Dan. 9:1-27.
_________
1 This prophecy of Jeremiah, uttered long
before Zedekiah's overthrow, was in the nature of a letter sent to those who had been
taken captive when Jehoiachin was taken, in Nebuchadnezzar's eighth year, as well as to
those taken captive originally, in Jehoiakim's third year and Nebuchadnezzar's first year.
This message was designed to comfort them, assuring them that the entire era of servitude
already begun, would not last longer than 70 years.
__________
The fall of Babylon as we have
seen had been predicted by Jeremiah to occur after its 70 years of rule over all nations
had ended, which 70 years began with Nebuchadnezzar's first year. Both secular history and
the Bible record that the combined armies of Darius, the Mede, and Cyrus, the Persian
king, were God's instruments in its overthrow, thus preparing the way for the release of
His captive people and the commencement of the ending of the "desolation" period
during which the land was to enjoy sabbath-keeping. However, the end of this desolation or
sabbath period was not reached until about seventeen years after the decree of Cyrus, 536
BC, which would be about 519 BC. Concerning this we have most clear and definite
statements of Scripture as we shall show later. Daniel was an old man at the time he
offered up this prayer. If he was 18, or as some think, 21 years of age when he had
finished his three-years' schooling at Babylon, when he interpreted the king's dream, he
would be at the time he offered up this prayer either 88 or 91 years of age. At the fall
of Babylon we read that at first Darius the Mede took the kingdom. (Dan. 5:31.) In the
year 536 BC, about two years after this, Cyrus began ruling. And in Cyrus' first year, he
issued the decree releasing the captive people, as we read: "Now in the first year of
Cyrus, king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be
fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, that he made a
proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith
Cyrus, king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth
[as He did to Nebuchadnezzar 70 years before; thus continuing the times of the Gentiles];
and He hath charged me to build Him an house at Jerusalem [as Nebuchadnezzar was to
destroy the house] which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all His people? His God be
with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel
(He is the God), which is in Jerusalem," etc.--Ezra 1:1-4.
We have cited direct Scripture
texts containing mention of the seventy years and find that none of them thus far is
really antagonistic to the thought that those years began in the third year of Jehoiakim.
We now offer some further texts by way of corroboration of this thought, which have an
indirect bearing and add strong testimony by way of inference. Shortly after the return of
the Jews to their land there were many of the people still living who had seen the temple
of the Lord in its former glory (Ezra 3:12,13), and even as late as the second year of
Darius Hystaspes (Ezra 4:24; Hag. 1:1; 2:1,3), which was the year BC 520, there were those
living who remembered the former temple. Now here is an important proposition: if it was
at least seventy years from the destruction of the temple to the event recorded in Ezra
3:12,13, there were a great many people living who were then at least ninety years of age,
for they must have been about or nearly twenty years of age at the time of their removal
to Babylon in order to appreciate the matter as recorded, and those living fifteen years
later would be over a hundred years of age. Or, considering that they were as young as ten
years of age when deported, those people would have been at least eighty years of age in
536 BC, and ninety-six years of age in 520 BC. Not many people go beyond the allotted
threescore years and ten, as we all know, and as is attested by history. From Luke
2:36,37, we see that eighty-four years was considered by the Jews as "a great age,
indicating that very few ever reached that mark. But if the period from Zedekiah to Cyrus
was fifty-one years, as we are suggesting, then this great number of people would have
been around seventy years of age (or sixty, if they had been nine years old upon the
removal) at the time of the return, and those still remaining some sixteen years later
would have been around seventy-six or eighty-six, which seems much more reasonable.
We would not forget the case of
Daniel, who was a young man at the time of his deportation, in the third year of
Jehoiakim. Assuming that he was twenty years of age at that time, he would have been one
hundred and nine years old according to the chronology as applying the seventy years from
Zedekiah, or ninety years of age according to our suggestion, which is in harmony with
historical chronology, at the beginning of the reign of Cyrus, and it is noted that he was
still living at a later date in the reign of Cyrus. (Dan. 6:28; 10:1.) Thus these
reasonable considerations seem to favor the thought that the seventy years began in the
third year of Jehoia-kim and not in the eleventh year of Zedekiah.
"And it shall come to pass
in that day, that Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years, according to the days of one king."--Isa.
23:15.
The word "king" here,
as in some other instances, stands for a "kingdom," and it is believed that the
kingdom referred to is Babylon. While Nabopolassar tore Babylonia away from the old
Assyrian Empire, his son Nebuchadnezzar by the victory of Carchemish estab-lished the
first universal empire, from which time we reckon the beginning of the kingdom. (Dan.
2:37,38.) And approximately seventy years from that event Babylon fell. It seems that
language could hardly be any stronger than the foregoing words of Isaiah in showing that
the kingdom of Babylon would endure just seventy years. But if the seventy years of
Jeremiah began with the end of the reign of Zedekiah, then the kingdom of Babylon endured
(or its days were) eighty-nine years. Yet here is a statement that Tyre would be
"forgotten" seventy years, according to the days of one king, or kingdom. (Note
the use of the word "king" throughout the 11th chapter of Daniel.)
Nebuchad-nezzar's army came against Tyre in the third year of Jehoiakim's reign, and for a
long time the city was besieged ere it was finally taken, thus being forgotten seventy
years, the seventy years of Tyre synchronizing with Israel's seventy years. (Compare Jer.
25:11,22 and 27:3,6 with Isa. 23:15.)
From a careful examination of all
the Scriptures bearing on the subject, it appears that Nebuchadnezzar conducted three
campaigns against Jerusalem, in addition to sending bands, "the families of the
north," against it during the latter days of the reign of Jehoiakim.
1. In
the third year of Jehoiakim, as shown by Dan. 1:1; 2 Kings 24:1; 2 Chron. 36:6; and Jer.
35:11.
2. In
the days of Jehoiachin, as shown by 2 Kings 24:10-12 and 2 Chron. 36:10.
3. At
the close of Zedekiah's reign.
No doubt King Nebuchadnezzar
would have preferred to leave the Jews in their own land if he could be guaranteed their
loyalty to him. This seems to have been the course he at first pursued, though waveringly
(2 Chron. 36:6), taking some of the chief of the people (princes, elders, etc.), including
some of the king's family, to Babylon (in the third year of Jehoiakim), with the thought,
no doubt, that the king whom he had left in the land would be loyal on their behalf. The captives were accorded
generous treatment. (Dan. 1:1-7.) Notwith-standing the rebellion of Jehoiakim, King
Nebuchadnezzar must have decided to try the same scheme with Jehoiachin, but becoming
sus-picious he finally took Jehoiachin captive to Babylon, with a large number of the
people, leaving only the worst of the people (2
Kings 24:14), whom he thought, because of ignorance, etc., would be more likely to submit
to him under the new king, Zedekiah. Thus, there appears ample Scriptural support for
laying emphasis upon the expedition of Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in Daniel 1:1*,
and other Scriptures, as being a proper place from which to reckon the seventy years of
Jeremiah as starting. It was in the following year, the fourth year, of Jehoiakim, that
Jeremiah first made the announcement concerning the seventy years.
___________
* Some have experienced difficulty in
harmonizing Daniel 1:1,5,6,18, with chapter 2:1,16, the seeming discrepancy appearing to
be in the statements that Daniel was taken captive in the third year of Jehoiakim's reign,
which was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, and that he was in training three
years, and then in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign was admitted into his
presence. In fact this seeming inconsistency has been triumphantly appealed to by skeptics
in depreciation of the book of Daniel, for it is urged that if the King of Babylon kept
Daniel three years in training before allowing him to come into his presence, how could
the Prophet have interpreted the dream in his (Nebuchadnezzar's) second year?
Those who hold to the old line of chronology
attempt to harmonize the statements by saying that Daniel 1:1 must be in error, a wrong
translation, that the words, "third year of the reign of Jehoiakim," must mean the third year
of the vassalage or servitude of Jehoiakim,
which would place the matter three years later. To us this explanation is not
satisfactory, for there is no reason whatever for construing the word reign to mean
vassalage. The two words are entirely different. A harmonious understanding is found in
the explanation that Daniel was writing from the standpoint of the records in Babylon. He
would therefore accept the Babylonian records bearing upon the reign of Nebuchadnezzar,
according to which he began to reign at the death of his father, but in reality he had
reigned previously--while his father was still alive. History clearly states that it was
about two years before his father died that Nebuchadnezzar led the siege against Jerusalem
in Jehoiakim's third year, when Daniel was taken captive. This would place the second year
of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar from the Babylonian standpoint about three or four years
after the third year of Jehoiakim; and thus Nebuchadnezzar's reign being recorded as
beginning at his father's death, would be two years after Daniel and companions were taken
captive, and the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign would synchronize with Daniel's
fourth year in Babylon, after the three years schooling had expired, when he was called
into the king's presence to interpret the dream. It is suggested in this connection that a
careful comparison be made of the following Scriptures: 2 Kings 23:36; 24:8,12. These
Scriptures clearly state that Jehoiakim reigned 11 years, and that the end of the eleventh
marked Nebuchadnezzar's eighth year. (Jehoiachin reigning only three months.) Eight years
reckoned backward would make Nebuchadnezzar's first year to synchronize with Jehoiakim's
third year, as Daniel states.
As for the seeming discrepancy between Daniel 1:1,
the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, and Jeremiah 25:1, where it is stated that
Jehoiakim's fourth year was Nebuchadnezzar's first year, the explanation is that Jeremiah
is recording the matter from the Jewish standpoint, which would count Nebuchadnezzar's
reign as commencing two years earlier than the Babylonian records--at the time he led the
siege against Jerusalem. It would be the fourth year according to the Jewish method of
reckoning, counting the year from Nisan to Nisan. Whatever portion of the year had expired
before Nisan would be counted as a year, and there the second year would commence. Two
years from that time the fourth year would be counted, whereas, actually less than three
years had expired. Thus Daniel calls it the third year of Jehoiakim, while Jeremiah calls
it the fourth; but the matter seems to be entirely harmonious from the above explanation.
___________
Before concluding this particular
section of our investigation, attention is called to another line of testimony, which
clearly indicates that there were but 70 years between the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's
reign and the first year of Cyrus, 536 BC, instead of 89 years, according to former
calculations:
Let us consider a few candid
facts. In 2 Kings 25:27 (or Jer. 52:31) we read: "And it came to pass in the seven
and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month in
the seven and twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the year
that he began to reign did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of
prison."
Hence Jehoiachin had been in
captivity thirty-seven full years when this event took place. Zedekiah succeeded
Jehoiachin with a reign of eleven years. (2 Chron. 36:11.) Therefore a period of
twenty-six years elapsed from the close of Zedekiah's reign until Jehoiachin was lifted up
out of prison. (37 minus 11 equals 26.) Secular authority agrees with these Bible
statements. But now: If the seventy years began with the close of Zedekiah's reign, then a
period of forty-four years ensued from the time Jehoiachin was lifted up out of prison
until the first year of the reign of King Cyrus. (70 minus 26 equals 44.) But what does
secular authority say about this period? It claims a period of only 25 years, or a
difference of 19 years. History has given an apparently accurate and complete account of
this period, as follows:
Babylonian History:
Evil-merodach reigned 561-559-2 years
Neriglissar reigned 559-556-3 years
Laborosoarchod reigned nine months 556-555-1 year
Nabonadius (Belshazzar) reigned 555-538-17 years
Medo-Persian History:
Fall of
Babylon. 538
To first year of reign of Cyrus 536-2
years
Total
25 years
It does not appear that any "chronological
irreguarities" of more than three years exist for this period among secular
authorities.
Let us note the situation from
the standpoint of reason, aside from the Scriptures; but we will show the Scriptural
corroboration of the reasonable conclusions also. We find the Scriptures and secular
authority agreeing with reference to the twenty-six-year period from the overthrow of
Zedekiah until the beginning of the reign of Evil-merodach; then for the following link in
the chain of chronology reaching to the beginning of the reign of Cyrus we find secular
authority claiming this a period of 25 years, and then we reach the point on the stream of
time where we are absolutely dependent upon history. Here we are confronted with the
element of reason: Is it reasonable to say that such great discrepancy as 19 years for so
brief a period exists between the sacred and secular chronology? that secular chronology
is in error to such large extent? that in a period of 44 years a hiatus of 19 years occurs
in history, of which men have absolutely no record, although they have apparently
accounted for the period the same as for those preceding and succeeding? Considering the
tendency of profane history to lengthen rather than to abridge ancient time periods, and
the fact that we are so dependent upon the same at this juncture, is it reasonable, we
inquire, to totally reject the testimony of men without endeavoring to make some
explanation why such discrepancy exists, or without attempting to harmonize the Scripture
chronology herewith? Is it consistent, in view of our dependence? Is there a hopeless
conflict between the sacred and profane? We believe not.
Let us face the proposition from another angle: The Canon
of Ptolemy, which established the first year of the reign of Cyrus as BC 536, has also
established various dates back to Nebuchadnezzar as follows:
Nebuchadnezzar began to reign BC 604-43 years
Evil-merodach began to reign 561-- 3 years
Neriglissar began to reign 558-- 5 years
Nabonadius began to reign 553-17 years
Cyrus began to reign 536--_______
From Nebuchadnezzar to Cyrus 68 years
Now, if Jeremiah's seventy years began with the overthrow of
Zedekiah, the date of the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar's reign would be BC 625, a
difference of 21 years from the above. A
difference of only two or three years for such a period might be allowable from the
standpoint of reason; but in view of our acceptance of and dependence upon the Canon with
reference to the BC 536 date, is it reasonable or consistent to reject its authority as to
the BC 604 date, to the extent of 21 years,
when a period of only 70 years is involved?
Would not such situation suggest the need of making a very thorough and honest examination
of all Scripture texts bearing thereupon with the hope of finding some reasonable and
satisfactory solution?
It has been deemed important to
go exhaustively into the subject as has been done foregoing that all the facts and
evidences might be seen showing that but 70 years passed between the time when
Nebuchad-nezzar was given his universal rule in the first year of his reign and 536 BC;
for this point stands most closely related to the great question of the beginning and
ending of the times of the Gentiles. We believe the conclusion is well established thus
far that the lease of power to the Gentiles began in Nebuchadnezzar's first year instead
of his nine-teenth; that the 70 years of Judah's servitude began at the same time; that
the Bible makes the 70 years of servitude to Babylon to be the length of time that the
Babylonian kingdom, according to Divine decree, was given dominion.
If, as we believe the evidence
herein given proves, there was but 70 years from the time Nebuchadnezzar ascended the
throne of Babylon to 536 BC, then 606 BC marks the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar's reign,
and 19 years later, or 588 BC, Zedekiah was overthrown, because we read: "Zedekiah
reigned eleven years in Jerusalem and it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in
the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,
came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it, and built forts
against it round about. So the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah.
And in the fourth month . . . the city was broken up. . . . Then he [the king of Babylon]
put out the eyes of Zedekiah; and the king of Babylon bound him in chains . . . Now in the
fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which
was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan captain
of the guard, . . . and burned the house of the Lord, and the king's house; and all the
houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire."--Jer.
52:1,4,5,6,11,12,13.
Is it not manifest from the
sacred record that the fourth and fifth months of Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year, when
Zedekiah was overthrown and the city destroyed, would be approximately the summertime of
the year 588 BC?* The tenth month of the ninth year of Zedekiah's reign (ver.
4) would be approximately a year and six months prior thereto, or January, 589 BC, when
Nebuchadnezzar made his final great assault upon Palestine and Jerusalem, causing general
cessation of agricultural pursuits, thus marking the beginning of the 70 years of
desolation and sabbath-keeping, as we shall see more clearly further on in this
discussion.
____________
* The Jewish year commencing about April,
the fourth and fifth months would be approximately July and August.
___________
Now with regard to the prophetic
"seven times," if they are to be understood to represent 2520 years (and we
believe they are), and if these years represent the length of the Divine decree giving a
lease of power to the Gentiles (this we also think is true)--then sure enough the 2520
years ran out in 1914 AD, and that year marked the end of the lease of power, but not
necessarily the full end of the exercise of power, nor the complete fall of the Gentile
governments, even as the kingdom of Israel did not fall and was not overthrown in the
final and absolute sense until Zcdekiah, a vassal king under Nebuchadnezzar, was taken
captive nineteen years after the period of servitude began.
Stating our conclusions up to
this point in another way, the sum of the matter is as follows: Whereas we have heretofore
understood that Zedekiah's overthrow took place in 606 BC, we now find that to be
erroneous, for it was but 606 BC, nineteen years prior to his overthrow, when
Nebuchadnezzar in the first year of his reign began the exercise of his world dominion and
commenced the period of the servitude of the Jews. Accordingly it was 588 BC when Zedekiah
was taken captive, and not 606 BC, and hence while the 2520 years' lease of Gentile power,
starting in Nebuchadnezzar's first year, 606 BC, would run out in 1914, yet the full end
of the Gentile times and the complete fall of Gentile governments is not indicated as
taking place till nineteen years later, or about 1933-1934. For if the downfall and
destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in Zedekiah's eleventh year (which was nineteen
years later than the Divine decree of the lease of power) be regarded as marking the full
establishment of the Gentile dominion, which is a logical deduction, then the parallel
event, the downfall of Christendom, could not occur until nineteen years later than 1914,
which would be about 1934. In other words, the seven times or 2520 years counting from
Zedekiah's fall and the fall of Jerusalem would end approximately in 1934: 587 BC + 1933
AD = 2520.
Let none misunderstand us; we are
not prophesying--we are predicting nothing. We are calling attention to the facts as to
the two points of time that stand out in much prominence in the starting and full
establishment of Gentile times or Gentile dominion, namely, 606 BC, when the lease of
power was given to Nebuchadnezzar, and 588 BC which marked the complete removal of the
Jewish kingdom. The reasonable deduction is that the great changes and events which we
have heretofore expected to take place in 1914 would, in view of the foregoing, be
logically expected to be in evidence somewhere around 1934.
Another item that becomes evident
is this: In fixing the 606 BC date in Nebuchadnezzar's first year and King Jehoiakim's
third year, instead of at Zedekiah's overthrow, nineteen years later, we are compelled to
subtract 19 years from the period of the kings in computing the 6,000 years from Adam. In
other words, we have in the past been saying that the period of the kings was 513 years
and then we added 70 years of servitude on to that, which we said extended to 536 BC. This
we believe is incorrect, for we must go back into the period of the kings nineteen years
to begin the 70 years of servitude; thus there is a lapping over of 19 years, which leaves
but 51 years between the end of the period of the kings and 536 BC, instead of 70. Note
the accompanying diagram.
Thus it is seen that in computing
the various periods of the past to make up 6,000 years of human history we are short 19
years of the results we have heretofore regarded as correct; that instead of 1872 marking
the end of 6,000 years of the world's history, we must look at least 19 years beyond 1872
to locate the end of 6,000 years, provided all the other periods of the chronology are
correct.
The
chronological table therefore stands as follows:
From the Creation
of Adam Years
To the end of the flood 1,656
Thence to the covenant with Abraham 427
Thence to the Exodus and the giving of the Law 430
Thence to the division of Canaan 46
The period of the Judges 450
The period of the Kings 513
Thence to the decree of Cyrus 51
Thence to AD 1 536
Thence to AD 1892 1891
6000
Though we are not relying upon
secular history in establishing the various points of this investigation, it is most
interesting to observe that secular authorities have fully accounted for the time from Nebuchadnezzar
to Cyrus, giving the names and lengths of reigns of the intermediate rulers, even
accounting for one of them by number of months; yea, and have given all the principal
events of those reigns with their respective dates, and are practically unanimous in their
testimony as to its length--all in general accord with what we are presenting from the
Scriptures. Note the following table from the Canon of Ptolemy:
Nabokolassa, the Nebuchadnezzar of Scripture 43
Ilvoradamus, the Evil-merodach of Scripture (Jer. 52:31) 2
Nerikassolassar 4
Nabonidus and Belshazzar his son 17
Adding to this the (about) two years that
Nebuchadnezzar reigned with his father, who
was
disabled because of old age 2
About two years from Babylon's fall to Cyrus'
first year ___2
Nor is it fair or reasonable to
attempt to discredit and sweep away all the testimony of secular history by saying that
these dates furnished us of the reign of the kings of Babylon prior to 536 BC have come
from Pagans and therefore is "Pagan" history and utterly worthless. Let such
remember that if there is no reliance to be put in so-called Pagan history, then the date
536 BC, accepted by all students, is of no value, for we get it from the Pagans--not from
Jews or Christians. Then between 36 BC and 1 AD there are several other important dates
accepted by all scholars that we get from "Pagan" history. With the end of the
first century AD all sacred history ends, and for the following eighteen centuries to the
present time we depend largely upon "Pagan" history for our information.
Gibbon, one of the greatest
historians, who wrote "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," must be
classed amongst Pagans, for he was neither a Jew nor a Christian believer; but no one for
a moment would think of questioning the reliability and truthfulness of this historian. It
does not require a divinely inspired writer to write history, but merely a measure of
intellect and integrity. Therefore, those who would refuse to accept the records of
secular history, should produce the proof and evidence that it is not valid or authentic.
We are interested in this connection in noting what Brother Russell said on the subject of
"Pagan" chronology:
"The period from the time of
the restoration of the Jews from Babylon, at the close of the 70 years desolation of their
land, in the first year of Cyrus, down to the date known as AD 1, is not covered by Bible
history. But, as before stated, it is well established by secular history as a period of
536 years. Ptolemy, a learned Greek-Egyptian, a geometer and astronomer, has well
established these figures. They are generally accepted by scholars, and known as Ptolemy's
Canon."
Again in setting forth the point
where he regarded secular or so-called Pagan history as being reliable, he said:
"As with history, so with
dates: the world has, aside from the Bible, no means of tracing its chronology farther
back than BC 776. On this subject we quote Prof. Fisher, of Yale College. He says: ,An
exact method of establishing dates was slowly reached. The invention of eras was
indispensable to this end. The earliest definite
time for the dating of events was established in Babylon--the era of Nabonassar, 747
BC. The Greeks (from about 300 BC) dated events from the first recorded victory at the
Olympic games, 776 BC. These games occur-red every fourth year. Each Olympiad was thus a
period of four years. The Romans, although not for some centuries after the founding of
Rome, dated from that event, i.e., from 753
BC.'"
THE SEVENTY YEARS DESOLATION AND
SABBATH-KEEPING A DIFFERENT PERIOD
"To fulfil the
word of the Lord by the month of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as
long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years."-2
Chron. 36:21.
The purpose of this phase in our
investigation is to set forth the Scripture testimony showing that the 70 years of
desolation and sabbath-keeping was an entirely separate era from that of the 70 years of
servitude that has been described foregoing though according to former reckoning they were
regarded as one and the same period. Because the same prophecies in Jeremiah speak of a
period of desolation of the land and also bondage and servitude to the kingdom of Babylon,
they were understood to refer to one and the same time; whereas, the evidence before us
now is that there were two 70-year periods, having separate beginnings and endings.
Thus some who reckon the period
of servitude to the kingdom of Babylon and the period of desolation and sabbath-keeping as
being all the same period, logically raise the objection to commencing this 70 years in
Nebuchadnezzar's first year; for it is urged that we would be including in that period the
19 years before Zedekiah's overthrow and Jerusalem's destruction during which the land was
not desolate and was still filled with inhabitants, whereas Jeremiah's prophecy had said
that the land should be desolate without an inhabitant. (Jer. 26:9.) Is not this a vital
and most serious objection? We reply that we think this objection is entirely eliminated
when we consider all the facts. The sum of the matter is Jeremiah's prophecy does not
state that the land will remain desolate without an inhabitant 70 years. Even if we calculate that the
seventy-year period began at Zede-kiah's overthrow and extended to 536 BC, it is
impossible to find 70 years of desolation of the land without an inhabitant from that point forward. For
the desolation of the land, without an inhabitant, did not occur at the destruction of
Jerusalem and the Jewish temple in Zedekiah's eleventh year, which was Nebuchadnezzar's
nineteenth. In proof of this we refer to the Scriptures, and read:
"Now in the fifth month, in
the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar . . . ; came
Nebuzar-adan . . . and burned the house of the Lord, and the king's house; and all the
houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire . . . But
Nebuzar-adan left certain of the poor of the land
for vinedressers, and for husband-men."--Jer. 52:12,16.
As showing that about four years
after this event there were still numbers of people in the land, we quote another
statement of Scripture: "In the three and
twentieth year of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuzar-adan, the captain of the guard, carried away
captive of the Jews seven hundred forty and five persons."--Jer. 52:30.
It does not appear that any
statement occurs in the Scriptures to the effect that the land would be desolate, "without an inhabitant" (Jer. 9:11) for seventy years. We know that there were people in
the land five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, and that there were people in the
land for a while prior to the return of the Jews in the days of Cyrus (Ezra 3:3; 4:4); so
that, although there was doubtless a period in which the land was "without an
inhabitant," that period cannot be shown to be seventy years. In this connection
attention is invited to Ezekiel 29:10-13: "I will make the land of Egypt utterly
waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia. No foot of
man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years. And I
will make the land of Egypt desolate in the midst of the countries that are desolate, and
her cities among the cities that are laid waste shall
be desolate forty years; and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations, and will
disperse them through the countries. Yet thus saith the Lord God; at the end of forty
years will I gather the Egyptians from the people whither they were scattered."
These words uttered by the
Prophet Ezekiel about the close of Zede-kiah's reign furnish a most positive and direct
statement that the land of Egypt would be desolated without an inhabitant forty years. No
such positive, direct statement is made concerning the land of Israel in connection with
the seventy years, and yet the Lord could have stated it just as positively if it was to
be so. It seems probable that it was about five years after the dethronement of Zedekiah
that this forty years of the desolation of Egypt began to run. Counting the period from
Zedekiah's overthrow until Cyrus as fifty-one years, this would indicate that people began
to settle in the desolated countries, including the land of Palestine, about six years
before the decree of Cyrus (see Ezra 4:4 and 9:1, noting that in the latter text the
Egyptians are mentioned), and that the time during which the land of Canaan was
"desolate without an inhabitant"
was likewise a period of forty years, though no doubt the Jews were entirely removed from the land for about
forty-six years. Otherwise, if the land of promise was "desolate without an
inhabitant" for seventy years, it was given thirty years more of such desolation than
the land of Egypt, whereas it appears that it was Jehovah's intention to give "all
these nations" about the same kind of treatment by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, His
servant, as indicated by Ezekiel 29:12.
Now, if the 70 years of
desolations do not have reference to the land being all that time without an inhabitant, the inquiry
is proper and to the point, What does it refer to? A careful scrutiny of the Scriptures
that have special reference to the "desolations" will discover that it has
especially to do with the cessation of sowing and reaping; in other words, the cessation
of agricultural pursuits until the divinely appointed time for the land to enjoy her
Sabbaths had ended. One of the several ordinances enjoined upon the Jewish people was that
every seventh year, as well as every fiftieth year, the land was to lie fallow, and it was
in relation to this neglect to observe this ordinance that the era of desolations was
decreed. (Lev. 25.) In proof of the fact that this is what is meant we quote a passage in
2 Chronicles, which passage is preceded by a description in general of Nebuchadnezzar's
invasion of the land in his seventeenth year, which culminated in the siege of the city of
Jerusalem, which siege lasted until his nineteenth year, when the city and temple were
captured and destroyed. The Scripture referred to reads: "And them that had escaped
from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him
[Nebuchadnezzar] and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia; to fulfil the word
of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the
land had enjoyed her sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to
fulfil threescore and ten years."-2 Chron. 36:20,21.
Let it be kept in mind that these
words do not describe the beginning of the 70 years of servitude or vassalage, because
this era began seventeen years before, in 606, and ended with Cyrus in 536 BC, as we have
shown. This Scripture, it is very apparent, describes or refers to the 70 years of
sabbath-keeping of the land; and it is most reasonable to think that this could not begin until the whole land was desolated, by the
invasion of an army. That this judgment-desolation began to count with Nebuchadnezzar's
laying siege to Jerusalem in Zedekiah's ninth year several Scripture statements very
plainly declare, each statement giving the year, month, and day that it occurred. As we
quote these Scriptures let the reader keep in mind when examining them that this
desolation of the land was a Divine judgment which came upon the people of the land
because of a failure to obey the Divine decree made seventeen years before. In proof of
this we refer to Jeremiah's prophecy found in the 27th chapter. The Prophet is rehearsing
the Divine decree given to him in the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign, seventeen years
before Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem, 589 BC, which decree Jehoiakim had
disobeyed and as a result incurred the judgment threatened, meeting finally a disgraceful
death and burial. (Jer. 22:18,19.) In the Scripture we now quote, Jeremiah is calling
Zedekiah's attention to this Divine decree, for he was disobeying it at the time. We read
his words: "The nations that bring their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon,
and serve him, those will I let remain still in
their own land, saith the Lord; and they shall
till it, and dwell therein. I spake also to Zedekiah, king of Judah, according to all
these words, saying, Bring your necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him
and his people, and live. Why will ye die, thou and thy people, by the sword, by the
famine, and by the pestilence, as the Lord hath spoken against the nation that will not
serve the king of Babylon? Therefore hearken not unto the words of the [false] prophets
that speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon; for they prophesy a
lie unto you. For I have not sent them, saith the Lord, yet they prophesy a lie in My
name; that I might drive you out, and that ye might perish, ye, and the prophets that
prophesy unto you."--Jer. 27:11-15.
From the foregoing Scripture it
will be seen that that which was involved in the judgment-desolaion was not so much that
of a ruined city and temple, but rather a land laid desolate by the terrible scourge of an
invading army, the effects of which would be followed by famine and pestilence, the
continuing evidences of the Lord's displeasure. It is quite plain, therefore, that the
true beginning of this desolating judgment is not the capture of Jerusalem in Zedekiah's eleventh
year, and Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year, but rather the invasion of Judea just previous
to his investiture or siege of the city. It will be apparent that from the time
Nebuchadnezzar's armies entered the land, all agricultural pursuits ceased, were
suspended, and therefore the desolation may be reckoned from the day the capital city,
Jerusalem, was invested, namely the tenth day
of the tenth month (Tebeth) in the ninth year of Zedekiah, 589 BC. In proof that this
was the time, we quote: "And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign [that is, Zedekiah's, see
2 Kings 24:20], in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar, king
of Babylon, came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it and they
built forts against it round about. And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of
King Zedekiah." The Jewish year commencing in the spring about April, the tenth month
would correspond to our January. This would mean that it was early in the year, about
January 589 BC, that the siege against Jerusalem was started. A very significant thing as
establishing this date as the proper time for beginning the judgment-desolation is the
fact that the Prophet Ezekiel, who was in exile, a captive in Babylon at the time this
siege of Jerusalem began, was informed by the Lord concerning the solemn importance that
this day would have after in Jewish history. Note his words:
"Again in the ninth year [of Zedekiah], in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, the word of the Lord came
unto me, saying, Son of man, write thee the name of
the day, even of this same day: the king of
Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same
day."--Ezek. 24:1,2.
The further significance of this
day as showing its sad importance on the Jewish mind is seen in the fact that for over
2500 years since, it has been observed as a fast day, as will be seen by consulting a
Jewish Almanac of Feasts and Fasts.--See "New York World Almanac." And now
before citing those Scriptures that plainly declare when this desolation in which the land
enjoyed her sabbaths to fulfil 70 years ended, we call attention to the fact that the
seventy-year desolations and sabbath-keeping did
not cease in the first year of Cyrus in 536 BC, because only about 52-53 years had
elapsed since 589 BC, when the era of seventy-year sabbath-keeping began.
The decree of Cyrus was the
Divine fulfillment of the promise made to those of the captivity recorded in Jeremiah 29th
chapter, and, as will be noted by the decree itself, granted all the captives in Babylon
the fullest possible liberty to return to the land of Palestine. However, not until the
seventy-year era of the desolations had run its full course, was there any success
achieved in building the temple. The returned captives commenced to build (Ezra 3:10), but
the work was immediately stopped by the adversaries of Judah, as we read: "Now when
the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the captivity builded
[started to lay the foundation] the temple unto the Lord God of Israel then they came to
Zerubbabel, and the chief of the fathers, and said unto them, Let us build with you: . . .
but Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and the rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel said unto
them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God but we ourselves
together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as king Cyrus the king of Persia hath
commanded us. Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and
troubled them in building, and hired counselors against them, to frustrate their purpose,
all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of
Persia."--Ezra 4:1-5. In the verses following in this same chapter we read that these
same adversaries succeeded in getting a decree from Artaxerxes, one of Cyrus' successors,
against the work of building the temple (see Ezra 4:7-24), and this continued to hold back
the building until Zerubbabel succeeded in securing another decree from Darius,
Artaxerxes' successor, and the work was resumed again under the encouraging exhortations
of the Prophets Haggai and Zechariah, divinely called for this service. One writer has
thus commented on this cessation of the work in Cyrus' day: "Till the era of
'desolations' had run their course not one stone was to be set upon another on Mount
Moriah. And this explains the seemingly inexplicable fact that the firman [decree] to
build the temple, granted to eager agents by Cyrus in the zenith of his power, remained in
abeyance till his death: for a few refractory Samaritans were allowed to thwart the
execution of this, the most solemn edict in respect of which a Divine sanction seemed to
confirm the unalterable will of a Medo-Persian king."--"The Coming Prince."
As showing that the desolations
had continued and the Lord's blessing was withheld up to that time (519 BC), and the work
of laying the foundation of the temple was then resumed by the Lord's command, we quote
from Hag-gai the Prophet:
"In the second year of Darius the king, in the sixth
month, in the first day of the month, came the word of the Lord by Haggai the Prophet unto
Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Joshua, the son of Josedech,
the high priest, saying,
"Thus speaketh the Lord of
hosts, saying, This people say, The time is not come, the time that the Lord's house
should be built. Then came the word of the Lord by Haggai the Prophet, saying, Is it time
for you, O ye, to dwell in your cieled houses, and this house lie waste? Now therefore
thus saith the Lord of hosts; Consider your ways [set your heart on your ways--marginal
reading]. Ye have sown much, and bring in little; ye eat, but ye have not enough; ye
drink, but ye are not filled with drink; ye clothe you, but there is none warm; and he
that earneth wages earneth wages to put into a bag with holes.
"Thus saith the Lord of
hosts; Consider your ways. Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house; and
I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified, saith the Lord. Ye looked for much,
and, lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith
the Lord of hosts. Because of Mine house that is
waste, and ye run every man unto his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed
from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. And I called for a drought upon the
land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the oil,
and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all
the labor of the hands."--Hag. 1:1-11.
This shows that from the days of
Cyrus, sixteen years before, the Lord had withheld His blessing; and does it not also
plainly show that it was because of the wrong condition of heart on the part of the people
that the Lord withheld His blessing as He said He would do in the beginning of their
history, as we read: "Thou shalt carry much seed out into the field, and shalt gather
but little in for the locust shall consume it. Thou shalt plant vineyards, and dress them,
but shalt neither drink of the wine, nor gather the grapes for the worms shall eat them.
Thou shalt have olive trees throughout all thy coasts, but thou shalt not anoint thyself
with the oil; for thine olive shalt cast his fruit."--Deut. 28:38,39.
We now quote the words of the
Prophet which plainly show that the special indignation of the Lord, which started with
the desolation of the land in Nebuchadnezzar's seventeenth year when he laid siege to
Jerusalem, and which was to continue full seventy years, did not cease until early in the
year 519 BC. The words were uttered in connection with a vision given to Zechariah in the
second year of Darius, in the four and twentieth day of the eleventh month, the month
Sebat; a vision in which the Lord declared the seventy years of indignation had then and
only then ceased. "Then the angel of the Lord answered and said, O Lord of hosts, how
long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which Thou
hast had indignation these threescore and ten
years? And the Lord answered the angel that talked with me with good words . . .
Therefore thus saith the Lord; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies; My house shall be
built in it."--Zech. 1:7,12,16.
It being a well established fact
that Darius' second year was 520 BC, his first year would be 521 BC, commencing about
April (the first month, Ni-san). The eleventh month (Sebat), of his second year would
therefore be February, 519 BC, when this statement was uttered, the 70 years desolation or
sabbath-keeping having ended less than two months previous, in the ninth month, Chisleu,
or December 520 BC.
What further proof do we need
that the seventy years of desolating indignation did not cease until the close of 520 BC,
seventeen years after the 70 years of servitude had ceased? We now give the word of the
Lord in which the exact month and day of the month is given, when the desolation did
cease and the land began to receive the Lord's blessing by beginning to be fruitful. The
words are from the Prophet Haggai: "And now, I pray you, consider from this day and
upward [onward], from before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the Lord . . .
I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the labors of your hands
yet ye turned not to Me, saith the Lord.
"Consider now from this day
and upward [onward], from the four and twentieth
day of the ninth month [Chisleu], even from the day that the foundation of the Lord's
temple was laid, consider it. Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, as yet the vine, and the
fig tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive tree, hath not brought forth; from this day will I bless you."--Hag.
2:15-19.
This Scripture states that the
Lord promises His people through Haggai that from the day that they gave heed to the
Prophet's words, and commenced in earnest the work of restoring the temple, which had been
over fourteen years hindered (which was doubtless of the Lord, because of their wrong
heart condition) by "the adversaries of Judah" (Ezra 4), God's blessing would
come upon them, the defective harvests would cease, and the year of drought and famine
come to an end.
This was in the second year of
Darius II, the four and twentieth day of the ninth
month, Chisleu. The desolation had ended. Now note carefully, from the tenth day of
Tebeth (January), 589 BC, which as we have shown was the very day that Nebuchadnezzar's
armies had desolated the land and caused all agricultural pursuits to cease, and the siege
of Jerusalem began--the day that was mentioned by the Lord to Ezekiel as a sad day to be
remembered (Ezek. 24:1,2); the day which has been observed as a fast day by the Jews ever
since--to the twenty-fourth of the ninth month, Chisleu (December), 520 BC, was exactly 70
years, fulfilling the Divine prediction of 70 years of desolation or sabbath-keeping.
Finally let us hear again the
words of the revealing angel of Zechariah's vision, confirming the foregoing: "O Lord
of hosts, how long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah,
against which Thou hast had indignation these
threescore and ten years?" and we listen with wonder to the voice of the Lord in
reply: "I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: My house shall be built in it."
The seventy years of desolation had ceased at the appointed time! The Lord's people had at
last given heed to His words, and returned to Him with all their heart; therefore the Lord
would again take up His abode in His holy temple! The blessing of the Lord, however,
began, as we have seen from the Scriptures, in the second year of Darius Hystaspes, the
24th day of the month Chisleu (December), in the year 520 BC.
Now, let us look again at the
statement made in 2 Chron. 36:20,21: "And them that had escaped from the sword
carried he away to Babylon: where they were servants to him [Nebuchadnezzar] and his sons
until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of
Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she
kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years." Again we ask, What word of
Jeremiah was fulfilled by the carrying away of Israel to Babylon and making them servants
to Nebuchadnezzar? The answer is that it was those prophecies of Jeremiah that we have
already considered above, found in chapters 29:10 and 25:11,12. And what did those
prophecies say? We reply, that Jeremiah, as the Lord's mouthpiece, had said that Israel,
amongst other nations, was to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And when did the
seventy years commence? As we have just pointed out, the seventy years of this servitude
or captivity commenced in Nebuchadnezzar's first year and in king Jehoiakim's third year,
which was about nineteen years before Zedekiah's overthrow and the destruction of
Jerusalem. This statement in 2 Chron. 36 is therefore telling us that the various
captivities of Israel, commencing with the first siege against Jerusalem, when Daniel and
his associates were taken, all happened or were brought to pass in fulfillment of
Jeremiah's words which had predicted those captivities; for he had declared that they
would serve the kingdom of Babylon, which kingdom would reach unto the reign of the
kingdom of Persia.
But does not 2 Chron. 36:20,21
mean that the seventy years of desolation or sabbath-keeping also ended at the beginning
of the reign of the kingdom of Persia; and since these years of desolation or
sabbath-keeping did not begin till near the time of Zedekiah's overthrow, would not this
prove that there were seventy years from the capture of Zedekiah to the reign of the
kingdom of Persia? Our answer is that this expression in 2 Chronicles with regard to the
sabbath-keeping must be interpreted in harmony with what we have found to be the facts;
and since, as we have presented foregoing, the evidences are that the desolating
indignation, wherein the land enjoyed her sabbaths, continued some seventeen years beyond
536, we cannot conclude otherwise than that at the beginning of the reign of the kingdom
of Persia, the seventy sabbaths or desolation period had only partly been fulfilled. So
far as the seventy years of servitude and bondage are concerned, the words by the mouth of
Jeremiah had been fulfilled at the beginning of the reign of the kingdom of Persia. It is
merely the sabbath feature that ran on for some seventeen years later. Thus, it could very
properly be said that the various captivities were permitted of the Lord for the purpose
of fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy; for indeed it was these various captivities that
finally brought about the desolation and prolonged it until 536 BC, and then on, as we
have shown, to approximately 520 BC, when the Lord blessed the building of the temple and
prospered their land so that it brought forth as in the former times, and thus ended the
desolation or non-producing condition.
In consideration of the foregoing
testimony of the Scriptures it seems plainly evident that Jeremiah's statement about the
land being desolate 70 years cannot refer to the 70 years of servitude, which began in the
first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, but must be reckoned from another point. In other
words, there is entire harmony on this subject of these two periods--the 70 years of
servitude or bondage to the kingdom of Babylon beginning 606 BC, and ending 536 BC, the
first year of Cyrus; and the 70 years of desolation or sabbath-keeping of the land,
starting January, 589 BC, when Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem and stopped all
agricultural pursuits, thus making the land desolate, and extending to near the close of
520 BC, the second year of Darius Hystaspes, at which time all embargo was removed and the
Lord plainly declared that from that time forward He would bless the land and the building
of the temple.
The following diagram is designed
to illustrate the two periods, their beginnings, and endings, in accordance with the
testimony offered foregoing:
Concluding at this point the
general review of the two 70-year periods, their beginnings and endings, as well as their
significance, it falls in proper order here to call to mind again the 2520 years or
"times of the Gentiles," as this period stands related to the two 70-year eras.
It is remembered that the period of "seven times" is mentioned twice in the
Scriptures: first, in the book of Daniel, where it is applied to Nebuchadnezzar; and
second, in the book of Leviticus, where it is applied to the nation of Israel. In
connection with Nebuchadnezzar the statement is made: "Let seven times pass over him." (Dan. 4:16.) Inasmuch as
Nebuchadnezzar attained universal dominion at the very beginning of his reign, and is
continually spoken of from that time as Jehovah's servant (Jer. 25:9; 27:6; Dan. 2:37,38),
it seems very appropriate to commence the seven times which were to pass over him who was
the head of the Gentile dominion from the time he became the head of the image, which was
at the very beginning of his greatness. Accepting BC 588 as the date of Zedekiah's
overthrow, this would place the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom in the autumn of BC
607, or nominally BC 606. Twenty-five hundred and twenty years from that date would
terminate in 1914. Therefore, we should expect some event in 1914 as marking a change in
the Gentile governments of the world, or something that would materially affect them. We
are all witness of the fact that with that date the world as it had been running along for
quite a while took on a sudden change, and that since that time the great transition
period, the epoch of change, has been in process, during which the Kingdom of our Lord
will be established in the earth. The "strong man" is being bound and
dispossessed and the rightful owner is coming in.
But there was a period of
"seven times" in connection with the children of Israel, a period of
chastisement, which began with the overthrow of the typical crown and kingdom under
Zedekiah, during which "Jerusalem" was to be trodden down of the Gentiles, and
at the close of which we should expect that Jerusalem will arise from the dust of
centuries, and the kingdom be fully restored to Israel. (Acts 1:6.) There is strong
evidence that the Gentile times began to be fulfilled, as has been noted, in the fall of
1914, and that 2520 years from 588 BC, namely in 1933-1934, the seven times pronounced
upon the children of Israel would fully run out. Just as the Jews began to be
"trodden down of the Gentiles" by Nebuchadnezzar the first year of his reign,
606 BC, and were fully trodden down 19 years later at the destruction of Jerusalem in 588,
so the times of the Gentiles began to be fulfilled in 1914 and we would logically expect
that 19 years later, 1933-1934, would bring us to a very important era. In other words,
the Gentile "seven times" indicates where the lease of power or right to rule expired, while the Jewish
"seven times" indicates when the exercise
of power or power to rule will cease. The
two applications of the "seven times" are, therefore, tabulated as follows:
Nebuchadnezzar's seven times 2520
From the beginning of his reign to AD _606
In AD period 1914
Israel's seven times 2520
From the year 588 to AD _587
In AD period 1933
Another section of our
chronological system is what has been designated as Israel's "Double" and the
"Parallel Dispensations." The "double" has heretofore been understood
as applying to two equal time periods of 1,845 years, the first measuring from the death
of Jacob to the year 33 AD, and the other from that year to 1878 AD thus
"folding" the two periods, as a book, upon the midway date of 33 AD. The
"hinge" has been located as the day upon which Israel's King rode into Jerusalem
upon the ass five days prior to the crucifixion. On the first fold was written a record of
God's "favor" upon fleshly Israel for 1,845 years, while upon the last fold or
page in this double entry ledger is indicated an equal period of "disfavor." In
connection with this "double" it has been concluded that the Jewish and Gospel
Dispensations are of exactly the same length, and that certain dates within each era parallel one another.
It will be recalled that the
presentation of this feature lays especial emphasis upon the fact that three different
Prophets have mentioned the "double," it being stated that this was, no doubt
for the encouragement of the faith of God's people at this time, and the further point is
stressed that this "double" serves as a proof of the correctness of the
application of other time prophecies.
The question properly arises, How
does the 19 years' discrepancy in connection with the times of the Gentiles affect or
disarrange this feature? In seeking the answer we shall not attempt to force matters by
wresting any Scripture or straining any point. It is to be acknowledged of course that
finding a period of 19 years short in connection with the close of the period of the kings
and the commencement of the 70 years of servitude, the result must be that the time from
Jacob's death to AD 33 is 19 years shorter than was supposed. According to the previous
reckoning it was regarded as 1845 years in length. Now with the correction of 19 years
that same time will not be found to be longer than 1826 years; and 1826 years onward from
AD 33 takes us approximately to 1859 as being a double or equal period of time to that of
the Jewish Age, and there is, of course, nothing whatever to mark that year in any such
manner. A harmonization of the situation is seen we believe by looking further, and in
recognizing from all the facts and circumstances that Israel's period of favor extended
beyond our Lord's crucifixion, even to AD 70.
Let us observe now the exact
Scriptural reference wherein the thought of Israel's double or the parallel dispensations
are intimated. The first Prophet to mention Israel's "double" was Isaiah
(40:1,2):
"Comfort ye, comfort ye My
people, saith your God. Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry into her that her
warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she hath received of the
Lord's hand double for all her sins."
We observe that this is a message
of comfort to Jerusalem. Thus it is a matter that concerns fleshy Israel, for
"Jerusalem" seems to always refer to the earthly phase of the kingdom, the
heavenly phase being spoken of as the "New Jerusalem." At a certain time the
"warfare" of Jerusalem is accomplished. The marginal rendering makes it,
"appointed time," in lieu of "warfare." With this thought in
connection with the "double," it will be seen that the double involves a
definite, foreordained period of time--Jerusalem's appointed time of warfare is
accomplished (Hebrew: "filled out"), and thus she has experienced a certain
"double" (Hebrew: "fold") at the Lord's hand. There can be no
question, therefore, after carefully pondering this prophecy, that the "double"
relates to a time period during which Jerusalem is punished for iniquity or sin.
The next prophecy with respect to
the "double" is found in Jer. 16:14-18:
"Therefore, behold, the days
come, saith the Lord, that it shall no more be said, The Lord liveth that brought up the
children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; but, The Lord liveth, that brought up the
children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither He had
driven them; and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers.
Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the Lord, and they shall fish them; and after
will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every
hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. For Mine eyes are upon all their ways; they are
not hid from My face, neither is their iniquity hid from Mine eyes. And first I will
recompense their iniquity and their sin double."
Here, again, the reference is
plainly to fleshly Israel, whose sin and iniquity are not hid from the Lord, but who will
bring them again into their own land from every place whither He has driven them. This is
indeed a message of comfort for Jerusalem. But the Lord is careful to state that before
they are returned to their own land they must experience a "double" on account
of their iniquity and sin. The Hebrew word "mishneh"
(a different word from the one used by Isaiah) which is here rendered "double"
means "repetition." The thought would be that Israel will experience an
"appointed time" which would be a repetition, or duplicate period, of one
preceding; and taking into consideration the word "kephel" used by Isaiah, which is translated
"double," meaning "fold," it can be understood that the duplicate
period follows immediately the preceding one,
since it is as a "fold" upon it. The Prophet Jeremiah, therefore, fixed the end
of the double, the "appointed time," as when the Lord gathers Israel from all
the lands whither He had driven the Jews. This could not have reference to deliveries
preceding the First Advent, but must be applied to the wonderful regathering awaiting them
at the time of the Second Advent.
The end of the "double" being established
by Jeremiah, we next consider the third prophetic utterance regarding this matter, in
which the beginning of the appointed period is referred to.--Zech. 9:9-12.
"Rejoice greatly, O daughter
of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold thy King cometh unto thee; He is just, and
having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass, and
I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow
shall he cut off; and He shall speak peace unto the heathen; and His dominion shall be
from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth. As for thee also, by the
blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water.
Turn you to the stronghold ye prisoners of hope; even today do I declare that I will
render double unto thee."
This prophecy of Zechariah takes
its stand at the time when Jesus, the King of the Jews, rode into Jerusalem upon the ass,
which was on Sunday preceding His crucifixion. He presented Himself as King to the Jewish
nation. He was the stronghold. He wanted the prisoners to turn unto Him for protection.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent
unto thee how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth
her chickens under her wings, and ye would
not!" They would not turn unto the stronghold. Consequently, a declaration is
made to the effect that "I will [still future] render double unto thee."
In fulfilment of this part of the prophecy, we note from the latter part of the 23rd
chapter of Matthew that Jesus further said: "Behold, your house is left unto you
desolate." Because they refused to turn to the stronghold, to get under the wings,
they would have a double, which Jesus interprets to mean that their "house"
would be desolate. Notice further, that Jesus too speaks to Jerusalem. But Jesus also is prophesying, as the context of Matthew 23 will
show, both preceding and following the statement that the Jewish house was left desolate,
for He continues to say that "ye shall see Me no more until that day when ye shall
say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." The Jewish house, as a
matter of fact, was not desolate on that very day, although it was full of corruption and
iniquity. The desolation (utter ruin) was impending, for Jesus had just prophesied certain
things to come upon the generation then living: "All these things shall come upon
this generation." Thus, the words, "is left unto you desolate," must be
understood to take a future standpoint (the immediate future in this case) as prophecy
often does. We are not left to speculate that this is a prophecy pertaining to the future,
because Jesus Himself, further on, throws light upon the subject. The record of Luke
embraces this prophecy in the 13th chapter. Then in chapter 21, wherein is recorded the
great prophecy of our Lord concerning the end of the Jewish and Gospel Ages, verse 20
reads: "And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the
desolation thereof is nigh." In this way Jesus Himself shows when the
"double" was to begin. The "double" being identified with the
desolation of the fleshly house is thus shown to begin immediately following the time when
Jerusalem would be encompassed with armies. These armies were those of the Roman Empire,
under Titus (previously under other leaders), which brought about the desolation of
Jerusalem in the year 70. On this historic fact all seem to be in agreement as to the
date.
From this standpoint it can he
appreciated that the "desolation" or the "double" did not begin on the
day Jesus offered Himself to Jerusalem as the stronghold, the king, but rather that it was
on that day the "declaration" was made: "Even today do I declare (not "Even today I will") that I
will (future tense) render double unto thee." Consider in this connection the words
of Jesus a few days later upon the cross, spoken to the thief: "Verily I say unto thee today, thou shalt be with Me in
paradise." But the thief was not to go to paradise with the Lord on that day. It was
merely that the fact was declared on that day.
It seemed very unlikely that the Lord would ever be a king in paradise. From all outward
appearances then, His declaration could never be realized. Contrast this occasion with
that of only five days previous. Jesus is riding into Jerusalem and the multitude is
hailing Him as king. Then a little further on He says: "Your house is left unto you
desolate--even today do I declare that I will render double unto thee." Yet the
kingdom seemed imminent. On the one occasion He in substance said: "On this dark day,
when it seems that I have not a friend in the world, I say unto you that I will have a
kingdom and that you will be with Me there." On the previous occasion: "This is
a triumphal day; it seems that I am about to be a king, that the kingdom is to be restored
to Israel, but I declare unto you nevertheless
that I will render double unto you." At about this time He cursed the fig tree and it
withered away. But the "appointed time" will be accomplished and the fig tree
will put forth leaves.
The double began with the
desolating of the Jewish house in the year 70. It ends by the regathering of the Jewish
house in Palestine. Our expectations heretofore were that in the year 1915 the Jewish
house would be set up. We have found that the chronological reckoning upon which this was
based was "off" to the extent of 19 years; that this event is not really due to
take place until 19 years later than the year 1915, namely 1934. Is it not more reasonable
to calculate that the "double" began in 70 AD, and will end in 1934, thus making
it a period of 1864 years (1934 minus 70 equals 1864)? Here comes an important test: Since
this is a "double" or "fold" and is also shown to be a
"repetition" of a previous period, can it be shown that the first fold is also
1864 years in length. Measuring back 1864 years from 70 AD, brings us exactly to the death
of Jacob, at which time the Jewish house was established, when Jehovah ceased to deal with
certain individuals alone, but began to accept the whole family or house of Jacob as his
chosen inheritance. The chronological table showing this first fold of 1864 years is as
follows:
From Jacob's death to the Exodus 98 years
From the Exodus to division of land 6 years
Period of the Judges 50 years
Period of the Kings 13 years
Thence to Cyrus 51 years
Thence to AD 536 years
In the AD period ___70 years
Total 1,864 years
This presentation of the matter shows that the
"double" does not relate so much to a period of "favor" or
"disfavor" as it does to a time of national existence, when there is such thing
as a Jewish house or polity, and then to a time when that house is desolated, utterly
ruined, during which there is no Jewish nation. It involves a question of
"Nationalism." During the time preceding AD the Jews were often taken captive,
but their nation was not destroyed until the year 70. It previously existed in some form
or other from the days following the death of Jacob. At the time of the First Advent it
was a subject nation, but since 70 AD it has not been a nation in any sense or degree. The
Jewish people have been scattered to the four winds and there will be no Jewish nation
again until the "double" is accomplished.
Nor is there any Scriptural
evidence that the time of Israel's national existence or the Law Dispensation must be
exactly the same length as the period commencing AD 33 and reaching unto the end of this
Age. The matter of the "double" should be confined to the limits wherein it has
been placed by Scripture. It is manifest to all that many of us in the past have been
disposed to make pictures and parallels of various items and incidents that were never
intended to bear any such significance. Our safer course now seems manifest--to require a
definite "thus saith the Lord" for our conclusions in this as well as in every
other matter of spiritual truth.
What is there to be said about
the parallels? How can it be shown that the Jewish and Gospel Ages are the same in length?
It is believed that enough has already been set forth to show that this matter of the
"double" is strictly a Jewish
proposition, that it refers exclusively to "Jerusalem." At least, that is the
way the Scriptures present the matter, and there does not seem to be any Scriptural
evidence to support the thought that the "double" has any bearing upon the
history of the "New Jerusalem" or for supposing that what is known as the Gospel
Age is exactly the same in duration of time as the so-called Jewish Age. The Gospel Age,
considered as beginning with the preaching of the Gospel at the First Advent, is longer
than either the period of Israel's national existence or the Law Dispensation. The Law
Dispen-sation could not begin with the death of Jacob because the Law was not yet
dispensed at that time. The Law was given by Moses, 198 years after the death of Jacob,
and it ended with the cross of Christ. The period of the Law, therefore, was much shorter
than the period of national existence.
It is found interesting in this
connection to observe the suggestion that has been made with reference to Genesis
15:8,9--that it is intended as a symbolical picture and is highly suggestive of a
chronological prediction--the thought being that this picture given to Abraham indicates
that it would be eleven symbolic years from the time that he entered Canaan until he would
receive it for his inheritance. The suggestion contains the thought that these eleven
years stand for 3,960 (11 times 360) literal years. The revision of the chronology herein
presented preserves the force of the above suggestion in a manner that is entirely
harmonious. Measuring these years upon our revised scale of chronology we have it thus:
From the entrance into the land to Exodus 430 years
To the division of land 46 years
Period of the Judges 450 years
Period of the Kings 513 years
Thence to Cyrus 51 years
Thence to AD 536 years
In the AD period 1,934 years
Total 3,960 years
Amongst the features of Israel's
history that have specially interested God's people is that of the Sabbath and Jubilee
system which pro- vided special days and years of rest; and from this
arrangement there has been deduced quite an important line of reasoning that has been
woven into our chronological system, the results of which have greatly strengthened the
conclusions of Bible students during the past 50 years, that the times of restitution were
already chronologically due to begin. Referring briefly to the system as it was given to
Israel, we observe that the year of Jubilee was a sabbath of rest and refreshing, both to
the people and to the land which God gave them. It was the chief of a series of sabbaths
or rests.
The sabbath year occurred every seventh year. In it the land
was allowed to rest and no crops were to be planted. Seven of the sabbath years, embracing
a period of seven times seven years, or forty-nine (7 x 7 = 49), constituted a cycle of
sabbath years.
Those familiar with the
presentations on the subject of the Jubilee in "The Time is at Hand," will
readily recall the method of reckoning by which the conclusion is reached, that 1874 marks
the beginning of the great Jubilee, or Times of Restitution.
It has been a very general
understanding of Bible students based upon this interpretation of Israel's Jubilee system,
that seventy Jubilees with 49 years between, was the full number divinely intended to be
celebrated; that with the expiration of these seventy cycles, provided they had been
faithfully kept by the nation of Israel, the great antitypical Jubilee, the Times of
Restitution, would begin to be ushered in. It is stated in Lev. 25:10,11, that these
Jubilees were to be celebrated at the end of cycles of 49 years each, the Jubilee being
called the fiftieth year.
The conclusion that seventy
Jubilees constituted the entire number is based wholly on the "sabbaths"
referred to in the words of 2 Chron. 36:21, which read: "To fulfil the word of the
Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths; for as long as she
lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years"; the supposition
being that Jubilee sabbaths were referred to. It is not our purpose to question the claim
that this Scripture proves conclusively that seventy Jubilees was the divinely intended
number to be celebrated, but rather to consider how the change of nineteen years in the
chronology of Gentile rule affects the ending of the Jubilee cycles. We take for granted
that the seventy years during which the land was to enjoy her sabbaths, refers to the
divinely intended number of Jubilee-year sabbaths to be kept by the nation of Israel.
As to the significance of the
Jubilee, Brother Russell set forth the matter, which all have generally understood:
"While in the typical Jubilee year many restored liberties and blessings were at once
entered upon, yet probably most of the year was required to straighten out affairs and get
each one fully installed again in all his former liberties, rights and possessions. So,
too, with the antitype, the Millennial Age of Restitution. It will open with sweeping
reforms, with the recognition of rights, liberties, and possessions long lost sight of;
but the work of completely restoring (to the obedient) all that was originally lost will require all of
that Age of Restitution. . . . The first work in the typical Jubilee year would naturally
be a searching out of former rights and possessions and the ascertaining of present lacks.
Tracing the parallel of this, we should expect in the antitype just what we now see going on all about us."
Now let us again bring before our
minds the Divine instruction to Israel as to how they should count to reach the typical
Jubilee year. We read: "And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee,
seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee
forty and nine years." (Lev. 25:8.) Concerning the year of Jubilee itself, we read:
"And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land
unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall be a Jubilee unto you." (Lev. 25:10.) In
some sense therefore the fiftieth year was to be the Jubilee year, and was to begin in
connection with the close of the forty-ninth year. The time of year for the Jubilee to
begin to be celebrated was in the autumn (October), as we read: "And thou shalt
number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the
seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of Jubilee to
sound on the tenth day of the seventh month,
in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. And ye
shall hallow the fiftieth year. . . . A Jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto
you."--Lev. 25:8-11.
We call attention to two
different methods of counting to reach the Jubilee. One of these that many of us have
observed in the past was as follows: Basing our calculation of course upon the seven-year
cycles, 7 x 7, each seventh year being a sabbatic year, the conclusion is reached, namely
49 years, the forty-ninth being a sabbatic, or rest year, the following or fiftieth was
calculated as the Jubilee year. Thus this method of reaching the next fiftieth or Jubilee year proceeds as follows:
Commencing the first year of the next seven-year cycle after the Jubilee and permitting a break or a
skipping of one year in following out the seven-year cycle system, thus,
7 x 7, again brings us to another Jubilee at the
end of 49 years and constitutes each Jubilee cycle 50 years, running thus, 50+50+50. We
believe that this method was not the one followed by the Jews and that it does not meet
the requirement specified in the Law; one point of error being in permitting the break to
occur in the sabbatic system or the seven-year cycle every 50 years--the passing over of
one year, that of the Jubilee. There was no intimation in the Law to Israel that this
break should be permitted to occur. The sabbath
system of seven was intended to count without cessation or break, for any reason, either
on account of the Jubilee or any other. A careful review of various facts bearing upon
this subject reveals, we believe, that the Jews observed a different method from the
foregoing.
First it is important to remember
that the system of year-sabbaths being identified with their land, Canaan, and their inheritance in it, the
first cycle of forty-nine years, leading to the first Jubilee, should begin to count from
the time they entered Canaan. This reasonable inference is made positive by the Lord's
words--"When ye come into the land which
I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath [observe the sabbath system] unto the Lord.
Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and
gather in the fruit thereof; but in the seventh year [from entering the land] shall be a
sabbath of rest unto the land." (Lev. 25:2-4.) So then, the cycle of seven times
seven, or forty-nine years (7 x 7 = 49), began
to count at once on entering the land of Canaan.
In this method which we now
submit it is seen that the septenary count or count by sevens is not disturbed or
interrupted by Israel's Jubilee celebration; there is no extra year, no year skipped every
49 years. In other words it will be seen that the Jubilee year, which is designated the
fiftieth, extended from the day of atonement in the forty-ninth year (reckoning from the
spring, when they entered the land), to the same date in the fiftieth year, and was thus
an overlapping of the forty-ninth and fiftieth years, the course of Jubilees being
49+49+49 years, etc.
Israel's Jubilee year is very
generally understood to be a type of the "Times of Restitution." Accepting this
as a true interpretation, we ask, If it occurred on a year following a seventh or a forty-ninth year, as it
would if reckoned from the fall after the entrance into the land, which of course would be
an eighth and a fiftieth, how could it possibly typify a seventh or a forty-ninth thousand
years? If it was celebrated on an eighth or a fiftieth year, would not the "Times of
Restitution" be due to begin on the eighth and fiftieth thousand years, thus making
the antitypical Jubilee due to begin a thousand years hence? The Scriptures indicate that
there would be six toiling days of one thousand years each, and the seventh thousand years
(not the eighth) would be the Millennial Times of Restitution; and what seems to us
another type teaches that there would be seven great epochal days of seven thousand years
each in length, and the forty-ninth thousand years (not the fiftieth) would be the
"Times of Restitution." The question is, How shall we harmonize these apparent
contradictions and inconsistencies?
The answer we believe is found in
being able to show that the count by sevens is not interrupted, and that Israel's Jubilee
year--beginning as it did in the seventh month of their forty-ninth year, reckoning from
the time they crossed the Jordan and entered Canaan--was made up of the last half of the
forty-ninth year and the first half of their fiftieth year. There are two ways of
demonstrating this. We will consider first the one that may be to some the more easily
comprehended.
Again we emphasize the point that
the time to begin the count of the 7 x 7, or 49 years, was not in Israel's seventh month, but rather on the tenth day of
their first month when they crossed Jordan. The time Israel's year began is divinely
stated: "This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first
month of the year to you." (Exod. 12:2.) This was in what we call the spring. It was
on the tenth day of this month, the month
Nisan, that the passover lamb was set apart. (Exod. 12:3.) It was on the tenth day of this month that Israel crossed Jordan
and entered Canaan. (Josh. 4:19.) It was on this very day--"When ye come into the
land" --that they were to begin the count to reach the Jubilee year. (Lev. 25:2.) The
Jews had two commencements of the year, and
because of this it is commonly but inaccurately said that they had two years, the sacred
and the civil. It is more correct to say, the sacred and civil reckonings. The sacred
reckoning was that instituted at the Exodus, in what we would call the spring. By the
civil reckoning the first month was the seventh, which began in what we call the autumn.
However, we know of no Scripture referring to the Levitical economy in which the seventh
month was called the first. What are commonly called the civil and the sacred years were
both lunar years, of 354 days. It was when the epacts of about 11 days grew by repetition
to complete lunations (months) that the years were made to agree with solar years. This
was done by intercalation, and recurred seven times in 19 years.
Following the Divine
instructions, the fiftieth year would begin at
Nisan, in what we term the spring, after the lapse of forty-nine full solar years.
However, it is divinely stated that their Jubilee year was to begin in their seventh
month, Tishri, in what we term the autumn. (Lev. 25:9.) This being a fact that is
indisputable, the question most naturally arises, Did the Jubilee year begin in the autumn
following the spring when forty-nine full solar
years had elapsed, or in the autumn preceding? If it began in the autumn following the end
of the forty-nine full solar years, it is evident that the last half of it would extend
through the first half of the fifty-first year.
If it began, as we have Scriptural reason to believe it did, in the autumn preceding the end of the forty-nine full solar
years from the entrance into the land, it would include the last half of the forty-ninth
solar year and the first half of the fiftieth. The Jubilee year, according to this method,
would be an overlapping of Israel's forty-ninth and fiftieth years, reckoning, as we are
divinely instructed to do, from the entrance into the land on the tenth day of the first
month of their first year.
This is a simple way of stating
it, and perfectly accords with its typical character, being both a seventh and a
forty-ninth year, which is required in order for it to foreshadow the "Times of
Restitution." It also preserves the septenary count, and is in a sense a fiftieth
year, as the Scripture requires it to be; and, as we shall endeavor to show, it meets the
requirements that are set forth in Lev. 25:20-22.
However, before considering these
verses, we call attention to a still more convincing method of proving the correctness of
the above conclusions. This is the more important one--the one that will require deeper
research and study. This method requires that we understand that the Jewish month was
strictly lunar; that is, it was a lunar month, comprehending the period elapsing between
one new moon and another new moon. This period was practically 291 days. A Jewish year
comprised twelve lunar months or 354 days. However, the count of 7 x 7 or 49 years was full solar time; lunar time
being made to agree with solar by frequent intercalation. The Jewish sacred feasts,
however, were regulated by lunar or moon time and not by solar. And while the adjustment
of solar to lunar years was effected by the intercalation of months, as the epact grew by
repetition to complete lunations, there was no break whatever in the lunar or moon months,
regulating their sacred feasts, each month beginning with the new moon and ending with the
next new moon. This succession in reckoning in regulating their sacred feasts continued
right on without a break throughout the whole period of the forty-nine solar
years--indeed, throughout the whole of Jewish history.
It will have been noticed by all
who have given any attention to the matter that the Jewish new year does not start each year on a date to correspond with our solar year
dates. The reason for this is, of course, that they begin their new year with the
appearance of the new moon nearest the vernal equinox. This causes the beginning of their
year to vary from our solar dates, sometimes nearly a whole month. We note this
peculiarity every year in our observance of the yearly Memorial of the antitypical
Passover, our Lord's death, which occurred on the fourteenth day of the Jewish new or
sacred year. The day of atonement, which was celebrated on the tenth day of the seventh
month, was located, not by counting six solar
months from the tenth day of their first month, but rather by reckoning six complete
moons, or lunar months, which would make it
occur about 51 days sooner than our solar
calendar would register. This is because there is a difference of about 11 days between a
solar and a lunar year.
Now, note carefully the effect
this has upon the matter of locating the beginning of the Jubilee year. The fact that the
Jewish feasts were regulated by lunar time, lunar months, would make it necessary that at
the time the Jubilee would be celebrated, the year and months or solar and lunar dates
would have to perfectly agree. As bearing on this we notice first that forty-nine full
solar years are equal to 606 lunar months. Forty-nine years, then, form what is called a
soli-lunar cycle. A soli-lunar cycle is a period of time in which, after a certain number
of years, the sun and moon occupy in the heavens the same relative position to each other
that they did when the cycle began, which of course would mean that if our solar calendars
were absolutely correct, the solar (sun) and lunar (moon) calendars would agree or
register the same day of the month as they did when the cycle began.
Furthermore, as bearing on the
matter that the Jubilee year began immediately the day after the tenth day of the seventh
month, in the autumn preceding the end of forty-nine full solar years, it would be
necessary that an exact number of months would terminate on the tenth day of the seventh
month, the day of atonement, of that particular year. This was the case. The interval from
the tenth day of the first month of the first year (beginning in the spring), to the tenth
day of the seventh month in the forty-ninth year was exactly 600 lunations. Forty-eight
solar years, and six months, are substantially the measures of 600 lunations.
We cannot do better in this
connection than to quote the words of Mr. Guinness, whose exhaustive research and study,
both as an astronomer of rare ability and as a Bible expositor, offers much assistance in
the investigation of this subject
"The divinely ordained
Levitical chronology was soli-lunar, i.e., it was regulated by the revolutions of both sun
and moon. Its years were solar, for they followed the seasons, as in the various
ordinances connected with the ingath-ering of the fruits of the earth; while its months
were strictly lunar--not artificial months, but lunations--certain ordinances being
connected with the recurrence of every new moon. The adjustment of solar to lunar years
was effected by the intercalation of months, as the epact grew by repetition to complete
lunations.
"The feasts of the Lord,
representing the history of redemption, were connected with certain days of lunations and
phases of lunar fullness; as the passover with the tenth and fourteenth day of the first
month; the feast of unleavened bread with the fifteenth; the feast of trumpets, the day of
atonement, and the feast of tabernacles, with the first, tenth, and fifteenth day of the
seventh month, etc. Lunar revolutions were the chronometric wheels measuring the intervals
of the Levitical calendar.
"There is a close adaptation
in lunar phases to the septiform arrangements of the calendar. . . . The nature and
closeness of this adjustment was very remarkable in the case of the Jubilee. The Jubilee
reckoning, regulating important civil arrangements in the land of Canaan, began with the
day on which Israel crossed Jordan and entered Palestine. Like the sabbatic law, of which
it was an expansion, its point of commencement is thus defined, ,when ye be come into the
land,' etc. (Lev. 25.) Now, as the Jubilee was regulated by years, for it recurred every
forty-ninth year at the time of the autumnal harvest, and was also regulated by months,
for it was reckoned from the tenth day of the first month when Israel crossed Jordan, and
the Jubilee day was the tenth day of the seventh month (that of atonement), it was
important that the year and months should closely agree. It is most interesting to observe
that such is their natural adjustment that, in the first place, forty-nine years form a
soli-lunar cycle; and in the second place, the interval from the tenth day of the first
month of the first year, to the tenth of the seventh month of the forty-ninth, is exactly
600 lunations; . . . forty-eight solar years, six lunar months, nine days, and fourteen
hours, of a tenth day, or 17,718 days, 8 hours, are the measures of 600 lunations. It
should be observed that the day of atonement was reckoned from the evening of the ninth
day to the evening of the tenth, ,in the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto
even shall ye rest' (marginal reading).
"It will be seen from this,
that the Jubilee redemption rest followed immediately on the expiration of the complete
period of 600 months. As 600 months are exactly fifty lunar years, the fiftieth lunar year
terminated on the day of atonement, on which day the Jubilee year commenced. The Jubilee
year, which is called the fiftieth, extended from the day of atonement in the forty-ninth
year to the same date in the fiftieth year, and was thus an overlapping year, the course
of Jubilees being 49+49+49 years, etc."
The accompanying diagram [next
page] illustrates various features explained foregoing:
It seems most evident that Bible
students have for some cause not given sufficient attention to the Scripture teaching
concerning solar and lunar influence and dominion, and the relation that both sustain to
the times and seasons of God's dealings with man. We have failed to realize the wonderful
significance of the words of Genesis: "And God made two great lights; the greater
light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. And God set them in the
firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over
the night, and to divide the light from the darkness." "And God said,
. . . let them be for signs, and for
seasons, and for days, and years." The three great tasks assigned to the sun and
moon by the Creator are, to rule, to give light, and to divide--to mark out the boundaries that separate
day from night, month from month, year from year, "appointed time" from
"appointed time." Let it be noted that the inspired narrative says, let them be for signs and seasons, etc.; that is, let
them in their conjoint revolutions be such. "So obvious and influential are the main revolutions of these ,great lights' that in
all ages men have as a matter of fact divided time by their means. The movements of the
sun and moon are such that naturally in most lands and ages, those of both, and not those of either alone, have been
employed as measures of time." The more these facts concerning the times and seasons
are studied in their relation to these divinely ordained typical feasts of redemption, the
more will we realize their Divine authorship. There is much, very much yet to be learned
about them. This is evidently one of the ways God has hidden, until a due time, the
prophetic periods of the "time, times, and a half," the "seven times,"
etc.
Again as illustrating the fact
that there was a close adaptation in lunar phases to the septiform arrangement of the
calendar, we cite the prophecy regarding the "seventy weeks," appointed to
extend from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto
Messiah the Prince, as an illustration of an enlarged Jubilee cycle, the former being 49
and the latter 490 years. (Dan. 9:24-27.) Thus the period to the end of the Jewish favor
was not ten times fifty, but ten times forty-nine, or 490 years -70 weeks.
We notice next that while the
foregoing is sufficient of itself to establish the fact that Israel's Jubilee year was an
overlapping of the forty-ninth and fiftieth solar years, reckoning from the tenth day of
the first month of the first year when they entered Canaan (and thus the septenary count
is not disturbed), this conclusion, as we would expect, also meets all the requirements
set forth in Leviticus 25, where the Jubilee subject is specially treated. These
requirements are stated in verses 20-22, and read: "And if ye shall say, What shall
we eat the seventh year? behold, we shall not
sow, nor gather in our increase: Then I will command My blessing upon you in the sixth
year, and it shall bring forth fruit for three years. And ye shall sow the eighth year, and eat yet of old fruit until the
ninth year until her fruits come in ye shall eat of the old store."
That these words apply to the
Jubilee arrangement seems very evident, because the Jubilee is the matter specially
considered in the preceding verses. Of course, with our understanding that the Jubilee and
sabbatic years were celebrated the same year, the words apply to both. If it be said that
they apply to the sabbatic year only, which we would be obliged to say if the Jubilee year
followed the seventh or sabbatic year, then we have recorded no promise on the part of
Jehovah concerning a special provision made by Him for that, the Jubilee year.
Furthermore, it will be readily seen that if there were to be two rest years in succession, the important matter
of most special solicitude on the part of the Israelites would be concerning an additional
year--the year following the sabbath, which would of course be both a fiftieth and an
eighth.
Considering the matter from the
standpoint that the sabbatic year or seventh year was in point of time identical with the Jubilee year, we
meet with no difficulty in explaining these words.
The first proof we present to
support this, is the statement "If ye shall say, what shall we eat the seventh year?"--not the eighth year. Certainly this is in perfect harmony
with what we have already noted is taught in the foregoing, namely that the Jubilee year
was from the last sabbatic year, a seventh
year, and must begin immediately following the occurrence of 600 lunations. It must
commence after the tenth day of the seventh month, the day of atonement; this, as we have
seen, would then be in the middle of the 49th solar year from the entrance into the land.
In other words, forty-eight and a half solar years having elapsed from the spring when
they entered the land, to the fall or middle of the 49th year, when the Jubilee began.
The next matter bearing on this
that is mentioned in the text is equally conclusive evidence that the Jubilee year was
identical with the sabbatic year in point of time. In other words, the Jubilee year was
both a seventh and a forty-ninth year. The words are: "And ye shall sow the eighth
year." Is it not apparent that if the Jubilee year were an eighth year, as it would
have to be if it began immediately after the lapse of forty-nine full solar years, this
would conflict with the command that there should be no sowing or reaping in that year?
That the seventh or sabbatic year on the occurrence of the 49th year is the Jubilee will
be seen from the fact that when the Lord said, "What shall we eat the seventh
year," He is referring to both the Jubilee and sabbath year; for both are clearly
referred to in the context. See verses 4, 8, and 10.
We consider next the words:
"Then I will command My blessing upon you in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth
fruit for three years." This statement would seem
at first as though provision were made for two rest years, but not so. Let us note
carefully the accompanying diagram:
By a careful study of this view
it will be seen that God's blessing upon the sowing and reaping of the sixth year was to
be such as to supply the people with food for the sixth, seventh, and eighth years, until
the ninth year opened, in harmony with the word of the Lord quoted above "until her
[the eighth year] fruit come in." Thus we see that instead of the Jews having only
five years in which to work the land, they had in every case six years, as the diagram
shows, and at the same time, in harmony with the command, it was necessary for them in the
sixth year preceding the Jubilee to reap sufficient to provide them for the sixth,
seventh, and eighth years, as they would not sow again until after the Jubilee would end,
which would be in the fall, and would need to continue to eat the fruit of the sixth year
until the fruit of the eighth year come; this would be close unto the ninth year, as
stated in the Divine instruction.
We submit still another diagram
[next page] which is designed to show that the method of making the Jubilee year follow a
seventh or sabbatic year, does not meet the requirements of Lev. 25:20-22. (Read Scripture
carefully.)
From this view it will be seen
that as there could be no reaping when the sabbatic year opened, the last sowing (the crop
of which would have to last through both the sabbatic year and the Jubilee year), would
have to be in the autumn, when the sixth year had begun. In other words, as according to
this view there could be neither sowing nor reaping, on either the sabbatic or Jubilee
years, the sowing at the beginning of the sixth year would have to last four years instead
of three. Hence, this diagram and explanation fails to meet the Scriptural requirements.
In consideration of the testimony
and evidence herein offered we conclude that the celebration of both the Jubilee and
sabbatic years began at one and the same time, in the fall (Deut. 31:10; Lev. 25:9), and
that only by arranging that the Jubilee and 49th or sabbatic year should be one, could
there be avoided the break in the septenary or count of sevens; and that this was done by
having the count to reach the Jubilee year begin in the spring, when the Israelites
entered the land. In this method of counting, 49 full solar years thus elapsed from the
spring of the first year to the spring of the 50th year. The sabbatic year, which would be
a 49th, began the autumn before this, and to make the Jubilee and 49th or sabbatic year
begin at the same time, the Jubilee year also began the fall before and not after the
spring when the 50th year from the entrance to the land began. This would constitute the
Jubilee both a 49th and a 50th year, through an overlapping process.
Commentators in general who have
written on the subject have adopted this method of counting the fiftieth year as inside of the 49-year cycle and
not as an extra year. It will be seen then by those who carefully observe this difference
in counting, that the course of 70 Jubilees in the old method would be 50 + 50 + 50, etc.,
making in all 3,500 years, while in the other, which we regard as the correct method, the
course of 70 Jubilees would be 49 + 49 + 49, etc., making 3,430 years.
We must look to discover what
difference is made in the ultimate results counting the 70 Jubilee-year cycles with 49
years each. First we recall the 19 years' shortage in connection with the starting of the
times of the Gentiles, in 606 BC, and Zedekiah's overthrow in 588 BC. A moment's thought
will cause one to see that while the period from Zedekiah's overthrow has been affected to
the extent of lengthening out the period of Gentile rule by nineteen years, the period from the entrance of
Israel into the land of Canaan, up to
Zedekiah's day is not affected. This period is 969 years, and is found as follows:
To the division of the land 6 years
Period of the Judges 450 years
Period of the Kings to Zedekiah's overthrow 513 years
Total 969 years
Regarding the former reckoning of
the Jubilee cycles as 50 years each, it is remembered that the method pursued to discover
when the last typical Jubilee was due to be
celebrated before the Babylonian servitude
began, was to divide these 969 years by 50. By thus doing, it was found that 19 Jubilees
had been celebrated, with 19 years remainder. It will be seen then, according to that reckoning, that 19 years had
elapsed at Zedekiah's overthrow, since the last one was celebrated. This is easily seen
because 969 years had elapsed since the entrance of Israel into the land, and if 50+50+50,
etc., was the course of Jubilees, then dividing 969 by 50 would give the number
celebrated. And if 606 BC marked Zedekiah's overthrow, as was our thought, then 19 years before this date would reach the year the last one
was celebrated, which was 625 BC.
Now mark the result of following
the other method, that of making the course of Jubilees to be 49+49+49, etc. Understanding
that Zedekiah's overthrow occurred 588 BC, when, of course, the same number of years had
elapsed, namely 969, we divide this number by 49 instead of 50, and find the result to be
in the number of Jubilees celebrated exactly the same-19; but the remainder we find to be
38 years instead of 19. Adding the 38 years, instead of 19, to 587 BC, instead of to 606
BC, we discover that we reach the same date, 625 BC, as the time the last typical Jubilee
was due to be celebrated. 969 : 49 = 19 and 38 remainder: 587 + 38 = 625 BC.
In other words, allowing but 49
years to each Jubilee cycle instead of 50, we gain 19 years over the other method, from
the time of Israel's entering the land to Zedekiah's overthrow, and this 19 years exactly
offsets the other 19 years we lose in computing the times of the Gentiles from
Nebuchadnezzar's first year.
It is then seen that if 19
Jubilees had been observed up to 625 BC, there would remain 51 Jubilees still unobserved
of the original 70 contemplated. Thus 51 x 49
= 2499, as the number of years to be measured from 625 BC to reach the end of the 70
sabbatic Jubilee cycles: 2499 -- 625 = 1874 AD, the end of the 70 Jubilee cycles.
Stating the matter in another
form: It has been quite generally understood among Bible students for some years past that
as the Jubilees were a part of the Law Covenant, and like all the other features of the
Law, were very imperfectly kept or celebrated, and sometimes, perhaps the Jubilees were
not celebrated at all, hence the proper way to discover when the great antitypical Jubilee
would be reached would be by counting the full number of years which would elapse to make
seventy Jubilees. This would be done by adding 49+49+49, etc., until 70 had been counted;
or by multiplying 49 years by 70, which equals 3,430 years. This will be found to reach
the same time-1875. Thus:
To the division of the land 6 years
Period of the Judges 450 years
Period of the Kings 513 years
To 536 BC 51 years
To Christian Era 536 years
Total 1,556 years
3,430
-- 1,556 = 1,874 full years.
Does this not appear to be indeed
an illustration of a Divine overruling--calculating incorrectly the two matters, as we
have been accustomed to doing in the past, that of Gentile dominion and of the
Jubilees--our mistake in the one instance perfectly counterbalancing the mistake made in
the other?
It occurs to us in this
connection that we may well supplement the evidence that we have already given as to the
unbroken septenary count--the counting of the 7-year cycles without any break--by
referring to certain historical matters in connection with Zedekiah's overthrow. By a
careful comparison of Jeremiah 37:1-11; 34:21,22, with Jeremiah 39:1,2, it will be seen
that in connection with the last siege, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem,
Nebuchadnez-zar's army came twice into the land before Zedekiah was overthrown. The first
time he was obliged to withdraw his army on account of being menaced by the King of Egypt.
Just previous to this first invasion, about three years before Jerusalem was destroyed,
indeed, on account of the threatening invasion, Zedekiah and his nobles, through fear, and
by an endeavor to gain Jehovah's favor, to the end that the judgment might be stayed,
started to observe a sabbatic year by letting their servants go free. When
Nebuchadnezzar's armies withdrew, on account of being menaced by the King of Egypt,
Zedekiah and his associates apparently repudiated their observance of the sabbatic year
and began to take their slaves back again. Jeremiah the Prophet then told the king,
Zedekiah, that Nebuchadnezzar would come back (Jer. 34:8-22), and in harmony with this
prediction Nebuchadnezzar did return, in Zedekiah's ninth year and tenth month (Jer.
39:1), and the city of Jerusalem was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar at this time until its
fall in Zedekiah's eleventh year and fourth month.
Now the conclusion to this matter
is this: According to the foregoing method of reckoning the sabbatic years, the count of
sevens, a sabbatic year was due to be observed in Zedekiah's eighth year, which, according
to the chronology, would be the 966th year from the entrance of the Israelites into the
land.
That this sabbatic year occurred
in the 966th year from the entrance into the land will be seen when we bear in mind that
the date 625 BC, which corresponded with the 931st year from entering the land, was the
year when a sabbatic Jubilee was due. This, as we have shown, was 37-38 years before the
overthrow of Zedekiah, which overthrow was in 588 BC. By a division of 38 by 7 we have 5
sabbatic years and 3 years remainder up to the destruction of Jerusalem, which, as we have
claimed, was in 588 BC; and as 588 BC corresponds with 969 years from the entrance into
the land, three years back of that would bring us to the 966th year or 591-590 BC, when a
regular sabbath was due, as was proved by the fact that Zedekiah and his nobles, that year
undertook to observe the sabbath by conforming to the requirements given in the Law.
On the contrary, if we calculate
the sabbath and Jubilee years according to the old method and allow that a year was passed
over in every 50 and a break occurred in the sabbatic system, then there would not have
been any sabbath year due to be kept at the time when Zedekiah and his nobles began to
observe it, 591-590 BC, for it would have come two years earlier, or in 593-592 BC; for
about 606 would have been the last Jubilee, instead of 625, leaving 19 years remainder,
which, divided by 7, would make 2 sabbath years, the last one of which would be due to be
observed 592 BC; and 5 years remainder to 587 BC; whereas the Scripture records we have
cited above show a sabbath year observed by Zedekiah about 591-590 BC, which is entirely
harmonious with our method of reckoning.
As we have been preparing the
foregoing explanation, the objection is raised that the deductions herein presented would
seriously interfere with the realization of certain hopes and expectations that many have
entertained with regard to the overthrow of the present order of things and the
establishment of the Kingdom in 1925; and we are asked to remember that the 51 Jubilee
years that have not been kept since the last one observed before Israel went into
servitude, added to 1874, brings us to 1925, when, as some have thought, the Great Jubilee
was to commence in full.
Our reply to this is that we
quite fully agree that in following that which we find to be the Scriptural method of
reckoning the Jubilees, the results in some respects are quite different from those of the
old method. In calculating the Jubilee cycles, allowing 49 years to each, and counting the
Jubilee year as one of the 49 years and as one of the cycles of seven, we discover of
course that there are no grounds for the accumulation of 51 extra years since the last one
was observed in the days of ancient Israel, but at the end of the 70 cycles of 49 years
each, which is reached about the year 1875, the entire matter ends and there is no
extension of it beyond that point. Since about the year 1875, it would therefore seem that
we have been realizing in some important measure the fulfilment of the antitype, the
blowing of the Jubilee trumpet--the general awakening of the world as to its rights and
liberties, and a general preparation looking toward the introduction of the great
thousand-year Jubilee period in full, in due time.
We must conclude, therefore, that
there is no foundation whatever, for believing that anything of an unusual character was
to take place in the year 1925; no reason for expecting that this order of things was to
pass away, nor that the Kingdom was to be established then.
Again we urge upon the brethren
everywhere great conservatism and modesty in this time, when so many seem to be giving
loose reign to wild fancy and foolish speculation with regard to fixing of dates for this,
that or the other thing to happen. Let us require a "thus saith the Lord" for
all that we receive as truth on the subject of time features, as well as upon every other
line that has to do with our system of faith. Let us cultivate more and more the
disposition to wait upon the Lord for His due time, and so far as our own departure or
deliverance is concerned, to strive to be ready at all times; and while we are waiting, to
give heed to our Master's solemn warning to "watch" and keep our lamps trimmed
and burning.
"He answering, said, 'He who saws the good seed is the
Son of Man; the field is the world; the good seed are the sons of the Kingdom; the darnel
are the sons of the evil one, that enemy who sowed them is the Adversary; the Harvest is
the end of the Age; and the reapers are messengers.' "--Matt. 13:37-39.--Diaglott.
That the Scriptures distinctly
point forward to a special period in the end of this Dispensation marked by
unusual and severe tests upon the Lord's people we presume is not disputed by any who are
really familiar with the teachings of the Bible. The Apostles and Prophets alike make
mention of that peculiar time, and declare that it will be a season of fiery trial in
which every man's work shall be tried so as by fire. (1 Cor. 3:12-15.) "In the last
days perilous times shall come." (2 Tim. 3:1-5.) "There shall come in the last
days scoffers," etc. (2 Pet. 3:3.) The words of the Savior, the solemn import of
which is realized by all the thoughtful of our day, declare: "Because iniquity shall
abound, the love of many shall wax cold" (Matt. 24:12); and the Master with equal
solemnity alleges that in the conclusion of this Age God shall gather out of His Kingdom
all things that offend and them which do iniquity.--Matt. 13:41.
For a number of years past many
of the brethren pursuing the study of this subject, have been made quite familiar with the
lessons of this as well as other of our Lord's parables. It is not therefore our purpose
to specially review the details here. All the evidence brought together bearing upon the
matter of the time has convinced us that for a
number of years past we have ourselves been privileged to observe that there has been a
harvest work in progress; a gathering of consecrated Christians, ripe wheat, out of a
state of bondage and error into a state of liberty, light, and oneness with their Divine
Lord, that they may be ready for their final glorification with Him. We have seen the
fulfillment to a considerable extent of the details of the parable. A harvest work has
been going on, a separating work, which has meant indeed very severe trials for the Lord's
people. The question of the length of the Harvest period is one of deep concern to all the
saints at the present time. Some years ago many of us were under the impression that the
Harvest was a period of only 40 years, and that it would come to an end by or during the
year 1914. The circumstances and events, however, as we have been carefully observing
them, cause us to seriously doubt the truthfulness of that impression, indeed, convince us
that we were in error in our conclusion that the Harvest was 40 years long and ended in
1914.
But it is asked, Did not the
Harvest truly end in that year? and are we not to think that the work since that time is
of another kind and not to be considered a part of the Harvest? Our reply is that we
should require sound Bible reasons for all that we assume or believe. Looking for evidence
that the Harvest ended 11 years ago, we look in vain. We can find not the slightest ground
for assuming or concluding that the Harvest work ended in 1914 or that it has yet come to a close. While it is
true that the work has not continued upon as large a scale, and not all the same methods
or instrumentalities have been continued in operation, yet it is nevertheless a matter of
fact that the message of Truth has continued to go forth enlightening the faithful and
calling the attention of these to various Babylonish entanglements, which has meant of
course that a gathering and a separating work has progressed unto this present time.
We consider the evidence wholly
lacking that the Harvest has ended. Nor is there any evidence that the Lord has instituted
another and different work. We earnestly urge upon the Lord's people to use moderation in
their reasoning upon this subject as upon all subjects--to use the spirit of a sound mind
and to require positive evidence, a "thus saith the Lord," for every doctrine or
thought that we accept. Whatever others may do, whatever changes in the work others may
presume to institute without proper authority, let us not be affected by it, nor be
alarmed, but let us look carefully to the Lord and His Word for guidance in this matter as
in every affair of life. "The meek will He guide in judgment and the meek will He
teach His way." The Great Head of the Church is still our only Teacher and faithful
Guide. There are no reasons whatever why we should institute some work different from that
of the past. The Message has not changed the slightest. It is still the old, old story of
Jesus and His love, the Message of the risen Christ and of our hope of joint-heirship with
Him in His glorious Kingdom, in the turning of the curse away from the earth, and the
blessing of humanity. The great commission given by the Savior to His followers was that
they should bear this Message onto the very end of the Age. We conclude, therefore, that
it is pleasing and acceptable to God that we continue bearing testimony to the Truth in
simplicity and in love, and allow the work of separation--the Harvest work--to go on under
the providence and supervision of the Great Chief Reaper, fully conscious that He is able
to have that work discontinued at any moment it may please Him.
As for the Harvest being a period
of 40 years, or as to how long that period is, we believe this is a matter entirely proper
for us to investigate and discuss. The question is, Is there anything in the Bible that
will enable us to determine how long this work of harvesting in the end of the Age will
last?
As is well known, the view held
by Brother Russell up to within a short time before his death and concurred in by many of
the Lord's people was that the Harvest was a period of forty years, beginning in 1874 and
ending in 1914; and this thought was based upon what was supposed to be certain
parallelisms between the Jewish and Gospel Ages. But it must be recognized today that the
accumulation of developments and circumstances through the years up to the present make
manifest that some of our conclusions with regard to pictures and parallels were not
sufficiently grounded, and we cannot do otherwise than discard some of these today. Those
who were following carefully Brother Russell's trend of thought just prior to his death
will readily recall that he himself had begun to re-examine matters pertaining to the
times and seasons, and particularly this feature involving the parallels that are related
to the Harvest periods. He published a review of his latest findings in the September 1st
issue of his journal in 1916. He there plainly called attention to what he designated
"our mistake," and said that "the parallelism between the Jewish Age and
the Gospel Age could not include anything belonging
to the new dispensation. The parallels affected merely the nominal Jewish house there and
the nominal Christian house here."
His statements furthermore show
that his mind was undergoing a radical change with regard to the subject of parallels, for
he said that it was his conviction then that "No parallels as between the Pentecostal
Church [commencing AD 33] and the true Church now are to be looked for."
We desire to emphasize this point
of his revised views as clearly indicating his open mind and his readiness to change his
position on one point or another as further study of the Word and developments of the
times might indicate. His concluding remarks bearing upon the subject convey unmistakably
the thought that in his judgment there was now no way to determine the length and ending
of the Harvest; neither any way to determine the time of the destruction of the nominal
Church system. His reasoning on this subject is well worthy of consideration, in view of
the fact that many have taught since that time that the Harvest is ended, and have been
engaged in setting particular dates for these great events to occur--all we believe
without proper Scriptural authority. His words summing up are:
"We should not have looked for parallelisms between the
starting of the Gospel Church [at Pentecost] and its experiences [here], and the starting
in this Harvest time of the Heavenly Church [since 1878] and its experiences. These are no
part to the parallel. The parallel belongs to the nominal Jewish system, which went to destruction [in 70 or 73 AD], and to the
nominal Gospel Church, which is now [in 1916, when he wrote] going [not gone] to
destruction."
His words go on to show that
whereas his former calculations had been that the Jewish Harvest lasted from AD 30 to AD
70, a period of 40 years, and that that 40 years would parallel a similar period here,
from 1874 to 1914, he now believed this was a "mistake." He thereupon
tentatively set forth that the Harvest of the Jewish Age might more properly be regarded
as starting AD 33 in connection with the Pentecostal blessing and possibly ending AD 73,
at which time it is claimed that the Jewish time of trouble came to an end. Reasoning on
that basis he stated that the 40 years from AD 33 to AD 73, supposed by inference to be a
type, might cover the period from 1878 to 1918, applying to the nominal Christian systems,
and meeting fulfillment in 1918 in their utter destruction. Everywhere there is now the
evidence that this suggestion also proved a failure, in that nominal Christendom still
continues.
As the end of the time of trouble
on the nominal Christian systems did not occur in 1918, which trouble would of course have
meant their destruction, is it not reasonable and Scriptural to say that the antitype, so
far as it related to the 40-year time feature, has failed both as applying to the nominal
and true Church? Would he not have understood it
this way if he had lived until April, 1918? Would it not also prove that the Gentile
date of 1914 must be considered as having no direct bearing upon the change of the Church, but to Gentile authority only? And still further
we ask, Would it not be much the wiser and the more
Scriptural course of the Church to be looking to the fulfillment of events yet to come to
pass, rather than to dates? Let him that readeth understand?
Finally his conclusion is clearly
stated, showing that in his mind the 40-year time feature of the Harvest as it relates to
the gathering of the Church, was wholly an inference and was discarded by him. He said:
"We imagined that the harvest work of gathering
the Church would be accomplished before the end of the Gentile times; but nothing in the
Bible so said. Our thought was purely an
inference, and now we see that it was an unjustified one. This Harvest work
belongs to the New Dispensation [beginning in 1874] and cannot be identified with the Old.
Anyway, the harvesting of the Jewish Age, gathering 'Israelites indeed' into the Gospel
Church, did not close with AD 70, but progressed in various parts of the world thereafter.
Quite a good many Jews, doubtless, profiting by their terrible experience, were all the
better prepared to be gathered into the Gospel Garner after the destruction of their
national polity. Similarly, we may expect that quite a good many will yet [since
September, 1916] be gathered to the Heavenly Garner, and we know of no time limit
here."
What now must be our reasonable
conclusion on this subject, seeing that ten years beyond the time when the above was
written there is still evidence of a harvest work, a work of testing and sifting, a work
of cleansing, going on among God's children today? Surely the lesson to all is to let
their moderation be known to all men, to accept the facts and circumstances as they are
clearly before us and act upon them. This will mean that as coworkers together with God we
will accord-ingly continue to engage in assisting fellow-members of the Body of Christ in
every quarter. Remembering that the significance of the Harvest is that of gathering or
assembling together the ripe fruitage of the Age in the glorified state, the present phase
of this work must relate to that of preparing the hearts and minds of the Lord's people
for their final gathering unto Him. It implies that in whatever state of bondage to error,
to various organizations or systems of men the Lord's people are, they must be enlightened
and freed from these in order to properly fulfil their engagements and obligations toward
their Divine Master.
The efforts of our great
Adversary all along the line have been to divert the attention of true children of God
from that of "holding the Head" to that of rendering homage and support to some
man-made headship or authority, and those who yield to this influence are bound to suffer
injury spiritually, are sure to suffer from lack of spiritual nourishment and a proper
appreciation of spiritual things. The great call of our Master specially applies:
"Come out of her, My people, that, ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye
receive not of her plagues," which signifies to come out of all Babylonish confusion
and teaching, and to remain free from all man-made authorities and powers in the
Church--free from all organizational headships, as well as self-constituted authority and
headship of any one individual. Doing this, such will understand more fully what it means
to "hold fast to the form of sound words," and to "stand fast in the
liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free." Such will recognize that no individual
in the Church may claim the right to dictate to fellow-members what is the faith or what
they shall believe, or what work they shall do. As the Master instructed in the beginning
of the Age that there was but one Lord and Head to His Church, it must mean that He is
dealing with His people as individuals. To Him alone and His divinely inspired Apostles
let us look for our instruction and support to the end of the way; meantime continuing to
herald the message of comfort that His kingdom draweth nigh. "The Lord knoweth them
that are His," and He assures us that the work of gathering, the work of the Harvest,
will yet be consummated, and then shall both the sowers and the reapers rejoice together
and shine as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. The great gathering place or Garner,
therefore, is the Kingdom itself, beyond the veil, and not another human system or
organization here on earth.
"For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at
the end, it shall Speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely
come, it will not tarry."--Hab. 2:3.
The Divine purpose of the Ages is
without doubt the vision seen by the Prophet Habakkuk, who was told to write it
and to "make it plain upon tables, that every one may read it plainly" (Leeser's
translation); that in the end the vision should "speak and not
lie"; though it would seem to tarry,
it would not tarry. To all humanity, through
the ages the great Plan of God has seemed to be long delayed; the groaning creation in
their ignorance think of the Heavenly Father as being very slack, or they are inclined to
lose their faith altogether in respect to the great Seed of Abraham, and to think that God
has forgotten the promise which He made, that ultimately all the families of the earth
should be blessed. We know what disappointments have come to God's people all along the
line. The Jews were disappointed in their expectations at the First Advent; all along
through the Age since, at various intervals Christians have been disappointed, as time
after time they have thought that their deliverance drew nigh. But still the disappointed
ones continued to wait and hope and pray.
In our day after getting rid of
many of the errors of the past, the subject of prophecy is forcefully before the attention
of God's people. Again wrong impressions are given out, and the subject of time prophecies
and the Lord's Second Advent have been brought into disrepute. Just as the wrong
impression that our Lord was born in Nazareth was a reflection upon Him, and some said,
Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? so it is now said, Can any good thing come out of
the study of the times and seasons, chronology, or the prophecies relating to the coming
of Messiah? Are not all these things written in the prophecies mere fanciful dreams of
men--of the rebuilding of Zion and the restitution of Jerusalem? Thus there are scoffers
today as foretold, and they are inclined to discourage everything in the direction of the
examination of prophetic testimony that may give light upon our pathway and become a means
of fresh encouragement and hope. The Lord tells us that although the vision may seem to
tarry, yet we are to exercise faith, because in the end it will speak, it will make itself
heard, and will not lie. It will then be seen to be the truth. Let us then have faith in
God; faith that will hold fast to the Divine promise, being fully assured that the great
Plan of God will yet, in the near future, speak and unfold the story of love Divine to all
humanity and bring in the long looked for morning of joy.
___________________
A word in conclusion in regard to
the subject and the matter treated in this issue: We urge none to accept the views herein
presented, nor the conclusions drawn, merely because they are presented in this journal.
All should carefully study and weigh the facts and evidences themselves and accept the
conclusions only after they are convinced that they are well grounded and represent the
truth. Nor should the acceptance or rejection of these conclusions be the cause of
disturbance of harmony amongst the brethren, or be made a test of fellowship to any
extent. The spirit of Christ dwelling richly in His fellow-members will lead all such to
guard against the spirit of contention and selfishness and at all times to stand in
defense of the holy spirit of liberty and love. Let brotherly love continue.
1925 Index |