THE TREATISES

OF

NELSON H. BARBOUR

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

MARCH, 1871

 

NEW YORK ADVENT CHRISTIAN CONFERENCE

 

. . . Two o'clock P.M. At this hour Dr. N.H. Barbour, late of New York, gave a very interesting discourse on the parable of the ten virgins, showing a beautiful harmony between it and the movements of the Advent people since 1843, and looking to 1873 for the return of the Bridegroom. . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1871

 

THE MIDNIGHT CRY

N. H. BARBOUR

 

This is the title of a pamphlet of one hundred pages, presenting evidences for the coming of the Lord in 1873. By Nelson H. Barbour. Price 25 cents per copy; $1.80 per dozen. For sale at this office, and by D.T. Cooper, 72 Mount Hope Avenue, Rochester, N.Y.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

WEDNESDAY,  DECEMBER 20, 1871

 

THE 1290 AND 1335 DAYS

DANIEL 12 -- N. H. BARBOUR

 

Brethren: -- There are so many views of the above prophecy, that I am almost afraid to offer the following for publication; and only venture in the hope that for the sake of sweet charity, which not only believeth, but "endureth all things," they will be kindly looked at, at least, if not entertained.

 

These periods were given in answer to a single question, and seem to refer exclusively to God's people; and not, like most other prophecies, to political events. They are twin periods; for the definite article "the," in the 12th verse, implies that the thousand years belong equally to both.

 

If they refer to political events, why should not the world understand them, as they do that of the taking away of the dominion of papacy, and many other prophetic periods? If the 1290 days were not given to mark the beginning of the Advent movement, why are they coupled with the period which is designed to mark the end of that movement? And I might ask one more question: Why, in their fulfillment, do they apply only to God's people? Permit me to explain.

 

If the abomination was "set up" in A.D. 538, when the "woman" of Revelation 17 took her seat on the Roman beast, then the thousand years, to which such special reference is made, would have ended in 1538, at which time that terrible despotism was broken in upon, and God opened a door for his Philadelphian church, which no man can shut. See Church History by Charles Hase, N.Y., 1855, page 391. -- "In A.D. 1538 was formed the holy league against papacy, by the Archbishop of Mentz, the Archbishop of Strasburgh, the Duke of Bavaria, George of Saxony, Henry of Brunswick, supported by Frances of France, Henry of England, and other northern powers." "If those days had not been shortened, viz., the 1260 of papal dominion, by the Lutheran Reformation, there should no flesh have been saved, but for the elect's sake, God hath shortened them."

 

If the above is the correct application of the thousand years (not of Revelation 20), then the remainder, (290) ended when the Advent movement began, in 1828. Not only does Bro. Miller state in his lectures, published in 1840, that he began the study of these periods twelve years previous, viz., in 1828, but I have a book before me now, published in London in 1831, in which the author states that he began to look for this glorious hope in 1828. And in different parts of the world there were many who began about that time to look and wait "for his Son from heaven."

 

"The wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand." The world will consider the beginning of Millerism a small matter to be a subject of prophecy. The movement of great men and kings may fill the prophetic page, but that so small a matter as the gathering out of a waiting people who should "go forth to meet the bridegroom," should be worthy of mention is simply nonsense. They do not understand that one of the least of God's little flock, to say nothing of his accumulated jewels, is of more importance in the courts of heaven, than a whole regiment of Alexanders. And some of our brethren in their humility, think this beginning pretty small.

 

If God should tell us that when the commotion caused by the falling of a certain pebble into the ocean, had reached to the uttermost drop of water, the blast from that trump which calls the nations to judgment, should be heard, we would consider the falling of the pebble as an important event.

 

If God is gathering out a waiting people there must needs have been a beginning, however small, and the standard by which he measures, who lets not a sparrow fall to the ground without his notice, differs widely from that of the world. "Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened" etc., began in 1828; and when the longer of these twin periods ends, it shall be said, "Lo, this is our God, we have waited for him." Amen.

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1872

 

THE CHRONOLGY

N. H. BARBOUR

 

In the last number of the Crisis (Feb. 14), I find a criticism on the chronology as given by me in the "Midnight Cry." The brother in referring to the "Midnight Cry," begins -- "Which is said to give the true time for the Lord's coming." This, although not found in the book, is in quotation marks, implying that we claim to be able to give the true time. Now, my brethren, the writer has never made any such claim. Long years of disappointment and waiting have taught him to mistrust human ability. And when speaking of "that blessed hope," either on paper, or by word of mouth, the feeling of modesty has ever been in the ascendant. "I find the chief dependence is on the chronology," says the brother, "which the writer seems to think shows the six thousand years to end in A.D. 1873, without fail, and Christ to come." "Without fail" is also in quotation marks.

 

I do not object to being understood as holding this faith; but I do object to being represented as dogmatical and positive on these great and momentous truths. Because nothing is further from the fact, as all who have heard me speak, or carefully read the book in question, can testify. The brother is mistaken, and evidently has not read carefully, when he says "he finds the chief dependence is on the chronology." The signs and types are in themselves very strong evidence in favor of 1872. There are many ways of showing, by the types, that the tarrying was to be thirty years; or from 1843 to 1873. But aside from these, and the chronology, there are three prophecies, each one of which, if standing alone, would be sufficient to make us look for our deliverance in 1873 with an earnest, trusting faith.

 

The brother objects to our position that the sum total given in God's word, are reliable. He thinks some of them may, and in fact must, overrun the time stated in the Bible, while none could fall short; therefore these God given periods are unreliable. I will give his own words -- "While the round years of patriarchs, judges and kings are given to us without mentioning months and days, none can doubt that such fractions existed."

 

Now I submit that we have no right to assume that Adam, or any other patriarch, or king, was one minute older than God declares him to be, simply because common sense teaches us that there must have been fraction of years, unless we also at the same time assume that some other periods may have run enough short to make the sum total correct, as God has given it. To this, however, the brother objects.

 

But he admits that if proof could be brought that some of these periods are short of the time given, then this position held in the "Midnight Cry" would be plausible. I am happy to be able to give the desired proof. But first I will say that I agree with the brother that we are not called upon to believe that Adam was just one hundred and thirty years old when Seth was born, and that every patriarch was born on the same day of the month and year, and that each and every king was born, crowned, and died on their birthday. But we have no right to assume one side of the question, and not the other. I should be willing to take my stand on God's word, taking the full years unquestioned, and all the fractions are given. There are but four or five, all of which will be referred to in this article, and if we use them all it only shortens the time one year and ten days, and would make the six thousand end this side of 1873, and not beyond it.

 

In the "Midnight Cry" we gave the full years without the fractions, because we believe God has so taught. But we will give the proof that a fraction of a year which overrun was not reckoned, and also that one which fall short was not reckoned in summing up the full years, by the pen of inspiration. "David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years." (2 Samuel 5:4.)  The next verse  (2 Samuel 5:5) tells us that he actually reigned six months over forty years, and yet this fraction is left out in the sum total here, as in two other places, vix., 1 Kings 2:11 -- "And the days that David reigned over Israel were forty years." Again, in 1 Chron. 29:27 -- "And the time that he reigned over Israel was forty years." Now for the fraction on the other side. "And Asa slept with his fathers, and died in the one and fortieth year of his reign." 2 Chron. 16:13. If he died in the one and fortieth year of his reign, then he did not reign forty-one full years. Now hear the word of the Lord -- "And in the twentieth year of Jeroboam king of Israel, reigned Asa over Judah, and forty and one years reigned he in Jerusalem." 1 Kings 15:9-10. The brother notices, he says, that two kings' reigns are left out; Jehoahaz, who reigns three months (2 Chron. 37:2), and Jehoiachin, who reigns three months and ten days. (2 Chron. 37:9) I confess that when I published the "Midnight Cry," these two fractions were left out of the chronology, because after the above teaching, in relation to fractions, I was at a loss what to do I now believe these are exceptional, and should be reckoned in their place. They stand alone. No other period of less than a year is given in the whole of the chronology, and one of these is given to a day, making together six months and ten days. Reckoning these, the six thousand, according to this chronology, will end in the autumn of 1872, six months and ten days prior to the end of the Jewish year terminating in the Spring of 1873. From many Scriptures, I am now convinced that such is the case; and that the time of trouble will begin this coming autumn, at the end of the six thousand. This would carry us about six months into the time of trouble, before Christ comes for our deliverance.

 

"The third error to which I wish to call attention," says the brother, "is in the reign of the judges. Forty-five years are given as the period from the sending of the spies, when Joshua was forty years old, to the division of the land." I first supposed this misstatement of the brother's naming Joshua for Caleb was a mistake of the printer, but he continues to reason from this premise, and says -- "This makes Joshua eighty-five years old at the division of the land." He then goes on and shows that Joshua being eighty-five at this time, lives twenty-five years after the land was divided. This would be very pretty reasoning if Joshua had been Caleb, and Caleb Joshua. Perhaps the brother will be a little surprised when he looks at Joshua 14:7-10, and discovers his mistake; and that there is not a place in the Bible where Joshua's age is given in connection with any of these events. We simply know that he died at one hundred and ten years of age.

 

Notwithstanding the fact, so apparent, that the brother has read neither the Bible or my book, on this point, with any benefit to himself, still he has touched the point here where this chronology is vulnerable, if it is so at any place. These four hundred and fifty years of the judges is an old battlefield over which many chronological writers have met and broken lances. The ground has been contested inch by inch until the marks of the struggle are familiar to all passers by. And we give the brother credit due for his discovery. But would it not have been better if he had given the answer to this admitted difficulty, which is already found in the book he was criticizing, instead of ignoring that answer?

 

The argument on this four hundred and fifty years of the judges has continued since the beginning of the Christian era, at least, and filled many pages of history. It will not be expected, therefore, that I should exhaust the subject at the end of a short article in a paper; still I will do the best I can under present circumstances. In the world's chronology we find an unbroken line from Adam to the end of Caleb's forty-five years, at the division of the land. Joshua 14:7-10. And this without the necessity of appealing to Josephus, or any other uninspired writer. Then come these four hundred and fifty years which we think measures from the point where the chronology is dropped, by Caleb, at the division of the land, until Samuel the prophet. Now for our reasons for so thinking.

 

The first chronological period given, after the division of the land, is that of Judges 3:8, where they serve the king of Mesopotamia eight years. On through the book of Judges, to the death of Eli (1 Samuel 4:18), we find nineteen short periods (chapter and verse for which may be found in the "Midnight Cry"). Thirteen of these periods measure the time given under their thirteen judges. The other six are the periods when their enemies prevail, between and prior to the reign of these various judges. Hence they are actually under judges but three hundred and thirty-nine years, and one hundred and eleven years under their enemies, making in all four hundred and fifty. In Acts 13:19-20, we read -- "And when he had destroyed seven nations, he divided unto them their land by lot. After that he gave them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet." As the judges were scattered over the greater part of this time with continual breaks between them, no other language would be so appropriate to cover this whole ground as that used by St. Paul. "He gave to them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years." I admit that it is reasonable to suppose, from Joshua 24:31, and other passages, that a considerable time elapsed after the division of the land, and even after Joshua's death, before the eight year period of Judges 3:8 begins. But there is time given to cover that apparent break in the chronology, without going outside of God's word. I am the last one to try to cover up the fact that there is a difficulty here. I believe this chronology was so arranged for the express purpose that men should stumble, as a part of the great plan of closing up the words and sealing the book "even to the time of the end." If the chronology of the six thousand years had pointed to 1873, without obscurity, it would have been a key to unseal the time centuries before God designed it to be understood.

 

There is an apparent break in the chronology during the time the children of Israel serve the Lord, after the land is divided, and prior to the first eight years which to make up these four hundred and fifty years, which twenty years would fairly cover. And on the other hand, there are twenty years too much time given in the period itself; which must be accepted if we take God at his word. Paul evidently makes these four hundred and fifty years measure from the division of the land until Samuel. (I admit he does not positively so affirm, but he certainly implies that the four hundred and fifty years cover that period of time.) These nineteen periods in the Judges run down as chronology with all the apparent clearness and positiveness of any other portion of chronology, not excepting that from Adam to the flood. A judge delivers them so many years, then they are under their enemies another given period, then another judge, and so on. "And the Lord delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years." Judges 13:1. Then we have the story of Samson, which winds up with the sixteenth chapter -- "And he judged Israel twenty years." This twenty is one of the nineteen periods which, added together, make four hundred and fifty for us, as they did for St. Paul. And yet in Judges 15:20 we learn that these twenty years are a part of the preceding period, viz., the forty years already given to the Philistines -- "And he judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years."

 

From the above I learn, first, that these four hundred and fifty years are twenty years too long to reach from the time they are sold into the hand of the king of Mesopotamia (Judges 3:8) until Samuel the prophet. Acts 13:20. Second, that it appears to be the right length to reach from the division of the land until Samuel. Third, Paul certainly implies that it does cover that ground. Fourth, that the peculiar way in which God has arranged these numbers, so that the chronology could be given perfect, unbroken, and in full, and yet in a way that men would stumble at it, and finally have to go back and take the simple word of God unquestioned, in order to arrive at the truth, is just like the Lord.

 

The four hundred and thirty years at the end of which the children of Israel came out of Egypt, is another very similar case. We should have remained in the dark as to where the four hundred and thirty years began, if Paul had not come to the rescue. And strange to relate, the time in the thirteenth of Acts, and the one from the covenant to the law, are the only places where chronology is so much as mentioned in the New Testament. The simple fact is recorded (Ex. 12:41), that when the four hundred and thirty years were fulfilled, on the self same day all the hosts of the Lord came out of Egypt. But not a word is found in the Old Testament as to where these four hundred and thirty years began, nor could we have known, without Galatians 3:17. So with these four hundred and fifty years of the judges. In both these cases the right number of years is given in the Old Testament, but in such a way that we could not place them without further light from the New Testament.

 

By taking this, and all other chronological periods, as found in the Bible, down to the reliable historic era, at the first year of Cyrus, B.C. 536, unquestioned: the six thousand years will end either the coming autumn, or, at the furthest, with the Jewish year ending in the spring of 1873; at the very time indicated by the 1335 years of Daniel, and other prophecies found in Isaiah and Jeremiah, together with the signs and types, as the end of this dispensation, May we all be ready to meet the Bridegroom, and go in to the marriage feast.

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1872

 

SPECIAL CONFERENCE REPORT

 

In accordance with the published invitation of the A.C. church of Worcester, Mass, a special conference was held in their chapel, beginning on Tuesday, Feb. 6th, and continuing over the following Sunday. The object of this meeting was to examine the evidence relating to the time of the Lord's return to earth, and from the large attendance from abroad, particularly of preachers, it was very evident there was a great interest felt in the subject. Besides Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire and Connecticut were represented.

 

First Day. -- The afternoon of Tuesday was spent in prayer and exhortation, and by the spirit manifested in this first meeting, it became evident that this special gathering of saints was to be of more than common interest. In the evening Bro. Simpson occupied the pulpit, and briefly dwelt upon the various chronological and prophetic periods which would be likely to come before the meeting for discussion. The effort seemed designed, not so much to confirm any special theory, as it was to show the relation the periods had to the time of the Lord's coming, and also their relation to one another.

 

Second Day. -- On Wednesday morning, at ten o'clock, Dr. H. W. Buxton, in behalf of the Worcester brethren, formally welcomed those present, assuring them that their coming together as they had was an event that gave great pleasure to the church, and that their hearts and homes were open to welcome them. The conference was then formally opened by appointing C.F. Horn Chairman, and C.E. Barnes Secretary. The rule regulating the addresses was, that those desiring to address the meeting should hand their names to the Chairman, and speak in the order said names were presented, each address not to exceed an hour and a half. Bro. L.T. Cunningham was the first to take the floor, and occupied about forty minutes. The "points" in his speech were (1) that definite time regarding the Lord's second coming is in the Bible; namely, the several prophetic periods; and (2) that they are to be understood, inasmuch as all inspiration is profitable (2 Tim. 3:16), and these cannot be profitable except they be understood. (3) He argued that the taking away of the "daily," and the setting up of the "abomination" (Dan. 12:11), was fulfilled in the taking away of paganism, and establishment of the papacy; (4) that the 120 days are to be reckoned from 508 A.D., when paganism was removed from Rome, and the 1260 days from 538 A.D., when the papacy was established, thus terminating both periods in 1798 A.D. (5) The 1335 days are to be reckoned from the establishment of papacy, and extend to 1873 A.D., at which time Christ will redeem his people.

 

After a short time spent in general comment on the foregoing, Bro. A. Simpson addressed the meeting. He did not differ materially from Bro. C., and spent thirty-five minutes in confirming him in his applications of the prophetic numbers. He advanced, in addition to Bro. C., the following: (1) "The holy city" (Rev. 11:2) is the church of God; (2) the "two witnesses" represent the Bible during the treading under foot of the holy city; (3) Rev. 13:10 was fulfilled when the pope was taken captive in 1798 A.D.; (4) Rev. 13:2 has its fulfillment as follows: the "power" was given to the pope in 533 by Justinian, but the "seat" not until 538. From this period the papacy was supreme just 1260 years. In proving the correctness of the foregoing positions, he read quite copiously from a number of historians, such as Gibbon, Allioson, Thiers, King, Marsh, and others.

 

A rule controlling those who wished to question the speakers was, that questions should be written and handed to the Chairman. In the P.M. Bro. C. answered a number, among which were the following: (1) What event marked the taking away of the "daily"? Ans. The conversion of the ten kings of divided Rome to Christianity. (2) What constitutes the "little horn" of Dan. 8? Ans. It refers to Rome. The "little horn" is synonymous with the fourth beast of Dan. 7.

 

Bro. Henry Pratt next took the stand for an hour, and gave an exposition of Dan. 8:13-14. His object was to prove that the 2300 days end with the 1335 days. Once his brethren had seven years intervene, and now but two, and he hoped ere long to see them agreeing that they end simultaneously. In proving that the end in 1873, he located the termination of the seventy weeks in A.D. 63, at which time the Jewish war began. To prove this, Josephus was read by the speaker quite extensively. This claim brought on quite an animated discussion as to the beginning of the Jewish war, some claiming it began in 65 A.D., and others in 63 A.D. To prove their respective points, both parties appealed to Josephus, and both sides ceased very confident of having gained their respective positions.

 

Before adjourning, it was voted to spend two hours each day during the meeting in a general Bible class; namely, from nine to ten o'clock A.M., and from four to five o'clock P.M., each speaker to be limited to five minutes. Adjourned to ten o'clock A.M.

 

Third day. -- After the meeting was called to order and opened with prayer, Bro. Orion green addressed the meeting fifty minutes. This speaker differed from those of the day before, in that he terminated the seventy weeks of Dan. 9 at the end of the Jewish war, which he located in A.D. 70. He claimed that the remaining 1810 days (during which Jerusalem was to be trodden down by the Gentiles) begin at this point, thus ending them in 1880.

 

The next speaker was Bro. Edw'd Daniels, who occupied about fifteen minutes. His claims were (1), that the 1260 years of papal supremacy ended in 1871, when Victor Emmanuel entered Rome. He referred to no event to mark the commencement of them. (2) He also claimed that the "two horned beast" of Rev. 13 is Victor Emmanuel, though he made no effort to identify the two horns.

 

Bro. N. H. Barbour next took the stand, and gave a brief exposition of Rev. 13. His positions were as follows: (1) The "beast" (Rev. 13:2) is the papacy. (2) The "image of the beast" is papacy restored, which restoration was brought about by the first Napoleon. (3) The "two horned beast" is the two Napoleons. Napoleon I gave life to the "image," or restored papacy, and Napoleon III sustained it until he fell, and then the "image" fell also. In establishing the above, he argued that the allied powers, or Holy Alliance, could not be the "image," as some claimed. Time, fifteen minutes.

 

The foregoing elicited considerable discussion, after which Bro. S.S. Brewer took the floor, and gave his views of the chapter. (1) The phrase "he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him' was explained: "Before" does not mean priority in point of time, but in the presence of. (2) The "two horned beast" is papacy; the "image" is its system of worship. The features attributed to this power from Rev. 13:12-18 are exactly fulfilled in the papacy. At the request of one of the brethren, Bro. B. then read the paraphrase of Father Miller on this chapter, after which the meeting adjourned to two o'clock P.M.

 

In the afternoon, after some promiscuous discussion, Bro. G.W. Brown occupied the pulpit and presented his ideas in the form of a sermon on Rev. 11:1-2, as follows: (1) the "angel" is identical with the one in Rev. 14:6. It is the Advent angel, or people who are proclaiming the advent. (2) The "temple of God" mentioned in the text is the Christian church. (3) The "man of sin" was to sit in the temple. He did obtain this seat in the church of Rome, 538 A.D. (4) The "forty two months" reach to 1798, and the 1335 days, beginning at the same point, reach to 1873, at which time Christ will return to earth. Time, sixty minutes. Adjourned to ten o'clock A.M.

 

Fourth Day. -- Met according to adjournment. After prayer, Bro. Barbour addressed the meeting for the purpose of showing that the six thousand years of the world's history, since the creation of man, will end with the year 1872 A.D. His measurements were as follows: --

 

\-

From creation to end of flood          1656 years

From Flood to death of Terah            427   "

Abrahamic Covenant to giving of law     430   "

Exodus to sending of spies                1   "

Sending of spies to division of land     45   "

From division of land to Samuel         450   "

From Samuel (under kings) to Zedekiah   513   "

From Zedekiah to end of Captivity        70   "

From end of captivity in first year of

       Cyrus (536 B.C.) to Anno Domini  536   "

From A.D. to 1872                      1872   "

                                      -----------

                                       6000   "

\+

 

Having thus presented his chronology, Bro. B. next presented an argument concerning the punishing of Israel "double," founded on Jer. 16:13-18. He claimed that the "double" punishment would extend beyond their rejection eighteen hundred years ago, a period of time equal to what they had existed at that time. At the time of their rejection (A.D. 30) they had existed as a nation eighteen hundred and forty-three (1843) years; to be punished "double" would be to extend their desolations an equal period beyond, which would accomplish their punishment in 1873. In proving the foregoing, Bro. B. argued that the Jewish nationality began at the death of Jacob, from which event to the coming of Shiloh (which was when Christ entered upon his ministry in A.D. 30, according to Bro. B.), there were eighteen hundred and forty three (1843) years, which he reckoned as follows: --

 

\-

From Jacob's death to giving of law     198 years

Giving of law to sending of spies         1   "

Sending of spies to division of land     45   "

From division of land to Samuel         450   "

From Samuel (under kings) to Zedekiah   513   "

From Zedekiah to end of Captivity        70   "

From end of captivity in first year of

       Cyrus (536 B.C.) to Anno Domini  536   "

From A.D. to coming of Shiloh            30   "

                                      -----------

                                       1843   "

\+

 

This is the period of their existence as a nation up to their rejection, from which the "double" is to be reckoned, bringing us to 1873, at which time Israel will be gathered. Following this the speaker gave an exposition of the parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25), in which he claimed that the Advent people since 1843 had fulfilled it exactly.

 

The preceding expositions gave rise to a general discussion, which was terminated by voting, on motion of Bro. W.N. Pile, that the afternoon session from one to three o'clock be spent in a discussion between Bros. Simpson and Cunningham, and bro. Barbour (the latter to have half the time), in order to learn wherein the variation of two years occurred between their respective chronologies, that of Bro. B. ending the six thousand years in 1873, while Bros. S. and C.'s  extended to 1875. Adjourned to one o'clock P.M.

 

Met according to adjournment. Bro. Simpson took the stand, and gave the following as being his system of chronology: --

 

\-

From creation of man to flood     1656 yrs

From beginning to end of flood       1 yr

From flood to end of Noahic age    427 "

Sojourn in wilderness               40 "

Under Joshua                        25 "

Anarchy                             18 "

Judges                             450 "

Samuel                              12 "

Kings                              509 "

From captivity to first of Cyrus    70 "

From Cyrus to Christ               483 "

From Christ to A.D.                  5 "

                                  ------

                                  4126 "

\+

 

From the expiration for Bro. S.'s time (each speaker being allowed ten minutes), until four o'clock, the time was spent in discussion between Bro. Barbour on one side, and Bros. Simpson and Cunningham on the other. Bro. Barbour claimed their chronology was wrong in the addition of one year for the duration of the flood, whereas he claimed the sixteen hundred and fifty-six years from the creation included the year of the flood. The discussion of this one point consumed the greater part of the time, in which discussion Bro. B. showed very plainly and unmistakably that in this place his opponents had inserted a year which did not belong there. His proof was in Gen. 7:11; 8:13; 9:28-29. By referring to the tables above, the reader will perceive wherein the variation occurs. His opponents did not acknowledge the mistake, although the feeling was almost universal among the listeners that they should have done so, as Bro. Barbour, on this point at least, was decidedly in the right.

 

Bro. Cunningham's speeches during this discussion were mainly for the object of proving Bro. B's reckoning wrong in dating the first year of Cyrus in 536 B.C. He argued that as the birth of Messiah was to be sixty nine weeks or four hundred and eighty three years from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem; and as Christ was born five months before A.D., the years would extend backward to 488 B.C. Now as Cyrus issued this decree in the first year of his reign (Ezra 1), it follows that 488 B.C. is the correct date. Although the two chronologies differ but two years in their termination, it must be evident to all that there is really a much greater difference between them, as at the first year of Cyrus they are forty eight years apart. Query. This being so, how is it they can be made to come out so near together? Surely there must be a gross error somewhere.

 

[We do not learn from the "Report" to which day the following notes belong. -- ED.]

 

On motion of E.G. Higgins, E.P. Woodward was appointed Secretary in absence of C.E. Barnes.

 

Barbour -- Bro. Cunningham said that these events might go beyond the seventy weeks. It seems to me that when the events are finished the weeks must be.

 

Cunningham -- I did not mean that they were specific events which commenced at a definite point, and ended at a definite point. There was nothing to specify when he should be born in the seventy weeks.

 

Pratt -- In his prayer, Daniel refers to his covenant by Moses, and says he has confirmed his word. If the covenant is to be a blessing, to confirm it is to bring blessings, and vice versa. The leader is to be the man of fierce countenance, who is to destroy the city. Titus comes, and does he do these things? The Savior says these be the days of vengeance. The transgression is to be restrained four hundred and ninety years, and then the Romans come. When the time is out, they come, confirm the covenant, destroy the city, and take away the sacrifices.

 

Pile -- a covenant is an agreement between two parties. It always has sanctions, that is, penalties attached to it, in case of breach. If the people broke it then the curses came upon them. What covenant was this, the old or the new? If one ends with Christ, how can it relate to the Jews? And about the seven weeks and sixty two weeks, are they separate or joined?

 

Ewell -- The question looks clear to me. How much of the time belongs to the Jews? Seventy weeks. IF I lease a house for five years, it is not four years and eleven months, but five years. If I do not comply with the terms of the lease, when the time has expired the owner has control of the house. It will take him some time to get possession, perhaps seven days.

 

Brown -- There were two covenants made with the Jews. The one referred to by Daniel is in Deut. 29:28. Gabriel comes along and says, I have come forth to give thee skill; therefore understand the matter. What matter? The matter you have been praying about. In regard to the "new covenant," it is not spoken of at all in Dan. 9. There are seventy weeks to restrain the evil that is to come upon you. When they are run out, and the people of the Prince shall confirm the covenant for one week, and cause the sacrifice to cease, and cease forever. They will take away all you have. We do not want to put the new covenant where it does not belong. Pile quoted from Deut. 26:27 -- "He that confirmeth not," etc.

 

Hemenway -- What does Bro. Brown mean by "confirm?"

 

Brown -- I suppose it means to make sure; so that it will never fail.

 

Pratt -- God makes the covenant himself. He says, if you do so and so, blessings will follow; if not, curses. What will it be to confirm the covenant? To bring these blessings or curses. Who will confirm it? Somebody else has got to do that. I say to my child, if you are a good boy, I will bring you something; otherwise, I will punish you. To confirm that is to do what he did to the Jews. The Savior says, these be the days of vengeance, etc. Nobody had confirmed the latter part of that covenant. It was not confirmed to that people, but "to you and to your seed." We go down a great many generations, and it is the Jewish people still. The leader that came did destroy the city, did confirm the covenant in besieging the city, did take away the daily, and so it is fulfilled.

 

Barbour. -- Bro. Pratt confuses the idea of word and covenant. Is it necessarily the same thing?

 

Pratt -- I will read one verse. Dan. 9:11 (here quoted) -- hath confirmed his words." It refers to the covenant.

 

Cunningham -- The word covenant in Deut. and the word covenant in Daniel, come from the same Hebrew word. It must be the same in both instances. It cannot apply to Christ. God used the Roman army as his scourge. The seventy weeks are for the restraining of transgressions that length of time. Echol is to restrain, -- always rendered with the sense of restraint. They should be afflicted, but not destroyed till the seventy weeks were ended. After sixty two weeks from the completion of the wall, Messiah should be cut off.

 

Pratt -- Gabriel comes to instruct about that vision. He says there are seventy weeks allotted to the people and the city. The remainder, or 1810 years, was "the time of the Gentiles."

 

Pile -- The question is whether they are really cut off from the 2300 days. Bro. Cunningham said the Romans were simply the scourge in the hands of the Lord. If that be so, the Lord confirmed the covenant. As to the sixty two weeks, it seems to me the last clause of the twenty sixth verse is simply and explanation; and that the only commencement of any period is from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem.

 

Hemenway -- In the phrase "confirm the covenant," it is not the covenant, but a covenant. I have no question but what is the covenant God made with his people. The seventy weeks spanned the whole thing. Then to make the matter clear, the prophet touches events to transpire in the seventy weeks. Who shall confirm the covenant? You apply it to Titus. You chastise a boy with a stick. You chastise him, not the stick. I think God would not apply the word confirm to the stick he used. He would not say the stick, but himself did it.

 

Green -- It is evident that a mistake has been made in this prophecy, and that is in the word "he." There is only one place to begin; that is, the birth of Christ.

 

Hobbs -- There are five points in the seventy weeks that are fulfilled in Christ. Reference has been made to the sixty two weeks, that (it?) is translated by some, after the weeks, and that it is identical with the other threescore and two weeks. That would prove conclusively that the last week of the seventy was to bring in everlasting righteousness, etc. This is seen by the connection. He shall cause the ----- to cease, not destroy it.

 

Cunningham -- The attempt to make a distinction where there is no difference seems unnecessary; ---- make to cease, and cause to cease. I have quoted from the Hebrew in order to show that "cut off" is the only correct translation.

 

Pile -- Bro. Cunningham is coming to the point. If these sixty nine weeks are an integral part of the seventy, then it follows that the sixty nine could not have ended at Christ. The word "determine" does not express what the angel meant to express. It is either cut off, or cut in pieces. The word is generally used in the sense of "cutting off," or divided. The form here is unusual, showing there is a triple division of the seventy weeks. But what evidence have we that the sixty two weeks commence with the completion of the walls?

 

Brown -- I think we are advancing a little. We must place ourselves a little in the place of Daniel. Gabriel said, Make this man to understand the vision; and he told him what the ram and the goat were, and "then I fainted, and was sick certain days, and was astonished at the vision." The next you hear of Daniel he was praying to God. What about? About the time. Then he is told about the 2300 days. The first thing was the seventy weeks cut off, to restrain the transgression, etc. He was going to make reconciliation for iniquity. This was God's time when the Messiah should be cut off.

 

Pile -- Does Bro. Brown commence the sixty nine weeks with the thirty second year of Artaxerxes?

 

Brown -- Messiah will be cut off in sixty nine weeks from the first of Cyrus.

 

Cunningham -- The apostle says, "If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God." I think we had better apply ourselves as Daniel did. We read that seventy weeks are to be cut off upon his people: there will be an attempt made, at a point when it will not do to have that people destroyed. The "restraint" shall commence at this point. If the vision had not been broken off there, it would never have been "shut up."

 

Barbour -- I believe the coming of the Lord is what we want to learn about; but we do not seem to be coming any nearer together. Suppose this theory, or that, is true; I would rather talk about the coming of the Lord. What interest have we in that? Paul and the apostles did not look any further.

 

Brown -- I do not want to be identified with those who believe that the 2300 days go beyond the end. And I expect that the 1335 days end at the same place. The war commenced with the end of the seventy weeks. There was a seven years' war commencing with A.D. 63. 1810 years will carry us to 1873.

 

Pile -- Have been profited by this meeting. Prophetic time is a proper subject for investigation. The more we keep the Lord's coming before us, the nearer we can live to him.

 

Brown -- What the "restraint" is off, the war will commence. The war will be for seven years, and in the midst of this time the sacrifices should cease. Where do the weeks commence? We can tell by running back from the time the war commenced.

 

Pile -- The trouble is, it does not hit any time. There must be a commencement for the 2300 days, as well as for the 1810. If we run back, it brings us to 428 B.C.

 

Brown -- What of it? Is it anything wonderful that there is a difference of two years? Here we have to depend upon Josephus; but when I get down to A.D. 70, I am at home.

 

Barbour -- If we can make it end in 1873, I would be willing to let it go so; but our other brethren run the 2300 years to 1875, so that they can run two years beyond the end.

 

Cunningham -- Br. Brown must show us some event in 428.

 

Brown -- I think there is nothing wonderful if there should be a mistake somewhere.

 

F.W. Higgins -- The question is in reference to the seventy weeks; what portion of the sixty two, or sixty nine, or seventy, extend from the death of Christ to the war?

 

Cunningham -- He says in the first place that seventy weeks are cut off upon thy people. Then there is Christ's coming introduced, and the reconciliation for iniquity to be made. Then he says the walls shall be built, and after sixty two weeks Messiah shall be cut off. There is a distinct work to be accomplished at the termination. When we come to the one week, we have the Messiah not introduced, but the people of the Prince that shall come.

 

E.G. Higgins -- Which part of the sixty nine weeks reaches to Christ?

 

Cunningham -- They do not terminate at the birth of Christ. The sixty two and sixty nine weeks are distinct from each other.

 

Pile -- The transgression was not restrained after 63 A.D. Does it not follow that the four hundred and ninety years must commence with the seventy (?) weeks? How shall we make the four hundred and ninety years reach from Cyrus to Christ?

 

Brown -- I do not believe the four hundred and ninety years commence with the first year of Cyrus. But I believe the sixty nine weeks do. If they commence together, they end forty nine years before he was born.

 

E.G. Higgins -- It says first that seventy weeks are cut off, and then that is divided up into sixty two and seven, which make sixty nine.

 

Brown -- I don't believe a word of it.

 

Pratt -- If the seventy weeks end with the crucifixion, the 2300 days run out in 1843 somewhere, and we are all afloat. It must have ended when the desolation of Jerusalem commenced. If the Jews' time ended in 63, we have the end in 1873; if in 65, the end is in 1875; if in 70, 1880.

 

Cunningham -- The brother admits the meaning of the word "restrain." When the restraint is taken off, the 490 years end. Josephus was in the war, and it seems that he might settle the matter. (Extract read respecting the last act of the war in 72, when nine hundred slew each other.) the war ended 72 A.D.

 

AFTERNOON BIBLE CLASS

 

Letter read from D. Clow, Janesville, Wis. Sisters invited to speak by Bro. Higgins. Bro. Barbour spoke on the Commune, as foretold in Revelation. He understood the beast of Rev. 11, Rev. 12 and 7, to be the Roman beast, tracing its various developments to the beast that was, is not, and yet is, which is of (not one of) the seven, being the general uprising of the people for power, * or Commune, as the last form.

 

-------------------
* I think Bro. Barbour had better be asked to set forth these views in an article. I know I could not fully understand him, and fear others did not. Perhaps a repart of his words would do him injustice. -- E.T.W.

-------------------

 

Bro. Pratt spoke of the designs of the Pope to repossess himself of kingly power, and the societies which oppose his plans, and the consequent certainty that those who look for "peace and safety" will be mistaken. (Remarks somewhat extended).

 

Barbour -- When Israel came out of Egypt, the last seven plagues were poured out on the Egyptians alone. So in the last seven plagues, the Lord will hide his people. And the world knows something is coming, yet they know not what.

 

Pile -- Read extract from the Report of the Troy Convention of American Spiritualists, showing the chances of union between Communists and Spiritualists to be consummated soon. Considers the Commune the last form of the Dragon. They aim at a Universal Republic, and Spiritualists aim at the same object.

 

Bro. Brittan thought property would not be worth much in this world soon. It was a good time to draw out what we had. Had nothing himself invested there. It is a great deal better to be burned out than to be burned up. Brethren say they cannot go into the churches, as they cannot get anything there; then go and carry something. Feed my sheep.

 

Bro. Pratt -- Had nine houses in Springfield he would dispose of in a manner that would satisfy everyone of his belief, if he could only be sure the Lord was coming in 1873. Adjourned.

 

THE BIBLE CLASS

 

As already mentioned, two hours each day were spent in a general Bible class, each speaker being allowed five minutes, and not to speak more than three times in a session without permission of the class. The hours thus spent were very profitable and interesting. The following are a few of the topics which occasioned considerable discussion: --

 

(1) Did Noah enter the ark seven days prior to, or on the day of, the flood? Gen. 7:11-13 were quoted as proving the latter supposition.

 

(2) Were the words in Matt. 24:15-22 fulfilled in part at the destruction of Jerusalem, and in part in the papal persecution, or is their fulfillment wholly in the latter? On this, it was clearly proved that the entire passage referred to but one event, and that was the papal persecution.

 

(3) Are the weeks in Dan. 9:25, reaching to Messiah the Prince, to be computed from the birth of Christ, or when he entered upon his public ministry, or from his resurrection and ascension? This question elicited a variety of opinions, and its discussion was very animated.

 

(4) Are the "weeks" in Dan. 9:25 to be considered as wholly distinct form the "seventy weeks" of the preceding verse; or does verse 25 enumerate the divisions of time into which the "seventy weeks" are to be divided? In proving the latter, the words "know therefore and understand" were appealed to as being proof that the periods in verse 25 were intimately connected with that of verse 24.

 

In their rejoinders one to another, as a general thing, kindness and brotherly love were very prominent. A word, however, concerning an occasional feature of the discussions, may not be out of place here. In trying to prove certain positions, after reading portions of Scripture and advancing certain deductions therefrom, the speaker would sometimes close with an appeal something like this: "Now which are you going to believe, the word of God, or men? Les us believe God!" and in a short time one or the other side would close his argument and deductions with the triumphant appeal, "Thus you see what the Bible says on this point. For my part, I choose to believe God!"

 

Would it not be well for brethren to remember that Christians may differ greatly from one another, and yet each have an abiding faith in the teachings of the Bible? When different views of the same passage are presented, the difference of opinion is not because one believes the Bible and the other does not, but merely because they differ in their interpretation of a text which both firmly believe.

 

THE PREACHING

 

The discussions were confined to the sessions during the day, the evenings being devoted to preaching. Bro. Simpson preached the first evening (see supra), and Bro. Carpenter the second, who gave a very interesting exposition of the seventh chapter of Daniel. In his remarks he considered France as the Euphrates of mystic Babylon, which was "dried up." Rev. 15:12. On Thursday evening Bro. Simpson gave an exposition of Matt. 24, and on Friday evening Bro. Pile preached on "The Coming Reign of Terror," in which discourse he argued that the same agencies that produced the French Revolution in the last century; namely , Spiritualis, Infidelity, Socialism, Free Love, etc., are not working in the world and tending to a similar result. (This discourse is printed in a tract of twenty four pages, which can be had of the author, Springfield, Mass.)

C.E. BARNES, Secretary.

 

As a whole, the meeting was undoubtedly profitable; new ideas were developed, and some old ones, supposed to be indisputable, were found to be unwarranted. So far as a united agreement upon the prophetic periods is concerned, no conclusion is reached. The point on which there seemed to be any general unanimity was the ending of the thirteen hundred and thirty five days in 1873. If any did not endorse this conclusion, they made no public statement to that effect. Harmony prevailed, and the meeting assured all that brethren can dwell together in unity, even though not agreed in all their opinions.

 

C.E. BARNES, Secretary.

 

 

 

THE WORLD'S CRISIS

AND SECOND ADVENT MESSENGER

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1872

 

THE SEVENTY WEEKS

N. H. BARBOUR

 

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy [koh-desh] sanctuary." Dan. 9:24. The same word occurs in Dan. 8:14. "Then shall the koh-desh be cleansed." These seventy weeks were evidently given to measure the remnant of, the Jewish dispensation. Most Bible students think they ended at, or about the time of the crucifixion; while some recent writers extend them to the destruction of Jerusalem. Objections to both views have been raise by those who take opposite sides. If the former be true, the balance of the 2300 days, from which these seventy weeks were cut off, must have ended 1810 years after the crucifixion, or about A.D. 1843. The objection to this application is with the ending of the longer period of 2300 days, and not with the seventy weeks themselves. If the latter view be taken, there are objections to the ending of the seventy weeks, and also that of the longer period. Those who believe they ending in A.D. 65, divide the 2300 days thus; seventy weeks or 490 years, "determined," or cut off on the Jews, and 1810 measure "the time of the Gentiles."

 

OBJECTIONS TO THIS VIEW

 

If the seventy weeks which were "determined" on that people ended at A.D. 65, it follows that their nationality and organization must have continued until that time; for when the organization which constituted them a peculiar people ended, they must have ceased to be "thy people," in every sense in which they are not "they people" today. Hence the "seventy weeks" must have been the measure of their dispensation, probation, or organization. The affirmative on this question, say their nationality, priesthood, sacrifices and organization did continue until A.D. 65. And this is in a certain sense correct. Hence they are right in making this assertion as they do, unsupported by Bible evidence; the burden of proof lying with the negative. Romanists assert that the bread is the body of Christ. "Take eat, this is my body." This is correct in letter. Protestants affirm that it represents his body. This is true in Spirit. The affirmative on the question before us, are correct in letter, and therefore have a plausible position. But we shall show theya re not correct in spirit. "The letter killeth, but the spirit maketh alive." Hence, whatever is based on the letter alone, is worthless.

 

Paul teaches that Christ made an end of sacrifice. The affirmative declares that Titus made an end of sacrifice. Both are correct in a certain sense. But which is true? It is not a handsome application of prophecy alone, but the true application, for which we are in search. "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change of the law." Here we perceive the law was changed Moses to Christ with the priesthood. The Aaronic priesthood ended when Christ, who was of the tribe of Judah, took the office of Priest upon himself, is the teaching of Paul. The Aaronic priesthood did not end until Jerusalem was destroyed, say they. "The law was, until John, says Christ. The law was until Titus, say they. The partition wall which made the distinction between Jew and Gentile, was broken down and removed by the gospel, is the teaching of Paul. The partition wall which made that people distinct, was not broken down, say they until A.D. 65, notwithstanding our Lord said "their house was left unto them desolate."

 

Under the gospel dispensation, Paul teaches that they that were Jews outwardly had ceased to be Jews. The outward Jew continued to be "thy people" until A.D. 65, say they. If nothing else, certainly their nationality continued until A.D. 65, say the affirmative. (From their stand point, I should say it continued until A.D. 70; but this would be five years too long.) The simple fact of their having a city, did not make or mar their nationality. They were a nation before they had a city. See Deut. 26:5. They were "a royal priesthood, a holy nation," so called of God. And the two characters were one and inseparable. When their priesthood ended and the kingdom of God was taken from them, they ceased to be a nation, in the true sense of the language of Inspiration. For under the gospel dispensation "we are a royal priesthood; we are a holy nation," says the Apostle. Did God have two royal priesthoods, two holy nations, two dispensations, two doors to the kingdom, at one and the same time? He did if that old Hagar and her children continued to be "thy people and thy holy city' until A.D. 65, in any sense in which they are not his today.

 

"They shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate" (Dan. 11:31) doubtless refers to the Romans. And the Romans did stop the burning of sheep and oxen. But when they took away the "daily," it was not a sacrifice. A sacrifice means an offering made to God, by his own appointed ministers, says Cruden. As the priesthood had been changed to Christ, there was no priest or minister among that God forsaken people to offer a sacrifice. Hence, the prophet calls it "the daily" simply; but not sacrifice, as our translators have. I should have called it "abomination." They -- the Romans -- took away the daily abomination, to please the one that "maketh desolate." Let no man deceive you, however plausible his theory may appear, when it is opposed by the whole spirit and teaching of the gospel, as this one is. That dispensation, covenant, law, priesthood, nationality, and organization ended with the introduction of a new order of things; when Christ became the minister of a better covenant. "And he shall confirm the covenant with man for one week." Dan. 9:27. This 'he" cannot refer to the prince of the preceding verse, for it is "the people of the prince" who accomplish the destruction. Hence if it is the work of destruction which confirms the covenant, as some of our brethren assert, it should have been, "they shall confirm the covenant," not "he." There is, to my mind, far more propriety in referring this "he" to "the Messiah." But to make an application of a prophecy as dark as this one is conceded to be, and with such a variety of renderings, hinge on the supposed application of a pronoun, as given in this one rendering, would be very unsatisfactory to me, unless it were supported by other evidence. A covenant, testament, or agreement, is an obligation or contract between two or more parties, and must be confirmed by the party who obligate themselves to accomplish or bring about certain results, and not by a third party who have no interest in it.

 

Again. A covenant, or testament (synonymous terms), must be confirmed before it comes into operation; not after it has expired. See Heb. 9:16, 18. "The first covenant had ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." This "first covenant," referred to by Paul, was evidently the Jewish covenant, and could not have continued after "the seventy weeks" determined on that people had ended. The seventy weeks ended, as our brethren say, at A.D. 65. Hence, by this theory of application, the Jewish covenant was confirmed after it had expired, and by Titus, who had no connection with it. All of which is opposed to Scripture and reason. Moses was the mediator of the first covenant, Christ of the second. The first covenant, confirmed by the shedding of blood; so was the second, -- but not the blood of Titus. "If that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." Heb. 8:7. "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old; now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." Heb. 8:13. "Then saith he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." Heb. 10:9. It was "he," the Messiah, and not Titus, who came "to do thy will, O God," and "took away the first, that he might establish the second." The whole tenor of Paul's rasoning, and of the gospel itself, teaches, beyond all question, that the first covenant was taken away to make place for a better one, long before Jerusalem was destroyed.

 

The "he" that confirms the covenant (Dan. 9:26) is the same "he" that causes the sacrifice and oblation to cease. And if Paul's testimony can be received, Messiah made the sacrifice and oblation to cease, "nailing them to his cross." The fact that the "one week" is mentioned after the destruction of the city, certainly does not prove that its chronological place is during its destruction. Events are often mentioned in prophecy without regard to their chronology. In Micah 5:1-2, for instance, they are said to "smite the judge of Israel on the cheek" in the first verse; after which his birth is mentioned in the second. In Zech. 9:9-11, the everlasting kingdom and gospel dispensation are strangely mingled, as also in many other places.

 

This stretching of the seventy weeks to the destruction of Jerusalem, does great injustice to the unity of the prophecy, as well as to its language. "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city," to accomplish certain definitely specified things, all of which were accomplished at and by the death of Christ, as we can prove from the New Testament. "Know therefore" -- in consequence of these seventy weeks being determined on thy people, that it shall be divided so and so -- "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks." This ended when Christ began his ministry, after John the forerunner had fulfilled his course. For as the Messiah, or Anointed, he did not come until after John had baptized. Acts 13:24. "And after threescore and two weeks [those just mentioned, not a new period] shall Messiah be cut off." Whether it was three and a half years after, or seven, we can never know, for Inspiration and history are alike silent on that point. "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week." Whether Christ confirmed it in his own person, during the whole week, or a portion of the time through those who heard him, we cannot tell; doubtless the latter; for as he causes "the sacrifice and oblation to cease in the midst of the week," and this occurs when he offers himself on the cross, it is probably that he preached only three and a half years.

 

By destroying the unity of this prophecy, and separating the seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks, and one week, into periods having no relation to each other, or to the seventy, of which it is so clearly implied they are a part, our brethren make them cover seventy nine weeks. Sixty nine weeks reach to the birth of our Lord, say they; while the one week, by some wonderful arrangement, is made to reach to A.D. 70, or ten weeks further on. Hence there were really seventy nine weeks determined on that people, it would appear.

 

It seems to me enough has been said to show that this whole theory is based on the one fact that Jerusalem was not destroyed for some thirty or forty years after God had given it up, and it had ceased to be "the holy city," and without one atom of Scripture support, but in the face of a perfect avalanche of inspired testimony against such application.

 

"The times of the Gentiles' must refer to Gentile dominion, or Gentile probation; there is nothing else to which they can refer. If to the first, they began with Babylon, the first universal Gentile kingdom. IF they refer to their probation, hey began when the gospel was first preached to the Gentiles. In either case the balance of the 2300 days, or 1810 years, is too short to cover "the times of the Gentiles." And to say that they began at A.D. 65, is like all the rest of this application, founded on pure assertion, entirely unsupported by Scripture. God had given them up long before that; and Christ had told them that by and by an army should come and destroy the old Hagar and her children.

 

OBJECTIONS TO THE 2300 DAYS ENDING IN 1843

 

The evidence that the Jewish covenant, law, ordinances, seventy weeks, and all that pertained to that dispensation ended with the last, or "one week," during which our Lord takes away the old, and confirms the new covenant, and "causes the sacrifice and oblation to cease," by instituting a better sacrifice and a "better covenant," is beyond all question. Therefore, it follows that the balance of the 2300 days must have ended 1810 years after the termination of that "one week," or at about 1843. But as we have clearly shown these 1810 years are not long enough to cover "the times of the Gentiles," we are forced to the conclusion that the Gentile times extend beyond the 2300. And there is nothing in the language of Dan. 8:14, which forbids it. "Unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed," certainly does not imply that it had been cleansed before the days ended, nor does it imply that it must be accomplished instantly at the end of the days. When 2300 days have ended, there was something in the future, something still to be done. "Then" implies time, and means the next even. You go to England, then to China. "How long the voyage from the time you leaven the shores of England, until you pass the last inch of water, and plant your feet on the soil of China? And he said unto me, until 2300 days, then shall the passengers go ashore." The question in the vision, like this question, covers the whole time, "even to the last end of the indignation;" but the answer is indefinite. You might go ashore in a few minutes, or, if night had come on, not until morning. In the case before us, night did come on. The vision tarried at the end of the 2300 days; "and while the bridegroom tarried they all slumbered and slept." A similar case occurs in the twelfth chapter. A question which covers the whole time down to the resurrection, is asked -- "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" The answer is, that it shall be for a "time, times and a half;" then something was to be done which the time given in the answer does not cover. Daniel then asks, "What shall be the end of these things?" and is informed that "there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days." And even this period does not cover it all; for after these days end, there is something still future -- a waiting time -- "blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the month and a half added thereto"; as some old translation read.

 

None of these periods so far given in the book of Daniel, reach to the end; for there is a positive declaration, that after each one of them there was something as yet unaccomplished. And whether that something would be accomplished in five minutes or fifty years, there is not the slightest hint, until the last period is given. Here, with "the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days," (1335) is the final and complete answer, to which God, the angels, and the prophet have been gradually bringing us, through all these past visions, questions, and answers. This final answer is clear and positive. Of this period it is said -- "Thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot, AT THE END OF THE DAYS."

 

This makes the book of Daniel, a unity, not broken fragments, independent of each other. The vision of the second chapter was a mere outline; the seventh adds new features; the eighth still more, and finally, with the last words that fall from the lips of the "man clothed in linen," we reach the solution of the great problem. The book was then "closed up and sealed, even to the time of the end." "Behold I will make thee to know what shall be in the last end of the indignation, for at the time appointed the end shall be." Verse 19. From this to the twenty fifth verse the angel shows him what shall be, even to the last end, where the "fourth beast" is "broken without hands." This was the time God had appointed in the second chapter for the end, when the stone cut out "without hands" should smite the image. Two prophetic periods had been mentioned prior to this -- "the time, times and a half" (1260) of the seventh chapter, and the 2300 days of this vision; but it does not necessarily follow that either of these periods was the time God had appointed for the end. God speaks of things that are not as though they were; and though he had declared the end from the beginning, he did not reveal it to Daniel until the last sentence of his communications was completed.

 

God appointed the time long before Daniel's day. He says to David, in Psalm 102 -- "When the Lord shall build up Zion, he shall appear in his glory" -- just what we are looking for at the end of the days -- "Thou shalt arise and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favor her, yea, the set time is come."


The Bible is a unit; and the plan of salvation, stretching from the garden of Eden till the "last trump" shall call the sleeping millions from the dust, is one progressive and unbroken work. A word uttered in some dark corner by an ancient seer, echoes down the centuries until the stream is caught by other lips, and used as if the language had but just burst forth from their own inspiration. "Let us then take heed unto the sure word of prophecy, as unto a light shining in a dark place, . . . . knowing this first, that no prophecy is given of any private interpretation;….but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," and their words are linked together in one great comprehensive plan. The several parts not perfect in themselves, or containing the whole truth; but each one dependent on, and perfect only in connection with, its fellows. The 1260 days reach to "the time of the end" -- 1798. The 2300 days reach to the tarrying time -- 1843. The 1290 days reach to the waiting time, or to where the Advent movement began -- 1828. The 1335 days reach to the time when Daniel will stand in his lot -- 1873.

 

The different phases of the Advent movement, like all of God's work, are consistent in themselves, and form a united whole. The first "going out to meet the bridegroom," began at the end of the 1290 days, and reached to 1843. Then came the disappointment, just as our Lord had said -- "And while the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept." This accounts for the divisions and mistakes of this phase of the movement. "At midnight," viz., the middle of this tarrying, or sleeping time, from 1843 to 1873, there was a cry -- the true one -- to be made. The 1873 cry began in the middle of this thirty years of tarrying, just where our Lord said it would begin. And now at that cry the virgins are waking up, and trimming their lamps by hundreds and by thousands, and still the cry goes on. But in order to preach 1873 time, we must go back to the platform occupied by "the virgins" before they went to sleep. Bro. Miller's dream is coming true. During this sleeping time the virgins have taken those "jewels," or prophetic periods which God gave to him, and scattering them to the four winds, have put counterfeit ones in their place. But these lost jewels are being found and reset, and are indeed "shining brighter than before."

 

There are many overwhelming evidences for 1873. Some of our brethren see one of these, the 1335 days, and are preaching it; others see more; but just so far as they are preachin