COMMENTARIES
ON
THE
BOOK OF THE PROPHET
DANIEL
BY JOHN
CALVIN
NOW FIRST TRANSLATED FROM THE
ORIGINAL LATIN, AND COLLATED
WITH THE
FRENCH VERSION, WITH DISSERTATIONS,
NEW
TRANSLATION OF THE TEXT, AND COPIOUS
INDICES,
BY THOMAS MEYERS,
M.A.
VICAR OF SHERIFF-HUTTON,
YORKSHIRE
VOLUME
SECOND
CHAPTER 7
|
DANIEL
7:1-2
|
|
1. In the first year of Belshazzar king of
Babylon, Daniel had a dream, and visions of his head upon his bed then he wrote
the dream, and told the sum of the matters.
|
1. Anno primo Beltsazar regis babylonis,
Daniel somnium vidit, eer visiones capitis ejus in lecto ejus. Tunc somnium
exposuit.
|
|
2. Daniel spake, and said, I saw in my vision
by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great
sea.
|
2. Loquutus est Daniel, et exposuit: Vidi in
visione mea per noctem, et ecce quatuor venti coelorum pugnantes,
f388
in mari magno.
|
Hear. Daniel begins to offer instruction peculiar to
the Church. For God had formerly appointed him an interpreter and instructor to,
profane kings. But he now appoints him a teacher to the Church, that he may
exercise his office within it, and instruct the sons of God in the bosom of the
Church. We must notice this first of all, because thus far his predictions
extended beyond the limits of the household of faith, but here Daniel’s
duty is restricted to the Church. He says:
This vision was bestowed upon him
in the first year of King Belshazzar, before
that change happened, which we have previously seen. First of all, we must try
to understand the design of the Holy Spirit; that is, the end and use for which
he opened up to Daniel the material of this chapter. All the prophets had held
out to the elect people the hope of deliverance, after God had punished them for
their ingratitude and obstinacy. When we read what other prophets announce
concerning their future redemption, we should suppose the Church to have been
promised a happy, quiet, and completely peaceful state, after the people had
returned from captivity. But history testifies how very differently it turned
out. For the faithful must have grown weary and have fallen away unless they had
been admonished of the various disturbances which were at hand. This, then, is
the first reason why God revealed to his Prophet what we shall soon see; namely,
that three monarchies yet remained, each of which should succeed the former, and
that during them all the faithful should endure permanently and constantly in
reliance on the promises, although they should see the whole world shaken, and
severe and distressing convulsions prevailing everywhere. For this reason,
Daniel’s vision concerning the four empires is here set forth. Perhaps it
will be better to defer the summary of it till the Prophet begins to treat of
each beast separately. But with regard to the two first verses, we must observe
the time of the dream.
Before the Medes and Persians transferred the
Chaldean Empire to themselves, the Prophet was instructed in this subject, that
the Jews might recognize the partial fulfillment of what God had so often
promised themselves and their fathers. For if their enemies had possessed
Babylon without any new prediction, the Jews perhaps would not have been so
attentive to. those prophecies which had been long ago uttered in their favor.
Hence God wished to refresh their memories, and then, when they saw the fall of
that empire which all thought to be impregnable, they would perceive the
government of God’s secret counsels, and the partial, if not the complete
fulfillment of what he had testified by their prophets. He says —
he saw a
dream. When he previously spoke of the
dream of King Nebuchadnezzar he mentioned a vision, but not for the same reason,
because the unbelieving when seeing do not observe. They perceive something
indeed, dimly and without distinctness, while their thoughts immediately fade
away. The Prophet’s method was different; because he not only dreamed, but
saw a distinct vision, and thus could profitably deliver to others what he had
received. The Prophet then expresses something peculiar by this phrase, for we
know how prophets usually attribute such visions to God, when they perceive the
secrets of heaven, not with the eyes of flesh, but by the illumination and
intelligence of the Spirit. He adds —
visions of his head were on his
bed; thus the dream would have more weight, and
lest we should think any confusion existed in Daniel’s brain. Thus he
expresses how he saw whatever the Lord wished him to know in a dream with a calm
mind. He afterwards adds —
Then he wrote the dream, and
explained the meaning of the words. By this
phrase he teaches us how his seeing the vision was not for his own sake
personally, but for the common edification of the Church. Those who suppose
Daniel to have leapt suddenly from his bed, lest he should forget the dream,
offer a vain and frivolous comment. Daniel rather wished to bear ‘witness
to this vision as not peculiar to himself, but common to God’s elect
people; and hence not only to be celebrated orally, but to be delivered to
posterity for a perpetual remembrance. We must bear in mind these two points;
first, Daniel wrote this prophecy that the knowledge of it might ever be
celebrated among the faithful; and then, he considered the interests of
posterity, and so left the vision written. Both these points are worthy of
notice to induce us to pay greater attention to the vision, since it was not
delivered for a single individual; but God chose Daniel as his minister, and as
the herald and witness of this oracle. Hence we see how it concerns us; it was
not teaching for any single age, but it extends to us, and ought to flourish
till the end of the world. He repeats the same thing by adding —
he explained the sense of the
words. For those who separate these two
clauses, seem to stumble on plain ground.
f389
Daniel
then spoke and said
— This has no reference to words, but to
writing; as if the Prophet had said, I have discharged my duty; since he knew
that what we shall afterwards see concerning the four monarchies was not
divinely entrusted to him for the sake of suppressing anything made known, but
he rather felt himself a chosen instrument of God, who was thus suggesting to
the faithful material for trust and endurance. He spoke, therefore, and
explained; that is, when he desired to promulgate this oracle, he bore
witness to there being no difference between himself and God’s Church in
this announcement; but as he had been an elect and ordained teacher, so he
delivered what he had received, through his hands, Hence Daniel not only
commends his own faith, but excites all the pious to anxiety and attention, lest
they should despise what God had pronounced through his mouth.
He repeats again,
He saw in his vision during the
night. Again, I say, Daniel affirms that he
brought forward nothing but what God had authoritatively delivered to him. For
we know that in the Church all human traditions ought to be treated as
worthless, since all men’s wisdom is vanity and lies. As God alone
deserves to be listened to by the faithful, so Daniel here asserts that he
offers nothing of his own by dreaming: in the ordinary way, but, that the vision
is sure, and such as cannot deceive the pious.
He afterwards adds,
Behold! the four winds of heaven
fought in a great sea. I much prefer this
rendering. Interpreters differ respecting the winds, but the genuine sense
appears to be this; Daniel assumes a simile universally known, for on solid
ground any such turbulent concussion is seldom heard of as at sea, when any
mighty tempest arises. Without doubt, he here proposes the image of a raging sea
to warn the faithful against dreadful commotion at hand, just as, if the sea
were agitated with storms and raging with tempests on all sides. This is the
meaning of the phrase. Hence he names
four
winds, to show the faithful how the motion
which should shatter the globe should not be single and simple, but that various
storms should arise together on all sides — exactly as it happens. We
may’ sometimes see the earth moved just as if a tempest were, tossing
about the sea in all directions, but the motion will yet be single. But God
wished to show his Prophet not only a simple concussion, but many and different
ones, just as if all the winds were to, meet in one general conflict.
Philosophers, indeed, enumerate more winds than four when they desire to treat
of the number with precision, but it is the common phrase to speak of four winds
blowing from the four quarters or regions of the globe. The sense, however, is
clear and by no means forced — the world being like a troubled sea, not
agitated by a single storm or wind, but by different. conflicting blast., as if
the whole heavens conspired to stir up commotion’s. This vision at the
first glance was very bitter to the faithful, because they counted the years
prescribed to them by Jeremiah; the seventieth year was now at hand, and God had
then promised them an end of their troubles. Now God announces that they must
not indulge in the hope of rest and joy, but rather prepare themselves for
sustaining the rush of the fiercest winds, as the world would be everywhere
agitated by different storms. They might perhaps suspect God of not performing
his promises, but this ought, to be sufficient for appeasing their minds and
propping them up with the hope of redemption, when they saw nothing happen
either rashly or by chance. Again God came to meet their temptations lest their
courage should fail, by teaching them that the method of their redemption was
not quite so easy as they had previously conceived from former predictions. God
indeed had not changed his plans, for although a long period had elapsed since
he spoke by Isaiah and the other prophets, yet he wished to prepare the Jews
against delay, lest it should break down the courage which would be required to
meet such great afflictions. But when redemption really approached, then God
explained its method more fully and familiarly, and showed how great and severe
were the remaining struggles. Hence the faithful, instructed by such prophecies,
would contend strenuously and yet proceed constantly in their course of faith
and patience. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
7:3
|
|
3. And four great beasts came up from the sea,
diverse one from another.
|
3. Et quatuor bestiae magnae prodibant e mari,
diversae haec ab illa.
f390
|
After Daniel had beheld these great commotion which
were shaking the earth in different parts, another vision was offered to him.
What has already been said concerning the troubled sea and the conflict of the
winds, is extended to the four monarchies, concerning which we shall now treat.
A certain preparation is intended when God offers to the eyes of his Prophet a
turbulent sea produced by the conflict of the winds. Just as if he should say
— after these troubles others shall spring up; thus men will wait for
peace and tranquillity in vain, for they must suffer under fresh
agitation’s. Now, the kind of trouble is expressed, by the
words, four beasts proceed out of
the sea. Hence that concussion, those storms,
and that confused disturbance of the whole world through one kingdom succeeding
to another. It can scarcely happen that any kingdom can perish without involving
others in its ruin. A single edifice can scarcely fall without the crash being
heard far and wide, and the earth seeming to gape at its overthrow. Then, what
must happen when the most powerful monarchies so suddenly perish? Hence in this
verse Daniel shows how the world is like a troubled sea, since violent changes
among its empires were then at hand. The comparison of empires to beasts is
easily explained. We know how God’s glory and power are resplendent in all
kingdoms, if they are rightly conducted after the law of equity. But since we
often see the truth of what was said to Alexander, — The greatest kingdoms
are the greatest robberies, and very few absorb the whole power in a great
empire, and exercise a cruel and excessive tyranny. Here the Prophet compares
empires to great and savage beasts, of which he will afterwards treat. Now we
understand the meaning of the words: and we may learn this lesson from what
usually happens in the empires of the world; in themselves, as I have said, they
are most beautiful reflections of the divine wisdom, virtue, and justice,
although those who obtain supreme sway very rarely acknowledge themselves
divinely created for the discharge of their office. As, therefore, kings are
mostly tyrants, full of cruelty and barbarity, and forgetful of humanity, the
Prophet marks this vice as springing from themselves and not from the sacred
ordinance of God. Let us proceed, —
|
DANIEL
7:4
|
|
4. The first was like a lion, and had
eagle’s wings: I beheld till the wings there of were plucked, and it was
lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, a man’s
heart was given to it.
|
4. Prima scut leo
f391
et alae aquilae ei: vidi donec evulsae sunt alae ejus, et sublata fuit e terra,
et super pedes suos quasi homo stedit, et cor himinus datum ets
ei.
|
It is clear that the four monarchies are here
depicted. But it is not agreed upon among all writers which monarchy is the
last, and which the third. With regard to the first, all agree in
understanding’ the vision of the Chaldean Empire, which was joined with
the Assyrian, as we saw before. For Nineveh was absorbed by the Chaldeans and
Babylonians; but the Prophet discourses at length of the Assyrian and Chaldean
Empire, which was then flourishing. No one, however, would have thought it so
near its end; and on the very night on which Belshazzar was slain, we saw how
securely and proudly he was immersed in his pleasures, and what great and
listless security existed throughout the city. This monarchy then ought to be
set before us in the first place. As in the second chapter that empire was
called the golden head of the statue, so also it is now called a lion; that is,
it is compared to a generous animal. It is comprehended under the image of a
beast, and its fierceness and atrocity, as I have said, is hereby denoted; but
with respect to the other kingdom, some superiority is granted to it, since the
world is always growing worse and worse. And although Cyrus was a very prudent
prince, yet he did not reach the temperance of former ages; for his ambition,
avarice, and cruelty were insatiable. For Isaiah also, when he speaks of the
Persians, says, They desire neither silver nor gold, but thirst after human
blood. (Isaiah 13:17.)
We perceive then the reason why the Prophet says,
The first beast offered to me
was like a lion, because greater integrity
flourished under the Chaldeans than when all the empires were mixed together,
and the Persians subdued both the Chaldeans and the Medes. For it is evident
from all histories that they were a barbarous and fierce nation. They were
indeed showy in their praise of virtue, since they spent their lives in
austerity, and despised all luxuries, and were exceedingly temperate in their
living; but their ferocity and brutal cruelty rendered them detestable.
The first
beast then
was like a
lion, says he,
and had eagle’s
wings; that is, although it was a lion, yet it
had wings. This refers to its swiftness, since we know in how short a time the
Assyrians increased their monarchy, for they had previously subdued the
Chaldeans, just like a lion for swiftness. For a lion has force, spirit, and
cruelty for committing injuries. Besides, the prophet saw a winged lion, since
they not only increased their empire by their own strength, but suddenly
extended their wings in every direction. We see, then, how strength and power
are denoted on the one hand, and the greatest speed on the other. He afterwards
adds, Their wings were dragged or
torn off. For when the Chaldeans desired to
stretch beyond their bounds, the Lord restrained them within due limits, and
checked their continual victories. Their wings were then torn off, when God
restrained them by the check of a bridle, lest they should wander as freely as
they had formerly done.
The Prophet. then adds,
This beast was raised from the
earth, implying the cessation of the empire.
For neither the Chaldeans nor the Assyrians were entirely destroyed; but their
glory was completely taken away. The face of the beast no longer appeared, when
God transferred that monarchy to the Medes and Persians. Hence the Prophet adds,
It stood upon its feet, and the
heart of a man was given to it. By this
form of expression, he means to imply the reduction of the Assyrians and
Chaldeans to their ordinary condition, and that they were no longer like a lion,
but like private men deprived of their power and strength. Hence the expression,
a man’s heart was given to
them, is not intended by way of praise, but by
“a man” he intends any private person; as if he had said, the aspect
of the Chaldeans and Assyrians was no longer terrible, since, while their sway
prevailed, all men dreaded their power. Hence God removed from the world the
face of that beast, and substituted that of a man, and made them
stand upon their
feet. Formerly they flew about. in the air, and
despised the earth as far beneath their feet, but God makes them stand upon
their feet; that is, not conduct themselves after their customary and former
manner, but simply on the common level, after God had deprived them of their
empire. This, in my judgment, is the simple meaning of the Prophet. Should there
be any necessity, we shall afterwards confirm the remarks which we now run
through but cursorily. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
7:5
|
|
5. And behold another beast, a second, like to
a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth
of it between the teeth of it: and they said, Arise, devour much
flesh.
|
5. Et ecce bellua, bestia, posterior altera
f392
similis urso (inquit) et surrexit ad latus unum: et tres costae in ore
ejus inter dentes ejus: et sic dicebant ei,
f393
Surge, comede carnem multam.
|
Here the Prophet. proclaims how he was instructed by
a dream concerning the second beast. If we will only judge by the event, this
beast doubtless represented the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, although the
Prophet specifies the Persians, as the Medes had long ago submitted to their
yoke.
Behold,
says he, another beast like a
bear. We know a bear to be a mean and foul
animal, slothful and inert, as well as cruel. In comparing the bear with the
lion, its appearance is foul and displeasing, while the lion is remarkable for
beauty, although it is formidable. He compares the Persians to a bear, on
account of their barbarity, since we have already pronounced that nation fierce
and savage. Then, again, the Persians were not civilized like the Assyrians and
Chaldeans, who dwelt in the most beautiful region in the whole world, and in a
most lovely country like a most noble theater; but the Persians lay hid like
wild beasts in their caves. They dwelt among their mountains, and lived like the
brutes. Hence the Prophet compares them very appositely to a bear; nay, God
showed this form to his Prophet. He afterwards adds,
It stood on one
side. Some think this to have been added
to express the more contracted dominion of the Medes and Persians, but this
opinion is unsuitable. We know how extensive was the sway of the Medes before
they came under the power of Cyrus and the Persians. By themselves the Medes
were most powerful; then the Persians were added, and afterwards Cyrus seized
upon the possessions of the Chaldean monarchy. He possessed even the keys of
Egypt, reigned in Syria, held Judea, and extended beyond the sea, till at length
he was conquered by the Scythians. When, therefore, it is said,
he stood on one
side, the obscure origin of his kingdom is
intended, for the fame of the Persians was included within their mountains until
Cyrus acquired for them a name by his exploits. For he was a brave warrior, and
deservedly eclipsed the glory of all others. Hence, at first
this beast stood on one
side; that is, the Persians were without fame
or reputation; they had no wealth, and never emerged from their lurking-places.
We see how this particular is restricted to their origin in consequence of its
obscurity.
The Prophet then adds:
Three ribs were in the
beast’s mouth between its teeth; and it was thus proclaimed, Arise, eat
much flesh! Those who understand three definite
kingdoms by the three ribs, seem to refine far too minutely. I think the number
indefinite, because this beast had bitten by its mouth not one rib but more;
because the Persians, as we have said, drew to themselves the power of the
Medes, and afterwards subdued the Assyrians and Chaldeans, and Cyrus also
subdued many nations, until all Asia Minor acknowledged his authority. When,
therefore, the Prophet speaks of three ribs, it implies the insatiable nature of
this beast, since it was not content with a single body, but devoured many men
together. For, by “many ribs,” he meant much prey. This is the whole
sense. I do not hesitate to explain the following
words, it was said to the
beast, of angels, or of God himself. Some
prefer to understand this of the stimulus by which Cyrus was instigated to
cruelty. But since God exhibits to his Prophet the image of his Providence, what
I have lately suggested becomes very probable:. namely,
it was said to the beast, Arise,
eat much flesh; not; because God was the author
of cruelty, but since He governs by His secret counsel the events which men
carry on without method, His authority is here deservedly placed be/ore our
eyes; for Cyrus would not have penetrated so swiftly into different regions, and
have drawn to himself so many empires, and subjugated so many powerful nations,
had not God wished to punish the world, and had made Cyrus the instrument of
slaughter. As therefore Cyrus executed God’s vengeance by shedding so much
human blood, the Prophet declares it to have been said to him,
Arise, and eat
flesh. In one respect God was not pleased by
the slaughter of so many nations by Cyrus, and by the increase of one
man’s power and tyranny through so much human bloodshed; but in another
respect God is said to have commanded the conduct of Cyrus, since he wished to
punish the world for its ingratitude, to which the most desperate obstinacy and
rebellion were added. There was no remedy for these vices; hence God entrusted
Cyrus with the duty of executing His judgment,. I am compelled to stop
here.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou exposest
us to various distresses in this world, for the purpose of exercising our faith
and patience: Grant, I say, that we may remain tranquil in our station, through
reliance on thy promises. When storms gather around us on all sides, may we
never fall away and never despond in our courage, but persevere in our calling.
Whatever may happen, may we recognize thee as carrying on the government of the
world, not only to punish the ingratitude of the reprobate, but to retain thine
own people in thy faith and protection, and preserve them to the end. May we
bear patiently whatever changes may happen to us and may we never be disturbed
or distressed in our minds, till at length we are gathered into that happy rest,
where we shall be free from all warfare and all contests, and enjoy that eternal
blessness which thou hast prepared for us in thine only begotten Son. —
Amen.
LECTURE THIRTY
THIRD.
|
DANIEL
7:6
|
|
6. After this I beheld, and lo another, like a
leopard, which had upon his the back of it four wings of a super the beast had
also four heads, and dominion was given to it.
|
6. Post hoc vidi,
f394
et ecce alia, bestia scilicet, sicut pardus, similis pardo, et alae quatuor avis
super dorsum ejus, et quatuor capita bestiae et potestas data est
ai.
|
DANIEL has already spoken of two empires, namely, the
Chaldean and Persian. Interpreters agree in the necessity for referring this.
vision to the Macedonian Empire. He compares this kingdom to a leopard, or, as
some translate, a panther, since Alexander obtained his great power through
swiftness alone; and although it is not by any means a striking animal, yet it
managed by its remarkable speed to subdue the whole east Others bring forward
many points of likeness, in which the Grecian character is in accordance with
the nature of the leopard. But I fear these minutiae have but little
weight: it is sufficient for me that the Spirit treats here of the Third empire.
It was not of any importance at first, and could neither terrify distant
regions, nor acquire subjects by its own worthiness. It then became like some
swift animal, if I may say so, since the swiftness of Alexander is notorious;
but he did not excel in either prudence, or gravity, or judgment, or in any
other virtues. Mere rashness seized upon him; and even if he had never tasted
wine, his ambition would have intoxicated him. Hence Alexander’s whole
life was drunken; there was neither moderation nor composure in him. We see,
then, how suitably this answers to the character of Alexander, although this is
also extended to his successors, all of whom partook largely of the nature of
their prince. Daniel says, therefore,
A beast appeared to him like a
leopard.
He also says,
It had four wings on its back,
and four heads. Some persons, as I think
perversely, distinguish between the wings and the heads. They suppose the
kingdom to be depicted as winged because Alexander seized upon manly kingdoms in
a short period; but the more simple sense is, this beast had four wings and four
heads, because Alexander had scarcely completed his victories when he died,
contrary to all expectation; and after his death, every one seized a portion of
the prey for himself. This, however, is certain: after the chief generals of his
army had contended for many years, all histories agree in stating that the
supreme power centered in four. For Seleucus obtained Asia Major, and Antigonus
Asia Minor, Cassander was king of Macedon, and was succeeded by Antipater, while
Ptolemy the son of Lagus became the ruler of Egypt They had agreed indeed
otherwise among themselves; for Alexander had a son by Roxana, first daughter of
Darius; he had a brother, Aridaeus, who grew up to manhood, but was epileptic
and of weak intellect. Then, since the generals of Alexander were cunning, they
acted on this pretext, that all should swear allegiance to their young ward, and
then to Aridaeus, in case their ward should die before he was of age.
F395
Then Lysimachus was set over the treasury, and another commanded the forces, and
others obtained various provinces. Fifteen or twenty leaders divided among
themselves both offices and power, while no one dared to assume the name of
king. For Alexander’s son was the lawful king, and his successor was that
Aridaeus of whom I have spoken. But they soon afterwards united; and that was an
admirable specimen of God’s Providence, which alone is sufficient to prove
that passage of Scripture He who sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood
be shed.
(<010906>Genesis
9:6.) For none of Alexander’s generals escaped in safety except those four
whom we have mentioned. His mother, at the age of eighty, suffered a violent
death; his wife, Roxana, was strangled; his son perished miserably; Aridaeus,
his brother, a man of no intellect, and almost on a level with the brutes, was
slain with the rest — in truth, the whole family of Alexander suffered
violent deaths. With respect to the generals, they perished in battles, some of
them being betrayed by their soldiers, and others the victims of their own
negligence; and yet, although they expected a sanguinary end, they did not
escape it. But four only survived, and so the whole empire of Alexander was
divided into four parts. For Seleucus, whose successor was Antiochus, obtained
Upper Asia, that is, four eastern empire; Antigonus, Asia Minor, with a part of
Cilicia, and Phrygia, and other neighboring regions; Ptolemy seized upon Egypt
and a part of Africa; Cassander and then Antipater were kings of Macedon. By
four
wings and
four
heads, Daniel means that partition which was
made immediately after the death of Alexander. Now, therefore, we understand
what God showed to his Prophet under this vision, when he set before him the
image of a leopard with four wings and heads.
He says,
Power was given to the
beast, because the success of Alexander the
Great was incredible. For who would have thought, ‘when he was crossing
the sea, that he would have conquered all Asia and the East? he led with him
50,000 men, and did not undertake the war on his own responsibility alone, but
by various arts, he procured the nomination to the leadership of Greece from the
Free States. Alexander was therefore, a kind of mercenary of the Greeks, and was
unable to lead with him more than 30,000 men, as we have said. he engaged in
battle with 150,000, then with 400,000, and then with almost a myriad. For
Darius in his last battle had collected above 800,000 men besides
camp-followers, so that there were almost a million with him. Alexander had
already drawn to himself some auxiliaries from the foreign nations whom he had
conquered; but he could not trust them: hence his whole strength lay in these
30,000, and on the day on which he conquered Darius, he was so overcome by sleep
that he could scarcely be aroused. The historians who extol his prudence, excuse
this by recording his sleeplessness during the preceding night; besides, all
agree in stating him to have been apparently dead, and when all his generals
approached they could scarcely wake him up, and then they purposely raised a
shout around his tent, though no one dared to enter. Alexander had scarcely
wiped his eyes, when Darius fled; hence the Prophet’s statement is true
— a beast’s power was given to him., since this happened beyond
every natural expectation and every human opinion, as by his aspect although he
could frighten all Greece, and lay prostrate so large an army. He states this of
the Third Empire. I will not repeat here all that can be said and can be
gathered from history; for many things must be put off till the eleventh
chapter. I will therefore briefly compress whatever points seem necessary for
the interpretation of the passage. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
7:7
|
|
7. After this I saw in the night visions, and
behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had
great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with
the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and
it had ten horns.
|
7. Postea, post hoc, vidi, hoc est, videbam,
in visionibus noctis; et ecce bestia quarta formidabilis, et metuenda,
f396
et fortis valde: et dentes ferri, hoc est, ferrei, illi magni: comedens et
conterens, et reliquum pedibus conculcans: et ipsa diversa erat ab omnibus
bestiis prioribus, et cornua decem illi.
|
There is greater difficulty in this Fourth Monarchy.
Those who are endued with moderate judgment, confess this vision to be fulfilled
in the Roman Empire; but they afterwards disagree, since what is here said of
the fourth beast many transfer to the Pope, when it is added a Little Horn
sprang up; but. others think the Turkish kingdom is comprehended under the
Roman. The Jews for the most part incline this way, and they are necessarily
compelled to do so, since Daniel will afterwards add — I saw the throne of
the Son of Man; since it is clear, from this prediction, that Christ’s
kingdom was erected by the overthrow of the Roman dominion, the Jews turn round,
and, as I have said, join the Turkish monarchy with the Roman, since they do,
not find their Christ according to their imagination. And there are some of our
writers who think this image ought not to be restricted to the Roman Empire, but
ought to include the Turkish. In nay view, there is nothing probable in that
opinion; I have no doubt that in this vision the Prophet was shown the figure of
the Roman Empire, and this will be more apparent as we go on.
He says a
fourth beast
appeared. He gives it no fixed name, because
nothing ever existed like it in the world. The Prophet, by adding no similitude,
signifies how horrible the monster was, for he formerly compared the Chaldean
Empire to a lion, the Persian to a bear, and the Macedonian to a leopard. In
these comparisons there was something natural; but when he descends to the
fourth beast, he says, it was
formidable in its aspect, and
terrible, and very brave or strong, and
without; any addition calls it “a beast.” We see then his wish to
express something prodigious by this fourth beast, as there is no animal so
fierce or cruel in the world which can in any way represent with sufficient
strength the nature of this beast.
Behold,
therefore, the fourth beast which
was formidable, and fearful, and very strong.
We know of no such Monarchy before this. Although Alexander subdued the whole of
the East, his victory, we are sure, was not stable. He was content with fame
alone; he, granted liberty to all people; and as long as they flattered him, he
sought nothing else. But we know the Romans. to have been masters even as far as
Babylon:; we know the following countries to have been subdued by them: Asia
Minor, Syria, Cilicia, Greece, and Macedon, both the Spains, Gaul, Illyricum,
and part of Germany. At length Britain was subjugated by Julius Caesar. No
wonder this beast is called formidable and very strong! For before Julius Caesar
became master of the Empire, the whole Mediterranean Sea was in all its parts
under subjection to the Roman Empire. Its amazing extent is well known. Egypt
had indeed its own kings, but they were tributary; whatever edicts the Romans
decreed, they were executed immediately in Egypt. Mirror sovereigns existed in
Asia Minor as a kind of spies, but this state of things we shall treat
presently. It is also well known that they possessed supreme power throughout
the Mediterranean Sea, and that by the conquest of Mithridates. Pompey reduced
Pontus under his dominion. In the East affairs were all at peace. The Medes and
Persians gave them some trouble, but they never moved unless they were provoked.
The Spains were not yet accustomed to the yoke, but we know that there were
always two praetors there. Julius Caesar was the first who entered Britain after
subduing Gaul. Hence we see how far and wide the Romans extended their power,
and with what immense cruelty. Hence Daniel calls this beast,
formidable and very
strong.
He afterwards adds,
It had large iron
teeth. This ought to be referred to its
audacity and insatiable greediness. We see how completely free their nation was
from the fear of death, for they were so hardened that if any one deserted his
rank for the sake of avoiding danger, he was afterwards branded with such marks
of infamy, that he was compelled either to strangle himself or to incur a
voluntary death! There was, then, a certain brutal cruelty in that nation, and
we also know how insatiable they were. For this reason Daniel says
they had large iron
teeth. He adds,
it consumed, and broke to pieces,
and trod the remnant under foot. These things
are spoken allegorically, not only because this vision was offered to the holy
Prophet, but also because God wished to paint a kind of living image, in which
he might show the peculiar characters of each government. For we know how many
lands the Romans had consumed, and how they transferred to themselves the
luxuries of the whole world, and whatever was valuable and precious in Asia
Minor, and Greece, and Macedonia, as well as in all islands and in Asia Major
— all was swept away — and even this was insufficient to satisfy
them! This, then, is the ravenousness of which the Prophet now speaks,
since they consumed, says he,
and rubbed to pieces with their teeth. He adds,
they trod the remnant under their
feet — a metaphor worthy of notice, as we
know they were accustomed to distribute the prey which they could not carry with
them. They devoured and tore with their teeth the treasures and costly furniture
and everything else; for their supplies were provided by tributes which produced
large sums of money. If there was any portion of the Mediterranean which they
could not defend without keeping a permanent garrison there, we know how they
engaged the services of tributary kings. Thus the kingdom of Eumenes increased
to a great extent till the time of his grandson Attalus, but they bestowed it
partly on the Rhodians, and partly on the Cyprians and others. They never
remunerated those Allies who almost exhausted their own possessions in aiding
them, out of their own resources, but enriched them with the spoils of others;
and they not only seized upon the property of one city and bestowed it on
another, but they set up their lands for sale. Thus, the liberty of the
Lacedaemonians was betrayed to the tyrant Nabis. They also enriched Masinissa
with so much wealth, that they acquired Africa for themselves by his means. In
fine, they so sported with kingdoms in seizing and giving them away, that they
rendered provinces tranquil by the wealth and at the expense of others. This was
remarkably conspicuous in the case of Judea, where they created out of nothing
Ethnarchs and Tetrarchs and kings, who were nothing but their satellites —
and that too but for a moment. For as soon as any change occurred, they
retracted what they had given as easily as they bestowed it. Hence, this their
cunning liberality is called treading under foot; for that remnant which they
could not devour and consume with their teeth
they trod under
foot, as they kept all those whom they had
either enriched or increased subject to themselves. Thus we see with what
servility they were flattered by those who had obtained anything through their
generosity. And how degrading was the slavery of Greece from the time the Romans
entered the country! for as each state acquired any new territory, it erected a
temple to the Romans. They also sent their ambassadors there to act as spies,
who, under the pretense of punishing the neighboring people for ‘plotting
against them, enriched themselves by plunder. Thus the Romans held under their
feet whatever they had given. to others. We see then how suitably and properly
the Prophet speaks, when he says, the Romans trod down the remnant; for whatever
they could not consume, and what their voraciousness could not devour,
they trod under their
feet.
He adds afterwards,
And this beast different from all
the former ones, and had ten horns. When he
says, this beast was different
from the rest, he confirms what we formerly
said, namely, this was a horrible prodigy, and nothing could be compared to it
in the nature of things. And surely if any one attentively and prudently
considers the origin of the Romans, he would be astonished at their remarkable
progress to such great power; for it was an unusual monster, and nothing like it
had ever appeared. Interpreters treat in various ways what the Prophet subjoins
respecting the ten
horns. I follow simple and genuine opinion,
namely, the Prophet means this Empire to belong to more persons them one For the
angel will afterwards assert the ten horns to be kings; not that so many kings
ruled at Rome, according to the foolish dream of the Jews, who are ignorant of
all things; but the Prophet here distinguishes the Fourth Monarchy from the
rest, as if he had said it should be a popular government, not presided over by
one king, but divided into really heads. For they even divided provinces among
themselves, and made treaties with each other, so that one was governor of
Macedonia, another of Cilicia, and another of Syria. Thus we see how numerous
the kingdoms were. And with regard to the number ten, we know this to be a
frequent and usual form of speech in Scripture, where ten signifies many. When
plurality is denoted, the number ten is used. Thus when the Prophet states the
fourth beast to have ten horns, he means, there were many provinces so divided,
that each ruler, whether proconsul or praetor, was like a king. For the supreme
power was given to them, while the city and Italy were given up to the consuls.
The consul could indeed write to the provinces and command whatever he pleased;
then he could elevate to honor whom he pleased for the sake of favor and
friendship; but each of the praetors and proconsuls when he obtained a province,
became a kind of king, since he exercised the supreme power of life and death
over all his subjects. We need not be too anxious about the number, as we have
already explained it. Those who reckon the Roman provinces make great mistakes;
they omit the principal one; they make only one of Spain, and. yet we know there
were two. They do not divide Gaul, yet there were always two proconsuls there,
except under Julius Caesar, who obtained the control of both Gauls. So also they
speak of Greece, and yet, neither a proconsul nor s praetor was ever sent into
Greece. Finally, the prophet simply means that the Roman Empire was complex,
being divided into many provinces, and these provinces were governed by leaders
of great weight at Rome, whose authority and rank were superior to others.
Proconsuls and proctors obtained the provinces by lot, but favor frequently
prevailed, as the histories of those times sufficiently assure us. Let. us
proceed, —
|
DANIEL
7:8
|
|
8. I considered the horns, and, behold, there
came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the
first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like
the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
|
8. Intelligebam
f397
ad cornua: et ecce cornu aliud parvum exortum fuit inter alia: et tria ex
cornibus prioribus ablata sunt e facie ejus: et ecce oculi quasi oculi hominis
in cornua illo, et os loquens grandia.
|
Daniel proceeds with his description of the fourth
beast. First, he says, he was
attentive, with the intention of rousing us to
serious meditation. For what is said of the fourth beast, was remarkably
memorable and worthy of notice. This, then, is the reason why God struck the
heart of his servant with wonder. For the Prophet would not have given his
attention to the consideration of the fourth beast, unless he had been impelled
to it by the secret instinct of God. The Prophet’s attention, then, sprang
from a heavenly impulse. Wherefore it is our duty not to read carelessly what is
here written, but to weigh seriously and with the greatest diligence what the
Spirit intends by this vision. I
was attentive, therefore, says
he, to the horns, and behold one
small one arose among them. Here interpreters
begin to vary; some twist this to mean the Pope, and others the Turk; but
neither opinion seems to me probable; they are both wrong, since they think the
whole course of Christ’s kingdom is here described, while God wished only
to declare to his Prophet what should happen up to the first advent of Christ.
This, then, is the error of all those who wish to embrace under this vision the
perpetual state of the Church up to the end of the world. But the Holy
Spirit’s intention was completely different. We explained at the beginning
why this vision appeared to the Prophet — because the minds of the pious
would constantly fail them in the dreadful convulsions which were at hand, when
they saw the supreme dominion pass over to the Persians. And then the
Macedonians broke in upon them, and acquired authority throughout; the whole of
the East, and afterwards those robbers who made war under Alexander suddenly
became kings, partly by cruelty and partly by fraud and perfidy, which created
more strife than outward hostility. And when the faithful saw all those
monarchies perish, and the Roman Empire spring up like a new prodigy, they would
lose their courage in such confused and turbulent changes. Thus this vision was
presented to the Prophet, that all the children of God might understand what
severe trials awaited them before the advent of Christ. Daniel, then, does not
proceed beyond the promised redemption, and does not embrace, as I have said,
the whole kingdom, of Christ, but is content to bring the faithful to that
exhibition of grace which they hoped and longed for.
It is sufficiently clear, therefore, that this
exhibition ought to be referred to the first advent of Christ. I have no doubt
that the little
horn relates to Julius Caesar and the other
Caesars who succeeded him, namely, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero,
and others. Although, as we said before, the counsel of the Holy Spirit must be
attended to, which leads the faithful forwards to the beginning of the reign of
Christ, that is, to the preaching of the Gospel, which was commenced under
Claudius, Nero, and their successors. He calls it a
little
horn, because Caesar did not assume the name of
king; but when Pompey and the greater part of the senate were conquered, he
could not enjoy his victory without assuming to himself supreme power. Hence he
made himself tribune of the people and their dictator. Meanwhile, there were
always Consuls; there was always some shadow of a Republic, while they daily
consulted the senate and sat in his seat while the consuls were at the
tribunals. Octavius followed the same practice, and afterwards Tiberius also.
For none of the Caesars:. unless he was consul, dared to ascend the tribunal;
each had his own seat, although from that place he commanded all others. It is
not surprising, then, if Daniel calls the monarchy of Julius and the other
Caesars a little
horn, its splendor and dignity were not great
enough to eclipse the majesty of the senate; for while the senate retained the
name and form of honor, it is sufficiently known that one man alone possessed
the supreme power. He says, therefore,
this little horn was raised
among the ten others. I must defer the
explanation of what follows, viz.,
three of these ten were taken
away.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou hast
formerly admonished thy servants, that thy children, while they are pilgrims in
this world, must be familiar with horrible and cruel beasts, if the same thing
should happen to us, that we may be prepared for all contests. May we endure and
overcome all temptations, and may we never doubt thy desire to defend us by thy
protection and power, according to thy promise. May we proceed through the midst
of numberless dangers, until after accomplishing the course of our warfare, we
at length arrive at that happy rest which is laid up for us in heaven by Christ
our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-FOURTH.
Three things remain to be explained by us in
expounding the Fourth Beast. First of all,
Three horns were taken away from
its face; Secondly,
The little
horn, which rose among the ten,
appeared with human
eyes; Thirdly,
It spoke
magnificently, or uttered swelling words. With
regard to the three horns, it is sufficiently evident from the testimony of the
angel that they were three kings; not because this ought to be referred to
persons, as I yesterday disproved, but because the Romans were accustomed to
send to each province, rulers like kings who there exercised the supreme
authority. Those who extend this prophecy to the end of Christ’s Kingdom,
think that a dispersion which happened about three or five hundred years after
the death of Christ is intended; but they are greatly mistaken. Clearly enough
the whole strength of the Roman Empire was exhausted and the provinces gradually
cut off, till it became a kind of mutilated body; but we yesterday showed the
incorrectness of any explanation of this oracle, except concerning the state of
the Church at the first Advent of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel. At
that time, it is well known, nothing had been subtracted from the boundaries of
the Empire. For Julius Caesar was formidable not only to the Gauls, but also to
the Germans; and besides this, the affairs of the East were at peace. After his
death, although Octavius or Augustus had suffered two very destructive
slaughters, especially under Quintilius Varus, who had been sent into Germany
with a powerful army, yet he also extended the boundaries of the Empire,
especially in the East. He also subdued the whole of Spain, where no commotion
afterwards took place. As, therefore, at that period no province had been cut
off from the Roman Empire, what is the meaning of the expression,
Three horns were cut off and
removed from the face of the beast? The
solution is not, difficult. Only let us observe how the little horn is compared
with the first stature of the beast. It first appeared with ten horns; when the
little horn arose its figure was changed. The Prophet then says — a part
of the horns was cut off, as the senate then ceased to create proconsuls. For we
know how Augustus assumed to himself certain provinces, and he did this for the
purpose of creating’ presidents at his own will, and of constituting a
strong force, ever at hand, should any one rebel against him. For he did not
care so much about provinces as about an army, should any tumult arise. He was
desirous, therefore, of throwing a bridle over them all, lest any one should
dare to attempt a revolution. Whatever was thus added to
the little horn
was taken from the ten horns, that is, from the
whole body, as the state of the monarchy was entirely changed. There is nothing
forced in this exposition. We must also contend for a definite or fixed number
being put for an uncertain one; as if the Prophet: had said — a part of
the power of the beast was abstracted after the rising’ of the little
horn. Thus much for the first clause.
He now adds,
The eyes in this small horn were
like those of men; and then,
it spoke mighty
things, With respect to the eyes, this
expression implies — the form of a human body was exhibited, because, the
Caesars did not abolish the senate nor change at once the whole form of the
government; but, as we yesterday said, they were content with power; and as to
splendor, titles, and pomp, they readily left these to the consuls and the
senate. If any one considers the manner in which those Caesars, who are
doubtless intended by the little horn, conducted themselves, their
conduct will appear like a human figure. For Julius Caesar pretended, although
he was dictator, to obey the senate’s authority, and the consuls asked the
opinion of the senators, after the ancient manner. He sat in the midst, and
permitted many things to be decreed without interposing his will. Augustus also
abused the shadow of the tribunitial power only for the purpose of ruling the
Empire. Thus he submitted to the consuls; and when he wished to be elected to
that office, he became a candidate with the other competitors, and put on the
white robe like a private citizen. Tiberius also was a great pretender, and
while plotting schemes of tyranny, was neither open nor ingenuous in his plans.
So also the eyes of a man
appeared in the little horn, that is, after
this change took place and the senate and people were deprived of their liberty.
He who held the government of the republic was not formidable, as an entire
beast, but was like a private man as to outward form.
The Prophet adds,
The small horn had a loud
sounding mouth. For although, with the
view of conciliating favor, the Caesars conducted themselves like men, we know
how atrociously they threatened their enemies, and how imperiously they either
hindered or committed whatever they lusted, as it seemed good to them. There
was, then, a great difference between their mouth and their eyes. For, as we
already said, the splendor and dignity of the empire was in the power of the
consuls and senate at the beginning. Meanwhile, by insidious arts, the Caesars
drew towards themselves the whole power, till no one dared to do anything,
except at their bidding. Many interpreters explain this as blasphemy against
God, and impiety; and the angel will touch upon this point at the close of the
chapter. But; if we weigh the whole expression judiciously, what I say will
appear correct, and the loud speaking here mentioned by the Prophet will
signify, that pride with which the Caesars’, were puffed up, imposing
silence on all men and allowing no one to open their mouths contrary to their
will. The Prophet’s words are very well explained by this fact;
for the three horns being removed
from the ten, means some part of the empire was
separated from the main body; then,
the small horn being endued with
human eyes, implies a kind of modesty, as the
Caesars acted like private persons, and left outward show with the senate and
people; and thirdly, when the
mouth of the little horn spoke swellingly,
trepidation seized upon all the Romans, and especially whoever enjoyed any
reputation, hung upon the nod of the Caesars, who imposed the vilest slavery,
and received the foulest and most shameful flattery from the whole senate. It
now follows, —
|
DANIEL
7:9
|
|
9. I beheld till the thrones were cast down,
and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair
of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his
wheels as burning fire.
|
9. Videbam usque dum throni erecti sunt,
f398
et Antiquus, senex, dierum sedit: vestimentum ejus quasi nix candidum et
capillis captias ejus lana munda, solium ejus scintillae ignis, rotae ejus ignis
ardens.
|
Daniel now relates how he saw another figure, namely,
God sitting on his throne to exercise judgment. We shall see it afterwards
concerning Christ, but Daniel now teaches only the appearance of God in his
character of a judge. This was the reason why many persons extend this prophecy
to the second Advent of Christ — an interpretation by no means correct, as
I shall show more copiously in the proper place. But first it is worth while to
consider here, why he says — the Ancient of days, meaning the eternal
Deity himself, ascended the throne judgment. This scene seems unnecessary,
because it is the peculiar office of God to govern the world; and as we know
this cannot be done without upright judgment, it follows that God has been a
perpetual judge from the creation of the world. Now, even a moderate
acquaintance with the Scriptures shows how well this passage. suits us by
appealing to. our senses; for unless God’s power is made conspicuous, we
think it either abolished or interrupted. Hence those forms of expression which
occur elsewhere; as, “How long art thou silent, O Lord; and how long wilt
thou cease from us?”
(<191301>Psalm
13:1;
<190907>Psalm
9:7, and elsewhere,) and — God ascends his throne — for we should
not acknowledge him as a judge, unless he really and experimentally proved
himself such. This then is the reason why Daniel says God himself was seated in
judgment.
But before we proceed further, we must observe the
sense in which he says — thrones were either erected or east down —
for the word
µwr,
rum can be taken in either sense. Those who translate it, “Thrones
were removed,” interpret it. of the Four monarchies already mentioned.
But; for my part, I rather incline to a different opinion. If any one prefers
explaining’ it of these Monarchies, I do not contend with him, for that;
sense is probable; and as far as the pith of the matter is concerned, there is
not much difference. But I think the thrones or seats are here proceed to
exhibit; the divine judgment, because the Prophet will immediately’
represent myriads of angels standing before God. We know’ how often angels
are adorned with this title as if they were, assessors of Deity; and the form of
speech which Daniel uses. when he says, “The judgment was set,” will
also agree with this. He speaks here of assessors with the judge, as if God did
not sit alone, but had councilors joined with him. In my opinion the most
suitable explanation is, — thrones were created for the Almighty to sit on
with his councilors; not implying his need of any council, but. of his own
goodwill and mere favor he dignifies angels with this honor, as we shall see
immediately. Daniel therefore describes, after our human fashion, the
preparations for judgment; just as if any king should go publicly forth for the
purpose of transacting any business of moment, and should ascend his tribunal.
Councilors and nobles would sit around him on both sides, not partaking of his
power, but rather increasing the splendor of his appearance. For if the king
alone should occupy the whole place, the dignity would not be so magnificent as
when his nobles, who depend upon him, are present on all sides, because they far
surpass the ordinary multitude. Daniel, therefore, relates the vision presented
to him in this form; first, ‘because he was a man dwelling in the flesh;
and next, he did not see it for himself personally, but for the common benefit
of the whole Church. Thus God wished to exhibit a representation which might
infuse into the Prophet’s mind and into those of all the pious, a feeling
of admiration, and yet might have something in common with human proceedings.
Thrones,
therefore, he says, were
erected;
afterwards, the Ancient of days
was seated. I have already expounded how God
then began to seat himself, as he had previously appeared to be passive, and not
to exercise justice in the world. For when things are disturbed and mingled with
much darkness, who can say, “God reigns?” God seems to be shut up in
heaven, when things are discomposed and turbulent upon earth. On the other hand,
he is said to ascend his tribunal when he assumes to himself the office of a
judge, and openly demonstrates that he is neither asleep nor absent, although he
lies hid from human perception.
This form of speech was very appropriate for denoting
the coming of Christ. For God then chiefly displayed his supreme power, as Paul
quotes a passage from the Psalms,
(<196808>Psalm
68:8, in
<490408>Ephesians
4:8,) “Thou hast ascended on high.” When the subject treated is the
first coming of Christ, it ought not to be restricted to the thirty-three years
of his sojourn in the world, but it embraces his ascension, and that preaching
of the gospel which ushered in his kingdom;-this will be said again more clearly
and copiously. Daniel appropriately relates how God was seated when the first
advent of Christ is depicted, since the majesty of God shone in the person of
Christ; for which reason he is called
“The invisible
image of God and the character of his glory,”
(<580103>Hebrews
1:3;)
that is, of the substance or person of the Father.
God therefore, who had seemed for so many ages not to notice the world nor to
care for his elect people, ascended his tribunal at the advent of Christ. To
this subject the Psalms, from the 95th to the 100th, all relate —
“God reigns, let the earth rejoice;” “God reigns, let the
islands be afraid.” In truth, God had not dwelt in complete privacy before
Christ’s advent; but. the empire which he had erected was hidden and
unseen, until he showed forth his glory in the person of his only begotten Son.
The Ancient of
days, therefore,
was
seated.
He now says,
His raiment was white like snow
the hair of his head was like pure wool. God
here shows himself to his Prophet in the form of man. We know how impossible it
is for us to behold God as he really exists, till we ourselves become like Him,
as John says in his canonical epistle.
(<620302>1
John 3:2.) As our capacity cannot endure the fullness of that surpassing glory
which essentially belongs to God, whenever he appears to us, he must necessarily
put on a form adapted to our comprehension. God, therefore, was never seen by
the fathers in his own natural perfection; but as far as their capacities
allowed, he afforded them a taste of his presence for the sure acknowledgment of
his Deity; and yet they comprehended him as far as it was useful for them and
they were able to bear it. This is the reason why God appeared
with a white
garment, which is characteristic of heaven; and
with snowy
hair, like white and clean wool. To the same
purpose is the following: His
throne was like sparks of fire, that is, like
glowing fire; his wheels were
like burning fire. God in reality neither
occupies any throne, nor is carried on wheels; but, as I already said, we ought
not to imagine God in his essence to be like any appearance, to his own Prophet
and other holy fathers, but he put on various appearances, according to
man’s comprehension, to whom he wished to give some signs of his presence.
I need not dwell longer on these forms of speech, though subtle allegories are
pleasing to many. I am satisfied with holding what is solid and sure. It now
follows: —
|
DANIEL
7:10
|
|
10. A fiery stream issued and came forth from
before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten
thousand stood before him: The judgment was set, and the books were
opened.
|
10. Fluvius
f399
ignis fluebat, et exibat a praesentia ejus, vel a conspectu: millia millium
f400
ministrabant ei: et decies millia millium
f401
coram ipso stabant: judicium sedit, et libri aperti sunt.
|
Daniel proceeds with what he commenced in the former
verse. He says a splendor or stream of fire; for
rhn,
neher, may be used in both senses, since
rhn,
neher, signifies both “to flow” and “to shine.”
Yet, since he previously spoke of splendor, the word “stream” will
suit the passage very well; for a fiery stream issued from the presence of God,
which both inundated and burnt up the land. Without doubt God wished to inspire
his Prophet with fear for the purpose of arousing him the better, as we never
sufficiently comprehend his majesty unless when humbled; and we cannot
experience this humility without fear. This is the reason why God always shows
something terrible when he appears to his servants, not merely to create
astonishment, but to excite their fear and reverence. Hence God seems to have
considered this point in this vision, when the stream took its rise from his
appearance, even a river of flame. Afterwards he adds, numberless attendants
stood before him. Without the slightest doubt, the Prophet here speaks of
angels. he says there were thousands of thousands, or ten times a hundred
thousand; and again, ten thousand times ten thousand, that is, ten thousand
myriads. Here the numbers are not reckoned, but God signifies his having at hand
the greatest forces obedient to his will, and far surpassing any armies which
the greatest; and most powerful princes collect. This passage teaches us that
angels were created for the purpose of receiving and executing the commands of
God, and of being the ministers of God, as it were his hands in heaven and in
earth. As regards numbers, no wonder many myriads are enumerated by the Prophet.
Christ said,
“Can I not ask the
Father and he will send a
legion?”
(<402653>Matthew
26:53.)
So, in this passage, Daniel says there were
numberless angels under God’s hand, and there was no need of collecting
armies after the manner of princes, since they are always present and intent on
obedience. Thus they immediately fulfill all his commands, as angels run swiftly
throughout heaven and earth. We also perceive the supreme power of the Almighty
denoted here, as if the Prophet had said — God is not like a king or a
judge merely by title, but he possesses the greatest and most unlimited power;
he has myriads of satellites ever at hand for the purpose of fulfilling and
executing his supreme will. And in this sense he says,
they stood before
him. He uses the word for ministry or service,
and afterwards, adds, to stand. For ministers cannot always render their
service as quickly as their rulers desire. But the angelic method is different.
Not only were they prepared to obey, but in a moment they understand what God
wishes and commands without needing time for compliance. We see even the
greatest princes cannot immediately carry out their decrees, because their
ministers are not always at hand. But there is no necessity for dwelling longer
upon angels. Daniel adds, The judgment was fixed, and the books were opened.
Although God alone is eminent and conspicuous above the angels, and the height
of their glory and dignity does not obscure the supreme empire of the Almighty,
yet, as we have formerly said, he deems them worthy of the honor of being placed
as councilors on each side of him, and that for the sake of illustrating his own
majesty. For we have stated that nobles do not sit at the side of monarchs to
diminish his majesty or to attract it to themselves, but rather to reflect the
magnitude and power of the monarch more fully. This is the reason why the
Prophet joins angels with God, not as allies, but simply as his
councilors.
I refer the phrase, the books were opened, to the
preaching of the gospel. Although God was recognized in Judea, as it is said in
the 76th Psalm,
(<197602>Psalm
76:2,) yet this acknowledgment was but slight and involved in many figures. God
was revealed through enigmas until Christ’s coming; but then he manifested
himself truly, just like opening books previously shut. There is therefore a
contrast to be observed here between that obscure season which preceded the
coming of Christ, and the clearness which now shines under the gospel. Because,
therefore, God was plainly made known after the Sun of righteousness arose,
according to the Prophet Malachi,
(<390402>Malachi
4:2,) this is the reason why the books are now said to have been opened at that
season. Meanwhile, we confess that God was not altogether hidden, nor did he
speak from astonishment, but this is said comparatively by the Prophet, as the
books were opened whenever God openly appeared as the Judge, Father, and
Preserver of the world, in the person of his only begotten Son. It afterwards
follows: —
|
DANIEL
7:11
|
|
11. I beheld then, because of the voice of the
great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and
his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
|
11. Videbam tunc, propter vocem
f402
sermonum grandium quos cornu proferebat, videbam usque dum occisa fuit bestia,
et abolitum corpus ejus, et data fuit incendio ignis.
|
Since the presumptuous speaking of the little horn
terrified the Prophet, he now says he was
attentive in considering this
portion. He next says,
The beast was slain, and his body
was consumed by the burning of fire. This ought
clearly to be referred to the end of the Roman empire. For, from the time when
foreigners obtained the mastery, the fourth beast ceased to flourish. The name
was always retained, yet with great mockery of that ancient monarchy. I now omit
all mention of Caligula, Nero, Domitian, and similar monsters. But when
Spaniards and Africans acquired the absolute sway, can we call Rome any longer
the mistress of the world? Surely this would be foolish indeed! To this very day
the Germans also say they possess the Roman empire; but while the title of
empire has passed to the Germans, clearly enough Rome is at this very day in
slavery. For as to the Pope having erected his own throne there, this empire is
unworthy of the name of monarchy; but whatever be our view of this point, for
about 1500 years the Romans have been in bondage as slaves to foreign princes.
For, after the death of Nero:, Trajan was his successor, and from that time
scarcely a single Roman obtained the empire; and God branded it with the, most
disgraceful marks of ignominy, when a swine-herd was created emperor, and that
too by the lust of the soldiery! The senate retained its name till then; But. if
it pleased the soldiers to create any one a Caesar, the senate was immediately
compelled to submit to their dictation. Thus, the Prophet with great propriety
says, The beast was
slain shortly after the promulgation of the
gospel. Then the presumptuous speaking of
the little
horn was at an end, and
the fourth
beast was extinct about the same time. For then
no Roman became an Emperor who claimed for himself any share of power; but Rome
itself fell into disgraceful slavery, and not only foreigners reigned there most
shamefully, but even barbarians, swine-herds, and cow-herds! All this occurred
in fulfillment of what God had shown to his Prophet, namely, after the coming of
Christ and the opening of the books, that is — after the knowledge which
shone upon the world through the preaching of the gospel — the destruction
of that fourth beast and of the Roman empire was close at hand.
PRAYER
Grant, Almighty God, whatever
revolutions happen daily in the world, that we may always be intent on the sight
of thy glory, once manifested to us in thy Son. May the splendor of thy majesty
illuminate our hearts, and may we pass beyond the visible heavens, the sun, the
moon, and every shining thing; and may we behold the blessedness of thy kingdom,
which thou proposest to us in the light of thy Gospel. May we walk through the
midst of the darkness and afflictions of the world, content with that light by
which thou invitest us to the hope of the eternal inheritance which thou hast
promised us, and acquired for us by the blood of thine only begotten Son.
— Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-FIVE
|
DANIEL
7:12
|
|
12. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they
had their dominion taken away: yet. their lives were prolonged for a season and
time.
|
12. Et reliquis bestiis abstulerant
potestatum, vel dominationem. Et longitudo in vita data illis fuerat usque ad
tempus at tempus.
|
Without doubt the Prophet refers to what ought to
come first in order, as the empires of which he is speaking were extinct before
the Roman. Hence these verbs ought to be taken in the pluperfect tense, because
the power had been already removed from the other three beasts. For the Hebrews
were, accustomed to repeat afterwards anything which had been omitted, and they
do not always observe the order of time in their narratives. Thus, after he had
said the fourth beast was slain and consumed by burning, he now adds what he had
omitted concerning the remaining three, namely,
their dominion had been take,
from them. He adds also what is worthy of
notice,
Length,
or continuance, in life was
granted to them even for a time and a time.
There are two different words used here, but
they signify one and the same thing, namely, a convenient time. Here the Prophet
understands how nothing happens accidentally, but all things are carried on in
the world in their own time, as God has decreed them in heaven. Perhaps when the
subject-matter of the discourse is
length of
life, it signifies the protracted period of
these afflictions, as they should not pass away suddenly like clouds. Not. only
severe but lengthened trials are said to await the faithful, which must afflict
their minds with weariness, unless the hope of a better issue propped them up.
Thus, the Holy Spirit predicts how God would at length deliver his Church when
he had exercised its patience for a length of time. From
the rest of the beasts power
was taken away. The copula in the word
hkra,
ve-arkeh, “and length,” may be resolved in this way —
“because length in life;” as if he had said, The trials by which the
sons of God were to be oppressed should not be perpetual, because God had
prescribed and defined a fixed
period. A
continuance, therefore,
in life was granted to
them, namely,
for a time and a
time. The copula may be treated as “an
adversative particle” as if he had said, “although a
continuance,” that is, although the people should not immediately escape
from those sorrowful cares which oppressed them, yet God’s opportunity
would at length arrive, that is, the time at which it pleased God to redeem his
own Church. But the former exposition seems more genuine and more consistent,
because length of time has its own limits and boundaries. There is also a
contrast between, the words
hkra,
arkeh, “length,” and
ˆmz,
zemen, “time,” and
ˆd[,
gneden, “time,” because length or “prolonging”
has reference to our perceptions; for when we are suffering pain, the greatest
speed seems delay. Thus, any one in anxiety for an improved state of things
counts every moment, and is so flagrant in his desires as to call the Almighty
in question for any delay. As, then, the impatience of men is so great, when
they are expecting with anxiety this freedom from adversity, the Prophet says,
in the ordinary acceptation of the phrase,
length of time was granted to the
beasts; but he opposes a fit time; as if he had
said — They act preposterously who thus indulge their own passions. Since
God has fixed his own time, they require patience, and need not reckon the
years; but this one thing must be concluded, when the Lord pleases he will not
delay his help. This, therefore, is the full sense of the verse. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
7:13
|
|
13. I saw in the night-visions, and, behold,
one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient
of days, and they brought him near before him.
|
13. Videbam in visionibus noctis: et ecce in
nubibus
f403
coeli, vel coelorum, tanquam Filius hominus veniebat, et usque ad Antiquum
dierum venit, et coram eo repraesentarunt.
f404
|
After Daniel has narrated how he saw God on the
throne of judgment, openly exercising his power and laying open to the world
what was formerly hidden from it, namely, his supreme authority in its
government, he now adds the second part of the vision,
As it were the Son of man
appeared in the clouds. Without doubt this is
to be understood of Christ, and the Jews, perverse as they are, are ashamed to
deny it, although they differ afterwards about Christ. But the object of the
vision was to enable the faithful certainly to expect the promised Redeemer in
his own time. He had been endued with heavenly power, and was seated at his
Father’s right hand. Hence Daniel says,
He was intent on these nightly
visions. And this repetition is by no means
superfluous, as it informs us of the Prophet’s alertness when God shews
himself present. Daniel expresses this fully in his own words, for he roused
himself when he perceived important, and rare, and singular matters set before
him. This attentive disposition of the Prophet ought to stir us up to read his
prophecy without listlessness, and with awakened minds earnestly to derive from
heaven true and sincere intelligence.
I
was, then, says he,
attentive in visions of the
night, and beheld as it were the Son of man. I
have already said this passage cannot be otherwise taken than concerning Christ.
We must now see why he uses the word “like” the Son of man; that is,
why he uses the letter
k,
ke, the mark for likeness. This might be twisted in favor of the folly of
the Manichees, who thought Christ’s body to be only imaginary. For, as
they wrest the words of Paul, and pervert their sense, that Christ was in
likeness as a man,
(<502007>Philippians
2:7.) so also they may abuse the Prophet’s testimony, when Christ is not
said to be a man but only like one. With respect to Paul’s words, he is
not speaking of the essence of his human nature, but only of his state; for he
is speaking of Christ being made man, of his condition being humble and abject,
and even servile. But in the passage before us the reason is different. For the
Prophet says, He
appeared to him as the
Son of
man, as Christ had not yet taken upon him our
flesh. And we must remark that saying of Paul’s: When the fullness of time
was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman.
(<480404>Galatians
4:4.) Christ then began to be a man when he appeared on earth as Mediator, for
he had not assumed the seed of Abraham before he was joined with us in brotherly
union. This is the reason why the Prophet does not pronounce Christ to have been
man at this period, but only like man; for otherwise he had not been that
Messiah formerly promised under the Law as the son of Abraham and David. For if
from the beginning he had put on human flesh, he would not have been born of
these progenitors. It follows, then, that Christ was not a man from the
beginning, but only appeared so in a figure. As also Irenaeus
f405
says: This was a “prelude,” he uses that word. Tertullian also says:
“Then the Son of God put on a specimen of humanity.”
f406
This was a symbol, therefore, of Christ’s future flesh, although that
flesh did not yet exist. We now see how suitably this figure agrees with the
thing signified, wherein Christ was set forth as the Son of man, although he was
then the eternal Word of God.
It afterwards follows,
.He came to the Ancient of
days. This, in my judgment, ought to be
explained of Christ’s ascension; for he then commenced his reign, as we
see in numberless passages of Scripture. Nor is this passage contrary to what
the Prophet had previously said — he saw the Son of man in the clouds. For
by this expression he simply wishes to teach how Christ, although like a man,
yet differed from the whole human race, and was not of the common order of men;
but excelled the whole world in dignity. He expresses much more when he says, in
the second clause, He came even
unto the Ancient of days. For although
the Divine Majesty lay hid in Christ, yet he discharged the duty of a slave, and
emptied himself, as Paul says,
(<502007>Philippians
2:7.) So also we read in the first chapter of John,
(<430114>John
1:14,) Glory appeared in him as of the only begotten Son of God; that is, which
belongs to the only begotten Son of God. Christ, therefore, thus put off his
glory for the time, and yet by His miracles and many other proofs afforded a
clear and evident; specimen of his celestial glory. He really appeared to Daniel
in the clouds, but when he ascended to heaven, he then put off this mortal body,
and put on a new life. Thus Paul also, in the sixth chapter to the Romans, says,
he lives the life of God,
(<450610>Romans
6:10;) and other phrases often used by our Lord himself agree very well with
this, especially in the Evangelist John, “I go to the Father.”
“It is expedient for me to go to the Father, for the Father is greater
than I,”
(<431607>John
16:7;
<431428>John
14:28;) that is, it is expedient for me to ascend to that royal tribunal which
the Father has erected for me by his eternal counsel, and thus the whole world
will feel the supreme power to have been entrusted to. me. Now, therefore, we
understand the full meaning of the Prophet’s words.
But as there are many fanatics who wrest what has
been said of the person of the Mediator, as if Christ were not the true God, but
had a beginning from the Father at some definite period of time, we must observe
how the Prophet’s expression are neither the human nor the divine nature
of Christ properly speaking, but a Mediator is here set before us who is God
manifest in flesh. For if we hold this principle that Christ is described to us,
not as either the word of God, or the seed of Abraham, but as Mediator, that is,
eternal God who was willing to become man, to become subject to God the Father,
to be made like us, and to be our advocate, then no difficulty will remain. Thus
he appeared to Daniel like the Son of man, who became afterwards truly and
really so. He was in the clouds, that is, separated from the common lot of
mankind, as he always carried with him some marks of deity, even in his
humility. He now arrives as the
Ancient of days, that is, when he ascends to
heaven, because his divine majesty was then revealed. And hence he says, It is
expedient for you, for me to go to the Father, because the Father is greater
than I.
(<431428>John
14:28.) Christ here detracts nothing from his deity, but as his nature was not
known in the world, while his divine majesty lay hid in the form of a servant,
he calls the Father simply God; as if he had said, If I remain with you upon
earth, what would the presence of my flesh profit you? But when I ascend to
heaven, then that oneness which I have with the Father will become conspicuous.
When, therefore, the world shall understand that I am one with the Father, and
that the Deity is one, the hope of all the pious will become more firm and
unconquered against all temptations; for they will know themselves to be equally
under the protection of both God and man. If, therefore, Christ were always
dwelling upon earth, and had borne witness a thousand times to his being given
to us by his Father as the guardian of our salvation, yet there always would
have been some hesitation and anxiety. But when we know him to be seated at his
Father’s right hand, we then understand him to be truly God, because all
knees would not. be bent before him, unless he had been the eternal God. We must
hold that passage of Isaiah,
(<234208>Isaiah
42:8,) As I live, saith the Lord, my glory I will not give to another. As,
therefore, God’s glory can never be transferred to either man or any other
creature, the true unity and nature of God necessarily shines forth in the human
nature of Christ, for every knee is bent before him. Now, therefore, we
understand the sense in which the Prophet says, Christ
came as the Son of
man, that is, like a man,
even to the Ancient of
days. For after Christ had passed
through the period of his self-abasement, according’ to Paul,
(<502007>Philippians
2:7,) he ascended into heaven, and a dominion was bestowed upon him, as the
Prophet says in the next verse. This passage, then, without the slightest doubt,
ought to be received of Christ’s ascension, after he had ceased being
mortal man. He says, He was
represented before God, namely, because he sits
at his right hand. It follows, —
|
DANIEL
7:14
|
|
14. And there was given him dominion, and
glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him:
his dominion is everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
that shall not be destroyed.
|
14. Et ei data fuit potrstas, et gloria, vel
decus, et regnum: et omnes, populi, nationes, et linguae ci servient: potestas
ejus potestas seculi, aeterna, quae non auferetur, et regnum ejus non
corrumpetur.
F407
|
The Prophet; confirms and explains more clearly in
this verse what he had said in the former one. For we may collect from it how
the personage previously mentioned arrived at the Ancient of days, who is God,
namely, because power was given
to him. For although Christ truly ascended into
heaven,
(<402818>Matthew
28:18,) yet we ought clearly to weigh the purpose of his doing’ so. It was
to acquire the supreme power in heaven and in earth, as he himself says. And
Paul also mentions this purpose in the first and second chapters of the
Ephesians.
(<490121>Ephesians
1:21;
<490207>Ephesians
2:7.) Christ left the world and ascended to the Father; first, to subdue all
powers to himself, and to render angels obedient; next, to restrain the devil,
and to protect and preserve the Church by his help, as well as all the elect of
God the Father. So, therefore, Daniel now proceeds with what he formerly said
concerning the approach of Christ to God. Thus the madness of those who argue
against Christ; being true and eternal God, because he is said to have come to
the Ancient of days, is refuted. First of all, as we have said, this is
understood of the person of the Mediator; next, all doubt is taken away when the
Prophet adds, Power was given
unto him. Behold, therefore, a certain
explanation. We will not say it was bestowed with relation to his being, and
being called God. It was given to him as Mediator, as God manifest in flesh, and
with respect to his human nature. We observe how well all these things agree,
when the Prophet here says, The
chief power was given to Christ. We must
hold therefore its reference to that manifestation, because Christ was from the
beginning the life of men, the world was created by him, and his energy always
sustained it,
(<430104>John
1:4;) but power was given to him to inform us how God reigned by means of his
hand. If we were required to seek God without a Mediator, his distance would be
far too great, but when a Mediator meets us, and offers himself to us in our
human nature, such is the nearness between God and us, that our faith easily
passes beyond the world and penetrates the very heavens. For this reason:.
therefore, All power, honor, and
kingdom was given to Christ. He adds
also, .All nations shall serve
him, that is:, they may serve him; for the
copula ought to be translated thus, —
That all nations, people, and
tongues should serve him. We have shewn how
this ought properly to be understood of the commencement of the reign of Christ,
and ought not to be connected with its final close, as many interpreters force
and strain the passage. Meanwhile we must add, that the events which the Prophet
here narrates are not yet complete; but this ought to be familiar to all the
pious, for whenever the kingdom of Christ is treated of, his glory magnificently
extolled, as if it were now absolutely complete in all its parts. It is not
surprising, if according to the frequent and perpetual usage of Scripture, the
Prophet should say power was
given to Christ, to subdue all people,
nations, and languages to himself, as it is said in
<19B001>Psalm
110:1, — Jehovah said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make
thy enemies the footstool of thy feet. We see, then, how Christ was raised to
his own empire to govern his Church in the name and with the power of his
Father, while at the same time many enemies rise up against him. Still the
obstinacy of the devil and of all impious men continues, although Christ governs
heaven and earth, and is the supreme king before whom every knee is bent. We
also know how marked the difference is between the beginning of his kingdom and
its final completion. Whatever the meaning, this vision suits very well with
many assertions of Christ, where he bears witness to the power given him by the
Father.
(<402818>Matthew
28:18, and elsewhere) He does not here speak of the last judgment, but is only
teaching us, the object of his ascension to heaven.
This view the Prophet confirms by saying,
his dominion is the dominion of
an age, which is mot taken away, and his kingdom can never be
corrupted or abolished. For by these words he
teaches familiarly and openly, why Christ is the Supreme King, namely, for the
perpetual government of his Church in this world. We ought to look up to heaven
in very deed whenever the state of the Church is under consideration, since its
happiness is neither earthly, nor perishable, nor temporary, though nothing
sublunary is either firm or perpetual. But when the Prophet says Christ’s
dominion is eternal, he doubtless signifies the constant endurance of his
monarchy, even to the end of the world, when he shall gather his people together
to a happy life and an eternal inheritance. Although, therefore, celestial
immortality is comprehended under these words, yet in a former passage the
Prophet pointed out the perpetual existence of the Church in this world, because
Christ will defend it, although daily subject to numberless causes of
destruction. And who would not assert the almost daily perishing of the Church,
if God did not wonderfully preserve it by the hand of his only begotten Son?
Hence it is correct to understand the phrase,
His kingdom shall be the kingdom
of an age. And thus we receive no common
consolation, when we see the Church tossed about amidst various fluctuations,
and almost buried and devoured by continual shipwrecks, yet Christ is ever
stretching forth his hand to preserve it, and to save it from every sorrowful
and horrible species of destruction. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
7:15-16
|
|
15. I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the
midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.
|
15. Succisus fuit spiritus meus mihi Danieli,
f408
in medio corporis,
f409
et visiones capitas mei terruerunt me.
|
|
16. I came near unto one of them that stood
by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the
interpretation of the things.
|
16. Accessi ad unum ex his qui aderant, et
sciscitatus sum ex eo veritatum super his omnibus: et dixit mihi, et
enarrationem sermonum patefecit mihi.
|
Daniel says, his spirit was either cut off or
vanished, as if he suffered some mental deficiency. In this way God wished to
communicate to his servant the magnitude of the vision. And he inspires us also
with reverence for this vision, lest we should treat it coldly and commonly. But
we ought to understand how God opens up to Daniel, his servant, and to us by his
assistance and ministry, these mysteries which meaning; be otherwise
comprehended by our human senses. For if Daniel, whom we know to have been a
remarkable Prophet, felt his spirit to be so deficient and nearly vanishing
away, surely we who as yet know so little of God’s mysteries, nay, who
have scarcely tasted their first rudiments, never can attain so great a height,
unless we overcome the world and shake off all human sensations. For these
things cannot be perceived by us unless our minds are clear and completely
purified.
He says, therefore, in the first place,
his spirit was cut
off, or vanished,
in the midst of his
body; as if he had said he was almost
lifeless and nearly dead. And he added, as reason,
the visions of his head had
frightened him. No one can faint away
— an event which sometimes happens — with-out a cause. When that
terror called a panic seizes upon some persons, we observe how they become
deprived of self-possession, and lie almost lifeless. But Daniel, to shew
himself separate from such persons, says
he was
frightened or disturbed
by visions of his
head; as if he had said, he was not disturbed
without occasion, but it was caused by the mystery of which the vision had been
offered to him. He came to one of
those standing by. He had said a short time
before, ten thousand times ten thousand were at the right hand of the tribunal
of God. Without the slightest doubt, the Prophet asked one of these angels. And
here we must notice his modesty and docility in flying to some instructor,
because he was conscious of his own ignorance and found no other remedy. At the
same time, we are taught by the Prophet’s example not to reject all
visions, but to seek their interpretation from God himself. Although God in
these days does not address us by visions, yet he wishes us to be content with
his Law and Gospel, while angels do not appear to us, and do not openly and
conspicuously descend from heaven; but, since Scripture is obscure to us,
through the darkness in which we are involved, let us learn not to reject
whatever surpasses our capacity, even when some dark veil envelops it, but let
us fly to the remedy which Daniel used, not to seek the understanding of
God’s word from angels, who do not appear to us, but from Christ himself,
who in these days teaches us familiarly by means of pastors and ministers of the
gospel. Now, as a supreme and only Master has been given us from the Father, so
also he exercises the office of teacher by his own ministers whom he set over
us.
(<402308>Matthew
23:8, 10.) Therefore, as Daniel approached the angel who was near him, so we are
daily commanded to approach those who have been entrusted with the gift of
interpretation and who can faithfully explain to us things otherwise obscure.
Our confidence, too, ought to be increased by what follows directly:
The angel spoke, and opened the
interpretation of the words. Daniel here shews
his modesty and humility not to have been in vain, as God commanded the angel to
explain all obscurities. So, without doubt, Christ will at this time satisfy our
prayers, if we are truly his disciples; that is, if, after those mysteries which
surpass and absorb all our senses have terrified us, we fly to that order which
he has prescribed for us, and seen from faithful ministers and teachers the
interpretation of those things which are difficult and obscure, and entirely
concealed from us.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since the faith of
the fathers was supported by obscure shadows, by which thou didst wish it to be
nourished, until thy Son was manifestly revealed to us in the flesh: Grant, I
pray thee, at this day, after he has appeared to us as the best and most perfect
teacher, and explained thy counsels to us similarly, that we may not be either
so dull or so careless as to allow the great clearness of the manifestation of
thyself offered us in the Gospel to escape from our grasp. May we be so directed
towards life eternal, until after the performance of our course in this present
life, and the removal of all obstacles which Satan places in our way, either to
delay us or turn us aside, we may at length arrive at the enjoyment of that
blessed life in which Christ., thine only begotten Son, has preceded us. May we
thus be co-heirs with him, and as thou hast appointed him sole inheritor, so may
he gather us unto the secure inheritance of a blessed immortality.
Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-SIXTH.
|
DANIEL
7:17-18
|
|
17. These great beasts, which are four, are
four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
|
17. Hae bestiae magnae quas vidisti quatuor,
sunt quatuor regna, quae exsurgent e terra.
|
|
18. But the saints of the most high shall take
the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever and ever.
|
18. Et sortientur, obtinebunt, regmu sancturum
excelsorum: et possidebunt regnum usque in seculum, et usque in secular
seculorum.
|
Here the angel answers Daniel concerning the four
beasts which had been shewn him in the vision. He says, therefore,
Four kingdoms
arose, and by the name kingdom he means
monarchy; for we know that the Persians had many kings until Alexander
transferred to himself the empire of the East. Although Cyrus had seven or eight
successors, yet the Persian empire continued through them all. And as we saw
before, although whatever Alexander had acquired by his arms was divided among
his four successors, yet it still remained the Macedonian kingdom. The same
thing must be said concerning the fourth kingdom. Although we know consuls to
have been created yearly at Rome, yet that government lasted till Julius Caesar
destroyed it, and consumed the strength of the empire, so as to surpass by his
power the splendid altitude which had been long and widely conspicuous in the
world. Hence the angel replied,
By the four beasts four
kingdoms are denoted: he says,
shall
arise; and yet the Chaldean had long ago
arisen, and was now verging under Belshazzar to its fall. But it was proposed by
the angel to teach the Prophet and all the people that there was no reason why
revolutions should disturb them too much. The Israelites then saw themselves
lying as if dead, yea, actually buried and concealed under the earth. For exile
was to them equivalent to the tomb. For this reason, then, the angel
announces the springing up of
four kingdoms, while the first was then
flourishing; but, as I have already said., this suits very well within the scope
and object of the prophecy. He had formerly said
from the
sea, but the word “sea” is
used metaphorically, since the condition of the earth was turbulent through many
ages. As, therefore, nothing was stable, God appropriately set forth the whole
world under the figure of the sea. He afterwards adds,
They will obtain the kingdom of
the holy lofty ones. Here interpreters
vary considerably, because, as I have before explained it, some take this
prophecy to relate to the kingdom of Turkey, others to the tyranny of the Pope
of Rome, and extend what the Prophet here says to the final judgment. There is
nothing surprising, then, in this diversity of opinion shewing itself more fully
in the various details. By sacred
holy ones some understand angels; but there is
still much controversy about the words, for the noun of
saints
is “in regimen,” as if the Prophet, had said saints of lofty ones,
properly speaking.
f410
Similar passages justify those who take it “in the absolute state.”
But if we follow the grammatical construction, we cannot explain it otherwise;
but the former noun may be put in a state of regimen, as we have said. And I
embrace this opinion. Some refer it to the one God, but. I think this a profane
way of expression. I have no doubt about the Prophet meaning sons of God by
sacred lofty
ones, because, though they are pilgrims
in the world: yet they raise their minds upwards, and know themselves to be.
citizens of the heavenly kingdom. Hence by the word
ˆynwyl[,
gnelionin, “lofty ones,” I have no doubt; the Prophet means
heavenly powers; that is, whatever we can conceive of divinity, and whatever is
exalted above the world. I will1 now give my reasons shortly why I like this
sense the best.
If we call the
holy lofty
ones God himself, what sense can we elicit from
the passage? Did the Chaldeans and the rest of the monarchies usurp and transfer
to themselves the power of God? There, is some truth in this, because all who
domineer without submitting to the one God despoil him of his peculiar honor,
and are rather robbers than kings. But the Prophet, in my opinion, understood
something else from the angel, namely, that the Church should lose all form and
dignity in the world during the flourishing of these four monarchies. We know
the sons of God to be heirs of the world; and Paul, when speaking of the promise
given to Abraham, says, he was chosen by God as heir of the world.
(<450413>Romans
4:13;
<580102>Hebrews
1:2) And this doctrine is sufficiently known — the world was created for
the sake of the human race. When Adam fell from his lawful rights, all his
posterity became aliens. God deprived them of the inheritance which he had
designed for them. Now, therefore, our inheritance must be restored through
Christ, for which reason he is called the only heir of the world. Thus it is not
surprising if the angel says that tyrants, when they exercise supreme dominion,
assume and arrogate to themselves the peculiar property of the sacred lofty
ones, meaning the people of God. And this suits very well with the assertions of
the present passage concerning the Church being deprived of its dignity,
eminence, and visibility in the world. For then God’s people were like a
putrid carcass, the limbs of which were separated and dispersed on all sides,
without any hope of restoration. Lastly, although by the permission of Darius,
and the edict and liberality of Cyrus, some portion of them returned to their
country, yet what was that nominal return? They had but a precarious dwelling in
the inheritance divinely promised them; they were pressed on all sides by their
enemies, and were subject to the lust and injustice of them all. For the Church
had no empire under the Persians. After the third change we know how miserably
they were afflicted, especially under Antiochus. That nation was always opposed
to them, but then they were almost reduced to extremities, when Antiochus
endeavored furiously to abolish the whole law and worship of God. Under the
Macedonian kingdom the Jews were in constant slavery; but when the Roman army
penetrated those regions, they felt the horrible tyranny of the fourth beast, as
we have already seen. Lastly, it is sufficiently evident from the continual
history of those times, that the sons of God were always under the yoke, and
were not only cruelly but ignominiously treated.
Thus this prophecy was fulfilled, namely,
The four beasts took upon
themselves the empire which properly belonged to the sacred lofty
ones; that is, to God’s elect sons, who,
though dwellers on earth, are dependent on heaven. In this interpretation I see
nothing forced, and whoever prudently weighs the matter will, as I hope,
recognize what I have said as the meaning of the Prophet. The latter clause now
follows. They shall obtain the
kingdom, says
he, for ever, and even for ever
and ever. A difficult question arises
here, because by these words Daniel, or the angel addressing him, seems to
express a perpetual condition under these four monarchies;. Belshazzar was the
last king of the Babylonian dynasty, and at the perform of this vision the
overthrow of that monarchy was at hand. With regard to the Persian kings, there
were only eight of them besides Cyrus. And concerning Alexander we know a sudden
change happened; the terror of him spread abroad like a storm, but it vanished
away after it had affected all the people of the East. The Macedonian kingdom
also suffered a concussion, when those leaders began to disagree among
themselves who had obtained from Alexander authority and rank; and at length the
kingdom became fourfold, as we have already stated, and shall mention again. Now
if we count the years, the length of those monarchies was not so great as to
justify the epithet “perpetual.” I reply, this must be referred to
the sensations of the pious, to whom that delay seemed specially tedious, so
that they would have pined away in their miseries, had not this prophecy in some
way relieved them. We see at the present moment how great is the for your of
desire when reference is made to the help of God; and when our minds have been
heated with desire, they immediately decline to impatience. It thus happens that
the promises of God do not suffice to sustain us, because nothing is more
difficult than to bear long delay. For if the Church in our time had been
oppressed for a hundred years, what constancy would have been discerned ht us?
If a whirlwind arises, we are astonished, and cry out, “What next? what
next?” Three or four months will not have elapsed before all men enter
upon a strife with God and expostulate with him, because he does not hasten at
once to bring assistance to his Church. We are not surprised, then, at the angel
here assigning one age, or even an “age of ages,” to tyrants under
whom the Church should be oppressed. Although I .do not doubt the reference to
the fullness of times, as we: know Christ to have been the end of the Law, and
as his advent drew nearer, so God admonished the faithful to carry forward their
own expectations to the advent of their Redeemer. When, therefore, the angel
uses the phrase one age and an
age of ages, I have no doubt that he defined
the time for the elect, to strengthen them in patiently bearing trouble of all
kinds, as this had been divinely decreed; for the four beasts were to reign not
only for a few years, but for continual ages; that is, until the time of
renovation had arrived for the world, when God completely restored his Church.
Let us proceed: —
|
DANIEL
7:19-20
|
|
19. Then I would know the truth of the fourth
beast, which was; diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth
were of iron, and his nails .of brass; devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped
the residue with his feet;
|
19. Tunc aptavi ad veritam
f411
de bestia quarta, quae erat diversa ab omnibus aliis, terribilis valde, cujus
dentes erant ferri, ferrei, et ungues aeris, aerei, comedens et conterens, et
residuu pedibus suis conculcans.
|
|
20. And of the ten horn that to were in his
head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that
horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was
more stout than his fellows.
|
20. Et super conrnibus decem, de cornibus
decem, quae erant in capite ejus, et de postremo quod surgebat, et quod
ceciderant ex prioribus tria: et quod cornu illi erant oculi, et os loquens
grandia: et aspectus ejus magna prae sociis.
f412
|
Here the Prophet interrogates the angel concerning
the Fourth Beast more attentively and carefully; as we formerly saw him touched
with greater admiration on beholding the beast which was formidable beyond the
other three, so that neither a name nor representation could be found for it.
As, therefore, God displayed something great under the image of the fourth
beast, he caused his Prophet to wake up to understand the mystery of it. For
this reason he now interrogates the angel; for he says
he wished for the
truth concerning the fourth beast, and he also
repeats what we saw before, namely,
its being different from the
others. And surely the subjugation of so
many kings by the Romans was a difference worthy of notice. Let us think upon
the origin of that nation; — a few robbers seizing upon a desert spot,
growing great by brutal audacity and force, until they reduced all their
neighbors under their power. Then they crossed the sea, and added first one
province, and then another to their sway. And when the kingdom of Macedon came
within their power, this was indeed portentous. At length they became masters
throughout the whole circuit of the Mediterranean, and there was no corner which
did not receive their yoke; and this could never have been imagined by human
apprehension.
It is said then,
this beast was different from the
others, and very terrible. In the same sense
its
teeth are called
iron,
and its claws
brazen. No mention had hitherto been made of
his claw; the Prophet had spoken only of iron teeth, but he now adds
brazen
claws, as if he had said, This beast
shall be endued with such savage madness, as not only to attack all things by
its unusual violence, but to tear, lacerate, and devour all things; as he
repeats again what he had said,
eating and destroying and
treading under foot the remainder. As. I
have already explained all these points, I am unwilling to consume your time in
vain and to confuse you with useless. repetitions. I
asked
also, said
he, concerning the ten horns,
which, were upon its head. And this is
the reason why I must cut the subject off shortly here, as the angel’s
reply will follow directly. The Prophet, therefore, is now, without doubt,
placed under a celestial impulse, because God was unwilling to teach him only as
a private person; he was. to be a witness and herald of so great a mystery; and
we may at this day learn from his writings, which are of the utmost use to us
when we become fully acquainted with them.
He says, therefore,
He also inquired about the ten
horns which were on the head of the beast, and of the other horn which had
arisen, meaning the small one,
and concerning the three horns
falling from the face of the beast. We have
shewn how provinces were denoted by the tell horns, and how the difference
between the Roman Empire and other monarchies was pointed out, because there
never was one supreme ruler at Rome, except when Syria and Marius exercised
their usurped authority — but each for only a short time. Here then the
continual state of the Roman Empire is under review, for it was not simply a
single animal, as it had ten horns. A finite number is put for an indefinite
one. With regard to the little horn, I said it referred to the Caesars, who
attracted the whole government of the state to themselves, after depriving the
people of their liberty and the senate of their power, while even under their
sway some dignity was continued to the senate and some majesty retained by the
people. We have explained also how the three horns were broken; that is, how
craftily the Caesars infringed upon and diminished the strength of both people
and senate. Lastly, we have accounted for this little horn being displayed with
human eyes, since the Caesars exercised their dominion with cunning, when they
pretended to be only tribunes of the people, and allowed the ensigns of empire
to remain in the hands of the consuls; for when they came into the senate, they
sat in a lowly situation in curule scats prepared for the tribunes. As,
therefore, they tyrannized with such cleverness and cunning, instead of by open
violence, they are said to be endowed with the eyes of a man. Then as to the
tongue, the sense is the same; for although they always professed the consular
power to be supreme in the state, yet they could not restrain themselves, but
vomited forth many reproachful speeches. On the one side, we see them remarkable
for eyes, and on the other, for the tongue.
And its aspect was terrible
beyond its companions. This seems not to
belong peculiarly to the little horn which had arisen among the ten, but rather
to the fourth beast. But if any one wishes to understand it of the little horn,
I will not contest the point, as it will thus make tolerable sense. But I rather
embrace my former opinion, for it is not surprising to find the Prophet after
his discourse on the little horn, returning to the beast
himself.
|
DANIEL
7:21-22
|
|
21. I beheld, and the same horn made war with
the saints, and prevailed against them;
|
21. Vide, et cornu illud faciebat praelium cum
sanctis, et praevaluit illis.
|
|
22. Until the Ancient of days came, and
judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that; the
saints possessed the kingdom.
|
22. Donec venit Antiquus dierum, et judicium
datum est sanctis excelsorum, et venit tempus, et regnum acceperunt
sancti.
|
The Prophet now adds what he had omitted. The angel
does not yet answer him, but as he had not sufficiently expressed how the little
horn waged war with the sons of God, he now supplies the omission. He says,
therefore, he
saw — this ought to be received by
way of correction; I
saw, says he, meaning it was shewn me in
a vision, how the little horn
made war with the saints so
as to prevail against them. Clearly enough
other tyrants assailed the elect people of God with tier greater injury. Hence
many refer this to Antiochus Epiphanes, who was hostile to the Jews beyond all
others, and was utterly determined to blot out the name of the God of Israel.
And we know how often he raised powerful armaments to extinguish both the people
and the worship of God. As, therefore, the cruelty of Antiochus was so severe
against the Israelites, many think his image to have been exhibited to the
Prophet as the little horn, and what we shall afterwards see about “the
time,” and “times’ and “half-a-time,” they explain
of the three years and a half during which the Temple was in ruins, and the
people thereby prevented from offering sacrifices. As, therefore, their religion
was then interrupted, they think that tyranny was denoted, by which the people
were prohibited from testifying their piety. But although this opinion is
plausible, and at first sight bears upon the face of it the appearance of truth,
yet if we weigh all things in order, we may easily judge how unsuitable it is to
Antiochus. Why, therefore, does the Prophet say —
the little horn waged war with
the saint? Antiochus certainly made war against
the Church, and so did many others; the Egyptians, we know, often broke in and
spoiled the Temple and the Romans too, before the monarchy of the Caesars. I
reply, this is spoken comparatively, because no war was ever carried on so
continuously and professedly against the Church, as those which occurred after
the Caesars arose, and after Christ was made manifest to the world; for the
devil was then more enraged, and God also relaxed the reins to prove the
patience of his people. Lastly, it was natural for the bitterest conflicts to
occur when the redemption of the world was carried out; and the event clearly
showed this. We know first of all, by horrid examples, how Judea was laid waste,
for never was such cruelty practiced against any other people. Nor was the
calamity of short duration; we are well acquainted with their extreme obstinacy,
which compelled their enemies to forget clemency altogether. For the Romans
desired to spare them as far as possible, but so great was their obstinacy and
the madness of their rage, that they provoked their enemies as if devoting
themselves to destruction, until that dreadful slaughter happened, of which
history has sufficiently informed us. When Titus, under the auspices of his
father Vespasian, tools: and destroyed the city, the Jews were stabbed and
slaughtered like cattle throughout the whole extent of Asia. Thus far, then, it
concerns the Jews.
When God had inserted the body of the Gentiles into
his Church, the cruelty of the Caesars embraced all Christians; thus the little
horn waged war with the saints in a manner different from that of the former
beasts, because the occasion was different, and the wrath of Satan was excited
against all God’s children on account of the manifestation of Christ.
This, then, is the best explanation of
the little horn, waging war
against the saints. Thus he says,
It must
prevail. For the Caesars and all who
governed the provinces of the empire raged with such extreme violence against
the Church, that it almost disappeared from the face of the earth. And thus it
happened, that the little horn prevailed in appearance and in general opinion,
as, for a short time, the safety of the Church was almost despaired
of.
It now follows,
Until the Ancient of days
came, judgment was given to the saints of the lofty
ones. No doubt the Prophet says God came
in the same sense as before; namely, when he erected his tribunal and openly
appeared as the judge of the world in the person of Christ. He does not here set
before us the Son of man, as he did before, but yet a fuller explanation of this
passage is to be sought in the former one.
God
then is said to have
come, when he put forth his power in supplying
the needs of the Church, as by common figure he is said to be at a distance from
us, and to sleep or to be reposing, when he does not show himself openly as our
deliverer. So, on the other hand, he is said to come to us, when he openly
proves his constant care of us. Under this figure Daniel now says he beheld the
appearance of God Himself. The
Ancient of days then
came.
If we ask when, we have the reply at hand; it was immediately after the
promulgation of the gospel. Then God stretched forth his hand for his Church,
and lifted it out of the abyss. For since the Jewish name had been for a
long’ time hated, and all people desired to exterminate the Jews from the
world, Christ’s advent increased this hatred and cruelty; and the license
to injure them was added, as they thought Christ’s disciples were plotting
a change of government, and wished to overthrow the existing state of things; as
in these days all the pious suffer grievously under this false imputation. God,
therefore, is said to have come, where the doctrine of the gospel was more and
more promulgated, and some rest granted to the Church. Thus, by this repose,
the saints received the kingdom
which had been taken from them; that is, the
kingdom of God and of the saints obtained some fame and celebrity in the world,
through the general diffusion of the doctrine of piety, in every direction. Now,
therefore, we understand what Daniel wished to convey by the phrase,
The Ancient of days came, and
judgment was given to the saints of the lofty
ones. The remainder
tomorrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou profest
our faith and constancy by many trials, as it is our duty in this respect and in
all others, to submit to thy will: Grant, I pray, that we may not give way to
the many attacks by which we are tossed about. For we are assailed on all sides
by Satan and all the impious, and while their fury is ever burning and raging
cruelly against us, may we never yield to it. May we proceed in our warfare, in
reliance on the unconquered might of the Spirit, even though impious men prevail
for a season. May we look forward to the advent of thy only-begotten Son, not
only when he shall appear at the last day, but also whenever it shall please
time for him to assist thy Church, and to raise it out of its miserable
afflictions. And even if we must endure our distresses, may our courage never
fail us, until at length we are gathered into that holy rest, which has been
obtained for us through the blood of the same, thine only-begotten Son —
Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-SEVENTH.
We, yesterday began to explain how
judgment was given to the
saints at the commencement of the gospel
era. For we know how very partial even in those times was the Church’s
tranquillity’. Because when it was free from external persecution and the
shedding of blood, domestic enemies arose who proved far more injurious. Thus
the kingdom of Christ never flourished in the world, so as to have anything in
common with those empires, in which great splendor and pomp were apparent. But;
God wished to propose this solace to his Prophet, by showing him the future
reputation of the Church and its elevation to some degree of honor after
emerging from obscurity, so that the elect dared openly to give homage to
Christ, and to profess true and sincere piety. Hence by judgment being given to
the saints, the Prophet in cans the restoration of the right of which they had
been deprived, and their obtaining the kingdom at the same time, as the Church
no longer lay prostrate as before the advent of Christ. For the promulgation of
the gospel was at length free, as we shall immediately see. Let us proceed to
the context, —
|
DANIEL
7:23
|
|
23. Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be
the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and
shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in
pieces.
|
23. Sic dixit,
f413
Bestia quarta, regnum quartum erit in terra, quod erit diversum ab omnibus
regnis: et vorabit
f414
totam terram, et conteret,
f415
et comminuet eam.
|
|
24. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are
ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be
diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
|
24. Et cornua decem ab illo regno, decem Reges
sunt, qui exorientur, qui surgent, et aliud postremum surget post illos Reges,
f416
et ipse
f417
erit diversus a superiorbus,
f418
et tres Reges affliget.
|
This reply of the angel is subject to the same
obscurity as the vision itself, but it ought to be sufficient to calm the minds
of the faithful to know that various changes should arise and shake the whole
earth; for as many troubles were, prepared for the saints, so also they were
braced up to fortitude and endurance. For God was not willing fully to explain
what he had shown to his Prophet; he only wished to set before him this
conclusion — a kingdom shall arise completely different from all others.
Thus the angel says, The Fourth Beast
signifies a fourth kingdom, which
shall differ from all the kingdoms.
Previously to that period, no state was so extensive in its sway. For
although the Spartans and Athenians performed illustrious and memorable
exploits, yet we know them to have been included within narrow boundaries; and
the ambition and wordy vanity of the Greeks caused them to celebrate those wars
which were scarcely of any consequence, as we learn even from their own
histories. Whichever way we take this, Sparta obtained with difficulty the
second rank in Greece, as Athens did the first,. As far as concerns the Roman
Empire, we know it to have been more extensive and powerful than the other
monarchies. When all Italy came under their sway, this was sufficient for any
noble monarchy; but Spain, Sicily, part, of Greece, arm Illyrieum were added,
and afterwards all Greece and Macedon, Asia Minor, Africa., and all the islands;
for by one word they expelled the king of Cyprus, and sold his goods by public
auction. When the dregs of the people were collected, Claudius made a law for
the banishment of the king of Cyprus, and this he accomplished by his single
voice, without the use of force at all. No wonder then that God foretold
how different this kingdom,
should be from all the others; it had no
single head; the senate had the chief authority, though all power was centered
in the people. there was therefore a kind of mingled confusion, since the
government of Rome was never settled. And if we weigh all things prudently, it
was neither a republic nor a kingdom, but a confused compound, in which the
people exercised great power in a tumultuous way, and the senate oppressed the
people as much as it could. There were three ranks — the senatorian, the
equestrian, and the plebeian, and that mixture made the kingdom like a monster.
The angel, therefore, announces
the fourth kingdom as different
from, the others.
He afterwards confirms what we said before;
it will
fall, says he,
and break to pieces, and tread
down the whole earth. This was fulfilled
after Gaul and Britain were subdued, Germany partially subjugated, and
Illyrieum, Greece, and Macedon, reduced to submission. At length they penetrated
to Asia, and Antiochus was banished beyond the Taurus; his kingdom afterwards
became their prey, then they obtained possession of Syria. The kings of Egypt
were their allies, and yet. became dependent upon their nod; the sovereign dared
not appoint an heir, without consulting their pleasure. As, therefore, they
ruled supremely so long and so widely, they fulfilled this prophecy by
devouring the whole
earth. For such lust for dominion never existed
before; wars were heaped upon wars, they were alike greedy of the blood of
others, and by no means sparing of their own. The whirlpool was insatiable,
while it absorbed the whole world, and their pride crushed it and trampled it
under foot,. Cruelty was added to pride, for all looked up to the Romans, and
conciliated the favor of Rome by flattery, for the purpose of raging savagely
against; their own people. By these arts almost the whole of Greece perished.
For they knew how many innocent persons everywhere perished in every city, a
kind of diversion which delighted them; they were fully aware how easy it was to
attract all the power of the whole world to themselves, when it was able to .put
forth neither strength, nor skill, nor power against them. For their nobles were
constantly at variance; sometimes one faction and sometimes another was supreme,
and thus the splendor of every city easily, and gradually diminished. Thus all
Greece was spoiled, and the Romans exercised their dominion there without
difficulty, as over brute beasts. We may say the same of Asia also. We are not
surprised then at the angel saying,
the earth would be trodden down
and trampled on by this fourth beast.
He afterwards adds,
The ten horns are the ten kings
which should arise. These Ten Kings are
clearly comprehended under one empire, and there is no question here of separate
persons. In the Persian kingdom, we observed many kings, and yet the image of
the second beast was single, while it embraced all those kings until the change
occurred. So also no when treating of the Romans, the Prophet does not assert
that ten kings should succeed each other in regular order, but rather the
multiform nature of the kingdom, under more heads than one. For the royal office
belonged to the senators or leading citizens, whose authority prevailed very
extensively both with the senate and the people. And with reference to the
number, we said the plural number only was denoted, without any limitation to
the number ten. The conclusion is as follows, — this kingdom should be
like a single terrible animal bearing many horns, since no single king held the
chief sway there, as was customary by constant usage in other lands, but there
should be a mixture, like many kings in place of one holding the pre-eminence.
The fulfillment of this is sufficiently known from the history of Rome; as if it
had been said, there should not be any single kingdom, as of Persia and other
nations, but many kings at the same time, alluding to the mixture and confusion
in which the supreme authority was involved.
The Little Horn follows:
A king shall
arise, says he,
different from those, other
ones, and shall afflict three kings. We
showed how unintelligible this becomes, unless we refer it to the Caesars to
whom the monarchy passed; for after long and continued and intensive strife, the
whole power passed over to the Triumvirate. A conspiracy was entered into by
Lepidus, Mark Antony, and Octavius. Octavius was then all but a boy, having
scarcely arrived at manhood, but all the veteran soldiers were in his favor, in
consequence of the name of Julius Caesar and his adoption by him. Hence he was
received by the other two into that alliance, of which Lepidus was the first,
and Antony the second. At length discords arose among them, and Lepidus was
deprived of his place in the triumvirate, and lived, as if half-dead, while his
life was only spared to him because he was raised to the office of chief
priest
Reverence for the priesthood restrained Antony from
putting him to death, so long as he was content to live in privacy and
retirement. Octavius at, length became supreme, but by what artifice? We said
Julius Caesar took no more upon himself than the office of dictator, while
consuls were annually elected as usual. He did not strain the power of the
dictatorship beyond moderation, but he so restrained himself, that some popular
rights might seem still to flourish. Octavius also followed the cunning of his
uncle and adopted father. The same conduct will be found in the other Caesars,
though there were many differences between them. As the shadow of a republic yet
remained, while the senate was held in some degree of reverence, it is not
surprising, if the angel predicts that the beast. should survive,
when another small horn should
arise different from the
others.
He adds,
And shall afflict the three
kings. I have explained this point by
the slight change which the Caesars effected in the provinces, for if any of the
provinces were warlike, strong armies and veteran soldiers were usually sent
there. The Caesars took these to themselves, while some executive management was
left to the senate with regard to the other provinces. Lastly, by this form of
speech, the angel portrays the coming dominion of the little horn, and its
diminishing the strength of the former ones’ and. yet the beast should
remain apparently entire; thus, the effigy of the republic was preserved, as the
people were always designated — in the forum, by the high-sounding name,
Romans, and in battle, as fellow-soldiers. Meanwhile, although the name of the
Roman empire was so celebrated, and its majesty was in every one’s mouth,
the supreme authority was. in the possession of one little horn which lay
concealed, and dared not openly raise its head. This, then, is the pith of the
interpretation of what the angel here sets before us. It; follows,
—
|
DANIEL
7:25
|
|
25. And he shall speak words against the most
High, and shall wear out the saints of the most high, and think to change times,
and laws: and they shall be given into his hand, until a time and times and the
dividing of time.
|
25. Et sermones ad regionem, vel as
lanctus,
f419
excelsi loquetur, et sanctos excelsorum conteret, et putabit ad mutantum
f420
tempora et legem: et tradetur in manum ejus usque ad tempus, et tempora, et
divisionem temporis.
|
The angel now explains a little more clearly what the
Prophet had formerly touched upon but briefly, namely, this last king should be
a manifest and professed enemy to the Church. We yesterday showed how miserably
and cruelly the Church had been harassed by many tyrants. And if we, compare
these tyrants with each other, we shall find the Church to have been much more
heavily afflicted after Christ’s advent, and to have been opposed by the
Caesars in open warfare. The occasion arose in this way. The doctrine of the
Gospel had been dispersed through almost all the provinces of the empire. The
Jewish name was hateful; and the novelty of the teaching added greatly to that
unpopularity. Men thought the Jews had invented a new deity for themselves
— even Christ;, as their language seemed to imply the worship of a new
divinity. As, therefore, some material for rage against the pure worship of God
was afforded them, the Caesars became more and more stirred up to carry on war
against the elect, and to oppress the Church. It was not their fault if they did
nor; extinguish the whole light of the celestial doctrine, abolish true
religion, and banish: the knowledge of God from the world. This agrees very well
with what Daniel relates of this king becoming so headstrong, as to
utter words against the most High
God. Some translate it, on the part of
the most high, but. I know no reason for their doing so.
dxl,
letzed, signifies on the side or the region. The equivalent phrase is
this; so great should be the pride of this new king, who did not exercise his
power openly but by hidden deceit, that he should sit as it were on the side of
God and in opposition to him. This means he should be manifestly God’s
enemy. Those who understand this of Antichrist, think their opinion confirmed by
the conduct of other tyrants who carried on their warfare against God with arms
and violence, but not by words. But the Prophet does not speak so subtlety here.
For by words he does not here mean doctrine, but that verbal boasting by
which the Caesars dared to promulgate their edicts throughout the whole world,
urging all the proconsuls to punish the Christians, and not to permit that
impious and cursed sect to flourish; and thus terrors flew about throughout the
whole world. What Daniel now relates was then fulfilled, namely,
the utterance of words of
defiance against God; for those tyrants
thought their own edicts, without the armament of soldiers, would be sufficient
to extinguish the memory of Christ. Thus, also, true piety was disgracefully
traduced, and the very name of Christ lacerated by horrible reproaches, as
historians have amply informed us.
This explanation, therefore, is most suitable
to the little horn
speaking or uttering
words against the most High. He
shall afflict, says he, the saints of the lofty
ones. We have already briefly explained
the meaning of this expression, according to its grammatical construction. By
saints he doubtless means sons of God, or his elect people, or the Church. He
calls these “saints of lofty ones,” because as elect they depend
upon heaven; and although they are pilgrims in the world, yet their life is in
heaven, where the eternal inheritance remains for them which was obtained by
Christ. As, therefore, their treasure is now heaven, they deservedly boast of
being citizens of heaven, and allies and brethren of angels. Thus they are
properly called “saints of lofty ones;” they are separated from the
world, and know themselves to live here day by day until they arrive at firm and
enduring repose. We know this to have been fulfilled, because overwhelming
terror fell upon all the pious, and the Church almost perished, while multitudes
who were suspected of being Christians were subjected to cruel tortures. The
prevalence of this universal license for persecuting all the pious explains how
the saints were then afflicted by the small horn.
The Prophet or rather the angel next says,
He will
think, or meditate,
to change time and law, and
they shall be delivered into his hand.
As to the time here spoken of, many refer it to holy days. But we may
understand it generally of the small horn overthrowing whatever was formerly
customary in the world; and thus also I interpret the word
tr,
reth, not the Law of God or the Gospel, but any rites, customs, and
institutions. While interpreters are contending about this word, some referring
it to the Decalogue, and others to the preaching of the Gospel, I think the
simple sense of the Prophet to be this. the Caesars perverted all laws, both
human and divine. We have seen how they attempted this, and how far they
accomplished it. It is not surprising then if the Prophet; assigns this
unbridled audacity to this last king,
who thought to change whatever
had been formerly ordained in the world.
And for this reason it had been formerly said this horn should be furnished
with human eyes; and next, should speak mightily, thundering horribly, and
inspiring all men with fear through its voice alone. We know this to have been
represented as in a glass, if we consider how far the Caesars proceeded in their
arrogance. First, as to Octavius, while he restrained himself within due bounds
politically, he suffered himself to be adored as a god, and altars to be erected
to him; he wished the public to be persuaded of his deity, and celebrated a
banquet in which he sat among the superior deities. Tiberius neglected religious
ceremonies entirely, and yet we see how he despised all men. Although he was of
an obtuse disposition, in his daring he was extreme, and was all the while
craftily deceiving the senate. Next, as to Caligula, he threatened Jupiter in
this way, — “What! thou art an exile here and I a native: I will
banish thee into Greece thy native place.” He often inflicted blows upon
the statue of Jupiter, and not content with the name of a god, he ordered the
chief sacrifices to be offered to himself. This diabolic fury increased in
Domitian. And considering the Caesars as men, what was their character? One of
them said, “I wish the Roman people had but one need.” He enjoyed
the slaughter of the senate as a sport, and wished to make his horse a consul.
How disgraceful was such conduct! We see, then, how this prediction was not
uttered without a cause; namely, so great should be the arrogance of the small
horn that it would dare to change and turn into a new almost all
“law,” meaning all order of every kind, and “times,”
meaning the very series and nature of all things. The Prophet then says
he
thought. He does not express the result,
but simply signifies the arrival of the small horn at such a degree of madness
as to suppose it could draw down the sun from heaven, turn light: into darkness,
and leave nothing entire, nothing in order, throughout, the world. Those
occurrences really happened in accordance with this prophecy. I cannot enter
into details here. I should have to detain you many days or even months while
citing history; I can only touch shortly upon what: is necessary for explaining
the Prophet’s words and the meaning of his prediction.
They shall be delivered into his
hands means, — however the small
horn should leap forward in desperate fury, yet: God should always rule over
him, and nothing should happen without his permission,. It was God then who
delivered into the hands of that identifying the saints, the political
government, and the institutions of piety, allowing him to pour out.
promiscuously human blood, to violate every national right, and to ruin as far
as possible all religion. It brings us then no little comfort to know when
God’s permission is given to tyrants to harass the Church and interfere
with His lawful worship; for if we were left to the mercy of their lusts, how
distressing would be the universal confusion! But he succors us, as the angel
says, when tyrants assail us and disturb all order by their horrible
licentiousness and cruel rage against the miserable and the innocent: he succors
us, I say, so that they are unable to move to finger against us without
God’s permission. We are not permitted to know why God relaxes the rein in
favor of the enemies of his Church; perhaps it is to prove and try the patience
of his people. It is sufficient for us, if, when tyrants scheme and plot in
every way, they are unable to do anything without the divine
permission.
But a greater consolation is added in the last
clause, even for a time and
times, and the division of a time, or
half, as some translate it; it is properly a division. Interpreters differ
widely about these words, and I will not bring forward all their opinions,
otherwise it would be necessary to refute them. I should have no little trouble
in refuting all their views, but I will follow my own custom of shortly
expressing the genuine sense of the Prophet, and thus all difficulty will be
removed. Those who consider a “time” to mean a “year,”
are in my opinion wrong. They cite the forty-two months of the Apocalypse,
(Revelation 13:5,) which make three years and a half; but that argument is not
conclusive, since in that case a year will not consist of 365 days, but the year
itself must be taken figuratively for any indeterminate time. It is better then
to keep close to the Prophet’s words. A “time,” then, is not
put for a certain number of months or days, nor yet for a single year, but for
any period whose termination is in the secret counsel of God.
They shall be
given, then,
for a
time, says he, and afterwards adds
times; that is, for a continuance of times; and again,
even to a
section or division of a time; meaning,
these calamities should come to an end whenever God, in mercy to his Church,
should restrain those tyrants by his wrath against them. .As long, therefore, as
the cruelty of the Caesars oppressed God’s Church, it was committed into
their hands. We have already seen how many Caesars were enemies of the true
Church. First, of all, Nero raged most cruelly, for he burnt some thousands of
Christians at Rome, to extinguish the infamy which raged against himself. The
people could not endure his barbarity; for, while the fourth part of the city
was destroyed by Nero, he was enjoying his pleasure and rejoicing so mournful a
spectacle! As he feared the popular tumult against himself, he laid hold of many
Christians, and offered them to the people as a kind of expiation. Those who
followed him, did not cease to pour forth innocent blood, and those who seemed
to be endued with some degree of clemency and humanity were all at length seized
with a diabolic fury. Trajan was esteemed a very excellent prince, and yet we
know how he commanded the Christians everywhere to be slain, since he thought
them obstinate in their error. And
others were more savage still. No
wonder, therefore, the angel predicts, even for a time, and times, and the
division of a time, that license would
be given to the tyrants and enemies of the Church to pervert all things, to
despise God, and set aside all justice, and to execute a cruel and barbarous
slaughter. This ought to be predicted for two reasons: first, lest through
length of time the faithful should fall away, because when “the
time” — a space of about ten years — had passed, they would
come to the times, consisting of about fifty or a hundred
years.
This, then, was one reason why God admonished the
faithful concerning the time and
times. But he wished also to mitigate their
sorrow by adding half a
time, thus promising some moderation and
ending to such great calamities. The language of our Lord to his Apostles
concerning the various commotion of the earth, corresponds very well with this
view. “There shall arise wars and rumors of wars, and no end as
yet,” says he. He announces them as the preludes to greater evils, when
the whole of Judea should be devastated with wars and other slaughters. He
afterwards adds, “Unless those days had been shortened.”
(<402406>Matthew
24:6;
<411307>Mark
13:7;
<422109>Luke
21:9.) This. shortening of the days is here noticed as if the Lord cut short; a
continued succession of them. For when the possession of the tyranny appeared
fierce, then suddenly and beyond the expectation of all, God at length snatched
away his Church, and then the evangelical doctrine emerged, and was celebrated
everywhere. God, therefore, then shortened the days on account of his own elect,
and this is understood by the last clause, a division of a time. I will defer
the rest till to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since we must be
daily exercised by various contests, that we may never yield to the infirmities
of the flesh, and never forget thy Holy calling. Animate us, we pray thee, for
all hostile engagements; may we stand unbroken against all the assaults of Satan
and the wicked; and thus give ourselves up and devote ourselves to thee. May we
never hesitate to suffer death itself, if necessary, and even to offer ourselves
daily to various kinds of death, until we shall have discharged our warfare, and
enjoy that happy and eternal rest which thou hast prepared for us in thine
only-begotten Son. — Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-EIGHT.
|
DANIEL
7:26
|
|
26. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall
take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the
end
|
26. Et judicium, sedebit, et potestam ejus
auferent ad dissipandum at perpendum,
f421
usque in finem.
|
The, angel now answers Daniel concerning the death of
the fourth beast. For we said when the Caesars had transferred the empire to
themselves, the strength of the senate and of the people was enervated; but
because the name still remained, the fourth beast is not said to have been slain
until foreigners disgracefully became masters of Rome. For if the Romans had
been conquered a hundred times over by professed enemies, they would not have
suffered such disgrace as when obscure and low-born men exercise a cruel and
barbarous tyranny; for then neither the senate nor the people enjoy any
authority. The angel thus marks the time correctly at which the fourth beast was
to fall, when the Spaniards, the Africans, and other barbarians, who were even
always unknown in. their own country, were raised to the highest honors beyond
the expectation of mankind. For their lust oppressed the whole state; they
beheaded the most noble senators, and appointed in their stead the meanest of
men, in token of their spirit of ignoniny.
Then the fourth beast, was
slain; and this is the explanation of
this portion of the angel’s reply. He says also,
Judgment shall then
sit; that is, God shall again restore to
order all this confusion, and the world shall feel his Providence ruling over
the earth and the human race. For when all things are allowed to proceed without
punishment, and neither justice nor honesty are held in any account, God is then
supposed to be enjoying his ease in heaven, and to be forgetful of the human
race. Hence, in opposition to this, he is said to ascend a tribunal as often as
we really and experimentally feel his care over us. Thus the restoration is here
called a sitting in judgment, when the Roman empire was blotted out, and God
executed the penalty of such great and such unbridled ferocity as that already
recorded. As this phrase is very common and of frequent use in Scripture, I will
not continue the explanation.
The
judgment, then,
shall be
set; that is, after all things have been
long involved in darkness, new light shall burst forth, and men shall readily
acknowledge the sway of the
Almighty. And
power, says he,
shall they take away from the
beast for dissipating and destroying even to the
end. Here the angel announces the final
overthrow of the fourth beast. Respecting the plural number of the verb, we have
already mentioned the opinion of some who refer it to more angels than one, but
it is better to understand it more simply, as an absolute and indefinite form of
expression. And yet; I do not. object., as I before, stated, to the view of
those who take it of angels, yet I fear this is too refined; I prefer the
simpler view as being free from all controversy. The sense, then, is this: When
the beast; shall have raged cruelly for a length of time, and especially the
little horn, God shall discharge the duty of a judge, and the beast, with this
small horn, shall be removed out of the way. The angel adds next, There shall be
no hope of any new life similar to that of many kingdoms which often fall at one
period and rise again at another; but he here announces the final slaughter, as
if he had said, the wound is incurable and deadly. It now follows:
—
|
DANIEL
7:27
|
|
27. And the kingdom and dominion, and the
greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of
the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all
dominions shall serve and obey him.
|
27. Et regnum, et potestas, et magnitudo regni
sub toto coelo dabitur populo sanctorum excelsorum. Regnum ejus regnum seculi,
hoc est, perpetuum, et omnes potestates ei servient, atque
obedient.
|
This verse assures us how these predictions
concerning the destruction of the beast regard the Church’s safety. Thus
the faithful might know themselves noticed by God, and how the changes which
successively happened tended to the same end, the acknowledgment on the part of
the pious of their continuance under the care and guardianship of God. For any
discussion of the four monarchies would have been cold and useless: unless there
had been added God’s peculiar care of his own Church., and his conducting
the affairs of the world for the safety of his people. .As we have said in other
places, God’s elect people are of more consequence than all the kingdoms
which are conspicuous in the world.
(<234303>Isaiah
43:3.) This, then, is the sense of the words. If we separate this verse from its
context, the prophecy will still have its use. We may elicit from it how all
things which seem stable in the world are yet perishable, and nothing is so firm
as not to be subject every moment to constant variation. But the chief intention
of this prediction is, as I have said, to show the relation of all events to the
safety of the pious. When, therefore, all things seem carried away by the blind
impulse of chance, we ought always to contemplate God as watching for his
Church, and tempering all storms and all commotion to the service and safety of
the pious, who rest upon his Providence. These two things, then, are mutually in
accordance, namely, the slaying
of the fourth beast, and the giving of the kingdom and authority to the people
of the saints. This does not seem to
have been accomplished yet; and hence many, nay, almost all, except the Jews,
have treated this prophecy as relating to the final day of Christ’s
advent. All Christian interpreters agree in this; but, as I have shewn before,
they pervert the Prophet’s intention. As to the Jews, theirs is no
explanation at all, for they are not only foolish and stupid, but even crazy
f422
And since their object is the adulteration of sound doctrine, God also blinds
them till they become utterly in the dark, and both trifling and childish; and
if I were to stop to refute their crudities, I should never come to an
end.
This prophecy does not seem to be accomplished at the
destruction of the beast; but this is easily explained. We know how
magnificently the prophets speak of Christ’s kingdom, and adore his
dignity and glory with splendid eulogies; and although these are not
exaggerated, yet if judged of by human perceptions, you would surely think them
exceedingly extravagant, and find neither solidity nor firmness in their words.
And no wonder: for Christ’s kingdom and his dignity cannot be perceived by
carnal eyes, nor even comprehended by the human intellect. Let those who appear
the most sagacious of men combine together all their clear-sightedness, yet they
can never ascend to the height of Christ’s kingdom, which surpasses the
very heavens. Nothing is more contrary to our natural judgment than to seek life
in death, riches in poverty and want, glory in shame and disgrace — to be
wanderers in this world, and at the same time its heirs! Our minds cannot
naturally comprehend these things. No wonder, then, if mortals judge erroneously
of Christ’s kingdom, and are blind in the midst of light. Still there is
no defect in the Prophet’s expressions, for they depict for us the visible
image of Christ’s kingdom, and accommodate themselves to our dullness.
They enable us to perceive the analogy between things earthly and visible, and
that spiritual blessedness which Christ has afforded to us, and which we now
possess through hope in him. For while we only hope, our happiness is concealed
from us; it is not perceptible by our eyes or by any of our
senses.
Let us now return to the passage. Daniel first of all
says, A kingdom, and power, and
extensive dominion, shall be given to the people of the holy
ones. This was partially fulfilled when
the Gospel emerged from persecution: then the name of Christ was everywhere
celebrated and held in honor and esteem, while previously it had been the
subject of the greatest envy and hatred. For nothing had been more hated and
detested for many years than the name of Christ. God, therefore, then gave the
kingdom to his people, when he was acknowledged as the Redeemer of the world
throughout its many changes, after having been formerly despised and utterly
rejected. I may here remark again, and impress upon the memory what I have
frequently touched upon, namely, the custom of the Prophets, in treating of
Christ’s kingdom, to extend their meaning further than its first
beginnings; and they do this while they dwell upon its commencement. Thus Daniel
or the angel does not predict here occurrences connected with the advent of
Christ as Judge of the world, but with the first preaching and promulgation of
the Gospel, and the celebration of the name of Christ. But this does not prevent
him from drawing a magnificent picture of Christ’s reign, and embracing
its final completion. It is sufficient for us to perceive how God begins to give
the kingdom to his elect people, when, by the power of his Spirit, the doctrine
of the holy Gospel was everywhere received in the world. The sudden change which
it occasioned was incredible, but this is a customary result; for, when anything
is predicted, we think it a fable and a dream, and when God performs what we
never would have thought of, the evil, appears to us trifling, and we treat it
as of no moment. For example, when the preaching of the Gospel commenced, no one
would have thought its success could have been so great and so prosperous; nay,
two hundred years before Christ was manifest, when religion was almost blotted
out, and the Jews were execrated by the whole world, who would have thought the
Law would spring from Zion? Yet God erected his scepter there. The dignity of
the kingdom had vanished: the offspring of David was extinct. For the family of
Jesse was but a trunk, after the simile used by the prophet Isaiah.
(<231101>Isaiah
11:1.) If any one had asked all the Jews one after another, no one would have
believed the possibility of those events which accompanied the preaching of the
Gospel; but, at length the, dignity and virtue of the kingdom of David. shone
forth in Christ. Yet it vanishes before our eyes, and we seek new miracles, as
if God had not sufficiently proved himself to have .spoken by his prophets! Thus
we observe how the Prophet keeps within bounds when he says,
A kingdom, and a power, and a
magnitude of empire was given to the people of the saints.
He adds,
one empire under the whole
heavens. Here the Rabbi Abarbinel, who
thinks himself superior to all others, rejects our idea of the spiritual reign
of Christ as a foolish imagination. For the kingdom of God, he says, is
established under the whole heavens, and is given to the people of the saints.
If it is established under heaven, says he, it is earthly, and if earthly,
therefore not spiritual. This seems in truth a very subtle argument, as if God
could not reign in the world except as extraordinary mortal. As often as
Scripture says “God reigns,” according to this argument God must be
transfigured into human nature, otherwise there will be no kingdom of God except
it is earthly, and if earthly it is temporal, and therefore perishable. Hence we
must infer that God changes his nature. His kingdom, then, will consist in
opulence, and military power and parade, and the common luxuries of life, so
that God will become unlike himself. We perceive the puerile trifling of those
Rabbis who pretend to glory in their ingenuity, to the total destruction of the
whole teaching of piety. They intend nothing else than to adulterate the purity
of Scripture by their foul and senseless comments. But we know the reign of God
and of Christ, although existing in the world, not to be of it,
(<431836>John
18:36;) the meaning of the two expressions is exactly the opposite. God,
therefore, still exercises his heavenly reign in the world, because he dwells in
the hearts of his people by his Spirit. While God held his seat at Jerusalem,
was his kingdom merely an earthly and corruptible one? By no means, for by the
possession of an earthly habitation he did not cease to be in heaven also. Thus
the angel instructed the Prophet concerning the saints who are pilgrims in the
world, and yet shall enjoy the kingdom and possess the greatest power under
heaven. Hence also we correctly conclude, that this vision ought not to be
explained of the final advent of Christ, but of the intermediate state of the
Church. The saints began to reign under heaven, when Christ ushered in his
kingdom by the promulgation of his Gospel.
Another point must be noticed, — what belongs
to the head is transferred to the body. There is nothing new in this, as the
supreme power is constantly promised by the Prophets to the Church, especially
by Isaiah, who often predicts its complete supremacy. The Papists seize upon
such testimonies to clothe themselves in the spoils of God, as if God had
resigned his right to them! But they are immersed in the same error with the
Jews, who swell with pride whenever such dignity is promised to the elect
people, as if they could remain separate from God and yet obtain the right of
treading the whole world under foot. The Papists also do exactly the same. We,
however, must be guided by a very different rule, namely, in consequence of the
intimate union between Christ and his Church, the peculiar a. tribute of Christ
himself is often transferred to his body. Not that the Church reigns by itself;
but Christ, as its only supreme head, obtains dominion therein, and not for his
own private advantage — for what need has he of this dominion? but for the
common safety of all its members. Wherefore Christ is our King, and he designs
to erect his throne in the midst; of us; he uses nothing for his own advantage,
but communicates all things to us, and renders them useful to us; hence, we are
deservedly called kings, because he reigns, and as I have already said, language
which is exclusively appropriate to him, is transferred to us in consequence of
the intimate communion existing between the head and the
members.
This is also the sense of the phrase here added by
the Prophet, All powers shall
serve and obey it. I have no doubt the
angel here confirmed Isaiah’s prophecy, as the Holy Spirit, the better to
confirm and strengthen the faith of the pious, often reconciles one Prophet with
another, and thus their mutual agreement becomes the seal of their truth. It is
said in Isaiah, The kingdom and the land which will not serve thee, shall. be
destroyed: kings shall come and adore thee, the people shall offer thee gifts.
(<236012>Isaiah
60:12.) In the Psalms, it is said,
“Kings shall
assemble together, to serve
God.”
(<19A222>Psalm
102:22.)
And Isaiah treats very fully on the empire of the
Church. The angel now repeats the same thing, to add, as I have said, greater
confidence and authority to the prophecy of Isaiah. Meanwhile, we observe how
completely all the Prophets agree, and at the same time we interpret these words
of the kingdom of Christ, from the period at which the teaching of the gospel
was rendered remarkably conspicuous; for then God’s royal scepter went
forth from Jerusalem, and shone far and wide, while the Lord was extending his
hand and his authority over all the regions of the world. As all these important
events tended to the common salvation of the Church, it is said,
The kingdom shall belong to the
holy people. As to the phrase,
The saints of the high
ones, I have already explained why the Prophet
applies this phrase to the faithful, and why the angel also does the same;
namely, because God separated them from the world, and they were always looking
upwards and drawing all their hopes from above. Then, as to the Rabbi whom I
cited, he twists this. passage, and tries to show that the Prophet did not speak
of Christ, when he says he saw the figure of the Son of man. But this is
complete trifling, for he asserts the Son of man to mean “the people of
the saints,” and thus the phrase would have no reference to Christ, but to
the whole offspring of Abraham. We must not be surprised at the shameful
ignorance of these Rabbis, and at their blundering at the very rudiments, since
they do not acknowledge the necessity for a Mediator, through whom alone the
Church can obtain any favor before God. They boast in what we also allow —
in the sons of Abraham being the elect, and in this title as availing to render
them a holy people, and heirs of God, and a kingdom of priests. This is true,
but on what was their covenant of adoption founded but on Christ? Hence their
separating the Church from the Mediator, is like leaving a mutilated body apart
from its disjoined head. Besides, from what the Prophet stated before about the
Son of man, his subject is evidently changed in this verse. He stated there,
power was given to the Son of man after he had arrived at the Ancient of days,
and the Son of man, or at least his likeness, appeared in the clouds. First of
all, we must notice this likeness, as it were the Son of man, as we have already
explained the vision. Surely Abraham’s posterity were really men, but the
vision offered to the Prophet was but a similitude; as Christ had not yet put on
our flesh, this was only a prelude to his future manifestation in the flesh.
Here he speaks openly and without a figure of
the people of the
saints, and this prophecy depends upon
the former one. For unless Christ were seated at His Father’s right hand,
and had obtained supreme dominion, causing every knee to bend before him, the
Church could never exercise its power. Thus we observe how all things mutually
agree among each other.
As, however, it is certain that many have
perseveringly rebelled against; God and the teaching of his gospel, it may seem
absurd for the angel to pronounce all the powers of the world obedient and
submissive. But it is worth while to study the customary methods of scriptural
expression. For instance, by the phrase “all people,” the Spirit
does not mean every single person, but simply some out of every nation who
should submit to Christ’s yoke, acknowledge him to be king, and obediently
obey his Church. How often do these sentiments occur in the prophets? All
nations shall come — all kings; shall serve. At that time no king existed
who was not professedly an enemy of true piety, and who did not desire the
abolition of the very name of his law. The prophets enlarge thus magnificently
on the future restoration of this kingdom, as we have stated before, in
consequence of the event being so utterly incredible. So, also, in this place
all
powers, says he,
shall serve and obey
him; that is:, no power shall so boast
in its loftiness, as not willingly to become subject to the Church, although at
present all so fully despise it: nay, while they rage with all their might,
against the most wretched Church, and while they tread it most ignominiously
under foot, even then they shall be subject to it. This we know to have been
amply fulfilled. Some persons foolishly press beyond their meaning words of
universal import, as when Paul says, God wishes all to be saved. Hence, they
say, no one is predetermined for destruction, but all are elect, that is, God is
not God.
(<540204>1
Timothy 2:4.) But we are not surprised at such madness as this, corrupting the
impious and profane, who desire by their cavils to promote disbelief in all the
oracles of the Spirit. Let us clearly comprehend the frequency of this figure of
speech; when the Holy Spirit names “all,” he means some out of all
nations, and not every one universally.
|
DANIEL
7:28
|
|
28. Hitherto is the end of the matter. As for
me Daniel, my cogitation’s much troubled me, and my countenance changed in
me, but I kept the matter in my heart.
|
28. Hucusque finis sermonis,
f423
mihi Danieli,
f424
multum cogitationes meae terruerunt me, et vilgus meus mutatus est super me,
vel, in me, et sermonem servavi,
f425
in corde meo.
|
In this verse Daniel first says the vision was
concluded, and thus the faithful might rest satisfied in looking for nothing
beyond it. For we know how restless are the fancies of mankind, and how insane a
disease is a vain curiosity. God is aware of what is useful for our information,
and so he adopts his method of teaching to our capacity and profit,. Yet we are
volatile and insatiable, saying, Why is not this added? Why does God stop here?
why does he not proceed further? As, therefore, human ingenuity is so inflamed
and intemperate, Daniel here deservedly says,
an end was put to the
vision, to cause all the elect to
acquiesce in it and be contented with this partial knowledge. He afterwards
adds, he was disturbed in his
thoughts, and his countenance was changed;
for he was afraid lest the pious should think this vision a mere vanished
specter. It was of the greatest importance to distinguish this vision from any
frivolous imagination. Daniel, therefore, to show how the scene proposed to his
notice was a divine revelation, expresses clearly how
he was terrified in his
thoughts. This occurred, because God
wished to stamp upon his heart the certainty of the prophecy. To the same
purpose is, the change of
countenance. He adds,
he laid up the discourse in
his heart, to assure us of his being a
faithful interpreter; for if we suspected him of negligence, we should not
receive, with reverence the message he delivered in these words, as really
proceeding from God. But when Daniel affirms that he discharged the duty of a
faithful servant, who kept the
whole discourse in his heart, additional
authority is added to his teaching. In conclusion, we must remember two points;
first, the celestial revelation made known to the Prophet to prove him a servant
and messenger of God to us; and secondly, the faithful discharge of his duties,
as he laid up in his
heart what he had received, and thus
delivered it through his own hands to the Church at large. Another vision
follows: —
CHAPTER 8
|
DANIEL
8:1
|
|
1. In the third year of the reign of King
Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that
which appeared unto me at the first.
|
1. Anno tertio regni Beltsazar Regnis, visio
visa fuit, visio apparuit, mihi, mihi inquam Danieli postquam apparuerat mihi in
principio.
f426
|
Here Daniel relates another vision, differing from
the former as a part from the whole. For God wished to show him first what
various changes should happen before Christ’s advent. The second
redemption was the beginning of a new life, since God then not only restored
afresh his own Church, but as it were created a new people; and hence the
departure from Babylon and the return to their country are called the second
birth of the Church. But as God at that time afforded then only a taste of true
and solid redemption, whenever the prophets treat of that deliverance, they
extended their thoughts and their prophecies as far as the coming of Christ. God
therefore, with great propriety, shows the Four Monarchies to His Prophet, lest
the faithful should grow weary in beholding the world so often convulsed, and
all but changing its figure and nature. Thus they would be subject to the most
distressing cares, become a laughing stock to their enemies, and ever remain
contemptible and mean, without the power to help themselves, under these
constant innovations. The faithful, then, were forewarned concerning these Four
Monarchies, lest they should suppose themselves rejected by God and deprived
altogether of his care. But now God wished to show only one part to his Prophet.
As the destruction of the Babylonian empire was at hand, and the second kingdom
was approaching, this dominion also should speedily come to its close, and then
God’s people should be reduced to the utmost extremity. And the chief
object of this vision is to prepare the faithful to bear patiently the horrible
tyranny of Antiochus, of which the Prophet treats in this chapter. now,
therefore, we understand the meaning of this prophet, where God speaks of only
two Monarchies, for the kingdom of the Chaldees was soon to be abolished: he
treats first of the Persian kingdom; and next, adds that of Macedon, but omits
all others, and descends directly to Antiochus, king of Syria. He then declares
the prevalence of the most wretched confusion in the Church; for the sanctuary
should be deprived of its dignity, and the elect people everywhere slain,
without sparing even innocent blood. We shall see also why the faithful were
informed beforehand of these grievous and oppressive calamities, to induce them
to look up to God when oppressed by such extreme darkness. And at this day this
prophecy is useful to us, lest our courage should fail us in the extreme
calamity of the Church, because a perpetual representation of the Church is
depicted for us under that calamitous and mournful state. Although God often
spares our infirmities, yet the Church is never free from many distresses, and
unless we are prepared to undergo all contests, we shall never stand firm in the
faith. This is the scope and explanation of the prophecy. I will defer the
rest.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou formerly
didst permit thy servants to maintain their courage in the midst of so many and
such heavy commotion, that we may reap the same edification from these
prophecies: are since we have fallen upon the fullness of times, may we profit
by the examples of the ancient Church, and by the pious and holy admonitions
which thou hast set before us. Thus may we stand firm and unconquered against
all the attacks of Satan, and the world, and the impious, and so may our faith
remain impregnable, until at length we enjoy the fruit of its victory in thy
heavenly kingdom, through Christ our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
THIRTY-NINTH
I have written a short preface to this vision, which
is here described for us in this eighth chapter, to enable you to comprehend
its contents, and to perceive the object for which it was offered to the
Prophet. As to the time, we must remember that the Prophet was informed of the
victory of Cyrus and Darius while the Babylonian monarchy was still standing.,
and flourishing. Although Cyrus had already made great progress, and begun to
lay waste the Chaldean territories, yet Belshazzar, as we have already seen, was
carelessly enjoying his festivities. No one ever thought Cyrus would become the
conqueror of so great a monarchy, for Belshazzar would not collect a great army
to defend the boundaries of his kingdom. He thought he should repel all the
endeavors of Cyrus as easily as possible; and the greater his violence the
more King Belshazzar hoped to overthrow him. Now God wished to show his servant
these future events. First of all, the immediate change is revealed; and next
the calamity to follow ultimately is made known — -the calamity, I mean,
of the Church under King Antiochus and his successors. The Prophet therefore
says: —
|
DANIEL
8:2-3
|
|
2. And I saw in a vision; (and it came to
pass, when I saw, that I was in the palace, which is in the
province of Elan;) and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of
Ulai.
|
2. Vidi in visione: et fuit cum videram, ut
ego essem in Susan,
f427
quae est in Elam provincia. Vidi in visione, et ecce eram super fluvium
Ulai.
|
|
3. Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw,
and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and
the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other,
and the higher came up last.
|
3. Et extuli oculos meos, et vidi: et ecce
aries unus stabat coram fluvio,
f428
et ei cornua duo, et cornua erant excelsa, et unam excelsius altero, et excelsum
hoc ascendebat retro.
|
Without any doubt, the Prophet here recognized a new
empire as about to arise, which could not happen without Babylon being reduced
to slavery. Hence it would tend in. no slight degree to alleviate the cares of
the pious, and to mitigate their sorrows, when they saw what they had previously
thought incredible, namely, the approaching destruction of that horrible tyranny
under which they had been so, cruelly oppressed. And if the liberty of returning
to their country was not immediately granted to the people, it would be no small
consolation to behold God’s judgment against the Chaldeans as foretold by
the prophets. We must now examine the Prophet’s language.
I have seen in a
vision, says he. This word
ˆwzj,
chezon, a “vision,” is added to show us that the ram
of which mention is made was not seen by the eyes of the body. Hence this was a
heavenly oracle, and ought to have raised the beholder above all human
sensations, to enable him to discern from lofty watch-tower what was hidden from
the rest of mankind. He did not see then what ordinary men might behold, but God
showed in a vision things which no mortal senses could apprehend. He next adds,
The vision was shewn to me,
Daniel, and I happened, says he, when I saw it, to be in
Shushan. Some think Daniel to be then
dwelling in Persia, bug this view is by no means probable; for who could
persuade the holy Prophet of God, who had been led captive with the rest and was
attached to the king of Babylon, to depart as if he had been entirely his own
master, and to go into Persia when the Persians were then open enemies? This is
not at all likely; and I wonder what can induce men to adopt this comment, so
contrary to all reason. For we need not dispute about a matter by no means
obscure if we weigh the Prophet’s words, as he removes all doubt by saying
he was in Shushan when he
saw, that is, when he was caught up by
the prophetic spirit beyond himself and above the world. The Prophet does not
say he dwelt in Shushan, or in the neighborhood, but he was there in the vision
only. The next verse, too, sufficiently shews him to have then been in Chaldean
in the third year, he says, of the reign of King Belshazzar. By naming the king,
he clearly expresses that he then dwelt under his power and dominion. It is
clearly to be gathered from these words, without the slightest doubt, that the
Prophet then dwelt in Chaldea. And perhaps Babylon had been already besieged, as
we saw before. He says he was in
the palace at Shushan. I know not how I
ought to translate this word,
hrybh,
hebireh, as I see no reason for preferring the meaning
“palace” to that of” citadel.” We are sure of the
nobility and celebrity of the citadel which was afterwards the head of the East,
for all nations and tribes received from thence their laws, rights, and
judgments. At the same time, I think this citadel was not then built, for its
empire over the Persian territory was not firmly established till the successors
of Cyrus. We may perhaps distinguish Shushan from Persia at large, yet as it is
usually treated as a part of that kingdom, I will not urge the distinction. The
country is, however, far milder and more fertile than Persia, as it receives its
name from being flowery and abounding in roses. Thus the Prophet says
he was there in a
vision.
He afterwards repeats
this I saw in a vision, and
behold I was near the river Ulai. The
Latin writers mention a river Eulaeus, and as there is a great similitude
between the words, I have no hesitation in understanding Daniel’s language
of the Eulaeus. The repetition is not superfluous. It adds certainty to the
prophecy, because Daniel affirms it; not to have been any vanishing specter, as
a vision might be suspected to be, but clearly and certainly a divine
revelation, as he will afterwards relate. He says, too,
he raised his eyes
upwards. This attentive attitude has the
same meaning, as experience informs us how often men are deceived by wandering
in erroneous imaginations. But Daniel here bears witness to his raising his eyes
upwards, because he, knew himself to be, divinely called upon to discern future
events.
He next. subjoins,
And behold a ram, stood at the
bank of the river, and it had horns. He
now compares the empire of Persia and Media to a ram. It ought not to seem
absurd that God proposed to his servant various similitude’s, because his
duty was to teach a rude people in various ways; and[ we know this vision to
have been presented before the Prophet, not for his private instruction only,
but for the common advantage of the whole people. I do not think we need!
scrupulously inquire why the Persian kings are called rams. I know of no valid
reason, unless perhaps to institute a comparison between them and Alexander of
Macedon and his successors. If so, when God, under the image of a ram, exhibits
to his Prophet the Persian empire, he does not illustrate its nature absolutely,
but only by comparison with that of Alexander. ‘We are well aware of the
opposition between these two empires. The Persian monarchy is called “a
ram,” with reference to the Macedonian, which, as we shall afterwards see,
bears the name of “he-goat” with respect to its antagonism. And we
may gather the best reason for this comparison in the humble origin of the kings
of Persia. With great propriety, then, Cyrus, the first ruler of this empire, is
here depicted for us under the form or image of a ram. His “horn”
produced a concussion through the whole earth, when no one expected anything
to spring from a region by no means abounding in anything noble. And as to
Alexander, he is called a “he-goat,” with respect to the
“ram,” as being far more nimble, and yet more obscure in his origin.
For what was Macedon but a mere corner of Greece? But I do not propose to run
the parallel between these points; it is sufficient that God wishes to show to
his Prophet and to the whole Church, how among the Persians, unknown as they
were, and despised by their neighbors, ,a king should arise to consume the
Median power, as we shall soon see, and also to overthrow the Babylonian
monarchy.
Behold,
therefore, says he, a ram
stood before the river, or at the bank
of the river, since Cyrus subdued both the Medes and his grandfather, as
historians inform us. Cyrus then rushed forth from his own mountains
and stood at the bank of the
river. He also says,
He had two
horns. Here the Prophet puts two horns
for two empires, and not by any means for two persons. For although Cyrus
married the daughter of Cyaxares his uncle, yet we know the Persian empire to
have lasted a long time, and to have supplied historians with a long catalogue
of kings. As Cyrus had so many successors, by the two horns God doubtless showed
his Prophet those two empires of the Medes and Persians united under one
sovereignty. Therefore, when the ram appeared to the Prophet, it represented
both kingdoms under one emblem.
The context confirms this by
saying, The two horns were lofty,
one higher than the other, and this was raised
backwards. The two horns were lofty;
for, though the Persian territory was not rich, and the people rustic and living
in woods, spending an austere life and despising all luxuries, yet the nation
was always warlike. Wherefore the Prophet says this horn
was higher than the
other, meaning, than the empire of the
Medes. Now Cyrus surpassed his father-in-law Darius in fame, authority, and
rank, and still he always permitted Darius to enjoy the royal majesty to the end
of his life. As he was an old man, Cyrus might easily concede to him the highest
one without any loss to himself. With respect then to the following period,
Cyrus was clearly pre-eminent, as he was certainly superior to Darius, whom
Xenophon calls Cyaxares. For this reason, then,
this horn was higher.
But meanwhile the Prophet shews how gradually
Cyrus was raised on high. The horn rose
backwards;
that is, “afterwards” — meaning, although the horn of the
Median kingdom was more illustrious and conspicuous, yet
the horn which rose
afterwards obscured the brightness and
glory of the former one. This agrees with the narratives of profane history: for
every reader of those narratives will find nothing recorded by Daniel which was
not fulfilled by the event. Let us go on: —
|
DANIEL
8:4
|
|
4. I saw the ram pushing westward, and
northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither
was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to
his will, and became great.
|
4. Vidi arietem ferientem Occasum et
Aquilonem, Septentrionem et Meridiem: et nullae bestiae consistebant
coram ipso,
f429
et nemo eripiens e manu ejus,
f430
itaque fecit secundum arbitrium suum, et magnificatus est.
|
The Prophet, now shortly sketches the great success
which should attend this double kingdom. He says,
The ram struck all the nations
towards the west, and north, and south. The
Persian and Median territory lay to the east of Babylon and Egypt, Syria, Asia
Minor, and Greece. This, without doubt, is extended to all the successors of
Cyrus, who are recorded as having convulsed the whole world. Cyrus himself was
shortly afterwards cruelly and basely slain, according to many historians,
although Xenophon affirms that he died in his bed. But I have before warned you
not to put your trust in that writer, although most excellent, since, under the
image of that king, he wished to set before us an example of perfect manliness;
and hence he brings him forward as discoursing on his deathbed, and exhorting
his sons to kingly virtues. Whichever is the true account, Cyrus was clearly
overtaken in the midst of his career. In this way God wished to chastise his
insatiable cupidity, a vice in which he resembled Alexander. As to his
successors, they excited such commotion in the whole world as to stir up heaven
and earth. Xerxes alone said he could bind the sea with fetters! and we know the
greatness of the army which he commanded; and this passage treats not only of
one king, but of all those of Persia. As they obtained a dominion so far and
wide, their ambition and pride always inflamed them, and there was no end to
their warfare till they had subdued the distant boundaries of the world. We are
acquainted too with their numerous attempts to destroy the liberty of Greece.
All this the Prophet embraces in but few words. God also wished to give his
Prophet a short glance into futurity, as far as such knowledge could be useful.
I
saw, then, says
he, a
ram, namely, a beast which possessed a
double horn, representing the Medes and Persians united in the same
sovereignty.
He struck the west, and the north,
and the south, so that no beasts could stand before
him. As the Persian kingdom is here
depicted under the, image of a ram, all kings and people are called
“beasts.” Thus, no
beast stood before him, and
no one could deliver out of his hand. It
is well known, indeed, how Xerxes and others failed in their attacks, and how
many wars the Monarchs of Persia attempted in which they were conquered by the
Greeks; but still their conquerors were in no better condition, as they were
compelled to seek peace like suppliants. So great became the power of the
Persians, that they inspired all nations with fear. For this reason the Prophet
says, he did according to his
pleasure, not implying the complete
success of these Monarchs according to their utmost wishes, for their desires
were often frustrated, as we have already narrated on the testimony of
historical evidence. Still they were always formidable, not only to their
neighbors who submitted to their yoke, but to the most distant nations, as they
crossed the sea and descended from Asia upon Greece. In the last word, he
expresses this fact, — the
ram became
mighty. For the Persian king became the
greatest of all Monarchs in the world, and it is sufficiently notorious that no
one could add to his dignity and strength. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
8:5-6
|
|
5. And as I was considering, behold, an
he-goat came from the west, on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the
ground; and the goat had a notable horn between his
eyes.
|
5. Et ego eram intentus,
f431
ecce, inquit hircus caprarum venit ab Occasu,
f432
super faciem totius terrae, neque tamen attingebat terram,
f433
et hirco cornu illustre erat inter oculos ejus.
|
|
6. And he came to the ram that had two
horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the
fury of his power.
|
6. Et venit ad arietem, cui erant cornua duo,
f434
quem videram standem in ripa fluvii,
f435
et cucurrit, ad eum cum furore fortitudinnnis suae.
|
Here another change is shown to the Prophet, namely,
Alexander’s coming to the east and acquiring. for himself the mighty sway
of the Persians, as afterwards happened. With the view, then, of procuring
confidence for his prediction, he says,
he was
attentive. He doubtless dwells upon the
reverence with which he received the vision to exhort us to the pursuit of
piety, and also to modesty and attention. The Prophet, therefore, was not
carried away in imagination by a dream which could be called in question; he
knew this vision to have been set before him by God, and acknowledged his duty
to receive it with modesty and humility. Wherefore, I
was attentive, and behold a
he-goat came forth from the west, says
he. The situation of Macedon with respect to Persia must be noticed. As the
Greeks were situated to the west, of Persia, the Prophet says,
the he-goat came from the west,
and went over the surface of the whole
earth. These words signify the very
extensive dominion of Alexander, aid. the terror of surrounding nations. His
arrival in Asia with a very insignificant army is well known. He thought 30,000
men sufficient, after he had been created their general by the States of Greece.
Hence, the passage is to be understood not of numbers, but of the terror
inspired on all sides; for, although he advanced with but a moderate force, yet
he terrified the whole earth.
But he did not touch the
ground, says he. This refers to his
swiftness, for he rather flew than traveled either on foot or by sea, so
incredible was his speed in this expedition. For if any one had galloped through
regions completely at peace, he could not have passed through Asia more
speedily. Hence a he-goat was shewn to the Prophet
who did not touch the
ground, that is, who was borne along
with a rapid impulse, like that of lightning itself.
And the goat had a
horn, says
he, between its
eyes
— a remarkable
horn. We know how much glory .Alexander
acquired for himself in a short time, and yet he did not undertake the war in
his own name, or on his own responsibility, but he used every artifice to obtain
from the Grecian States the office of general-in-chief against the Persians, as
perpetual enemies. We are well acquainted with the hostility of the Persians to
the Greeks, who, though often compelled to retreat with great disgrace, and
infamy, and loss of troops, still kept renewing the war, as they had abundance
of men and of pecuniary resources. When Alexander was created general of the
whole of Greece, he had a
remarkable horn between his eyes; that
is, he took care to have his title of general made known to increase his
personal superiority. Besides, it was sufficiently prominent to constitute him
alone general of the whole army, while all things were carried on according to
his will, as he had undertaken the war. This, then, is the reason why the
Prophet says, the horn was
visible between the eyes of the goat. It
follows, It came to the ram,
which had two horns; that is, it came
against the king of the Medes and Persians. Cyrus also had seized on Babylon,
and had subdued many kings, but two horns are assigned to the ram, since the
Persian kings had united the Medes in alliance to themselves. Hence
one he-goat with his horn,
came against the ram which had two horns, and ran against it in the ardor of its
bravery. Thus the perseverance of
Alexander is denoted, as he hastened so as to surpass all expectation by the
speed of his arrival. For Darius continued in security, although he had
collected a large army, but Alexander
rushed forwards in the boldness
of his strength, and surrounded the
enemy by his celerity. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
8:7
|
|
7. And I saw him come close unto the ram, and
he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two
horns; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him
down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver
the ram out of his hand.
|
7. Et vidi appropin quantem ad arietem, et
exasperantem seipsum
f436
et confregit duo cornua ejus, et non fuit virtus in ariete ad standum coram
facie ejus et dejecit eum in terram,
f437
et calcavit eum: et non fuit qui erueret e manu ejus.
|
Here God shews to his Prophet the victory of
Alexander, by which he subdued almost the whole east. Although he encountered
many nations in battle, and especially the Indians, yet the name of the Persian
empire was so celebrated in the world, that the dignity of others never
approached it. Alexander, therefore, by conquering Darius, acquired nearly the
whole east. God showed his Prophet the easiness of his victory under this
figure. I
looked, says he,
when he approached the
land. Darius was fortified by both the
distance of his stations and the strength of his fortifications; for many of his
cities were impregnable, according to the common opinion of mankind. It was
incredible, then, that the he-goat should approach the ram,
surrounded as he was on all sides by such strong and such powerful garrisons.
But the Prophet says he;
approached the ram, and then,
he exasperated himself against
him. This applies to Alexander’s
furious assaults. We are well acquainted with the keenness of his talents and
the superiority of his valor; yet, such was his unbridled audacity, that his
promptness approached rather to rashness than to regal bravery. For he often
threw himself with a blind impulse against his foes, and it was not his fault if
the Macedonian name was not destroyed ten times over. As, then, he rushed on
with such violent fury, we are not surprised when the Prophet says
he was exasperated of his own
accord. And he struck the ram, says he.
He conquered Darius in two battles, when the power of the Persian sway
throughout Asia Minor was completely ruined. We are all familiar with the
results of these hazardous battles, shewing the whole stress of the war to have
rested on that engagement in which Darius was first conquered; for when he says,
The ram had no strength to
stand; and although he had collected an
immense multitude, yet that preparation was available for nothing but: empty
pomp. For Darius was resplendent with gold, and silver, and gems, and he rather
made a show of these, luxuries in warfare, than displayed manly and vigorous
strength. The
ram,
then, had no power to stand
before the he goat. Hence,
he threw him prostrate on the
earth, and trod him down; and no one was able to deliver out of his
hand. Darius, indeed, was slain by his
attendants, but Alexander trod down all his glory, and the dignity of the
Persian empire, under which all the people of the east trembled. We are aware
also of the pride with which he abused his victory, until under the influence of
harlots and debauchees, as some report, he tumultuously set fire to that most
celebrated citadel of Susa in the drunken fit. As he so indignantly trampled
under foot the glory of the Persian monarchy, we see how aptly the events
fulfilled the prophecy, in the manner recorded by all profane
historians.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou desirest
us to be tossed about amidst many and various convulsions, that our minds may
always look upwards towards heaven, where thou hast prepared for us certain rest
and a tranquil inheritance beyond the reach of disturbance and commotion. When
the land through which we are on pilgrimage is in confusion, may we be so
occupied during its storms, as to. stand composed and grounded upon the faith of
thy promises, until having discharged our warfare, we are gathered together into
that happy rest, where we shall enjoy the fruit. of our victory, in Christ Jesus
our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
FORTIETH.
|
DANIEL
8:8
|
|
8. Therefore the he-goat waxed very great:
and, when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four
notable ones, toward the four winds of heaven.
|
8. Et hircus caprarum magnificatus est
admodum: et cum in robore suo esset, fractum fuit cornu magnum, et prodierunt
loco ejus illusttria quatuor alia, versus quatuor ventos
coelorum.
|
This prophecy relates to the death of Alexander. We
have explained how, under the image of a he-goat, the Macedonian empire is set
before us, having its beginning in the person of Alexander, but by no means
ending there, as the monarchy was divided into four parts. The angel said, or at
least Daniel records his words, —
that he-goat increased to an
immense magnitude, because he wandered
as it were in sport through almost the whole east, and at the same time subdued
it; but when it was in its
strength, says he,
its great horn was
broken. By the great horn, he means the
monarchy which was solely m Alexander’s power during his life, as he, was
the first and last monarch of his race. And in consequence of his generals, who
had obtained dominion in the four quarters of the world, becoming kings, as we
shall soon see, the word “he-goat” is not restricted to his person,
but is extended to his successors. He Himself is called “the great
horn.” Hence, when the
he-goat was in his strength, the great horn was
broken. For Alexander had arrived at the
height of prosperity when he died. Whether he perished by disease or by poison
is unknown, since historians report; a great suspicion of foul-play. The angel
does not notice his age, which was thirty-three years at his death, while he
seemed to have been born for subduing the whole world, although he was so
suddenly snatched away. But the angel regards those continued successes, since
Alexander almost by a look subdued the whole land, as we have stated before, and
hurried on rashly from place to place. Hence he perpetually gained fresh
victories, though at the constant hazard of his life, as he had far more
audacity than skill. When he was
in his strength, says he; meaning, after
having subjugated the whole east. He had returned from India, and had determined
to re-cross the sea, and to reduce Greece under his power; for the States had
rebelled against him, and the Athenians had already collected a great army; but
all the eastern States of Asia had been rendered subservient to Alexander when
he died. The angel refers to this by the breaking of
the great
horn.
He afterwards adds, In
his place four conspicuous horns
sprang up. For he uses the noun
twzj
chezeveth, notable,” as in yesterday’s Lecture.
f438
There were, therefore, four kingdoms which excelled, and each of them was
celebrated and placed aloft. Nor is This superfluous, since we know how many
became kings, who had enlisted in the service of Alexander with reputation and
dignity. Perdiccas was the first, and all thought him to have been favored with
special honor by Alexander When asked whom he wished for a successor, he
replied, according to the greatness or pride of his spirit, “The person
whom he considered most worthy of empire.” He had a son by Roxana the
daughter of Darius, as well as another son; then Aridmus his brother approached;
yet he deemed no one worthy of the honor of being his successor, as if the world
contained no equal to himself. His answer, then, was a proof of his pride. But
when he was unable to speak, he took a ring from his hand and gave it to
Perdieeas. Hence all conjectured that he had the preference in Alexander’s
judgment, and he obtained the supreme authority. After this, Eumenes was slain,
who had served under him. Although he was an ally, he was judged as an enemy,
and betrayed by his men; Lysimachus being slain on the other side. Fifteen
generals were put to death. And as so many succeeded to the place of Alexander
and exercised the royal authority, the angel correctly expresses how
four conspicuous horns sprang up
in the place of one great one. For after
various conflicts and many fluctuations for fifteen years or thereabouts,
Alexander’s monarchy was at length divided into four parts. Cassander, the
son of Antipater, obtained the kingdom of Macedon, after slaying Olympias, the
mother of Alexander, his sister, his sons, and his wife Rexaria. This was a
horrible slaughter, and if ever God offered a visible spectacle to the world,
whereby he openly denounced the shedding of human blood, surely a memorable
proof of this existed in the whole of Alexander’s race! Not a single one
survived for twenty years after his death. Though his mother had grown old, she
was not permitted to descend naturally to the grave, but was murdered. His wife,
and son, and brother, and all his relations, shared her fate. And that slaughter
was even yet more cruel, as no single leader spared the life of his companions,
but each either openly attacked or craftily assailed his friend and confederate!
But omitting details, four kingdoms were at last left after such remarkable
devastation’s. For Cassander, the son of Antipater, obtained Macedon and
some part of Thrace, together with the cities of Greece. Seleucus became master
in Syria; Antigonus in Asia Minor, joining Phrygia, Paphlagonia, and all other
Asiatic regions, after five or six generals were slain. Ptolemy became prefect
of Egypt. This makes four horns, which the angel calls
“conspicuous,” for on the testimony of history, all the other
principalities vanished away. Alexander’s generals had divided among
themselves many large and fertile provinces, but at length they were summed up
in these four heads. He says, by
the four winds of heaven , that is, of
the atmosphere. Now the kingdom of Macedon was very far distant from Syria; Asia
was in the midst, and Egypt lay to the south. Thus, the he-goat, as we saw
before, reigned throughout the four quarters of the globe; since Egypt, as we
have said, was situated towards the south; but the kingdom of Persia, which was
possessed by Seleucus, was towards the east and united with Syria; the kingdom
of Asia was to the north, and that of Macedon to the west, as we formerly saw
the he-goat setting out from the west. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
8:9
|
|
9. And out of one of them came forth a little
horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and
toward the pleasant land.
|
9. Et ex uno illorum egressum est cornu unum
parvum, et magnificatum fuit eximie versus Meridiem , et ad Orientum, et ad
glorium.
f439
|
Now God shews his Prophet what peculiarly concerned
the welfare of his Church. For it was of very great importance to warn the Jews
of the calamities which were about to oppress them. There is nothing which more
torments the minds of men than their becoming bewildered in false imaginations,
and thinking the world the sport of chance, while they never ponder over the
providence of God nor reflect upon his judgments. Hence, with this design, God
wished to teach the Prophet and all the pious the nature of their future
afflictions, since they would thus understand how events never happened by
chance, but all these scourges proceeded from God; for the same God both
determines and executes his decrees, as he also predicts future events. For if
nothing had been predicted, the pious would have glided gently downwards to
despair in consequence of their heavy afflictions. We know also how
magnificently the prophets extol the grace of God when they promise return and
deliverance. Isaiah, too, has elsewhere spoken to this effect: Not in haste nor
in tumult shall ye go forth, but with a standard displayed. Again, The wealth of
all the nations shall flow towards you; kings shall come, and submit, and bow
the knee to thee.
(<235210>Isaiah
52:10;
<235512>Isaiah
55:12;
<235506>Isaiah
55:6.) The Jews were permitted to return to their own land; but we know how
cruelly they were harassed by all their neighbors, so that they did not dwell in
that corner of the world without the greatest difficulties. The building of both
the city and the Temple was hindered by many enemies, till at length they became
tributary to the kings of Syria. Antiochus, indeed, who is here alluded to,
advanced with cruel tyranny against the people of God. If this had not been
predicted, they would have thought themselves deceived by the splendid promises
concerning their return. But when they perceived everything occurring according
as they had been opportunely forewarned, this became no slight solace in the
midst of their woes; they could then determine at once how completely it was in
the power of God to relieve them from so many and such oppressive evils. With
what intention, then, had God predicted all these things to his Prophet Daniel?
clearly that the Jews might look forward to a happy result, and not give way to
despair under events so full of anxiety and confusion. This, then, was the
utility of the prophecy, with reference to that particular
period.
When the Prophet says,
Out of one of those four horns a
little horn arose, Antiochus Epiphanes
is most distinctly pointed out. The title Epiphanes entails
“illustrious,” as, after the capture of his father, he was
detained as a hostage at Rome, and then escaped from custody. Historians inform
us of his possessing a servile disposition, and being much addicted to gross
flattery. As he had nothing royal or heroic in his feelings, but was simply
remarkable for cunning, the Prophet is justified in calling him
the little
horn. He was far more powerful than his
neighbors; but the
horn is called
little,
not in comparison with the kingdoms of either Egypt, or Asia, or Macedon,
but because no one supposed he would ever be king and succeed his father. He was
the eldest of many brothers, and singularly servile and cunning, without a
single trait worthy of future royalty. Thus he was
the little
horn who escaped secretly and
fraudulently from custody, as, we have already mentioned, and returned. to his
native country, which he afterwards governed.
He now adds,
This horn was very mighty towards
the south, and the east, and “the
desire”’ for unless he had
been checked by the Romans, he would have obtained possession of Egypt. There is
a remarkable and celebrated story of Pompilius, who, was sent to him to command
him to abstain from Egypt at the, bidding of the senate. After he had delivered
his message, Antiochus demanded time for deliberation, but Pompilius drew a
circle with the staff which he held in his hand, and forbade him to move his
foot until he gave him an answer. Though he claimed Egypt as his own by right of
conquest, yet he dared not openly to deny the Romans their request; at first he
pretended to be merely the guardian of his nephew, but he certainly seized upon
the kingdom in his own name. However, he dared not oppose the Romans, but by
changing his ground wished to dismiss Pompilius. They had been mutual
acquaintances, and a great familiarity had arisen between them while he was a
hostage at Rome; hence he offered to salute Pompilius at the interview, but he
rejected him disdainfully, and, as I have said, drew a line around him, saying,
“Before .you go out of this circle answer me; do not delude me by asking
time to consult with your councilors; answer at once, otherwise I know how to
treat thee.” He was compelled to relinquish Egypt, although he had
formerly refused to do so. The language of the Prophet, then, was not in vain,
The small horn became mighty
towards the south, that is, towards
Egypt, and the
east; for he extended his kingdom as far
as Ptolemais. In the third place, he uses the word glory; that is, Judea,
the sanctuary of God, which he had chosen as his dwelling, and desired his name
to be invoked. Thus this small horn
extended itself to the
glory, or the land of glory or desire.
There is nothing doubtful in the sense, though the interpretation scarcely
agrees with the words. It afterwards follows: —
|
DANIEL
8:10
|
|
10. And it waxed great, even to the
host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the
ground, and stamped upon them.
|
10. Et magnificatum est cornu illud parvum
ad exercitum coelorum, dejecit in terram ex illo exercitu, nenipe
coelesti, et ex stellis, et calcavit eas.
|
Here Daniel continues the vision which he had
received. We have already shewn he object of the Almighty to be the preparation
of the faithful to bear serious calamities, because nothing new or unexpected
should happen to them.:Now, Daniel’s dwelling upon this point is not
surprising, for it becomes his duty to inform the faithful of the heavy
calamities which were at hand, and thus to mould them to patience and equity.
Thus he says, The horn became
magnificent, even to the army of the heavens.
Without the slightest doubt this figure marks
the elect people of God. Although the Church often lies prostrate in the world,
and is trodden under foot and buried, yet it is always precious before God.
Hence the Prophet adorns the Church with this remarkable praise, not to obtain
for it any honor before men, but because God has separated it from the world,
and provided a sure inheritance in heaven. Although the sons of God are pilgrims
on earth, and have scarcely any dwelling-place here, becoming like castaways
before men, yet they are nevertheless citizens of heaven. The usefulness of this
teaching to us is apparent, by its inducing us to bear it patiently whenever we
are often thrown prostrate on the ground, and whenever tyrants and the
despiser’s of God look down upon us with scorn. Meanwhile our seat is laid
up in heaven, and God numbers us among the stars, although, as Paul says, we are
as dung and the offscouring of all things.
(<460413>1
Corinthians 4:13.) In fine, God here shews his Prophet, as in a mirror, the
estimation in which he holds his Church, however contemptible it is on earth.
That
horn, then,
was magnified before the army of
the heavens, and cast down some of that army upon the earth, and trod them out
of the stars. Exactly as if he
proclaimed the loosening of the reins from the tyrant, permitting him to treat
the Church with contempt, to tread it under foot;, and to draw down the stars
from heaven, just as if God never appeared for its protection. For when God
permits us to be safe and secure in his hand, and pronounces it impossible to
prevail against his help, while tyrants harass and oppress us by their lust, it
is like drawing down stars from heaven. God therefore, while he takes us under
his guardianship, does not offer us. any succor, but dissembles as if he wished
to betray us to our enemies. Nothing therefore is superfluous in these
expressions of the Prophet —
The stars were trodden down
and the heavenly army thrown down to earth.
He now adds —
|
DANIEL
8:11
|
|
11. Yea, he magnified himself even to
the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away,
and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
|
11. Et ad Principem exercitus magnificatum est
f440
et ab eo ablatum fuit juge,
f441
et projectus fuit
f442
locus sancturii ejus.
|
Daniel announces something still more atrocious here,
namely, the exaltation of the little horn against God. Some take “the
prince of the army” for the high priest, as princes are sometimes called
µynhwk,
kuhnim, as well as
µyrç,
serim; but that is too forced. The true sense of the passage imputes such
arrogance and folly to Antiochus as to urge him to declare war with the stars of
heaven, implying not only his opposition to God’s Church, which is
separate from the world, but also his daring defiance of God himself and his
resistance to his power. He not only exercised his cruelty against the faithful,
but profaned the temple itself, and endeavored to extinguish all piety, and to
abolish the worship of God throughout Judea, as we shall explain more fully in
other passages. As, therefore, Antiochus not only raged against men, but used
his utmost endeavors to overthrow religion, Daniel relates how
that horn was raised up even
against the prince of the army. God is
deservedly entitled to this appellation, because he defends his Church, and
cherishes it under his wings. This expression ought to be explained not only of
God’s glory and empire, but also of his paternal favor towards us, as he
deigns to manifest his care for us as if he were our Prince.
From
him, says he,
was the perpetual sacrifice
utterly snatched away, and the place of his sanctuary cast
down. These words are horrible in their
import; God was thus spoiled of his rights, since he had chosen but a single
corner in the world for his special worship. What heathen, then, would not
despise this forbearance of God, in permitting himself to be deprived of his
legitimate honor by that sordid tyrant? As we have already stated, Antiochus had
neither greatness of mind nor warlike courage, being skillful only in cunning
and in the basest acts of flattery. Besides, granting him to have comprised a
hundred Alexanders in his own person, what can be the Almighty’s design in
allowing his temple to be polluted, and all true sacrifices to cease throughout
the world? One corner alone, as we have lately mentioned, was left where God
wished to be worshipped, and now Antiochus seizes upon the temple, and profanes
and defiles it with the utmost possible indignity, thus leaving no single place
sacred to the Almighty. For this reason I have asserted the prophecy to appear
very harsh. The Prophet now increases the indignity when he speaks of
the perpetual
sacrifice. For God had often borne
witness to his temple being his perpetual “rest,” or
“station,” or “seat;” yet he is now ejected from
this spot, as if exiled from the earth entirely. The temple could not exist
without sacrifices, for the whole worship under the law was a kind of appendage
to the temple. As God had promised the sacrifice should be perpetual and
eternal, who would not assert, when Antiochus destroyed it, either all the
promises to have been deceptive, or all authority to have departed from God, who
failed to defend his right against that impious tyrant. Surely this must have
been a distressing calamity, overwhelming all the faithful! And when even at
this moment we read the prophecy, all our senses are horrified by its perusal.
No wonder, then, that God forewarned. his servant of such sorrowful events, and
such incredible evils, to admonish his whole Church in due season, and to arm
them against the severest temptations, which might otherwise strike down even
the most courageous. The
sacrifice , then , says he,
was snatched away from God
himself, and the place of his sanctuary was cast
down or dissipated. It afterwards
follows: —
|
DANIEL
8:12
|
|
12. And an host was given him against
the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the to
the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.
|
12. Et tempus
f443
datum est super jugi sacrificio in scelere,
f444
et projiciet veritatem in terram et faciet,
f445
et prospere aget.
|
The Prophet mitigates the asperity which he now
records. It seems absurd for God to allow such license to Antiochus, that his
temple should be spoiled and all sacrifices and all worship exterminated. It is
difficult to reconcile this, for the opinion will naturally creep in, —
possibly God is constrained and deprived of power to subdue his foes. The,
Prophet therefore clearly states here how the license for vexing and
oppressing’ the Church would never have been granted to Antiochus without
God’s permission.
Time,
therefore, shall be given
him, says he. By the words,
time shall be
given. he refers to the will of
God, meaning, the pious shall have no cause for desponding while they see all
things disturbed and confused in every direction, as God will rule all these
perplexities by his secret judgment.
Time, then, shall be
given, implying, Antiochus can do
nothing by his unbridled and furious audacity, unless divinely permitted and
previously limited.
abx tzeba, signifies both “army”
and “time,” but the latter meaning is the most suitable here; for
when it is translated “an army shall be given him,” the sense
appears forced. I more willingly embrace the sense of time being allowed; that
is, God will try the patience of his Church for a certain definite time, and
will then bring their troubles to an end. We, know it to be impossible to
sustain the spirits of the faithful, otherwise that by their expectation of a
favorable termination, and by the hope of their emerging from the abyss of
sorrow. This, then, is the reason why God shews his Prophet by a vision the
temporary duration of the sway of Antiochus.
A
period, then,
shall be appointed to him
over the perpetual sacrifice; meaning,
whatever he may intend, he shall not abolish the worship of God. For, however he
may exert himself, God will not permit the sacrifices to perish utterly and
forever; he will restore them in his own time, as we shall afterwards see, and
when we come to the close, we shall find the context flowing on in accordance
with this meaning — a time
shall be given him over the continual sacrifice.
He afterwards adds
[çpb,
beph-sheng, in wickedness,” or “in sin.” I prefer the
simple translation ‘“ in sin” to “by
sin,” although different senses are elicited according to the different
views of interpreters. It is better to leave it to every one’s free
choice, and thus simply to translate “in wickedness” or
“sin.” Some refer it to Antiochus, because he wickedly polluted
God’s temple, and abolished the sacrifices. This sense is probable, but I
will add others, and then say which of them I like best. Some understand
“in sin” of the priests, because, through the perfidy of Jason,
Antiochus entered the city, spoiled the temple, and introduced those
abominations which exterminated all piety and divine worship. (2 Maccabees.
4:7.) As Jason desired to snatch the priesthood from his brother Onias, he
opened the gates to Antiochus; then a great slaughter followed, in which all the
adherents of Onias were cruelly slain. Afterwards Menelaus expelled Jason again
by similar perfidy. Some translate “by means of wickedness,”
as these priests induced Antiochus to exercise cruelty in the holy city, and
to violate the temple itself. Others approach nearer the real sense, by
supposing the sacrifices to have ceased through wickedness, because they were
adulterated by the priests. But this appears to me too restricted. In my
judgment, I rather hold towards the view of those who take
“wickedness” as a cause arid origin, thereby teaching the
Jews how justly they were punished for their sins. I have already explained how
properly the vision was limited as to time, and controlled by God’s
permission and secret counsel. The cause is here expressed; for it might still
be objected, “How happens it that God submits himself and his sacred name
to the ridicule of the impious, and even deserts his own people? What does he
intend by this .The Prophet, therefore, assigns this cause — the
Jews must feel the profanation of the temple, the sad devastation. of the whole
city and their horrible slaughter, to be the reward due to their sins.
A time, therefore, shall be
assigned over the perpetual sacrifice in
sin; that is, on account of sin. We here
see how God on the one hand moderates the weight of the evils which pressed upon
the Jews, and shews them some kindness, lest sorrow, anxiety, and despair should
consume the wretched people; on the other hand, he humbles them and admonishes
them to confess their sins, and then he urges them to apply their minds to
repentance, by stating their own sins to be the cause of their afflictions. He
thus shews how the source of all their evils was in the Jews themselves, while
God’s anger was provoked by their vices. It is necessary to stop here till
tomorrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as thou hast
enlightened us by the teaching of thy Gospel, and set before our eyes thine only
begotten Son as a Sun of righteousness to rule us, and hast deigned to separate
us from the whole world, and to make us thy peculiar people, and to prepare for
us a certain seat in heaven: Grant, I pray thee, that we may be heirs of eternal
life. Grant us also, to be mindful of thy sacred calling, and to make our
pilgrimage on earth with spirits looking upwards and tending towards thee. May
we meditate upon the righteousness of thy kingdom, and be entirely devoted to
thee. Do thou protect us by thy hand even to the end, and may we march boldly
under thy standard, till at length we arrive at that blessed rest, where the
fruit of our victory is laid up for us in Jesus Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-FIRST.
Daniel here mentions one among the many crimes of
Antiochus, his casting down truth
to the ground. This clause ought to be
joined with the former; for Antiochus could not deprive God of his lawful
worship without abolishing sound doctrine. The angel seems here to express the
reason for the destruction of the sanctuary, because the worship of God depended
upon the teaching of the law, which is here understood by the word
“truth.” This passage then states that no religion is
pleasing to God unless founded on truth; for God, according to the uniform
teaching of the Scriptures, does not desire to be worshipped according to
man’s caprice, but rather tries the obedience of men by prescribing what
he demands and approves, lest men should pass over these bounds. We must here
remark the union which Daniel now establishes between the overthrow and
abolition of the worship of God, and the casting down of truth to the ground,
when it neither obtains its proper rank, nor subdues all mortals to
itself.
It may be read, he will east down truth in the earth;
thus making a distinction between heaven and earth. And if we like to read it
so, the sense will be — truth still remains stable although it perishes in
the earth, because it has its station in heaven. Thus the sense would be —
after the abolition of the worship of God, and the cessation of the sacrifices,
piety could no longer exist among mortals. At length he adds,
he shall succeed and
prosper. The first word here implies
execution. God wished on the whole to admonish his Church concerning the
prosperous success of Antiochus, lest the faithful should be dispirited at
beholding the impious tyranny so petulantly and wantonly polluting God’s
temple, and utterly destroying his religion, as if he had provoked God himself
to the contest. For this conduct was equivalent to a direct declaration of war
against God. For his success would trouble all the pious, as if the tyrant was
superior to God himself. Hence this prediction would warn the faithful against
the novelty or suddenness of anything which might occur. It follows,
—
|
DANIEL
8:13-14
|
|
13. Then I heard one saint speaking, and
another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall
be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the
transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be
trodden under foot?
|
13. Et audivi sanctum unum loquentum: dixit
ergo sanctus unus mirabili, dicemus postea de voce, loquens, Quousque
visiom jugis sacrificii, et sceleris vastantis ad dandum,
f446
et sanctuarium, et exercitus conculcatio.
f447
|
|
14. And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and
three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
|
14. Et dixit mihi, ad vesperum, mane,
f448
duo millia et trecenti anni: et justificabitur
sanctuarium.
|
Here he expresses more clearly, what I formerly said,
unfolding God’s intention of consoling and soothing the sorrows of the
pious lest they should sink under the severity of their trials, at the sight of
an impious tyrant domineering in the sanctuary of God. Besides, the spot which
God had promised should be his perpetual dwelling-place, was exposed to impious
superstitions, for the idol of Jupiter Olympius was erected there, the history
of the Maccabees informs us. (2 Maccabees. 1:57; 2 Maccabees. 6:2.) God
therefore wished to uphold his servants, lest too severe a temptation should
overwhelm them, and lest trial in so many forms should cause them to yield and
become deficient in piety through want of courage. But while Daniel is stupefied
through astonishment., God provides for his infirmity by means of an angel.
Daniel himself, without doubt, inquired concerning the vision as we shall see he
did afterwards; but here God desired to meet him, as he saw the holy man. so
overcome by fear as scarcely to dare to make any inquiry. God, therefore, here
affords no common proof of his paternal goodness and indulgence, in interposing
and sending his angel to make inquiries in the Prophet’s name. He says,
then, he heard a holy
one, meaning an angel. For, although God
deigns to call the faithful while dwelling in the world by this honorable title,
yet the superior purity of angels is familiar to us, as they are altogether free
from the lusts of the flesh. But we, alas! are detained in this prison-house, we
are bound down in slavery to sin, and are polluted by much corruption. The
holiness of angels, however, is far greater than that of mortals, and thus this
attribute of “holiness” is properly applied to them. When Daniel was
caught up by the prophetic spirit, he was separated from the society of men, and
was admitted to that of angels.
An angel then, said to the
wonderful one. The Hebrews often use
this expression when they mean “whoever it may be” — ploni
almoni and apply it to places as well as persons. They use it also of any
place unknown to them or concealed from them. They treat the noun as compounded
of two words, and many interpret it of any one unknown, but I think the word to
be more emphatic than this.
f449
Daniel here brings forward an angel speaking, and adds dignity to his
description by calling him “holy.” Without doubt, then, the
person of whom the angel asked the question was his superior; it is not likely
that he would be called “a certain one,” while the angel is termed a
holy one. Reason, then, requires the expression to be applied to some angel
whose glory was incomprehensible, or at least far superior to ordinary ones;
for, as Daniel calls one angel “holy,” so he would have called the
rest, as we shall afterwards see. When treating, however, of a distinct being,
he uses the word
ynwmlp,
palmoni, and its etymology guides us to its sense, as meaning something
mysterious and incomprehensible. Then, who does not see that Christ is denoted,
who is the chief of angels and far superior to them. all? In the ninth chapter
of Isaiah,
(<230906>Isaiah
9:6,) he is called
alp
pela, “wonderful.” The word in the text is a compound one, as we
have said, but as
alp
pela , signifies “hidden” in Hebrew, as Christ is so called, and
as in
<070301>Judges
3:1, God claims this name as peculiarly his own, all these points agree well
together. The sense then is, an angel comes to Christ for the sake of Daniel and
of the whole Church, and seeks from him as from the supreme teacher and master,
the meaning of the declarations which we have just heard. We need not feel
surprise at angels inquiring into eternity, as if it were unknown to them. It is
the property of Deity alone to know all things, while the knowledge of angels is
necessarily limited. Paul teaches us to wonder at the Church being collected out
of profane and strange people; this was a mystery hidden from angels themselves,
before God really showed himself the father of the whole world.
(<490310>Ephesians
3:10.) Hence, there is no absurdity in supposing angels to inquire into
mysteries, as ignorance is not necessarily deserving of blame, and as God has
not raised his creatures for his own level. It is his peculiar province to know
all things, and to have everything under his eye. The angel desires to
understand this mystery, not so much for his own sake as on account of the whole
Church; for we know them to be our ministers, according to the clear testimony
of the Apostle. (Hebrews 1:14.) As they keep watch over us so carefully, it does
not surprise us to find the angel inquiring so anxiously concerning this vision,
and thus benefiting the whole Church by the hand of Daniel.
Meanwhile, we must notice, how Christ is the chief of
angels and also their instructor, because he is the eternal Wisdom of God.
Angels, therefore, must draw all the light of their intelligence from that
single fountain. Thus angels draw us to Christ by their example, and induce us
to devote ourselves to him through the persuasion that this is the supreme and
only wisdom. If we are his disciples, being obedient, humble, and teachable, we
shall desire to know only what he will make manifest to us. But the angel asks.
What is the meaning of the vision
of the perpetual sacrifice,
and of the
sin? that is, what, is the object of the
vision concerning the abrogation of the perpetual sacrifice, and concerning the
sin which lays waste? As to the second point, we explained yesterday the various
opinions of interpreters, some twisting it to Antiochus, who impiously dared to
violate God’s temple, and others to the priests. But we said the people
were intended, lest many, as they are accustomed, should blame the Almighty for
so heavily afflicting the Church. But God wished to bear witness to the origin
of this devastation from the sins of the people. It is just as if the angel had
said, How long will the sacrifices cease? How long will this vengeance, by which
God will chastise the wickedness of his people, endure? For the sin is called
devastating, through being the cause of that calamity. It is afterwards
added, how long will the
sanctuary and the army be trodden, down?
that is, how long will the worship of God, and true piety, and the people
itself, be trodden down under this cruel tyranny of Antiochus? But this question
has far more efficacy, than if the Prophet had said, as we saw yesterday, that
the punishment should be uniform and temporal. It was now necessary to explain
what had already been stated more clearly. Thus this question was interposed
with the view of rendering Daniel more attentive, and of stirring up the people
by this narrative to the pursuit of learning. For it is no common event when
angels approach Christ for our sakes, and inquire into the events which concern
the state and safety of the Church. As, therefore, angels discharge this duty,
we must be worse than stony, if we are not urged to eagerness and carefulness in
the pursuit of divine knowledge. We see, then, why this passage concerning the
angel is interposed.
The phrase,
And he said to
me, now follows. This ought to be
referred not to the angel inquiring, but to the Wonderful One. Whence we, rather
gather the great anxiety of the angel concerning the interpretation of the
prophecy, not for his own sake, but for the common benefit of the pious.
Respecting this Wonderful One, though I am persuaded he was the Son of God, yet
whoever he was, he certainly does not reject the angel’s request. Why then
does he address Daniel rather than the angel? Because the angel was not seeking
his own benefit, but took up the cause of the whole Church, as we have Shawn how
angels are occupied in our salvation. Thus also we see how the angel notices the
Prophet’s astonishment, when he was almost dead, and had not thought of
inquiring for himself, or at least did not dare to break forth at once; for he
afterwards recovered himself, and was raised up by the angel’s hand, as we
shall soon perceive. The
Wonderful One said to me — that is, the
incomprehensible or the mysterious one said to
me — for two thousand three
hundred evenings and mornings, then the sanctuary shall be
justified. Here the Hebrews are mutually
at variance whether they ought to understand the number of years or of months;
but it is surprising to perceive how grossly they are deluded in so plain a
matter. The expression, to
evening and morning, is not doubtful,
since Christ, clearly means two thousand three hundred days; for what else can
the phrase, morning and
evening, signify? It cannot be used of
either years or months. Evidently we ought to understand natural days here,
consisting of twenty-four hours each. Those who receive it of years and months
are wretchedly mistaken, and even ridiculous in their calculations. For some
begin to calculate the, time from Samuel, they next descend to the reign of
Saul, and next to that of David; and thus they foolishly trifle, through not
understanding the intention of Christ, who wished his Church to be forewarned of
the coming empires and slaughters, with the view of rendering the faithful
invincible, however sorely they may be oppressed on all sides. Christ therefore
wished to hold up a light to direct all the elect through the approaching
darkness under the tyranny of Antiochus, and to assure them that in the very
depths of it they would not be deserted by the favor of God. Hope would thus
elevate their minds and all their senses unto the promised termination. To what
purpose, then, do those interpreters speak of the reigns of Saul and .David? We
see this to be altogether foreign and adverse to the mind of Christ, and to the
use of this prophecy.:No less absurd is the guess of those who prate about
months. Their refutation would occupy three or four hours, and would be a waste
of time, utterly profitless. It is sufficient to gather this simple meaning from
the words — Christ does not speak here of years or months, but of days. We
must now seek the true interpretation of the passage from the whole context. We
have shewn how impossible it is to explain this prophecy otherwise than by
Antiochus: the event itself proves this to be its meaning. Blind indeed must be
those who do not hold this principle — the small horn sprang from one of
those remarkable and illustrious persons who came forth in place of one very
large horn. Boys even know this by reading the accredited. history of those
times. As Christ here alluded to the tyranny of Antiochus, we must observe how
his words accord with the facts. Christ numbers 2300 days for the pollution of
the sanctuary, and this period comprehends six years and about four months. We
know the Jews to have used lunar years as well as months. They afterwards used
interealary periods, since twelve lunar months did not correspond with the
sun’s course. The same custom prevailed among both Greeks and Romans.
Julius Caesar first arranged for us the solar year, and supplied the defect by
intercalary days, so that the months might accord with the sun’s course.
But however that was, these days, as I have said, fill up six years and three
months and a half. Now, if we compare the testimony of history, and especially
of the book of Maccabees, with this prophecy, we shall find that miserable race
oppressed for six years under the tyranny of Antiochus. The idol of Olympian
Jove did not remain in the temple for six continuous years, but the commencement
of the pollution occurred at the first attack, as if he would insult the very
face of God. No wonder then if Daniel understood this vision of six years and
about a third, because Antiochus then insulted the worship of God and the Law;
and when he poured forth innocent blood promiscuously, no one dared openly to
resist him. As, therefore, religion was then laid prostrate on the ground, until
the cleansing of the temple, we see how very clearly the prophecy and the
history agree, as far as this narrative is concerned. Again, it is clear the
purifying of the temple could not have .been at the end of the sixth current
year, but in the month
wlsk,
keslu, answering to October or November, as leaned men prudently decide,
it was profaned. For this month among the Jews begins sometimes in the middle of
October, and sometimes at the end, according to the course of the moon; for we
said the months and years were lunar. In the month Keslu the temple was
polluted; in the month
rda
Ader, about three months afterwards, near its close, the Maccabees purged
it. (1 Maccabees 4:36.) Thus the history confirms in every way what Daniel had
predicted many ages previously — nay, nearly three hundred years before it
came to pass. For this occurred a hundred and fifty years after the death of
Alexander. Some time also had already elapsed, as there were eight or ten kings
of Persia between the deaths of Cyrus and Darius. I do not remember any but the
chief events just now, and it ought it to be sufficient for us to perceive how
Daniel’s predictions were fulfilled in their own season, as historians
clearly narrate. Without the slightest doubt, Christ predicted the profanation
of the temple, and this would depress the spirits of the pious as if God had
betrayed them, had abandoned all care of his temple, and had given up his
election and his covenant entirely. Christ therefore wished to support the
spirit of the faithful by this prediction, thereby informing them how fully they
deserved these future evils, in consequence of their provoking God’s
wrath; and yet their punishment should be temporary, because the very God who
announced its approach promised at the same time a prosperous
issue.
Respecting the phrase,
the sanctuary shall be
justified, some translate it —
“Then the sanctuary shall be expiated;” but I prefer retaining the
proper sense of the word. We know how usually the Hebrews use the word
“justify” when they speak of rights. When their own rights are
restored to those who have been deprived of them — when a slave has been
blessed with his liberty — when he who has been unjustly oppressed obtains
his cause, the Hebrews use this word “justified.” As God’s
sanctuary was subject to infamy by’ the image of Olympian Jove being
exhibited there, all respect for it had passed away; for we know how the glory
of the temple sprang from the worship of God. As the temple had been defiled by
so great disgrace, it was then justified, when God established his own
sacrifices again, and restored his pure worship as prescribed by the Law.
The
sanctuary, therefore,
shall be
justified; that is, vindicated from that
disgrace to which for a time it had been subject. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
8:15
|
|
15. And it came to pass, when I, even I
Daniel, had seen the vision and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there
stood before me the appearance of a man.
|
15. Et factum est. cum videram ego Daniel
visionem, et quaererem intelligentiam, ecce stetit coram me quasi aspectus,
vel species, viri.
|
Daniel again confirms his original statement. But
before he descends to the interpretation, he makes a preface concerning the
faithfulness and certainty of the oracle, lest the Church should hesitate to
embrace his utterance as really proceeding from God.:In doing this, he uses no
artifice as rhetoricians do; but God wished to stir up both him and all the
pious to meditate upon this prophecy, the knowledge of which was then so
peculiarly necessary and useful. He says, therefore,
when he sought the understanding
of this vision, there appeared to him a form like that of a
man. Now God had anticipated this desire
of the Prophet, by the answer which the angel received from Christ, who in reply
had partly explained the sense of this vision. Now Daniel, finding himself
anticipated by God who did not wait for his inquiry, gathers courage, and
trusting in God’s readiness to furnish an answer, he wishes to learn the
matter more clearly; not that he was altogether ignorant of the subject, but he
did not yet perceive with sufficient clearness what was useful to himself and
the whole Church. We see then, how the answer of Christ only afforded him a
taste of the vision, and only urged him forwards towards the full comprehension
of it. Many are immediately satisfied with but moderate information, and as soon
as they understand a portion of any subject, they reject every addition, and
many too often settle down at the first elements, and their obstinacy prevents
that complete knowledge which is necessary. Daniel therefore shews himself to be
far distant from such fastidiousness, as he was rendered more attentive by
hearing from Christ’ lips the rea1 object of the vision.
When I was attentive 1 sought to
understand it, says he,
behold! there stood before my
face (or near it)like
the aspect of a
man. We ought probably to interpret this
passage of Christ, who is now called like a man, as formerly.
(<270713>Daniel
7:13.) For he had not yet put on our flesh, so as to be properly entitled to the
name of a man; but he was here like a man, because he wished to allow the holy
fathers a taste from which they might understand his future coming as Mediator,
when he should put on human nature as God manifest:in flesh:.
(<540316>1
Timothy 3:16.) Thus Daniel speaks suitably as before when he says, Christ
appeared to him under the aspect
of a man. But this adds to the same
purpose, —
|
DANIEL
8:16
|
|
16. And I heard a man’s voice between
the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man
to understand the vision.
|
16. Et audivi vocem hominis in Ulai
f450
et clamavit, et dixit, Gabriel, doce hane visionem.
|
He does not use the particle implying fitness, but
says he heard the voice of a man, because he treats no longer of either a man or
a figure, but of a voice. It is sufficient to say at once, he was like a man,
not really so, but only under the image and appearance of one. Christ therefore
appeared as a
man, and is called one, since Scripture
often records how angels often appeared under the form of men, and are called
indiscriminately, either angels or men.
(<070803>Judges
8:3, etc.) So in this place Daniel relates the appearance of a. man, or the
aspect of one, improperly indeed, but without any danger of mistake; for he
afterwards admonishes the faithful, how this person was not clothed with the
substance of flesh, but had only a human form and aspect.
I heard then a human voice in the
midst of the river. We gather from this
that the same person is here intended of whom mention was lately made, because
he commands the angel; whence this can be referred to Christ
alone.
Gabriel,
says he, teach
him. We observe the speaker from the
midst of:the river here commanding Gabriel, as if superior to him. For Gabriel
as. the name of an angel, is sufficiently known from other passages of
Scripture;
(<420119>Luke
1:19, 26;) and its etymology, “The strength of God,” is very
suitable to this meaning. Without ally doubt, the angel here receives his
commands from Christ. Thus, we see the supreme power and authority represented
under the form and aspect of a man, as well as obedience portrayed in Gabriel,
who discharges the duty enjoined upon him. From this Christ’s divinity is
inferred, as he could not issue orders to angels, without either having special
authority, or being God himself. But when the phrase “like a man” is
used, we are taught his manifest superiority to man. And what does this imply?
not angelic nature but divine. Christ by thus presenting himself under a human
form, shews, by a kind of foreshadowing, how he would become a man, when the
fullness of time arrived. Then he would really manifest himself as the head of
the Church, and the guardian of the salvation of the pious. For he proves
himself to have power over all angels, when he orders Gabriel to discharge the
office of the Prophet’s instructor. We will put off the
remainder.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since in these days
the earth is full of defilement’s which pollute the sacred worship of thy
name, as there is scarcely a corner of the world which Satan has not corrupted,
and as thy truth is everywhere adulterated, that we may persevere and remain
steadfast in our course of piety. May we always be attentive to that light which
thou didst first set before us in the Law, and which shines upon us now more
fully under the Gospel. May we never become plunged into that darkness in which
we see the world wrapped up, and in which those who seem to be themselves most
acute are still involved. Grant us always to follow that life which thou shewest
us, until we arrive at that goal which thou hast set before us, and to which
thou daily invitest us by thine only-begotten Son. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-SECOND.
|
DANIEL
8:17
|
|
17. So he came near where I stood; and when he
came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O
son of man; for at the time of the end shall be the
vision.
|
17. Et venit ad stationem meam: et cum veniret
territus sum, et cecidi super faciem meam: tunc dixit ad me, Intellige, fil
hominis, quai ad tempus finis visio.
f451
|
I will not repeat what I have already explained. I
will proceed with what I had commenced, namely, the Prophet’s need of
instruction, because he could not understand the vision without an interpreter;
wherefore the angel was ordered to explain his revelation of God more fully.
But, before he narrates this, he says,
he was frightened at the approach
of the angel. Without doubt., this
reverence was always present to his mind. Whenever he perceived himself called
or taught by God, he was doubtless struck with fear; but here some special
feeling is expressed, as God desired to influence his mind to set us an example,
and to render us more attentive. Here Daniel explains his own mind to us,
commending the magnitude and importance of the vision, lest we should read with
carelessness what he will afterwards relate, and not treat the occasion with
sufficient seriousness. For God used the angel as his servant to explain his
intention to the Prophet; at the same time he inwardly touched his mind by his
Spirit to show us the way, and thus he would not only train us to docility, but
also to fear. He says, then, he
was frightened and fell down. This, as I
have said, was usual with the Prophet, as it ought to be with all the pious.
Paul also, in celebrating the effect and power of prophecy, says, if any
unbelievers should enter into the assembly and hear a prophet speaking in
God’s name, he would prostrate himself, says he, upon his face. (1
Corinthians 14:25.) If this happened to unbelievers, how great will be our
troubles, unless we receive most reverently and humbly, what we know to have
been uttered by the mouth of God? Meanwhile, we should remember what I have
lately touched upon, — the importance of the present oracle ,as here
commended to us by the Prophet;
for he fell upon his face through
his fright, as he will repeat in the
next verse.
Nor is the following exhortation superfluous;
understated,
says he, O son of
Adam. It would be of little use to us to
be moved and excited for a time, unless our minds were afterwards composed for
hearing. For many are touched by fear when God appears to them; that is, when he
compels them to feel the force and power of his sway; but they continue in their
stupidity, and thus their fright is rendered profitless. But Daniel here makes a
difference between himself and the profane, who are only astonished and by no
means prepared for obedience. At the same time, he relates how his own
excitement was effected by the assistance of the angel. The fear, then, of which
we have lately made mention, was preparation for docility; but; this terror
would have been useless by itself, unless it had been added,
that he might
understand. We ought. to understand how
piety does not consist merely in acknowledging the fear of God, but obedience is
also required, preparing us to receive with tranquil and composed feelings
whatever we shall be taught. We ought diligently to observe this
order.
It now follows:
Because there shall be an end of
the vision at a fixed time. Some join
≈qAt[l
legneth-ketz, making the sense “at the end of the time,”
≈q
ketz, in this sense being in the genitive case by way of an epithet, as
the Hebrews commonly use it. They elicit this sense — the vision shall be
for a prefixed time. But others prefer — the end of the vision shall be
for a time. I think this latter sense is better, as the former seems to me
forced. On the whole, it is not of much consequence, yet as that form of
expression is the easier, namely, the end or fulfillment of the vision should be
at a definite time, I had rather follow that interpretation. The angel asserts,
then, that this was no vain speculation, but a cause joined with its effect,
which should have its completion at a stated period.
There shall be an
end, then,
of the vision in its
time; meaning, what you now behold shall
neither vanish away nor be destroyed, but its end shall happen when the time
shall arrive which God has determined.
≈q,
ketz, is often taken in this sense. Hence
there shall be an end of the
vision,; that is, the vision shall be
completed when the fitting time shall arrive. We ought to bear in mind this
exhortation of the angel, because unless we are certainly persuaded of the
fixedness of anything when God speaks, we shall not be ready to receive whatever
he pronounces. But when we are convinced of this saying, God never separates his
hand from his mouth — meaning, he is never unlike himself, but his power
follows up his word, and thus he fulfills whatever he declares; this becomes a
sure and firm foundation for our faith. This admonition of the angel ought to be
extended generally to the whole of Scripture, since God does not throw words
into the air, according to the common phrase. For nothing happens rashly, but as
soon as he speaks, his truth, the matter itself and its necessary effect, are
all consistent. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
8:18
|
|
18. Now, as he was speaking with me, I was in
a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me
upright.
|
18. Et cum loqueretur mecum, sopitus corrui
super faciem meam in terram, et tetigit me,
f452
et restituit me super stationem meam.
f453
|
The Prophet repeats what he had said, namely, how he
had been frightened by the magnitude of this vision; meanwhile, he was raised up
by the angel, lest he should remain in that state of stupor. Yet these two
clauses must be noticed: Daniel was astonished at the outset, for he could not
otherwise be sufficiently composed to listen to the angel’s voice; but at
the same time another clause is added, stating, the angel set him upright in his
place. Whenever God addresses us, we must necessarily be subject to fear and
dread, to produce humility, and to render us docile and obedient. Fears the true
preparation for obedience; but, as we formerly said, another feeling ought to
follow; namely, as God has previously prostrated and cast us down, he will also
raise us up, thereby preparing us for listening; and this disposition cannot
arise except our minds are sedate and composed. The Prophet then expresses both
these states of mind here. This, as I have said, is common to all the pious; but
a peculiarity is noticed here, lest the readers of the vision should become
torpid, and receive it carelessly; for they ought to collect all their
senses, conscious of their inability to understand it, unless the fear of God
should precede, and thus form the mind for obedience.
While he was speaking with
me, therefore,
I fell into a swoon with my face
upon the ground; that is, I lay
astonished, and he touched
me. I have already stated the opinion of
others, that the angel approached him, but it is only tolerable. He now adds:
—
|
DANIEL
8:19
|
|
19. And he said, Behold, I will make thee know
what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time
appointed the end shall be.
|
19. Et dixit, Ecce ego docebo te
f454
quod erit in fine irae: quia ad praefixum, vel statutem tempus
finis.
|
Those who read the noun ketz,
“end,” in the genitive case in
<270817>Daniel
8:17, understand in this place the word “vision” again, as if the
Prophet had said, “At the time of the end there shall be a vision.”
But as
d[wm,
meveged, or moed, signifies a “time fixed and settled
beforehand,” there is nothing superfluous in that method .of
speech; then ketz, as I have said, is properly taken for the effect
itself, and it would be harsh and far-fetched to say “at the time of the
end there shall be a vision,” in the, sense of the filling up of the
vision. For this word expresses all which such interpreters wish it to imply.
Besides, all are agreed as to the matter itself, since the angel bears witness
to his being the interpreter chosen by God, who explains futurity to the
Prophet.
Behold,
therefore, says he, I will
explain to thee. He here acquires
confidence for himself from his office, as he had accepted the commands
divinely laid upon him. And we should remark this also, since our faith will
never rest or become firm unless the authority on which it is founded be fixed.
As then the angel declares himself to be executing an office divinely enjoined
upon him, ought we to put confidence in men who conduct themselves with
rashness, and, though they assume authority in God’s name, yet have no
certain and lawful calling? We may learn, then, how neither angels nor men ought
to be held in such honor as to induce us to receive whatever they bring forward,
unless the Almighty has appointed. them to be his ministers and
interpreters.
He then says,
I will announce to thee what
shall happen even at the end of the wrath.
Without doubt, the angel asserts by this phrase
the suddenness of God’s wrath. We are aware how instantaneously on the
return of the people their enemies attacked them in Judea, and never ceased to
inflict upon them numberless troubles. Wherefore, as soon as the Jews had
returned from exile, God began to exercise them in various ways, and not without
sufficient reason. Every one privately studied his own interests, but without
any regard for the temple and any desire for the worship of God, and thus they
were given up to avarice and caprice. They also defrauded God himself in tithes
and offerings, as is evident from the prophets Malachi and Haggai.
(<370112>Haggai
1:12;
<390308>Malachi
3:8.) From that period God began to punish them, but deferred his vengeance till
the time of Antiochus. The angel, therefore, calls
the end of the
vengeance that severer punishment which
God inflicted after the people had abused his forbearance. Therefore
I will teach
thee, or lay before time,
what shall happen at the close of
the vengeance, because, says he,
it shall be the time of the
end. He here repeats what he had said
concerning the effect of the prophecy, meaning, the fulfillment should take
place at its own appointed season. We must; now notice the noun moed,
because it is here opposed to our fervor and intemperance. Haste in desiring
anything leads, as they say, to delay; for as soon as God bears witness to
anything, we wish it to be fulfilled at the very first moment, and if he suspend
its execution only a very few days, we not only wonder but cry out with
vexation. God, therefore, here admonishes us by his angel that he has a settled
time, and thus we are to learn to put a bridle on ourselves, and not to be rash
and unseasonably hasty, according to our usual habit. We ought, then, to
remember the explanation given, and perceive how the effect of the vision is
shewn here, and thus it will obtain from us its just reverence. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
8:20-21
|
|
20. The ram which thou sawest having two
horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
|
20. Et aries quem vidisti habentem duo cornua,
reges sunt Medorum et Persarum.
|
|
21. And the rough goat is the king of
Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first
king.
|
21. Et hircus caprae, qui natus erit ex hirco,
rex Graecae, et cornu magnum quod erat inter oculos, ejus, est rex
primus.
|
By the word “Javan” the Hebrews designate
not only the Greeks but the: Macedonians, and the whole of that tract which is
divided by the Hellespont, from Asia Minor as far as Illyricmn. Therefore the
meaning is — the king of Greece.
|
DANIEL
8:22-23
|
|
22. Now that being broken, whereas four stood
up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his
power.
|
22. Et confractum est,
f455
et extiterunt quatuor, cornua scilicet, loco ejus: quatuor regna a gente
exsurgent, vel, existent, et non pro fortitudine illius.
|
|
23. And in the latter time their kingdom, when
the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and
understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
|
23. Et in fine regni illorum, ubi perfecti
fuerint scelerati, existet rex praefractus facie,
f456
et intelligens aenigmata.
|
Hence Luther, indulging his thoughts too freely,
refers this passage to the masks of Antichrist, but we shall trace this point
afterwards.
f457
|
DANIEL
8:24-25
|
|
24. And his power shall be mighty, but not by
his own power and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice,
and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
|
24. Et roborabitur fortitudo ejus, et non in
fortitudine sua,
f458
et mirabilia
f459
evertet, prosperabitur, et efficiet, et perdet, repetit idem verbum,
robustos, et populum sanctorum.
|
|
25. And through his policy also he shall cause
craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself.’
in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up
against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without
hand.
|
25. Et pro intelligentia sua prosperabitur
dolus in manu ejus, et in corde suo magnificabit se, et in pace perdet multos,
vel fortes, et contra Principem principum stabit, vel exsurget, et
absque manu frangetur.
|
We have previously given a brief explanation of all
these subjects. But here the angel removes all doubt, lest we should still
anxiously inquire the meaning of the ram which Daniel saw, and of the he-goat
which followed and prostrated the ram. The angel, therefore, here pronounces the
ram to represent two kingdoms, which coalesced in one. Cyrus, as we have said,
granted it for a time to his father-in-law Cyaxares, but yet; drew the whole
power to himself, and the Persians began to extend their sway over all the
realms of the East. But God in this vision had respect to the beginning of
that monarchy. When, however, the Persians and Medes, were united, then the ram
bore two horns; then the he-goat succeeded, and he threw down the ram, as we
have already seen. In that he-goat there was first one great horn and then four
small ones. Tim angel then answers concerning the he-goat representing the
kingdom of the Greeks. There is not the slightest doubt here, since Alexander
seized upon the whole East, and thus the Persian monarchy was utterly destroyed.
In the he-goat, therefore, the kingdom of Greece or Macedon was displayed, but
the horns will mark something special.
That great,
horn, says Daniel,
was the first
king, namely, Alexander; afterwards four
smaller horns arose in his place. We have already explained these. For when much
blood had been shed, and the greater part of the leaders had been slain, and
after the followers of Alexander had mutually attacked and. destroyed each
other, those who remained divided his dominions among themselves. Cassander the
son of Antipater obtained Macedon; Seleueus, Syria; Ptolemy, Egypt; and
Antigonus his own fourth share. In this way the smaller horns succeeded
Alexander, according to the clear testimony of profane history. From the
frequency with which God sets this prophecy before us, we gather his intention
of giving us a conspicuous sign of his majesty. For how could Daniel conjecture
future events for so long a period before they happened? He does not pronounce
mere enigmas, but; narrates things exactly as if they were already fulfilled. At
the present time Epicureans despise the Scriptures and laugh at our simplicity,
as if we were too ridiculous. But they rather display their own prodigious
madness, and blindness, by not acknowledging the prediction of Daniel to be
divine. Nay, from this prophecy alone we may prove with certainty the unity of
God. If any one was inclined to deny that first principle, and utterly reject
the doctrine of his divinity, he might be convinced by this single prophecy. Not
only is this subject treated here, but Daniel points with his finger to the God
of Israel as the only one in whose hand and will are all things, and from whom
nothing either escapes or is concealed. From this prophecy alone the authority
of Scripture is established by proofs perfectly sure and undoubted, as the
Prophet treats with perfect clearness events at the time unknown, and which no
mortal could ever have divined.
First of all he says,
The ram which, thou sawest,
having two horns, means the kings of the Medes and
Persians. This had not then occurred,
for that ram had not yet risen and seized upon Babylon, as we have stated
already. Thus Daniel was raised up as it were to heaven, and observed from that
watch-tower things hidden from the minds of men. He afterwards adds,
The he-goat is the king of
Greece. Philip, the father of Alexander,
although a strenuous and a most skillful warrior, who surpassed all the kings of
Macedon for cleverness, yet, superior as he was, never dared to cross over the
sea. It, was sufficient for him if he could strengthen his power in Greece, and
render himself formidable against his neighbors in Asia Minor. But he never
dared to attack the power of Persia, or even to harass them, and much less to
overcome the whole East. Alexander, inflamed rather by rashness and pride than
by good judgment, thought nothing would prove difficult to him. But when Daniel
saw this vision, who ever would have thought of any king of Greece invading that
most powerful monarchy, and not only seizing upon the whole of Asia, but
obtaining sway in Egypt, Syria, and other regions? Although Asia Minor was an
extensive region, and well known to be divided into many rich and fertile
provinces, yet it was but a small addition to his immense empire. Nay, when
Nineveh was conquered by Babylon, and the Chaldeans became masters of Assyria,
this also was an addition to the Persian monarchy. We are familiar with the
amazing riches of the Medes, and yet they were entirely absorbed. Darius drew
with him 800,000 men, and quite buried the earth under his army. Alexander inet
tiim at the head of 30,000. What comparison was there between them! When Xerxes
f460
came to Greece he brought with him 800,000 men, and threatened to put fetters
upon the sea; yet Daniel speaks of his incredible event just as if it had
already taken place, and were matter of history. These points must be diligently
noticed that the Scriptures may inspire us with the confidence which they
deserve.
The great
horn, says he,
which was between his eyes was
the first king, and when it was broken, four others sprang
up. Alexander, as we have mentioned,
perished in the flower of his age, and was scarcely’ thirty years old when
he died, through the influence of either poison or disease. Which of the two is
uncertain, although great suspicion of fraud attaches to the manner of his
death; and whichever way it happened, that horn was broken. In his place there
arose four horns, which sprang
up, say’s he, from that nation.
Here we must notice this, since I very much wonder what has come into some
persons’ minds, to cause them to translate it “from the
nations” and yet these are persons skilled in the Hebrew language. First,
they show great ignorance by changing the number, and next, they do not
comprehend the intention of the angel. For he confirms what he formerly said
concerning the unity of the kingdom and its division into four parts, and he
assigns the reason here. They shall spring, says he, from a nation,
meaning the Greeks, and all from a single origin. For by what right did
Polemy obtain the empire? solely by being one of Alexander’s generals. At
the beginning, he dared not use the royal name, nor wear the diadem, but only
after a lapse of time. The same is true of Selcucus, and Antigonus, and
Cassander. We see, then, how correctly the kingdom of the Greeks is represented
to us under the figure of a single beast, although it was immediately dispersed
and torn into four parts. The kingdoms, then, which sprang from
the
nation meaning; Greece,
shall stand, but not in full
strength. The copula is here taken in
the sense of “but;”
the four
kingdom shall stand,
but not by his
strength, for Alexander had touched upon
the Indian sea, and enjoyed the tranquil possession of his empire throughout the
whole east, having filled all men with the fear of his industry, valor, and
speed. Hence, the;angel states the four horns to be so small, that not one of
them should be equal to the first king.
And at the end of their reign, when
the wicked shall be at their height, one king shall
stand. By saying at the end of their
kingdom, he does not mean to imply the destruction of the four kingdoms had
ceased. The successors of Antiochus were not directly cast down from their sway,
and Syria was not reduced into a province till about eighty or a hundred years
after Antiochus the Great had been completely conquered. He again left heirs,
who, without doubt, succeeded to the throne, as we shall see more clearly in the
eleventh chapter. But this point is certain — Perseus was the last king of
Macedon, and the Ptolemies continued to the times of Julius Caesar and Augustus,
and we are well aware how completely Cleopatra was conquered and ruined by
Antony. As women succeeded to the throne, we could not place the destruction of
the Macedonian empire under Antiochus Epiphanes. But the angel means,
at the end of their
kingdom, when they had really come to
the close of their reigns, and their final ruin was at hand. For when Antiochus
Epiphanes returned to his country, he seemed to have re-established his power
though it very soon afterwards began to die away. Similar circumstances also
happened to Egypt and to Macedon, for the reign of all their kings was
precarious, and although not direct]y overthrown, yet they depended on the
Romans, and thus their royal majesty was but fleeting.
At the
end, therefore, of
their
kingdom, that is, when they arrived at
the height, and their fall led them on to ruin, then, says he,
when the wicked were consummated
or perfected. Some apply this to the
professed and outward enemies of the Church, but I rather approve of another
opinion, which supposes the angel to be speaking of the impious, who provoked
God’s wrath, till it became necessary for grievous and severe penalties to
be inflicted on the people, to whom God had so magnificently promised a happy
and a tranquil state. This, however, was no common temptation, after the
prophets had treated so fully of the happy and prosperous state of the people
after their return from captivity, to behold the horrible dispersion, and to
witness these tyrants making their assault not only upon men, but upon the
temple of God itself. Wherefore the angel, as before, fortifies the Prophet and
all the rest of the pious against this kind of trial, and shews how God had not
changed his counsels in afflicting his Church, to which he had promised
tranquillity, but had been grievously provoked by the sins of the people. He
then shews the urgent necessity which had compelled God to exercise this
severity. When, therefore, the
impious had come to their height, that
is, when they had arrived at the highest pitch, and their intolerable obstinacy
had become desperate. We perceive how the angel here meets the trial, and
instructs the pious beforehand, unfolding to them the inviolability of
God’s word, while the people’s impiety compelled him to treat, them
severely, although he had determined to display liberality in every way. Then,
he says, a king shall stand with
a fierce countenance. But the rest
tomorrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since we see thy
Church throughout all ages to have been exercised by the Cross in various ways,
and with constant suffering, that we also may prepare ourselves for undergoing
whatever thou mayest lay upon us. May we learn also to consider our sins as the
cause of whatever adversity happens to us; may we consider thee to be not only
faithful in all thy promises, but also a Father — propitious to those
wretched ones who suppliantly fly to thee for pardon. When we are humbled under
thy powerful hand, may we be raised up by the hope of eternal salvation which is
prepared for us. Thus may we look for a happy and joyful termination of all our
contests, until we enjoy the fruit of our victory in thy’ heavenly
kingdom, as it has been obtained for us by the blood of thine only-begotten Son.
— Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-THIRD.
After the angel had explained the Grecian monarchy,
he records the future origin of a king who should be
hard of
face. Without the slightest doubt, he
implies the iniquity of Antiochus by this phrase. He was notoriously destitute
of any nobleness of mind, and remarkable for low cunning, and to this
disposition was added an impudence which faltered at nothing. This is the sense
in which I take the words hard of
face. The following phrase asserts his
cunning, when it says, he shall
be skilled in enigmas. This is
equivalent to saying, he should excel in cunning, and should not be easily
deceived. By these two epithets he does not compliment, but rather defames
Antiochus Epiphanes, by representing him as hardened as the wicked usually are,
without the slightest particle of either reason, or equity, or shame. He next
blames his craftiness and deceit, by stating he should be
skilled in
enigmas. He afterwards adds,
his power shall be strengthened,
and yet not by his own might. Some are
of opinion that Antiochus Epiphanes is here compared to Alexander, as the angel
had previously stated the inferiority of the four kings to the first; for they
were prefigured by four small horns. For the most powerful of them all did not
reign over a fifth part of the dominions which Alexander had acquired for
himself by violence and war. Others, again, explain this passage as if the power
of Antiochus would be great, but still very unlike that of Alexander, and far
inferior to it, according to the sense,
not in
his, i.e., Alexander’s,
strength,. Many, however, refer this to Antiochus, although they do not
agree among themselves. Some, again, want a kind of correction, as if the angel
implied that the power of Antiochus should be great, but not quite openly so.
Hence his valor shall be
strengthened, not meaning by
“valor” that heroic spirit with which kings are usually endowed, nor
any increase in magnanimity; nor yet that Antiochus should imitate such monarchs
as these, but his strength should lie concealed. He should creep on by
clandestine acts, and not contend in open battle according to the practice of
those who excel in courage; he should secretly try many schemes, and thus
stealthily extend his empire. This makes a tolerable sense. Others, again, think
this ought to be referred to God, since the strength of Antiochus was not the
result of his own industry or valor, but of the judgment of God, who armed him
with it, because he wished to use him as a scourge to execute his punishments on
the Jews. His fortitude, therefore, shall be strengthened, yet not by his
own valor, as this entirely depended on the just designs and vengeance of God.
Although this last sense is more profitable, and contains much useful
instruction, yet I fear it is distorted. And thus the last clause is either a
correction of the preceding words, meaning” because he should not increase
with ingenuous earnestness,” or else, the angel is still comparing his
strength with the power of Alexander.
His
power, therefore,
shall be
strengthened, and yet not bear
comparison with Alexander’s; or, his power shall be strengthened, but not
by habits of war nor by open magnanimity, but he shall grow great by fraudulent
and clandestine arts; because he was on the one hand most impious, and on the
other, of a servile disposition, as we have formerly said.
It follows,
He shall make wonderful havoc,
and shall prosper, and shall proceed,
that is, shall execute, and
shall destroy the strong, and the people of the
saints. By
µymwx[,
gnetzumim, I understand not only the Jews, but also other neighboring
nations; as if the angel had said, Antiochus shall be conqueror wherever he
shall extend his arms, until at length he shall subdue Judea, and miserably
afflict the people of God.
Wherefore, he shall strike or
destroy the brave, and the people of the
saints, that is, the holy people, as we
saw before. And according to his
understanding shall his craftiness prosper in his
hand. The conjunction “and may be
here superfluous; in this sense the passage is usually received, thus reading it
on in one context; according to his understanding he shall prosper, although
there is the conjunction “and” in the way, but this is frequently
superfluous in Hebrew. It means,
deceit shall prosper in his
hand. Here the angel confirms the former
assertion respecting the servile cunning of Antiochus, as he did not act with
ingenuous manliness, but with his audacity and hardihood he united malicious
arts and craftiness unworthy of a king.
Craft
, therefore, shall prosper in
his hand, and that too, as far as he understands
it. Some suppose the sharpness of
Antiochus to be noticed here, as if the angel had said, Craftiness shall prosper
in his hand, in consequence of his possessing superior ability and penetration.
But the passage may be suitably explained in this way, — Antiochus shall
act prosperously according to his mental perception, and shall be so assisted
by’ his craftiness, as to obtain whatever he shall grasp
at.
It follows next;
He shall magnify himself in his
heart, or he shall raise himself, and
bear himself magnificently; although this expression implies boasting and pride,
and is taken in a disadvantageous sense.
He shall be insolent, therefore,
in his heart. The angel seems to distinguish
here between the scheming and penetration of Antiochus, and his pride of heart;
for, although he should obtain great: victories, and should subdue many nations
according to his desires, yet he would oppress the Jews, and
then, should be magnified in
heart; that is, should be puffed up with
greater pride than before, on account of those continuous successes. And
in peace he shall destroy
many, or the brave; for the word
µybr
rabbim, signifies either. Some translate, on account of his prosperity,
because the Lord wished to relax the reins, so that no one should hinder the
course of his victories. On account, then, of that success, he shall destroy
many. Profane men, indeed, who understand nothing of God’s providence,
have said that folly and chance prevail more in war than skill or arms; but the
success of generals does not spring from either chance or fortune, but as God
pleases to conduct the affairs of the world in various ways, so in some eases
the evil and unskillful warriors succeed, while others make many fruitless
efforts and trials, although they are superior in counsel, and are provided with
the very best ornaments. But I rather incline to another sense which
interpreters do not mention; namely, Antiochus should destroy and lay waste many
nations without any trouble, with the greatest ease, and as it were in sport.
Wherefore the Prophet signifies, or the angel who addresses the Prophet., that
Antiochus should be the conqueror of many nations, not only because he should be
endowed with great cunning, ,and should carry on the war more by treachery than
by open violence, but as it is reported of Timotheus the Athenian general: He
will take cities and lands, and subject them to himself, through fortune
spreading her net for him while he is indulging in sleep. The angel, therefore,
seems to point out this listlessness, by predicting much devastation by the hand
of Antiochus in apparent ease and calmness. Others expound it thus, —
nations shall be laid waste by that robber which have given him no occasion for
attack, because they have never stirred up any hostility against him; but when
they attempt to cultivate peace, he wearies them without the slightest pretext.
But this interpretation seems to:the forced.
He afterwards adds,
And against the Prince Of Princes
he shall stand, or rise up,
and he shall be destroyed without
hand, or shall be ruined. The
w,
vau, is put adversatively; yet he shall be destroyed without hand.
This was far more galling to the Prophet, and to the whole people, for the angel
to predict the contests of Antiochus, not only with mortals, but with God
himself. Some understand
µyrçArç,
sar-sarim, of the high priest, but this is too confined and spiritless. I
have not the least doubt that God is here meant by the
Prince of
Princes. Wherefore the complete sense
is, — Antiochus should be not only bold, and cruel, and proud towards men,
but this madness and full should proceed so far as to lead him to attack and
resist God. This is the full sense. But a consolation is soon added, when the
angel says, he should be
destroyed without hand. It would,
indeed, have been almost intolerable for the Jews to hear only of the insolence
of Antiochus in contending against God, unless this correction had been added
— the end of the contest must be the self-destruction of Antiochus by his
own impiety. He shall be
destroyed then. But how?
without
hand, says he. For after subduing so
many nations, and after obtaining whatever he wished, what more could be hoped
for as far as man is concerned? Who would dare to rise up against him? Clearly
enough, if the kings of Syria had been content with their own boundaries, they
need not have feared any one, for no enemy would have molested them; but they
provoked the Romans to attack them, and when they wished to invade Egypt, they
did not prosper in their attempts. Whichever be the meaning, the angel here
announces the sufficiency of the divine power without any human aid, for the
destruction and overthrow of Antiochus. Some think this prophet refers to
Antichrist, thus they pass by Antiochus altogether, and describe to us the
appearance of Antichrist, as if the angel had shewn to Daniel what should happen
after the second renovation of the Church. The first restoration took place when
liberty was restored to the people, and they returned from exile to their native
land, and the second occurred at the advent of Christ. These interpreters
suppose this passage to unfold that devastation of the Church which should take
place after the coming of Christ, and the promulgation of the gospel. But as we
have previously seen, this is not a suitable meaning, and I am surprised that
men versed in the Scriptures should so pour forth clouds upon clear light. For,
as we said yesterday, nothing can be clearer, or more perspicuous, or even more
familiar, than this prophecy. And what is the tendency of ascribing so violently
to Antichrist what even mere children clearly see to be spoken of Antiochus,
except to deprive Scripture of all its authority? Others speak more modestly and
more considerately, when they suppose the angel to treat of Antiochus for the
purpose of depicting in his person the figure of Antichrist. But I do not think
this reasoning sufficiently sound. I desire the sacred oracles to be treated so
reverently, that no one may introduce any variety according to the will of man,
but simply hold what is positively certain. It would please me better to see any
one wishing to adapt this prophecy to the present use of the Church, and to
apply to Antichrist by analogy what is said of Antiochus. We know that whatever
happened to the Church of old, belongs also to us, because we have fallen upon
the fullness of times.
No doubt the Holy Spirit wished to teach us how to
bear our cross by making use of this example, but as I have already said, it
seems to me far too frivolous to search for allegories. We should be content
with true simplicity, and transfer to ourselves whatever occurred to the ancient
people.
(<461011>1
Corinthians 10:11.) With how much reason does the Apostle say there should be
false teachers in the kingdom of Christ, as there were formerly false prophets!
(<610201>2
Peter 2:1.) So we must determine, that the devil, who was a murderer from the
beginning, will always find those whom he will stir up and impel to persecute
the Church. The devil contends at this very day, not only by fallacious
doctrines, and impious errors, and impostures, but also by cruel tyranny, as he
inflames many impious men to madness, and thus harasses the sons of God. As the
Jews ought not to quail under the calamities which oppressed them, through
Daniel’s predictions concerning Antiochus, so the same doctrine ought in
these days to fortify us, lest the novelty of our calamities should appall us,
when the Church is oppressed by heavy burdens, and tyrants rage and storm, with
fire and sword.
(<450828>Romans
8:28:) For the fathers experienced similar trials, to whom Christ had not then
pointed out the way of life, and who did not comprehend so clearly as we do our
duty to be conformed to the only-begotten Son of God, because he is the
first-born in the Church; he is our head and we are his members. This. was not
so fully unfolded to those holy men, who still endured under so many
afflictions, when they might suppose the Church completely buried, as it is
certainly surprising that they did not yield a hundred times over to so many and
such dreadful calamities. Therefore this doctrine will be best accommodated to
our instruction, if we are convinced of the justice of our condition not being
better than that of the fathers. What, therefore, happened to them?
These wicked ones should be
destroyed, namely, the Jews:, who
professed themselves to be the elect people of God, and the holy family of
Abraham, and in numberless ways had obstinately provoked God’s wrath; thus
the Church was miserably harassed. Antiochus, especially, like a sweeping
tempest, reduced all things to ruin, till the people felt themselves utterly
undone, and to all human appearance were without the slightest hope. As God
punished so severely the wickedness of his ancient people, it does not surprise
us when we feel his present chastisements, as in these days the land is full of
sinfulness, and we do not cease perpetually and purposely to provoke God’s
wrath.
(<520303>1
Thessalonians 3:3.) Lastly, to avoid the penalty due to our sins, let us
consider the end of our calling, the subjection of our whole life to the cross.
This is the warfare to which our heavenly Father destines us. As this is our
lot, we ought to look into this mirror, and there behold the perpetual condition
of the
Church. It is therefore no matter of surprise, if,
instead of one Antiochus, God should raise up many who are hardened and
invincible in their obstinacy, and in their cruelty make many attempts with
clandestine arts, and plot for the destruction of the Church. If the fathers
experienced this, it does not surprise us, if we in these days undergo similar
sufferings. This, I say, is a useful analogy, and does not distort the simple
sense of Scripture. Now, let us go on, —
|
DANIEL
8:26
|
|
26. And the vision of the evening and the
morning which was told is true, wherefore shut thou up the. vision; for
it shall be for many days.
|
26. Et visio matutina, et vespertina, quae
pronuntiata fuit, veritas est, Tu ergo obsigna, vel claude, visionem, quia ad
dies multos, protenditur.
|
The angel again confirms the assertion that no part
of this vision was shewn to the Prophet in vain, because not even the slightest
portion of it should fail of its effect. The necessity of this method of
confirming our faith is notorious, because, although the events may be well
known to us, yet we cannot acquiesce in God’s word, unless he should
testify so repeatedly to the truth of his assertions, and sanction by such
repetition whatever appears to us ambiguous. When it becomes perfectly obvious
that the angel discourses upon obscure events, and such as were utterly
incredible at the time, it does not surprise us when he announces again, that
the Prophet had seen nothing which God would not accomplish.
This
vision, therefore, says he,
is
truth. He calls it “the vision of
the evening and morning,” because while the angel was treating of the six
years and almost a half, he used this form of speech. And we said this was
purposely expressed, lest any one should extend it to years or months, as some
did; as if the angel had said, — Behold! by calculating single days up to
six years and about a half, the completion of this prophecy when the Temple
shall be cleansed, shall be accurately discovered. Again it is asserted, that
the vision is certain, because God had computed day by day the time of the
profanation of the Temple until the period of its cleansing.
Do
thou, therefore, says
he,
seal or close
the
vision,
because it is for many
days. It may surprise us why God should
wish what he had explained to his servant to remain concealed. For Daniel was
not
instructed in futurity for his own private
advantage, but for the common usefulness of the whole people. It seems,
therefore, contrary to his office to be commanded to close up the vision, and to
keep it. in complete obscurity. But the angel means, if the greater part of the
people should reject this prophecy, this formed no reason why Daniel should
hesitate. Be thou, therefore, the
guardian of this prophecy, as if God had
deposited a treasure in the hands of his servant, and had said, “Pay no
regard to any who despise this prophecy; many may deride thee, and others think
thou art narrating fables, and very few will have confidence in thee. but do not
relax on this account, but faithfully guard this treasure,”
since it is for many
days; that is, although its effect is
not immediately apparent, because God will suspend for some time the punishments
of which entreats, and will not restore the Temple all at once, nor wrest His
people immediately out of the hand of the tyrant. In consequence, then, of his
deferring his judgments as well as his pity for many days,
do thou close up this
visions, that is, keep it to thyself, as
if thou art alone. Thus God does not simply command his Prophet to be silent, or
to conceal what he had learnt, but rather confirms him in his consistency, lest
he should estimate this prophecy according to the ordinary opinions of his
countrymen. And at the same time he shews, that though the Jews did not pay
attention to what Daniel announced to them, yet nothing whatever should be in
vain. It follows, —
|
DANIEL
8:27
|
|
27. And I Daniel fainted, and was sick
certain days: afterward I rose up, and did. the king’s business;
and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood
it
|
27. Et ergo Daniel deliquium passus, vel,
fractus sum, et aegrotavi dies,
f461
et surrexi,
f462
feci opus regis,
f463
et obstupui propter visionem:neque intelligens.
f464
|
Again, Daniel shews himself to have been so touched
with the secret instinct of God, that he knew for certain this vision to have
been divinely presented to him. For God wished so to affect his servant, that he
might embrace with greater reverence what he both heard and saw. I have already
referred to our want; of attention in listening to God’s word as it
deserves, unless some kind of fear precedes it which may rouse our minds by some
means from their torpor; but this prophecy had a special intention. In an
ordinary case, God did not humble his servant; but by the disease which is here
mentioned, he wishes to show how this prediction related to some event of
serious magnitude. Daniel, therefore, states
himself to have been astonished,
as if suffering under some defect, and afflicted by
disease. This disease did not happen to
the Prophet naturally, but it fell upon him in consequence, of his being
suddenly terrified. And he afterwards shews this, by saying, no one understood
the prediction. Here, then, he admonishes all the pious, neither to hear nor
read this, narrative with carelessness, but to summon up their utmost attention,
and to perceive that God here shews them things of the greatest importance, and
which vitally concern their salvation. This forms a reason why Daniel ought to
suffer dejection and to be afflicted by disease. He next says,
he returned to the king’s
business, meaning his ordinary
occupation. We infer from this expression, the grievous error of those who think
him to have been in Persia at this period, because he could not return to his
duties, unless to were present in the king’s palace. But why is this
added? To assure us that the Prophet was not drawn off from the duties which the
king had assigned to him, although God had chosen him to perform the peculiar
office of Prophet and teacher of his Church. This is a rare instance, and ought
not to be drawn into a precedent, according to the usual phrase. Which of us,
for instance, would be sufficient for those duties of political government
assigned to Daniel, and also for those incumbent upon a pastor and teacher? But
God made use of his servant Daniel in an extraordinary way, because he had many
reasons for wishing him occupied in the king’s palace. We have previously
seen how .God’s glory was illustrated by his position, for Daniel
admonished Belshazzar of his approaching death, when his enemies had already
partially captured the city. And the utility of this was proved by Cyrus and
Darius sparing the Jews. As long as the Chaldeans held the supreme power, Daniel
was of no slight benefit to those miserable exiles; for even if he lived under
cruel tyrants, yet he had some authority remaining, and this enabled him to
alleviate many of the sufferings of his nation. God, therefore, was consulting
the advantage of the whole people, when he desired Daniel to proceed in the
course of his usual duties. Besides this, he wished to confer upon him the
extraordinary gift of prophecy, an endowment, as I have said, peculiar to
Daniel. It now follows, —
CHAPTER 9
|
DANIEL
9:1-3
|
|
1. 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.
|
1. Anno uno, id est, primo, Darii filii
Assueri e semine Medorum, qui rex fuit constitutus,
f465
in regno Chaldaico.
|
|
2. 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
desolation’s of Jerusalem.
|
2. In anno primo, inquam,
f466
regni illius, ego Daniel intellexi in libris numerum annorum, de quibus fuerat
sermo Jehovae, ad ad Jeremiam prophetam,
f467
ad implendum desolationem Jerusalem annos septuaginta.
|
|
3. And I set my face unto the Lord God, to
seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and
ashes.
|
3. Et levavi faciem meam ad Dominum Deum, ut
quaererem oratione et precationibus,
f468
cum jejunio, sacco, et cinere.
|
In this chapter Daniel will explain to us two things.
First, how very ardently he was accustomed to pray when the time of redemption,
specified by Jeremiah, drew nigh; and next, he will relate the answer he
received from God to his earnest entreaties. These are the two divisions of this
chapter. First, Daniel informs us how
he prayed when he understood from
books the number of the years. Whence we
gather, that God does not here promise his children earthly blessings, but
eternal life, and while they grow torpid and ease aside all care and spiritual
concern, he urges them the more earnestly to prayer. For what benefit do
God’s promises confer on us, unless we, embrace them by faith? But prayer
is the chief exercise of faith. This observation of Daniel’s is worthy of
notice. He was stimulated to
prayer because he knew from books the number of the
years. But I will defer the rest till
to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as in these days
thou hast called us to a similar lot to that which the fathers under the Law
formerly experienced, and as thou didst confirm them in patience, and arm them
for constancy in warfare, and render them superior in all conflicts with Satan
and the world. Grant, I pray thee, that we at this day, whom thou wishest to be
joined to them, may become proficient in thy word. May we look forward to
bearing the cross throughout our whole life. May we be prepared for the contest,
and prefer miserable affliction under the standard of the cross, to spending a
secure and luxurious life in our own enjoyments,:and thus becoming deprived of
that hope of victory which thou hast promised us, and whose fruit thou hast laid
up for us in heaven, through Jesus Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-FOURTH.
We began to say yesterday, that the faithful do not
so acquiesce in the promises of God as to grow torpid, and become idle and
slothful through the certainty of their persuasion that God will perform his
promises, but are rather stimulated to prayer. For the true proof of faith is
the assurance when we pray that God will really perform what he has promised us.
Daniel. is here set before us as an example of this. For when he understood the
time of deliverance to be at hand, this knowledge became a stimulus to him to
pray more earnestly than he was accustomed to do. It is clear then, as we have
already seen, that the Prophet was diligent and anxious in this particular. He
did not deviate from his usual habit when he saw the greatest risk of being put
to death; for while the king’s edict prohibited every one from praying to
God, he still directed his face towards Jerusalem. This was the holy
Prophet’s daily habit. But we shall perceive the extraordinary nature of
his present prayer, when he says, he prayed in dust arid ashes. From this it
appears, how God’s promise stirred him up to supplication, and hence we
gather what I have lately touched upon, — that faith is no careless
speculation, satisfied with simply assenting to God. For the stupid seem to
assent by outward hearing, while true faith is something far more serious. When
we really embrace the grace of God which he offers us, he meets us and precedes
us with his goodness, and thus we in time respond to his offers, and bear
witness to. our expectation of his promises. Nothing, therefore, can be better
for us, than to ask for what he has promised. Thus in the prayers of the saints
these feelings are united, as they plead God’s promises wherein they
entreat him. And we cannot possibly exercise true confidence in prayer, except
by resting firmly on God’s word. An example of this kind is here presented
to us in Daniel’s case. When
he understood the number of the
years to be at hand of which God had spoken by
Jeremiah, he applied his mind to
supplication. It is worth while to notice what I have mentioned: — Daniel
is not here treating of his daily prayers. We may easily collect from the whole
of his life, how Daniel had exercised himself in prayer before Jeremiah had
spoken of the seventy years. Because he knew the time of redemption to be at
hand, he was then stimulated to more than his usual entreaties. He expresses
this, by saying, in fasting, and
sackcloth, and ashes. For the saints
were not accustomed to throw ashes over their heads every day, nor yet to
separate themselves for prayer, by either fasting or putting on sackcloth. This
action was rare, used only when God gave some sign of his wrath, or when he held
out some scarce and singular benefit. Daniel’s present prayer was not;
after his usual habit, but when he put on sackcloth and sprinkled himself with
ashes, and endured fasting, he prostrated himself suppliantly before God. He
also pleaded for pardon, as we shall afterwards see, and begged the performance
of what the Almighty had surely promised.
From this we should learn two lessons. First, we must
perseveringly exercise our faith by prayers; next, when God promises us anything
remarkable and valuable, we ought then to be the more stirred up, and to feel
this expectation as a sharper stimulus. With reference to the fasting, and
sackcloth, and ashes. we may shortly remark, how the holy fathers under the law
were in the habit of adding extraordinary ceremonies to their prayers,
especially when they wished to confess their sins to God, and to cast themselves
before him as thoroughly guilty and convicted, and as placing their whole hope
in their supplication for mercy. And in the present day the faithful are
justified in adding certain external rites to their prayers; although no
necessity either can, or ought to be laid down beforehand in this case. We know
also, the, Orientals to be more devoted to ceremonies than we are ourselves. And
this difference must be noticed between the ancient people and the new Church,
since Christ by his advent abolished many ceremonies. For the fathers under the
Law were, in this sense, like children, as Paul says.
(<480403>Galatians
4:3.) The discipline which God had formerly instituted, involved the use of more
ceremonies than were afterwards practiced. As there is this important difference
between our position and theirs, whoever desires to copy them in all their
actions, would rather become the ape than the imitator of antiquity. Meanwhile,
we must notice that the reality remains for us, although external rites are
abolished. Two kinds of prayer, therefore, exist; one which we ought to practice
daily, in the morning, evening, and if possible, every moment; for we see how
constancy in prayer is commended to us in Scripture.
(<421801>Luke
18:1;
<451212>Romans
12:12;
<520517>1
Thessalonians 5:17.) The second kind is used, when God denounces his wrath
against us, or we have need of his special aid, or seek anything unusual from
him. This was Daniel’s method of praying when he put on sackcloth, and
sprinkled himself with ashes. But as I have treated this subject elsewhere, I
now use greater brevity.
When Daniel perceived the period of deliverance at
hand, he not only prayed as usual, but left all his other occupations for the
purpose of being quite at ease and at leisure, and thus he applied his mind
exclusively to prayer, and made use of other aids to devotion. For the sackcloth
and the ashes availed far more than mere outward testimony; they are helps to
increase our ardor in praying, when any one feels sluggish and languid. It is
true, indeed, that when the fathers under the Law prayed with sackcloth and
ashes, this appearance was useful as an outward mark of their profession. It
testified before men, how they came before God as guilty suppliants, and placed
their whole hope of salvation in pardon alone. Still this conduct was useful in
another way:. as it stirred them up more eagerly to the desire to pray. And both
these points are to be noticed in Daniel’s case. For if the Prophet had
such need of this assistance, what shall be said of our necessities? Every one
ought surely to comprehend how dull and cold he is in this duty. Nothing else,
therefore, remains, except for every one to become conscious of his infirmity,
to collect all the aids he can command for the correction of his sluggishness,
and thus stimulate himself to ardor in supplication. For when Daniel. according
to his daily custom, prayed so as to run the risk of death on that very account,
we ought to gather from this, how naturally alert he was in prayer to God. He
was conscious of the want of sufficiency in himself, and hence he adds the use
of sackcloth, and ashes, and fasting.
I pass by what might be treated more diffusely
— -how fasting is often .added to extraordinary prayers. We conclude also,
how works by themselves fail to please the Almighty, according to the fictions
of the Papists of these days, and also to the foolish imaginations of many
others. For they think fasting a part of the worship of God, although Scripture
always commends it to us for another purpose. By itself it is of no consequence
whatever, but when mingled with prayers, with exhortations to penitence, and
with the confession of sinfulness, then it is acceptable, but not otherwise.
Thus, we observe Daniel to have made use of fasting correctly, not as wishing to
appease God by this discipline, but to render him more earnest in his
prayers.
We must next notice another point. Although Daniel
was an interpreter of dreams, he was not so elated with confidence or pride as
to despise the teaching delivered by other prophets. Jeremiah was then at
Jerusalem, when Daniel was dragged into exile, where he discharged the office of
teacher for a long period afterwards, so that Babylon became a kind of pulpit.
f469
And Ezekiel names him the third among the most excellent servants of God,
(<261414>Ezekiel
14:14,) because Daniel’s piety, integrity, and holiness of life, were even
then celebrated. As to Jeremiah, we know him to have been either just deceased
in Egypt, or perhaps to be still living, when this vision was offered to Daniel,
who had perused his prophecies previously to this occasion. We observe also, the
great modesty of this holy man, because he exercised himself in reading the
writings of Jeremiah; and was not ashamed to own how he profited by them. For he
knew this prophet to have been appointed to instruct himself as well as the rest
of the faithful. Thus he willingly submitted to the instruction of Jeremiah, and
ranged himself among his disciples. And if he had not deigned to read those
prophecies, he would have been unworthy to partake of the promised deliverance.
As he was a member of the Church, he ought to have been a disciple of Jeremiah,
so in like manner, Jeremiah would not have objected to profit in his turn, if
any prophecy of Daniel’s had been presented to him. This spirit of modesty
ought to flourish among the servants of God, even if they excel in the gift of
prophecy, inducing them to learn from each other, while no one should raise
himself above the common level. While we are teachers, we ought at the same time
to continue learners. And Daniel teaches us this by saying,
he understood the number of years
in books, and the number was according to the word of Jehovah to the
prophet Jeremiah. He shews why he
exercised himself in the writings of Jeremiah, — because he was persuaded
that God had spoken by his voice. Thus it caused him no trouble to read what he
knew to have proceeded from God.
We must now remark THE TIME OF THIS
PROPHECY-the first year of
Darius. I will not dwell upon this point
here, because I had rather discuss the years when we come to the second part; of
the chapter. I stated yesterday that this chapter embraced two principal
divisions. Daniel first records his own prayer, and then he adds the prediction
which was brought to him by the hand of the angel. We shall next speak of the
seventy years, because the discussion will then prove long. enough. I will now
touch but briefly upon one point — the time of redemption was at hand, as
the:Babylonian monarchy was changed and transferred to the Medes and Persians.
In order to render the redemption of his people the more conspicuous, God
desired to wake up the whole East after the Medes and Persians had conquered the
Babylonians. Cyrus and Darius published their edict about the same time, by
which the Jews were permitted to return to their native country.
In that
year, therefore, meaning the year in
which Darius began his reign. Here it may be asked, Why does he name Darius
alone, when Cyrus was far superior to him in military prowess, and prudence, and
other endowments? ‘The ready answer is this, Cyrus set out immediately on
other expeditions, for we know what an insatiable ambition had seized upon him.
He was not stimulated by avarice. but by an insane ambition, and never could
rest quiet in one place. So, when he had acquired Babylon and the whole of that
monarchy, he set out for Asia Minor, and harassed himself almost to death by
continual restlessness. Some say he was slain in battle, while Xenophon
describes his death as if he was reclining on his bed, and at his ease was
instructing his sons in what he wished to have done. But whichever be the true
account, all history testifies to his constant motion from place to place. Hence
we are not surprised at the Prophet’s speaking here of Darius only, who
was more advanced in age and slower in his movements through his whole life. It
is sufficiently ascertained that he was not a man fond of war; Xenophon calls
him Cyaxares, and asserts him to have been the son of Astyages. We know, again,
that Astyages was the maternal grandfather of Cyrus; and thus this Darius was
the uncle as well as father-in-law of Cyrus, as the mother of Cyrus was his
sister. When the Prophet calls his father Ahasuerus, it need not occasion us any
trouble, as the names vary very much when we compare the Greek with the Hebrew.
Without the slightest doubt, Astyages was called Ahasuerus, or at least one was
his name and the other his surname. All doubt is removed by the expression,
Darius was of the seed of the
Medes. He distinguishes here between the
Medes and Persians, because the Medes had seized upon rich and splendid
territories, stretching far and wide on all sides, while the Persians were shut
up within their own mountains, and were more austere in their manner of life.
But the Prophet here states of this Darius his Median origin, and adds another
circumstance,
namely, his obtaining the
kingdom of the Chaldees. For Cyrus
allowed him to be called king, not only on account of his age and of his being
both his uncle and father-in-law, but because he would not attempt anything
against his authority. He knew he had no heir who might in future become
troublesome to him. Cyrus therefore yielded the empty title to his
father-in-law, while the whole power and influence remained completely within
his own grasp.
He says, then,
When I understood in books the
number of the years for filling up the desolation of
Jerusalem, namely,
seventy
years. This prophecy is found in the
25th chapter of Jeremiah, (Jeremiah 25), and is repeated in the 29th, (Jeremiah
29). God fixed beforehand seventy years for the captivity of his people, as it
was a grievous trial to be cast out of the land of Canaan, which had been
granted them as a perpetual inheritance. They remembered those celebrated
sentences,
“This shall be my
rest for ever,” and
“Ye
shall possess the land for ever.”
(<19D214>Psalm
132:14.)
When they were cast out and dispersed throughout the
various countries of the earth, it seemed as if the covenant of God had been
abolished, and as if there was no further advantage in deriving their origin
from those holy fathers to whom their land had been promised. For the purpose of
meeting these temptations, God fixed beforehand a set time for their exile, and
Daniel now recurs to this prediction. He adds,
Then I raised my
face. It is properly
hnta,
ath-neh, I placed; but as some interpreters seem to receive this word too
fancifully, as if Daniel had then looked towards the sanctuary. I prefer
rendering it, He raised his face
to God. It is quite true that while the
altar was standing, and the ark of the covenant was in the sanctuary,
God’s face was there, towards which the faithful ought to direct, both
their vows and prayers; but now the circumstances were, different through the
temple being overthrown. We have previously read of Daniel’s praying and
turning his eyes in that direction, and towards Judea. but his object was not a
desire to pray after the manner of his fathers. For there was then neither
sanctuary nor ark of the covenant in existence.
(<270610>Daniel
6:10.) His object in turning his face towards Jerusalem was openly to shew his
profession of such mentally dwelling in that land which God had destined for the
race of Abraham. By that outward gesture and ceremony the Prophet claimed
possession of the Holy Land, although still a captive and an exile. With regard
to the present passage, I simply understand it to mean, he raised his face
towards God. That I might
inquire, says he, by
supplication and
prayers. Some translate, that I might
seek supplication and prayer. Either is equally suitable to the sense, but the
former version is less forced, because the Prophet sought God by supplication
and prayers. And this form of speech:is common enough in Scripture, as we are
said to seek God when we testify our hope of his performing what he has
promised. It now follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:4
|
|
4. And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made
my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the
covenant and mercy to them that love him diligently and to them that keep his
commandments.
|
4. Rt oravi Jehovam Deum meum, et confessus
sum,
f470
et dixi. Quaeso Domine Deus magne et terribilis, custodiens foedus et
misericordam diligentibus ipsum, et custodientibus praecpeta
ejus.
|
Here Daniel relates the substance of his prayer. He
says, He prayed and confessed
before God. The greatest part of this
prayer is an entreaty that God would pardon his people. Whenever we ask for
pardon, the testimony of repentance ought to precede our request. For God
announces that he will be propitious and easily entreated when men seriously and
heartily repent.
(<235809>Isaiah
58:9.) Thus confession of guilt is one method of obtaining pardon; and for this
reason Daniel fills up the greater part of his prayer with the confession of his
sinfulness. He reminds us of this, not for the sake of boasting, but to instruct
us by his own example to pray as we ought. He says, therefore,
he prayed and made
confession. The addition of “my
God” to the word Jehovah is by no means superfluous.
I
prayed, he says,
to my God.
He here shews that he did not utter prayers
with trembling, as men too often do, for unbelievers often flee to God, but
without any confidence. They dispute with themselves whether their prayers will
produce any fruit; Daniel, therefore, shews us two things openly and distinctly,
since he prayed with faith and repentance. By the word confession he implies his
repentance, and by saying he
prayed to God, he expresses faith, and
the absence of all rashness in throwing away his prayers, as unbelievers do when
they pray to God confusedly, and are all the while distracted by a variety of
intruding thoughts. I
prayed, says
he, to my
God. No one can use this language
without a firm reliance on the promises of God, and assuming that he will prove
himself ready to be entreated. He now adds, I
entreat thee, O
Lord. The particle
ana,
ana, is variously translated; but it is properly, in the language of
grammarians, the particle of beseeching. O
Lord
God, says he,
great and
terrible. Daniel seems to place an
obstacle in his own way by using this language; for such is the sanctity of God
that it repels us to a distance as soon as we conceive it in the mind: wherefore
this terror seems to be removed when we seek a familiar approach to the
Almighty. One might suppose this method of prayer by no means suitable, as
Daniel places God before his eyes as great and formidable. It seems something
like frightening himself; yet the Prophet deserves a due moderation, while on
the one hand he acknowledges God to be great and terrible, and on the other he
allows him to keep his covenant
towards those who love him and obey his
statutes. We shall afterwards see a
third point added — God will receive the ungrateful and all who have
departed from his covenant. The Prophet joins these two things
together.
With reference to the epithets
great and
terrible, we must maintain what I have
already stated, namely, the impossibility of our praying rightly, unless we
humble ourselves before God; and this humility is a preparation for repentance.
Daniel, therefore, sets before himself the majesty of God, to urge both himself
and others to cast themselves down before the Almighty, that, in accordance with
his example, they may really feel penitent before him.
God,
therefore, says he, is great
and terrible. We shall never attribute
just honor to God unless we become cast down, as if dead, before him. And we
ought diligently to notice this, because we are too often careless in prayer to
God, and we treat it as a mere matter of outward observance. We ought to know
how impossible it is to obtain anything from God, unless we appear in his sight
with fear and trembling, and become truly humbled in his presence. This is the
first point to be noticed. Then Daniel mitigates the asperity of his assertion
by adding, keeping his covenant,
and taking pity upon those who love him. Here
is a change of person: the third is substituted for the second, but there is no
obscurity in the sense; as if he had said,
Thou keepest thy covenant with
those who love thee and observe thy
statutes. Here Daniel does not yet fully
explain the subject, for this statement is too weak for gaining the confidence
of the people; they had perfidiously revolted from God, and as far as related to
him, his agreement had come to an end. But Daniel descends by degrees and by
sure steps to lay a foundation for inspiring the people with assured trust in
the lovingkindness of God. Two points are embraced in this clause: first of all,
it shews us there is no reason why the Jews should expostulate with God and
complain of being too severely treated by him. Daniel, therefore, silences all
expressions of rebellion by
saying, Thou, O God, keepest thy
covenant. We must here notice the real
condition of the people: the Israelites were in exile; we know how hard that
tyranny was — how they were oppressed by the most cruel reproaches and
disgrace, and how brutally they were treated by their conquerors. This might
impel many to cry out, as doubtless they really did, “What does God want
with us? What, the better are we for being chosen as his peculiar people? What
is the good of our adoption if we are still the most miserable of all
nations?” Thus the Jews might complain with the bitterest grief and
weariness of the weight of punishment which God had inflicted upon them. But
Daniel here asserts his presenting himself before God, not to cavil and murmur,
but only to entreat his pardon. For this reason, therefore, he first says,
God keeps his covenant towards
all who love him; but at the same time
he passes on to pray for pardon, as we shall afterwards perceive. We shall treat
of this covenant and the Almighty’s lovingkindness in the next
Lecture.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as at the present
time thou dost deservedly chastise us for our sins, according to the example of
thine ancient people, that we may turn our face to thee with true penitence and
humility: May we throw ourselves suppliantly and prostrately before thee; and,
despairing of ourselves, place our only hope in thy pity which thou hast
promised us. May we rely on that adoption which is founded on and sanctioned by
thine only-begotten Son, and never hesitate to come to thee as a father whenever
we fly to thee. Meanwhile, do thou so thoroughly affect our minds, that we:may
not only pray to thee as a matter of duty, but truly and seriously take refuge
in thee, and be touched with a sense of our sins, and never doubt thy propitious
disposition towards us, in the name of the same thy Son our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-FIFTH.
Is the last Lecture Daniel said that
he prayed and
confessed. Now, in narrating the form of
his prayer, he begins by confession. We must notice this, to enable us to
understand the scope which Daniel had in view, as well as the special object of
his prayer. This is the kind of beginning which he makes, — the people are
guilty before God, and suppliantly pray for pardon; but before the Prophet comes
to this entreaty, he confesses how the people were most severely and justly
chastised by the Lord, as they had so grievously and variously provoked his
anger. First of all, he calls God terrible, for I have recited and translated
his words. When the Prophet desires to attract God’s favor towards
himself, he begins by bringing forward his majesty. By these words he stirs up
himself and the rest of the faithful to reverence, urging them to approach the
presence of God with submission, to acknowledge themselves utterly condemned,
and to be deprived of all hope except in the mere mercy of God. He calls him,
therefore, great and terrible, in order to humble the minds of all the
pious before God, to prevent their aspiring to any self-exaltation, or being
puffed up with any self-confidence. For, as we have said elsewhere:, the
epithets of God are at one time perpetual, and at another variable, with 1;he
circumstances of the subject. in hand. God may always be called great and
terrible; but Daniel calls him so here, to stir up himself and all others to
humility and reverence, as I have previously remarked. Then he, adds, He is
faithful in keeping his covenant and in shewing pity towards all his true
worshippers. I have referred to a change of person in this clause, but it does
not. obscure the sense or render it in any way doubtful. I have explained how
these words also testify to the absence of all cause why the people should
murmur or complain of being treated too harshly. For where the faithfulness of
God to his promises has once been laid down, men have not the slightest reason
to complain when he treats them less clemently, or frustrates them because they
are found fallacious and perfidious; for God always remains true to his words.
(<460109>1
Corinthians 1:9;
<461013>1
Corinthians 10:13;
<530303>2
Thessalonians 3:3.) In this sense Daniel announces that
God keeps his covenant towards
all who love him. We must next notice, how he
adds the word “pity” to “covenant.” He does not put
these two words as differing from each other,
tyrb,
berith, and
dsj,
chesed, but unites them together, and the sentence ought to be understood
by a common figure of speech, implying that God made a gratuitous covenant which
flows from the fountain of his pity. What, therefore, is this agreement or
covenant and pity of God? The covenant flows from God’s mercy; it does not
spring from either the worthiness or the merits of men; it has its cause, and
stability, and effect, and completion solely in the grace of God. We must notice
this, because those who are not well versed in the Scriptures may ask why Daniel
distinguishes mercy from covenant, as if there existed a mutual stipulation when
God enters into covenant with man, and thus God’s covenant would depend
simply on man’s obedience. This question is solved when we understand the
form of expression here used, as this kind of phrase is frequent in the
Scriptures. For whenever God’s covenant is mentioned, his clemency, or
goodness, or inclination to love is also added. Daniel therefore confesses, in
the first place, the gratuitous nature of the covenant of God with Israel,
asserting it to have no other cause or origin than the gratuitous goodness of
God. He next testifies to God’s faithfulness, for he never violates his
agreement nor departs from it, as in many other places God’s truth and
faithfulness are united with his clemency.
(<193606>Psalm
36:6, and elsewhere.) It is necessary for us to rely on God’s mere
goodness, as our salvation rests entirely with him, and thus we render to him
the glory due to his pity, and thus it becomes needful for us, in the second
place, to obtain a clear apprehension of God’s clemency. The language of
the Prophet expresses both these points, when he shows how God’s covenant
both depends upon and flows from his grace, and also when he adds the
Almighty’s faithfulness in keeping his agreement.
He adds,
Towards those who love thee and
keep thy commandments. We must
diligently notice this, because Daniel here drives away the whole people from
the defense which many might put forward, hypocrites willingly become angry with
God; nay, boldly reproach him because he does not either pardon or indulge them.
Daniel, therefore, to check this pride and to cut off every pretense for strife
on the part of the impious, says,
God is faithful towards all who
love him. He admonishes us thus: God is
never severe unless when provoked by the sins of men; as if he had said,
God’s covenant is firm in itself; when men violate it, it is not
surprising if God withdraws from his promises and departs from his agreement, on
perceiving himself treated with perfidy and distrust. The people, therefore, are
here obliquely condemned, while Daniel testifies to God’s
constancy in keeping his
promises, if men on their part act with
good faith towards him. On the whole, he shews how the people were in tumult,
when God altered his usual course of kind and beneficent treatment, and put in
force instead his severest vengeance, when the people were expelled from the
land of Canaan which was their perpetual inheritance. Daniel here explains how
all blame must be removed from God, as the people had revolted from him, and by
their perfidy had violated their compact. We see, therefore, how he throws the
blame of all their calamities upon the people themselves, and thus absolves God
from all blame and all unjust corer, labors. Besides, the Prophet shews how the
special object of the worship of God is to induce us to love him. For many
observe God’s law after the manner of slaves; but we ought to remember
this passage, God loveth a cheerful giver.
(<470907>2
Corinthians 9:7.) When, therefore, hypocrites are violently drawn towards
obedience, the Prophet here distinguishes between the true worshippers of God
and those who discharge their duty only in a perfunctory manner:, and not from
the heart. He asserts the principle of worshipping God to be a diligent love of
him, and this sentiment frequently occurs in the writings of Moses.
(<051012>Deuteronomy
10:12.) We must hold, therefore, the impossibility of pleasing God by obedience,
unless it proceeds from a sincere and free affection of the mind. This is the
very first rule in God’s worship. We must love him; we must be prepared to
devote ourselves entirely to obedience to him, and to the willing performance of
whatever he requires from us. As it is said in the Psalms,
(<19B924>Psalm
119:24) Thy law is my delight. And again, in title same Psalm, David states
God’s law to be precious to him beyond gold and silver, yea, pleasing, and
sweet beyond even honey.
(<19B972>Psalm
119:72, 103.) Unless we love God we have no reason for concluding that he will
approve of any of our actions: all our duties will become corrupt before him,
unless they proceed from the fountain of liberal affection towards him. Hence
the Prophet adds, To those who
keep his statutes. External observance
will never benefit us, unless the love of God precede them. But we must notice
this also in its turn; — God cannot be sincerely loved by us unless all
our outward members follow up this affection of the soul. Our hands and all that
belong to us will be kept steady to their duty, if this spontaneous love
flourish within our hearts. For if any one asserts his love of God a thousand
times over, all will[ be discovered to be vain and fallacious, unless the whole
life correspond with it. We can never separate love and obedience It now
follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:5-7
|
|
5. We have sinned, and have committed
iniquity, and have wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy
precepts, and from thy judgments:
|
5. Peccavimus, et inique egimus et imprope nos
gessimus, et rebellavimus, et recessimus a praeceptis tuis, et judicii tuis.
f471
|
|
6. Neither have we hearkened unto thy servants
the prophets, which spake in thy name to our princes, and our fathers, and to
all the people of the land.
|
6. Et non auscultavimus servis tuis prophetis,
qui loquuti sunt in nomine tuo ad reges nostros, principes nostros, et partres
nostros, et ad populum terrae.
|
|
7. O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto
thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and
to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and
that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven
them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against
thee.
|
7. Tibi domine justitia, et nobis pudor
vultus,
f472
scuti hodie viro Jehudah,
f473
et incolis Jerusalem, et toti Israeli, propinquis, et longinquis, in omnibus
terris, quo expulsisti eos, ob transgressiones,
f474
quibus transgressi sunt contra te.
|
Daniel here continues his confession of sin. As we
have already stated, he ought to begin here, because we must remark in general
the impossibility of our pleasing God by our prayers, unless we approach him as
criminals, and repose all our hopes on his mercy. But there was a special reason
for the extraordinary nature of the Prophet’s prayers, and his use of
fasting, sackcloth, and ashes. This was the usual method of confession by which
Daniel united himself with the rest of the people, for rite purpose of
testifying throughout all ages the justice of the judgment which God had
exercised in expelling the Israelites from the promised land, and totally
disinheriting them. Daniel, therefore, insists upon this point. Here we may
notice, in the first place, how prayers are not rightly conceived, unless
founded on faith and repentance, and thus not being according to law, they
cannot find either grace or favor before God. But great weight is to be attached
to the phrases where Daniel uses more than a single word in saying the people
acted impiously. He puts
wnafj,
chetanu, we have
sinned, in the first place, as the word
does not imply any kind of fault, but rather a serious crime or offense. We,
therefore, have sinned; then we
have done wickedly; afterwards
we have acted
impiously; for
[çr,
reshegn, is stronger than
afj,
cheta. We have done wickedly, we have been rebellious, says he,
in transgressing thy statutes and
commandments. Whence this copiousness of
expression, unless Daniel wished to stimulate himself and the whole people to
penitence? For although we are easily induced to confess ourselves guilty before
God, yet scarcely one in a hundred is affected with serious remorse; and those
who excel others, and purely and reverently fear God, are still very dull and
cold in recounting their sins. First of all, they acknowledge scarcely one in a
hundred; next, of those which do come into their minds, they do not fully
estimate their tremendous guilt, but rather extenuate their magnitude; and,
although they perceive themselves worthy of a hundred deaths, yet they are not
touched with their bitterness, and fear to humble themselves as they ought, nay,
they are scarcely displeased with themselves, and do not loathe their own
iniquities. Daniel, therefore, does not accumulate so many words in vain, when
he wishes to confess his own sins and those of the people. Let us learn then how
far we are from penitence, while we only verbally acknowledge our guilt; then
let us perceive the need we have of many incentives to rouse us up from our
sloth; for although any one may feel great terrors and tremble before
God’s judgments, yet all those feelings of dread vanish away too soon. It
therefore becomes necessary to fix God’s fear in our hearts with some
degree of violence. Daniel shews us this when using the phrase,
The people have sinned; they have
acted unjustly; they have conducted themselves wickedly and become rebellious,
and declined from the statutes and commandments of
God. This doctrine, therefore, must be
diligently noticed, because, as I have said, all men think they have discharged
their duty to God, if they mildly profess themselves guilty before him, and
acknowledge their fault in a single word. But as real repentance is a sacred
thing, it is a matter of far greater moment than a fiction of this kind.
Although the multitude do not perceive how they are only deceiving themselves
when they confess a fault, yet in the meantime they are only trifling with God
like children, while some say they are but men, and others shelter themselves in
the crowd of offenders. “What could I do? I am but a man; I have only
followed the example of the many.” Lastly, if we examine carefully the
confessions of men in. general, we shall always find some latent hypocrisy, and
that there are very few who prostrate themselves before God as they ought. We
must understand, therefore, this confession of Daniel’s as stimulating
himself and others to the fear of God, and as laying great stress upon the sins
of the people, that every one may feel for himself real and serious
alarms.
Then he shews how
impiously, and wickedly, and
perfidiously the Israelites had rebelled,
and how they had declined
from God’s statutes and commandments.
Daniel enlarges upon the people’s fault, as they had no pretext for
their ignorance after they had been instructed in God’s law. They were
like a man who stumbles in broad daylight. He surely is without excuse who
raises his eyes to heaven or closes them while he walks, or casts himself
forward with blind impulse, for if he fall he will find no one to pity him. So
Daniel here enlarges upon the people’s crime, for the law of God was like
a lamp pointing out the path so clearly that they were willfully and even
maliciously blind. (Psalm 119:105.) Unless they had closed their eyes, they
could not err while God faithfully pointed out the way in which they ought to
follow and persevere. This is the first point. But we ought to gather another
doctrine from this passage, namely, there is no reason why men should turn away
entirely from God, even if they have transgressed his commands, because,
although. they please both themselves and others, and think they have obtained
the good opinion of the whole world, yet this will avail men nothing if they
decline from God’s commandments and statutes. Whoever, therefore, has the
law in his hands, and turns aside in any direction, although he may use the
eloquence of all the rhetoricians, yet no defense will be available. This
perfidy is surely without excuse — to disobey the Almighty as soon as he
shews us what he approves and what he requires. Then, when he forbids anything,
if we turn aside ever so little from his teaching, we are perfidious and wicked,
rebellious and apostate. Lastly, this passage proves that there is no rule of
holy, pious, and sober living except a. complete performance of God’s
commandments. For this reason he puts
statutes and
judgments to shew that the people did
not sin in ignorance. He might have concluded the sentence in one word: we have
departed from thy commandments; but he joins judgment to commands. And why so?
To point out how easy and clear and sufficiently familiar was God’s
institution, if the Israelites had only been teachable. Here we may notice the
frequent recurrence of this repetition. The unskillful think these synonyms are
heaped together without an object, when statutes, judgments, laws, and precepts
are used, but the Holy Spirit uses them to assure us that nothing shall be
wanting to us if we inquire at the mouth of God. He instructs us perfectly in
regulating the whole course of our lives, and thus our errors become knowing and
willful, when God’s law has been clearly set before us, which contains in
itself a perfect rule of doctrine for our guidance.
He afterward, adds,
We have not obeyed thy servants
the Prophets who have spoken in, thy name.
We ought also diligently to notice this, because the impious often wickedly
fail to discern the presence of God, whenever he does not openly descend from
heaven and speak to them by angels; and so their impiety is increased throughout
all ages. Thus, in these days, many think themselves to have escaped by boasting
in the absence of any revelation from heaven: the whole subject, they say, is
full of controversy; the whole world is in a state of confusion; and what do the
teachers of the Church mean by promoting such strife among
each
other? Then they boast and think as they please, and are blind of their own
accord. But Daniel here shews how no turning to God is of the slightest avail,
unless he is attended to when he sends his prophets, because all who despise
those prophets who speak it the
name of the Lord are perfidious and
apostate, wicked and rebellious. We see, then, the suitability of this language
of Daniel, and the necessity of this explanation:
The people were wicked, unjust,
rebellious, and impious, because they did not obey the
prophets. He does not assert that this
wicked, impious, contumacious, and perfidious character of the people arises
from their not listening to God thundering from heaven, or to his angels when
sent to them, but because they did not obey his prophets. Besides this, he calls
the prophets servants of God who
speak in his name. He distinguishes
between true and false prophets; for we know how many impostors formerly abused
this title in the ancient Church; as in these days the disturbers of our
churches falsely pretend to the name of God, and by this audacity many of the
simple are deceived. Daniel, therefore, distinguishes here between the true and
false prophets, who everywhere boast in their divine election to the office of
teachers. He speaks here of the effect, treating all these boastings as vain and
foolish, for we are not ignorant of the manner in which all Satan’s
ministers transform themselves into angels of light.
(<471114>2
Corinthians 11:14.) Thus the evil as well as the good speak in God’s name;
that is, the impious no less than the righteous teachers put forth the name of
God; but here, as we have said, Daniel refers to the effect and the matter
itself, as the phrase is. Thus when Christ says, When two or three are gathered
together in my name,
(<401820>Matthew
18:20,) this is not to be applied to such deceptions as are observable in the
Papacy, when they proudly use God’s name as approving certain assemblies
of theirs. It is no new thing, then, for a deceiving Church to hide its baseness
under this mask. But when Christ says, Where two or three are assembled in my
name, this refers to true and sincere affection. So also Daniel in this passage
says, True prophets speak in
God’s name; not only because they
shelter themselves under this name for the sake of its authority, but because
they have solid proofs of the exercise of God’s authority, and are really
conscious of their true vocation.
He afterwards adds,
To our kings, our nobles, our
fathers, and all the people of the land.
Here Daniel lays prostrate every high thing in this world with the view of
exalting God only, and to prevent any pride rising in the world to obscure his
glory, as it otherwise would do. Here, then, he implicates
kings, princes, and
fathers in the same guilt; as if he had
said, all are to be condemned without exception before God. This, again, must be
diligently noticed. For we see how the common people think everything permitted
to them which is approved by their kings and counselors. For in the common
opinion of men, on what does the whole foundation of right and wrong rest,
except on the arbitrary will and lust of kings? Whatever pleases kings and their
counselors is esteemed lawful, sacred, and beyond all controversy; and thus God
is excluded from his supreme dominion. As, therefore, men thus envelop
themselves in clouds, and willingly involve themselves in darkness, and prevent
their approach to God, Daniel here expresses how inexcusable all men are who do
not obey the Prophets, even if a thousand kings should obstruct them, and the
splendor of the whole world should dazzle them. By such clouds as these
God’s majesty can never be obscured; nay more, this cannot offer the
slightest impediment to God’s dominion or hinder the course of his
doctrine. These points might be treated more copiously: I am only briefly
explaining the Prophet’s meaning, and the kind of fruit which ought to be
gathered from his words. Finally, it is a remarkable testimony in favor of the
Prophet’s doctrine, when kings and their counselors are compelled to
submit, and all the loftiness of the world is brought under subjection to the
prophets, as God says in Jeremiah,
(<240110>Jeremiah
1:10) Behold! I have set thee above kingdoms, and above the empires of this
world, to destroy and to build up, to plant and to root out. There God asserts
the authority of his teaching, and shews its superiority to everything in the
world; so that all who wish to be free from it, as if endowed with some peculiar
privilege, are both foolish and ridiculous. This, then, must be noticed in the
Prophet’s words, when he says,
God spoke by his prophets to
kings, princes, and fathers. Respecting
the “fathers,” we see how frivolous is the excuse of those who use
their fathers as a shield in opposing God. For here Daniel unites both fathers
and children in the same guilt, and shews how all equally deserve condemnation,
when they do not listen to God’s prophets, or rather to God speaking by
means of his prophets.
He next subjoins,
To thee, O Lord, belongs
righteousness, and to us confusion of face, as it is at this
day. The meaning is, God’s wrath,
which he manifests towards his people, is just, and nothing else remains but for
the whole people to fall down in confusion, and candidly acknowledge itself
deservedly condemned. But this contrast which unites opposite clauses, ought
also to be noticed, because we gather from the Prophet’s words that God
can neither be esteemed just nor his equity be sufficiently illustrious, unless
when the mouths of men are closed, and all are covered and buried in disgrace,
and confess themselves subject to just accusation, as Paul also says, Let God be
just, and let all men’s mouths be stopped,
(<450304>Romans
3:4, 26;) that is, let men cease to cavil and to seek any alleviation of their
guilty their subterfuges. While, therefore, men are thus cast down and
prostrate, God’s true glory is illustrated. The Prophet now utters the
same instruction by joining these two clauses, of opposite meaning’s.
Righteousness is to thee, but
shame to us. Thus we cannot praise God, and
especially while he chastises us and punishes us for our sins, unless we become
ashamed of our sins, and feel ourselves destitute of all righteousness. Lastly,
when we both feel and confess the equity of our condemnation, and when this
shame seizes upon our minds, then we begin to confess God’s justice; for
whoever cannot bear this self-condemnation, displays his willingness to contend
against God. Although hypocrites apparently bear witness to God’s justice,
yet whenever they claim anything as due to their own worthiness, they at the
same time derogate from their judge, because it is clear that God’s
righteousness cannot shine forth unless we bury ourselves in shame and
confusion. According as at this
day, says Daniel. He adds this to
confirm his teaching; as if he had said, the impiety of the people is
sufficiently conspicuous from their punishment. Meanwhile, he holds the
principle that the people were justly chastised; for hypocrites, when compelled
to acknowledge God’s power, still cry out against his equity. Daniel joins
both points together: thus, God has afflicted his people, and this very fact
proves them to be wicked and perfidious, impious and rebellious.
As it is at this
day, meaning, I will not complain of any
immoderate rigor, I will not say thou hast treated my people cruelly; for even
if the punishments which thou hast inflicted on us are severe, yet thy
righteousness shines forth in them: I therefore confess how fully we deserve
them all. To a man of
Judah, says he. Here Daniel seems to
wish purposely to strip the mask off the Israelites, under which they thought to
hide themselves. For it was an honorable title to be called a Jew, an inhabitant
of Jerusalem, an Israelite. It was a sacred race, and Jerusalem was a kind of
sanctuary and kingdom of God. But now, says he, though we have hitherto been
elevated aloft so as to surpass the whole world, and though God has deigned to
bestow upon us so many favors and benefits, yet confusion of face is upon us:
let our God be just. Meanwhile, let all these empty boastings cease, such as our
deriving our origin from holy fathers and dwelling in a sacred land; let us no
longer cling to these things, says he, because they will profit us nothing
before God. But I see that I am already too prolix.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as no other way of
access to thee is open for us except through unfeigned humility, that we may
often learn to abase ourselves with feelings of true repentance. May we be so
displeased with ourselves as not to be satisfied with a single confession of our
iniquities; but may we continue in the same state of meditation, and be more and
more penetrated with real grief. Then may we fly to thy mercy, prostrate
ourselves before thee in silence, and acknowledge no other hope but thy pity and
the intercession of thine only-begotten Son. May we be so reconciled to thee, as
not only to be absolved from our sins, but also governed throughout the whole
course of our life by thy Holy Spirit, until at length we enjoy the victory in
every kind of contest, and arrive at that blessed rest which thou hast prepared
for us by the same our Lord Jesus Christ. — Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-SIXTH
|
DANIEL
9:8
|
|
8. O Lord, to us belongeth confusion of
face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned
against thee.
|
8. Jehovah, nobis pudor faciei, regibus
nostris, principibus nostris, et patribus nostris, quia peccavinus in
te.
|
In this verse Daniel completes his own confession. We
have stated the beginning of his prayer to be this: He threw himself before God
as a criminal, with the whole people, and prayed earnestly for pardon. It was
his duty to begin in this way: he had previously named the whole people; he now
speaks of kings, princes, and
fathers, and thus comprehends the common
people. Besides, kings are accustomed to absolve themselves and those who
approach their presence from all ordinary laws; wherefore Daniel uses the
phrase, kings, princes, and
fathers. While he treated of the people,
he shewed how those at a distance, as well as those at home, were equally
subject to God’s wrath, because, had he executed his vengeance equitably
on all, no one was so free from wickedness as to be free from punishment. God
had not driven all the Jews into either Chaldea or Assyria, and many had
remained in the neighboring nations. Yet Daniel denies them any diminution of
their guilt, although they had been treated more humanely by God, who had spared
them some portion of their suffering. We are taught by this passage, that the
crimes or guiltiness of men are not always to be estimated by the amount of
their punishment. For God acts very mildly with some who deserve yet greater
severity; and if he does not entirely spare us, he partially remits his rigor
towards us, either to allure us to repentance, or for some reasons hitherto
unknown to us. Whatever the reason may be, even if God does not openly punish us
all, this ought neither to lead us to excuse ourselves, nor to ally
self-indulgence, because we do not experience the same severity from God. The
conclusion to be drawn is this, all the Israelites are justly afflicted,
because, from first to last, all have conducted themselves impiously. For Daniel
repeats the word which does not signify declension merely, but to act with gross
wickedness; as if he had said, the Israelites deserved no common punishment, and
thus it should not surprise us when God executes such dreadful vengeance against
them. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:9
|
|
9. To the Lord our God belong mercies
and forgiveness, though we have rebelled against him.
|
9. Domino Deo nostro miserationes, et veniae,
f475
quamvis rebelles fuerimus in ipsum.
f476
|
Daniel here betakes himself to God’s mercy as
to a sacred asylum; for it is not sufficient to acknowledge and confess our
sins, unless we are supported by a confidence of our obtaining pardon from
God’s mercy. We see numbers who use great prolixity in bearing witness to
the truth, that they richly deserve all kinds of punishment; but no good result
arises from this, because despair overwhelms them and plunges them into an
abyss. Recognition of a fault is in truth without the slightest profit, unless
with the addition of the hope of pardon. Daniel, therefore, after candidly
confessing the treatment which the whole people had received from God to have
been deserved, although so severe and harsh, still embraces his pity. According
to the common saying, this is like a drowning man catching at a straw. We
observe also how David makes use of the same principle. There is forgiveness
with thee that thou mayest be feared.
(<19D004>Psalm
130:4.) And this moderation must be diligently marked, because Satan either
lulls us into torpid security, or else so agitates us as utterly to absorb our
minds in sorrow. These two artifices of Satan are sufficiently known to us.
Hence that moderation which I have mentioned must be maintained, lest we should
grow torpid in the midst of our vices, and so indulge in contempt of God as to
induce forget-fullness of him. Then, on the other hand, we ought not to be
frightened, and thus close against us the gate of hope and pardon. Daniel,
therefore, here follows the best arrangement, and prescribes the same rule for
us. For, in confessing the people’s wickedness, he does not entirely throw
away the hope of pardon, but supports himself and others with this consolation
— God is merciful. He rests this hope of pardon on the very nature of God;
as if he had said, there is nothing so peculiar to God as pity, and hence we
ought never to despair. To
God, says he,
belong mercies and
forgiveness. No doubt Daniel took this
phrase from Moses, especially from that remarkable and memorable passage where
God pronounces himself a severe avenger, yet full of mercy, inclined to clemency
and pardon, and exercising much forbearance.
(<023406>Exodus
34:6.) As, therefore, Daniel held the impossibility of God putting away his
affectionate feelings of pity, he takes this as the main point of his teaching,
and it becomes the chief foundation for his hopes and his petition for pardon.
He argues thus, To God belong
loving kindnesses; therefore, as he can
never deny himself, he will always be merciful. This attribute is inseparable
from his eternal essence; and however we have rebelled against him, yet he will
never either cast away nor disdain our prayers.
We may conclude from this passage that no prayers are
lawful or rightly composed unless they consist of these two members. First, all
who approach God ought to cast themselves down before him, and to acknowledge
themselves deserving of a thousand deaths; next, to enable them to emerge from
the abyss of despair, and to raise themselves to the hope of pardon, they should
call upon God without fear or doubt, and with firm and stable confidence. This
reliance upon God can have no other support than the nature of God himself, and
to this he has borne ample testimony. With respect to the close of the verse, it
may be explained in two ways:
Because, or although, we are
rebellious against him. I have stated
that I rather approve of taking the particle
yk,
ki, in the sense of opposition.
Although
we have rebelled against God, still he will be entreated, and never
will be unmindful of his pity. If any one prefers taking it in a causal sense,
it will suit tolerably well; as if Daniel had said, the people have no other
hope left but the mercy of God, as they have been convicted of sin over and over
again.
Because
we have acted wickedly towards him, what is left for us but to throw
ourselves with all our trust upon the clemency and goodness of God, since he has
borne witness to his being propitious to sinners who truly and heartily implore
his favor? It now follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:10
|
|
10. Neither have we obeyed the voice of the
Lord our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the
prophets.
|
10. Et non auscultavimus voci Jehovae Dei
nostri, ut ambularemus in legibus ejus, quas proposuit coram facie nostra per
manum servorum suorum prophetarum.
|
Here, again, Daniel shews how the Israelites provoked
God’s anger against them by the wickedness of their conduct. He points out
one special kind of sin and method of acting wickedly, namely, despising the
teaching which proceeded from God as its author, and was expounded to them by
his prophets. We must diligently notice this, as we have previously advised; for
although no one is excusable before God by the pretext of ignorance, yet we
perceive how our wickedness is aggravated when we knowingly and willfully make a
point of rejecting what God commands and teaches. Daniel, therefore, enlarges
upon the people’s crime by adding the circumstance,
they would not hear the
prophets. Everything which would have
been a fault in the Chaldeans or Assyrians was the most grievous wickedness in
the elect people. Their obstinacy was the more provoking, because while God had
pointed out the way by his prophets, they had turned their backs upon him.
We have not
heard. Clearly enough this verse is
added by way of explanation, as Daniel might express the reason for their
wickedness. Therefore he calls the laws of God “doctrine,” which
consists of many parts; for it is certain that nothing was omitted by God which
was useful to be known, and thus he had embraced the whole perfection of justice
in his discourse. He is treating here not only the law of Moses, but the
teaching of the prophets, as the words clearly point out; and the noun
hrwt
torah, “law,” is to be taken for “doctrine.” It
is just as if Daniel had said, God was rejected when he wished to rule his
people by his prophets. But the plural number seems to denote what I have
staffed, namely, that the perfection of doctrine was comprehended in the
prophets; for God omitted nothing while he completed the revelation of whatever
was needful for the guidance of the life. Yet this was rendered entirely useless
by the perverseness of the people’s nature, apparent. in their rejection
of all God’s laws.
Daniel confirms this sentiment by adding,
Those laws were set before the
people. This shews how everything was
supplied to the people, since God had familiarly delivered to them whatever was
needful for the utmost degree of piety and justice. For this phrase,
to put anything before
one’s face, means to deliver all
useful knowledge openly, perspicuously, and lucidly, and with great familiarity
and skillfulness. Thus nothing is left doubtful or complicated, nothing remains
obscure, unconnected, or confused. As, therefore, God had unfolded the whole
scope of righteousness by his law, the people’s impiety was the more
severe and detestable, because they would not receive benefit from such familiar
instruction. The Prophet intends by these words to shew how such willful sinners
were worthy of double punishment. They are first convicted of contumacy because
they had no pretext for their ignorance; they made an open and furious assault
upon God, for although the way was pointed out to them, yet they turned aside in
all directions, and threw themselves headlong. We must remember what I have
previously touched upon, namely, the value of an external ministry, because we
are aware how the ancient people, when rebellious against the prophets, were
accustomed to pretend that they did not really despise God. As, therefore,
hypocrites think their sins are concealed by a covering of this kind, Daniel
clearly expresses that God is despised in his prophets, although he neither
descends from heaven nor sends down his angels. And this is the meaning of the
expression, the prophets were the
servants of God; it declares how they
taught nothing either rashly or in their own name or by their own impulse, but
faithfully executed the Almighty’s commands. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
9:11
|
|
11. Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law,
even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is
poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of
God, because we have sinned against him.
|
11. Et totus Israel transgressi sunt legem
tuam, et defecerunt,
f477
ne auscultarent voci tuae. Ideo,
f478
effesa est super nos,
f479
maledicto,
f480
et jusjurandum, quod scriptum est in lege Mosis sevei Dei, quai peccavimus
contra ipsum.
|
Daniel again confirms what I formerly said concerning
the punishment being most justly inflicted upon the people. They had no cause
for the slightest complaint of any excess of severity on the part of God. He now
says, All Israel had
sinned. He does not enumerate the
separate ranks of the people as he did before, but he pronounces all to be
transgressors in one single word, as they had broken God’s law from the
least to the greatest. He uses sometimes the second and sometimes the third
person, as a mark of his vehemence and ardor, since Daniel now speaks for the
whole world, and then prostrates himself before God, and prepares to approach
his tribunal. It is just as if at one time he were to confess himself guilty
before God and angels, and next to ascend a theater and testify to his own
infamy and that of the whole people before all mankind.
In
revolting, he says,
so as not to
hear. By these words Daniel expresses
the determined obstinacy of the people, implying — this was not occasioned
by either error or ignorance; nay, even sloth was not the cause of
Israel’s willful blindness and inattention to God’s precepts, but
was only the beginning of this act of rebellion.
In
revolting, therefore,
so as not to hear thy
voice. We now understand the
Prophet’s meaning. He was not content with the simple condemnation of the
people, but he wished to mark distinctly the various forms of rebellion, to
impress the Israelites with a further sense of the grievous manner in which they
had provoked God’s wrath. Not only had they departed from the right course
through negligence or folly, but they had knowingly transgressed God’s
law. We must carefully notice this. Although hypocrites testify themselves to be
prepared for obedience, if only they can be quite sure that God is speaking to
them, yet they are certainly held back by some hidden depravity from coming
openly to the light. And whenever God’s word is put before us, whoever
does not prove himself of a docile disposition, even if he should swear a
hundred times over that he is perplexed and must decline embracing the teaching
proposed to him, because he is doubtful whether God speaks to him or not, he
lies; and the truth of Daniel’s assertion will always be made clear; for
all who do not hear God when he speaks to them are backsliders and inwardly
perverse, and by the depravity of their nature place a veil before themselves
which obscures their perceptions, and then their own minds prevent them from
becoming obedient to God.
He next adds,
For this cause the curse of which
Moses had written is poured down upon us.
By this circumstance he enlarges upon the people’s crime, because they
had long ago been warned of the impending judgments, and yet they closed their
eyes and despised both threats and instruction. This was the very height of
wickedness; for the Israelites were intractable, although God stretched out his
hand towards them, pointed out the way of safety, and taught them faithfully
whatever was useful for them; but this only increased their perverseness, while
they treated his threatenings as if utterly worthless. Besides this, they added
contempt of his teaching to ridiculing his threats, as they thought either that
God was deluding them when he announced by Moses his coming vengeance unless
they obeyed his law, or else they imagined it all invented by Moses, and that
God could not possibly execute his threats. Thus the people are convicted of
desperate impiety, as they neither attended to the teaching of the Almighty nor
believed in the authority of his threatenings. If a father threatens his son, or
a master his servant, the vengeance will be just, as the comic poet says, Do not
say you have not been warned. (Terence Ardria, Act 1:Scene 2.) As God had
predicted for so many ages that the Israelites should not be unpunished if they
transgressed the law, this proves how completely unmanageable they were.
(Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28.) And when he says
the curse was poured
out or distilled, he confesses how the
wrath of God inundated the whole people like a deluge, although it was
completely under control. For God had predicted what he intended to do by the
mouth of Moses, and whoever reads those curses which Moses denounces against
transgressors of the law, will confess them to be by no means immoderate. When,
therefore, execution really occurs, must we not acknowledge the shining forth of
God’s justice without the slightest possibility of blame? I have stated
that the word
h[wbç, shebugneh, is explained by
some as an “oath,” and by others a “curse:” it properly
means a curse, and is deduced from the word
[wbç
shebugn, which seems to be taken in an extraordinary sense, because this
word properly means seven., and the word derived from it means to
“swear,” through the practice of bringing forward a certain number
of witnesses; and hence the noun means an oath. But because a curse is often
interposed, and the swearer calls God to witness against himself if he fails to
perform his verbal engagement, some interpreters elicit the sense of a curse
being poured out. But there may be some change of construction here, and so I
willingly interpret it. The curse
and the oath, then,
are poured
out; that is, the curse which God has
sanctioned by an oath, by a figure of speech well known to grammarians under the
name of hypallage. The curse, therefore, was sworn by the mouth of God
himself; and we know how threats cause more terror by being confirmed by an
oath, just as God, on the other hand, adds strength to the promises of his
favor.
He adds afterwards,
Because we have acted wickedly
against him. By this expression, Daniel
shortly but clearly affirms that the people have no cause for complaint, as
their calamities were the result of neither accident nor chance. They might
behold the very source of their evils in the law of God. had there been no
predictions of this kind, the Israelites might have doubted and even disputed
with themselves, as to the origin and cause of their being enslaved by their
enemies, and of their being cast out with the utmost contempt and cruelty into
distant lands. They might then have inquired into the causes of their evils, as
if they were entirely unknown. But when the law of Moses was before their eyes,
and God had therein sworn that he would perform the very threatenings just as
they had happened, no further doubt could possibly remain. This, then, is the
summary of Daniel’s meaning; the very denunciation of these punishments
was sufficient to condemn the Israelites, because their sins were brought home
to them over and over again, when God fulfilled against them, what he had
formerly predicted by his servant Moses. It follows, —
|
DANIEL
9:12
|
|
12. And he hath confirmed his words, which he
spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a
great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon
Jerusalem.
|
12. Et stabilivit sermonem suum, quem loquutus
fuerat super nos, et super judices,
f481
ut adduceret super nos malum magnum quod non factum est sub toto coelo, sicut
factum est
f482
in Jerusalem.
|
Daniel pursues the same sentiment, shewing how the
Israelites had no cause whatever for expostulating with God on account of their
being so heavily afflicted, and no reason for doubting either its origin or
intention. For now all had come to pass exactly as it had been long ago
predicted.
God,
therefore, has stirred up his
word against us; as if he had said,
there is no reason why we should strive with God, for we behold his truthfulness
in the punishments which he has inflicted upon us, and his threats are no mere
vain scarecrows, or fabulous inventions manufactured to frighten children. God
now really proves how seriously he had spoken. What then is the use of our
turning our backs upon him, or why should we seek vain excuses when God’s
truthfulness shines brightly in our destruction? Do we wish to deprive God of
his truthfulness? surely whatever our earnestness we shall never succeed. Let,
therefore, this suffice to condemn us, — God has predicted everything
which occurs, and thus effectually and experimentally proves himself an avenger.
God, therefore, ratified
his word; that is, God’s word
would have remained without the slightest efficacy and rigor, unless this curse
had been suspended over our head; but while we lie prostrate and almost buried
under our calamities, God’s word is borne aloft; that is, God makes his
truthfulness conspicuously visible, which otherwise would scarcely be
perceptible at all. Unless God punished the wickedness of men, who would not
treat the threatening of his law as childish? But when he demonstrates by
certain proofs the very best reasons for terrifying mankind, efficacy and rigor
are immediately imparted to his words. Besides this, Daniel here intends to cast
off all subterfuges, and to cause the people candidly to acknowledge, and really
to feel themselves justly afflicted. He says,
against us and against our
judges, who judged us. Again, Daniel
throws down all haughtiness of the flesh, with the view of exalting God alone
and of preventing any mortal splendor from obscuring the authority of the Law.
For we know how the common people think they have a shield for the defense of
all their crimes, when they can quote the example of kings and judges. At this
very day, whenever we argue against the superstitions of the Papacy, they say,
“Well! if we do make a mistake, yet God has set over us both kings and
bishops who rule us after their manner, why then should we be blamed when we
have God’s command for following those who are endued with power and
dignity?” As, therefore, the vulgar generally catch at a subterfuge like
this, Daniel again affirms, that although those who transgress God’s law
are endowed with great worldly authority, yet they are not exempt from either
blame or punishment, nor can the ordinary multitude be excused if they follow
their example. Therefore, as he
had spoken by Moses against our judges who judged
us, he says; that is, although power had
been conferred upon them for ruling us, yet the whole ordination of it is from
God: yet after they had utterly abused their government, and violated
God’s justice, and thus had endeavored to draw down God, if possible, from
his elevation, Daniel asserts that their loftiness will by no means shelter them
from the consequences of transgression.
He afterwards adds,
To bring upon us a great evil,
which has never happened under the whole heavens, as it has now occurred at
Jerusalem. Here Daniel foresaw an
objection which had some slight force in it. Although God had deservedly
punished the Israelites, yet when he displayed his anger against them more
severely than against other nations, he might seem forgetful of his equity.
Daniel here removes all appearance of incongruity, even if God is more severe
against his elect people then against profane nations, because the impiety of
this people was far greater than that of all others on account of their
ingratitude, contumacy, and impracticable obstinacy, as we have already said.
Since the Israelites surpassed all nations in malice, ingratitude, and all kinds
of iniquity, Daniel here declares how thoroughly their disastrous afflictions
were deserved. Again, we are here reminded, whenever God severely chastises his
Church, of that principle to which we must return, namely, our impiety is the
more detestable to God the nearer he approaches us; and the kinder he is to us,
the more chargeable we are, unless in our turn we prove ourselves grateful and
obedient. This state of things ought not to seem troublesome to us, as vengeance
begins at the house of God, and he puts forth examples of his wrath against his
own people far more tremendous than against others; this, I say, we ought not to
take ill, as I have already explained the reason of it. It does not surprise us
to find the Gentiles groping in darkness, but when God shines upon us and we
resist him with determined willfulness, we are doubly impious. This comparison,
therefore, must be noticed, as evil was poured out upon Jerusalem; meaning, no
similar punishment was inflicted upon other nations, for
what happened to
Jerusalem, says Daniel,
never occurred under the whole
heaven. It follows,
—
|
DANIEL
9:13
|
|
13. As it is written in the law of
Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the Lord
our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy
truth.
|
13. Sicuti scriptum est in lege Mosis, totum
malum hoc venit super nos, et non deprecati sumus faciem Jehovae Dei nostri, ut
reverteremur ab iniquitatibus nostris, et attenti essemus ad veritatum
tuam.
|
He repeats what he had already said, without any
superfluity, shewing how God’s judgments are proved by their effects, as
the law of Moses contains within it all the penalties which the Israelites
endured. As, therefore, so manifest an agreement existed between the law of God
and the people’s experience, they ought not to become restive and to have
sought every kind of subterfuge without profit. By this alone God sufficiently
proved himself a just avenger of their crimes, because he had predicted many
ages before what he had afterwards fully carried out. This is the object of the
repetition, when Daniel says the people felt the justice of the penalties
denounced against them in the law of Moses, for in the meantime he adds,
we have not deprecated the face
of God. Here he severely blames the
people’s hardness, because even when beaten with stripes they never grew
wise. It is said — fools require calamities to teach them wisdom. This,
therefore, was the height of madness in the people to remain thus stubborn under
the rod of the Almighty, even when he inflicted the severest blows. As the
people were so obstinate in their wickedness, who does not perceive how
sincerely this conduct was to be deplored?
We have not deprecated,
therefore,
the face of our
God. This passage teaches us how the
Lord exercises his judgments by not utterly destroying men, but holding his
final sentence in suspense, as by these means he wishes to impel men to
repentance. First of all, he gently and mercifully invites both bad and good by
his word, and adds also promises, with the view of enticing them; and then, when
he observes them either slow or refractory, he uses threatenings with the view
of arousing them from their slumber; and should threats produce no effect, he
goes forth in arms and chastises the sluggishness of mankind. Should these
stripes produce no improvement, the desperate character of the people becomes
apparent. In this way, God complains in Isaiah of their want of soundness; the
whole body of the people is subject to ulcers from the head to the sole of the
foot,
(<230106>Isaiah
1:6;) and yet he would lose all his labor, through their being utterly
unmanageable. Daniel now asserts the existence of the same failing in the
people, while he states the Israelites to be so untouched by a sense of their
calamities, as never to supplicate for pardon. I cannot complete the remainder
to-day.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, that we may learn
seriously to consider in how many ways we become guilty before thee, especially
while we daily continue to provoke thy wrath against us. May we be humbled by
true and serious repentance, and fly eagerly to thee, as nothing is left to us
but thy pity alone; when cast down and confounded, and reduced to nothing in
ourselves, may we fly to this sacred anchor, as thou art easily entreated, and
hast promised to act as a father of mercies to all sinners who seek thee. Thus
may we approach thee with true penitence, and relying on thy goodness, never
doubt the granting of our requests; and being freed by thy mercy from the
tyranny of Satan and of sin, may we be governed by thy Holy Spirit, and so
directed in the way of righteousness as to glorify thy name throughout our
lives, till we arrive at that happy and immortal life which we know to be laid
up in heaven for us, by Christ our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-SEVENTH.
IN yesterday’s Lecture we dwelt on the
Prophet’s enlarging upon the people’s crime, in resisting the
impression made by God’s chastisements; but now he more clearly
demonstrates the kind of obstinacy displayed. For
they did not turn away from their
iniquities, and were not attentive to God’s
truth. He had said before,
we have not deprecated the anger
of God. But here he expresses something
more, namely, allowing the existence of some pretense to prayer, there was no
real sincerity, We know how impiously hypocrites abuse God’s name, and
pretend to the outward form of prayer, and even to the greatest fervor, but
there is no reality in their prayers. Thus the Prophet has good reason for
uniting what ought never to be separated, and then convicts the Israelites of
obstinacy, because they did not flee suppliantly to God’s mercy with
repentance and faith. There was, doubtless, some form of piety left among the
people; but Daniel here estimates prayers according to God’s word, and
thus puts these two things before us, namely, repentance and faith. We must
diligently notice this. For nothing is more common than an earnest supplication
for pardon when the signs of God’s wrath are apparent; this was always
customary among all nations and at all times, and yet there existed neither
repentance nor faith. Hence their prayers became mere falsehood and vanity. This
is the meaning of the Prophet’s language when he says,
We have not asked at the face of
Jehovah our God, by turning away from our
iniquities, (or that we may return,)
and by being instructed in thy
truth. Finally, we may gather from this
passage what the rule of pious and acceptable prayer really is; first, we must
be displeased with ourselves for our sins; next, we must regard the threats and
promises of the Almighty. As to the first member of the sentence, experience
teaches us how rashly many break forth into prayer, even when their evil conduct
rises up professedly against God. On the one hand, they are so enraged as not to
hesitate to engage in warfare with God, and yet they pray unto him, because
terror seizes upon their minds and compels them to submit themselves to God. The
Prophet, therefore, here shews the utter inutility of that outward shew and
perverse mixture of noise and flattery, because God cannot approve of any
prayers, unless they spring equally from repentance and faith. When he says,
the people were not attentive to
God’s truth, in my opinion this is
extended equally to threats and promises, and faith apprehends both God’s
pity and his judgments. For, surely, it cannot be otherwise, when terror rouses
the pious to fly to God’s mercy. As, therefore, God embraces each quality
in his word, as he cites all who have sinned to his own tribunal, and then gives
them a hope of reconciliation, if the sinner is really converted to him; so also
Daniel, by saying, the Israelites
were not attentive to God’s truth,
doubtless had respect to both objects, namely, their want of sufficient
consideration of God’s judgments, and next, their stupidity in despising
his pity when plainly set before them. On the whole, This passage shews us the
impossibility of our prayers being pleasing to God, unless they flow from true
repentance and faith; that is, when we heartily feel our wickedness, we then
flee to God’s mercy and rely upon his promises. Hence we discover three
things to be necessary to render God propitious to us; first, dissatisfaction
with ourselves which occasions sorrow, through our being conscious of our sins,
and of our having provoked God’s anger. This is the first point. Secondly,
faith must necessarily be added. Lastly, prayer must follow as a proof of our
repentance and faith. When men remain without repentance and faith, we observe
how God’s name is profaned although we conceive and utter many prayers, at
the very time when the two principal dispositions are entirely wanting. Now let
us proceed, —
|
DANIEL
9:14
|
|
14. Therefore hath the Lord watched upon the
evil, and brought it upon us: for the Lord our God is righteous in all
his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice.
|
14. Et vigilavit Jehovah super malum, et
immisit illud
f483
spuer nos: quai justus est Jehovah Deus noster in omnibus operibus suis quae
fecit, hoc est, facit, et non auscultavimus voci ejus.
|
Daniel confirms what he had formerly said respecting
the slaughter which afflicted the Israelites not being the offspring of chance,
but of the certain and remarkable judgment of God. Hence he uses the word
rqç,
seked, which signifies to watch and to apply the mind attentively to
anything. It is properly used of the guards of cities, who keep watch both by
night and by day. This phrase does not appear to me to imply haste, but rather
continual carefulness. God often uses this metaphor of his watching to chastise
men who are far too eager to rush into sin. We are familiar with the great
intemperance of mankind, and their disregard of all moderation whenever the
lusts of the flesh seize upon them. God on the other hand say’s he will
not be either slothful or neglectful in correcting this intemperance. The reason
for this metaphor is expressed in the forty-fourth chapter of Jeremiah, where
men are said to burst forth and to be carried away by their appetites, and then
God is continually on the watch till the time of his vengeance arrives. I have
mentioned how this word denotes rather continual diligence than hasty swiftness;
and the Prophet seems here to imply that although God had endured the
people’s wickedness, yet he had at length really performed his previous
threatenings, and was always on the watch, and rendering it impossible for the
people to escape his judgments upon the wickedness in which they indulged.
Therefore hath Jehovah closely
attended to the calamity, and caused it to come upon
us, says he. With the view of
comprehending the Prophet’s intention more fully, we must notice what God
pronounces by Jeremiah in the Lamentations,
(<250338>Lamentations
3:38,) where he accuses the people of sloth, because they did not acknowledge
the justice of the punishments which they suffered; he blames them in this way.
Who is he who denies both good and evil to proceed from the mouth of God; as if
he were pronouncing a curse against those who are ignorant of the origin of
calamities from God, when he chastises the people. This sentiment is not
confined to a single passage. For God often inveighs against that stupidity
which is born with mankind, and leads them to attribute every event to fortune,
and to neglect the hand of the smiter.
(<230913>Isaiah
9:13.) This kind of teaching is to be met with everywhere in the prophets, who
shew how nothing can be worse than to treat God’s judgments as if they
were accidents under the influence of chance. This is the reason why Daniel
insists so much upon this point. We know also what God denounces in his law: If
ye have walked against me rashly, I also will rashly walk against you,
(<032627>Leviticus
26:27, 28;) that is, if ye do not cease to attribute to fortune whatever evil ye
suffer, I will rush against you with closed eyes, and will strive with you with
similar rashness; as if he had said, If ye cannot distinguish between fortune
and my judgments, I will afflict you on all sides, both on the right hand and on
the left, without the slightest discretion; as if I were a drunken man,
according. to the expression, With the perverse, thou wilt be perverse. For this
reason Daniel now confesses, God
watched over the calamity, so as to bring down all those
afflictions by which the people was
oppressed.
In this passage we are taught to recognize
God’s providence in both prosperity and adversity, for the purpose of
stirring us up to be grateful for his benefits, while his punishments ought to
produce humility. For when any one explains these things by fortune and chance,
he thereby proves his ignorance of the existence of God, or at least of the
character of the Deity whom we worship. For what is left for God if we rob him
of his providence? It is sufficient here just to touch on these points which are
often occurring, and of which we usually hear something every day. It is
sufficient for the exposition of this passage to observe how the Prophet
incidentally opposes God’s judgment and providence to all notions of
chance.
He next adds,
Jehovah our God is just in all
his works. In this clause the Prophet
confirms his former teaching, and the phrase,
God is
just, appears like rendering a reason
for his dealings; for the nature of God supplies a reason why it becomes
impossible for anything to happen by the blind impulse of fortune. God sits as a
judge in heaven; whence these two ideas are directly contrary to each other.
Thus if one of the following assertions is made, the other is at the same time
denied; if God is the judge of the world, fortune has no place in its
government; and, whatever is attributed to fortune is abstracted from
God’s justice. Thus we have a confirmation of our former sentence by the
use of contraries or opposites; for we must necessarily ascribe to God’s
judgment both good and evil, both adversity and prosperity, if he governs the
world by his providence, and exercises the office of judge. And if we incline in
the least degree to fortune, then God’s judgment and providence will cease
to be acknowledged. Meanwhile, Daniel not only attributes power to God, but also
celebrates his justice; as if he had said, he does not arbitrarily govern the
world without any rule of justice or equity, but he is just. We must not
suppose the existence of any superior law to bind the Almighty; he is a law unto
himself, and his will is the rule of all justice; yet we must lay down this
point; God does not reign as a tyrant over the world, while in the perfection of
his equity, he performs some things which seem to us absurd, only because our
minds cannot ascend high enough to embrace a reason only partially apparent, and
almost entirely hidden and incomprehensible in the judgments of God. Daniel,
therefore, wished to express this by these words,
Jehovah our
God, says he,
is just in all the works which he
performs. The meaning is, the people
would not have been so severely chastised and afflicted with so many miserable
calamities, unless they had provoked God’s wrath; this might be easily
collected from the threatenings which God had denounced many ages beforehand,
and which he at that time proved in real truth to be in no degree frivolous.
Next, a second part is added, as not only God’s power but. his justice
shines forth in the slaughter of the people; and I have touched briefly on each
of these points, as far as it was necessary for explanation. But we must notice
the Prophet’s allusion in these words to those numerous trials which had
fallen upon the faithful for the purpose of proving their faith. They perceived
themselves the most despised and miserable of mortals; the peculiar and sacred
people of God was suffering under the greatest reproach and detestation,
although God had adopted them by his law with the intention of their excelling
all other people. While, therefore, they perceived themselves drowned in that
deep whirlpool of calamities and disgrace, what would they suppose, except that
God had deceived them, or that his covenant was utterly annihilated? Daniel,
therefore, establishes the justice of God in all his works for the purpose of
meeting this temptation, and of confirming the pious in their confidence, and of
inducing them to fly to God in the extremity of their
calamities.
He adds, as a reason,
Because they did not listen to
his voice. Here, again, he points out
the crime of the people who had not transgressed through ignorance or error, but
had purposely taken up arms against God. Whenever God’s will is once made
known to us, we have no further excuse for ignorance; for our open defiance of
the Almighty arises from our being led away by the lusts of the flesh. And hence
we gather how very detestable is the guilt of all who do not obey God’s
voice whenever he deigns to teach us, and who do not instantly acquiesce in his
word. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
9:15-17
|
|
15. And now, Lord our God, that hast brought
thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten
thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done
wickedly.
|
15. Et nunc Domine Deus noster, qui eduxisti
populum tuum e terra Aegypt cum manu forti, et fecisti, comparasti, tibi nomen
secundum diem hanc,
f484
peccavimus, impie egimus.
|
|
16. 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: because for our sins, and for the
iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach
to all that are about us.
|
16. Domine secundum omnes justitias tuas
avertatur, quaeso, ira tua, et excandescentia tua ab urbe tua Jerusalem, monte
sanctitatis tuae: quoniam ob peccata nostra, et ob iniquitates,
f485
patrum nostrorom, Jerusalem, et populus tuus est in probum cunctis vicinis,
f486
circuitibus nostris.
f487
|
|
17. Now therefore, our God, hear the prayer of
thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy
sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake.
|
17. Et nunc audias, Deus noster, precationem
servi tua, et orationem ejus atque illumina faciem tuam
f488
super sanctuarium tuum quod vastatum est, vel, desolatum, propter
Dominum.
|
After Daniel has sufficiently confessed the
justice of those judgments which God had inflicted upon the people, he again
returns to beg for pardon. First, he would conciliate favor for himself; next,
he would stir up the minds of the pious to confidence, and so he sets before
them that proof of grace which ought to avail to support the minds of the pious
even to the end of the world. For when God led his people out of Egypt, he did
not set before them any momentary benefit merely, but he bore witness to the
adoption of the race of Abraham on the condition of his being their perpetual
Savior. Therefore, whenever God wishes to gather together those who have been
dispersed, and to raise their minds from a state of despair to cheerful hope, he
reminds them of his being their Redeemer. I am that God, says he, who led you
out of Egypt.
(<031145>Leviticus
11:45, and often elsewhere.) God not only commends his own power in such
passages, but denotes the object of their redemption; for he then received his
people under his care on the very ground of never ceasing to act towards them
with the love and anxiety of a father. And when in their turn such anxiety
seized upon the faithful as to lead them to apprehend their own utter desertion
by God, they are in the habit of seizing upon this shield — God did not
lead our fathers out of Egypt in vain. Daniel now follows up this
reasoning-Thou, O Lord our
God, says he,
who hast led forth thy
people; as if he had said, he called
upon God, because by one single proof he had testified to all ages the sacred
character of the race of Abraham. We observe, then, how he stirs up himself and
all the rest of the pious to prayer, because by laying this foundation, he could
both complain familiarly, and fearlessly request of God to pity his people, and
to put an end to their calamities. We now understand the Prophet’s
meaning, when he says, the people
were led forth from Egypt.
He afterwards adds another cause,
God then acquired renown for
himself, as the event evidently displayed.
He here joins God’s power with his pity, implying, when the people
were led forth, it was not only a specimen of paternal favor towards the family
of Abraham, but also an exhibition of divine power. Whence it follows, his
people could not be cast off without also destroying the remembrance of that
mighty power by which God had acquired for himself renown. And the same
sentiment often occurs in the prophets when they use the argument: — If
this people should perish, what would prevent the extinction of thy glory, and
thus whatever thou hadst conferred upon this people would be buried in oblivion?
So, therefore, Daniel now says,
By bringing thy people from the
land of Egypt, thou hast made thyself a
name; that is, thou hast procured for
thyself glory, which ought to flourish through all ages unto the end of the
world. What, then, will occur, if the whole of thy people be now destroyed? He
next. adds, We have done
impiously, and have acted wickedly. In
these words Daniel declares how nothing was left except for God to consider
himself rather than his people, as by looking to them he would find nothing but
material for vengeance. The people must necessarily perish, should God deal with
them as they deserved. But Daniel here turns away God’s face by some means
from the people’s sins, with the view of fixing his attention on himself
alone and his own pity, and on his consistent fidelity to that perpetual
covenant which he had made with their fathers.
Lastly, he would not permit that redemption to fail
which was an illustrious and eternal proof of his virtue, favor, and goodness.
Hence he subjoins, O Lord, may
thine anger be averted according to all thy righteousness, and thine indignation
from thy city Jerusalem, the mountain of thy
holiness. We observe how Daniel here
excludes whatever merit there might be in the people. In reality they did not
possess any, but I speak according to that foolish imagination which men can
scarcely put off. They always take credit to themselves, although they are
convicted of their sins a hundred times over, and still desire to conciliate
God’s favor by pleading some merit before God. But here Daniel excludes
all such considerations when he pleads before God his own justice, and uses the
strong expression, according to
all thy righteousness. Those who take
this word “righteousness” to mean “judgment,” are in
error and inexperienced in interpreting the Scriptures; for they suppose
God’s justice to be opposed to his pity. But we are familiar with
God’s righteousness as made manifest, especially in the benefits he
confers on us. It is just as if Daniel had said, that the single hope of the
people consisted in God’s having regard to himself alone, and by no means
to their conduct. Hence he takes the righteousness of God for his liberality,
gratuitous favor, consistent fidelity, and protection, which he promised his
servants: O
God, therefore, he says,
according to all thy prormsed
mercies; that is, thou dost not fail
those who trust in thee, thou dost promise nothing rashly, and thou art not
accustomed to desert those who flee to thee; oh! by thy very justice, succor us
in our distress. We must also notice the universal particle “all,”
because when Daniel unites so many sins which might drown the people in an abyss
a thousand times over, he opposes to this all God’s promised
mercies. As if he had said, although the number of our iniquities is so great
that we must perish a hundred times over, yet thy promised mercies are far more
numerous, meaning, thy justice surpasses whatever thou mayest find in us of the
deepest dye of guilt.
He says, again,
Let thine anger be turned away,
and thy burning wrath from thy city Jerusalem, and from thy holy
mountain. In joining together anger and
burning wrath, the Prophet does not imply any excess on the part of God, as if
he revenged the sins of the people too severely, but he again represents the
aggravation of their wickedness, causing him to become so angry with them as to
lay aside his usual character, and to treat their adoption as vain and
fruitless. Daniel does not complain in this case of the severity of the
punishment, but rather condemns himself and the rest of the people for causing a
necessity for such severe measures. Once more, he sets before God the holy
mountain which he had chosen, and in this way averts his countenance from
judgment, lest he should reckon with them for so many sins, by which God was
deservedly incensed. Here, therefore, God’s election is interposed,
because he had consecrated Mount Zion to himself, and desired to be worshipped
there, where also his name should be celebrated and sacrifices offered to him.
In this respect, therefore, Daniel obtains favor for himself before God, and, as
I have said, he excludes all other considerations.
He next adds,
Because on account of our sins,
and the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem. and thy people are a reproach to
all our neighbors. By another argument,
the Prophet desires to bend God to pity; for Jerusalem as well as the people
were a disgrace to the nations; yet this caused equal disgrace to fall upon God
himself. As, therefore, the Gentiles made a laughing-stock of the Jews, they did
not spare the sacred name of God; nay, the Jews were so despised, that the
Gentiles scarcely deigned to speak of them, and the God of Israel was
contemptuously traduced, as if he had been conquered, because he had suffered
his temple to be destroyed, and the whole city Jerusalem to be consumed with
burning and cruel slaughter. The Prophet, therefore, now takes up this argument,
and in speaking of the sacred city, doubtless refers to the sacredness of
God’s name. His language implies, — Thou hast chosen Jerusalem as a
kind of royal residence; it was thy wish to be worshipped there, and now this
city has become an object of the greatest. reproach to our neighbors. Thus he
declares how God’s name was exposed to the reproaches of the Gentiles. He
afterwards asserts the same of God’s people, not by way of complaint. when
the Jews suffered these reproaches, for they deserved them by their sins, but
the language is emphatic, and yet they were God’s people. God’s name
was intimately bound up with that of his people, and whatever infamy the profane
east upon them, reflected chiefly on God himself. Here Daniel places before the
Almighty his own name; as if he had said, O Lord! be thou the vindicater of
thine own glory, thou hast once adopted us on this condition, and may the memory
of thy name be ever inscribed upon us; permit us not to be so reproachfully
slandered, let not the Gentiles insult thee on our account. And yet he says this
was done on account of the
iniquities of the people and of their
fathers; by which expression he removes
every possibility of doubt. 0h! how can it happen, that God will so lay his
people prostrate? Why has he not spared at least his own name! Daniel,
therefore, here testifies to his being just, because the iniquity of the people
and of their fathers had risen so high, that God was compelled to exercise such
vengeance against them.
His next prayer is,
Do thou who art our God hear the
prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine
forth. In these words Daniel wrestles
with distrust, not for his own sake privately, but for that of the whole Church
to whom he set forth the true method of prayer. And experience teaches all the
pious how necessary this remedy is in those doubts which break into all our
prayers, and make our earnestness and ardor in prayer grow dull and cold within
us, or at least we pray without any composed or tranquil confidence, and this
trembling vitiates whatever we had formerly conceived. As, therefore, this daily
happens to all the pious when they leave off the duty of prayer for even a short
period, and some doubt draws them off and shuts the door of familiar access to
God, this is the reason why Daniel so often repeats the
sentence, Do thou, O Lord, hear
the prayer of thy. servant. David also
inculcates such sentiments in his prayers, and has the greatest necessity for
acting so. And those who are truly exercised in praying feel how God’s
servants have good cause for such language whenever they pray to him. But I will
complete the rest to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as thou hast
deigned to gather us once among thy people, and hast wished us also to bear thy
name, and that of thine only-begotten Son; although we so often provoke thine
anger by our sins, and never cease to heap evil upon evil: Grant that we may
never be exposed as a laughing-stock and spectacle, to the disgrace of thy
sacred name. As, therefore, thou now seest the impious seizing all occasions of
grossly slandering thyself, and thy sacred gospel, and the name of thine
only-begotten Son, do not permit them, I pray thee, petulantly to insult thee.
May thy Spirit so govern us, that we may desire to glorify thy name. May it be
glorified in spite of Satan and all the impious, until we are gathered into that
celestial kingdom which thou hast promised us in the same Christ our
Lord.-Amen.
LECTURE
FORTY-EIGHTH
We yesterday commenced our comment on the passage in
which Daniel asks the Almighty to
make his face to shine upon his own
sanctuary. We are well aware how often
this expression occurs in the Scriptures, where God is said to manifest his
opposition by hiding his face, when he does not assist his own people, but hides
himself as if he were forgetful of them. As Scripture everywhere compares our
calamities and adversities to darkness, therefore God in whose favor our
happiness is placed is said to hide his face when he does not succor us; and
again, he is said to render his face bright and conspicuous, when he gives us
some sign of his parental layout. God seemed for a long time to have deserted
his sanctuary, and therefore the Prophet prays him
to make his face to
shine. We must remark his expression;
upon thy sanctuary which is laid
waste. We gather from it, that although
the Prophet saw all things lost in a carnal sense, yet he neither despaired nor
desisted from his prayers. And this rule must be noticed, — God’s
grace is not to be estimated by the present aspect of things, because he often
shews himself angry with us. Our carnal reason must be overcome, if we wish to
pray to God in adversity, as the Prophet here teaches us by his own example. For
the sanctuary was cut off; its very devastation might have formed an excuse to
Daniel and all the pious for offering their prayers no longer. What success
could be hoped for in such a deplorable state of affairs? Daniel by this
circumstance shews how he struggled on without allowing any obstacle to
interrupt the course of his prayer. He adds,
for the Lord’s
sake; all the Hebrew doctors agree that
the word
ynda,
Adoni, when written with the great point karnetz, is taken for God
alone; but in certain passages of Scripture it is as clearly used for the
Mediator also. And very probably it has this sense here; although the Hebrews
use this form for God’s
sake, or for thy sake, when they make a
direct, appeal to the Deity, yet I confess they often use the third person. But
what necessity is there for flying to this harsher form of speech, when the
other sense appears more appropriate to the passage? He will afterwards say, on
account of thee, my God; but he says here,
for the Lord’s
sake. If, however, I had to contend with
a person of a captious disposition, I confess I could not convince him from this
passage; but if we weigh the Prophet’s words without contention, we shall
rather incline to this view of the subject. Here, therefore, he sets before God
the Mediator by whose favor he hopes to obtain his request. Still, if any one
prefers to apply this to God, let him retain his opinion. Let us now
proceed,.—
|
DANIEL
9:18
|
|
18. My God, incline thine ear, and hear; open
thine eyes, and behold our desolation’s, and the city which is called by
thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our
righteousness, but for thy great mercies.
|
18. Inclina Deus mi, aurem tuam, et audi:
eperi oculos tuos, et respice desolationes nostras,
f489
et civitem super quam invocatum est nomen tuum, super eam,
f490
quia non propter justitias nostras nos prosternimus preces nostras coram facie
tua, sed propter misericordias tuas
f491
multas, vel, magnas.
|
This short clause breathes a wonderful fervor and
vehemence of prayer; for Daniel pours forth his words as if he were carried out
of himself. God’s children are often in an ecstasy in prayer; they moan
and plead with God, use various modes of speech and much tautology, and cannot
satisfy themselves. In forms of speech, indeed, hypocrites are sometimes
superior; they not only rival God’s sincere worshippers, but are
altogether carried along by outward pomps, and by a vast heap of words in their
prayers, they arrive at much elegance and splendor, and even become great
rhetoricians. But Daniel here only displays some portion of his feelings; there
is no doubt of his wishing to bear witness to the whole Church how vehemently
and fervently he prayed with the view of inflaming others with similar ardor. In
this verse, he says, O my God,
incline thine ear and hear. It would
have been sufficient simply to have said, hearken; but as God seemed to remain
deaf notwithstanding so many prayers and entreaties, the Prophet begs him to
incline his ear. There is a silent antithesis here, because the faithful had
seemed to be uttering words to the deaf, while their groans had been continually
carried upwards to heaven during seventy years without the slightest effect. He
adds next, open thine eyes and
see. For God’s neglecting to
answer must have cast down the hopes of the pious, because the Israelites were
treated so undeservedly. They were oppressed by every possible form of reproach,
and suffered the most grievous molestation in their fortunes as well as in
everything else. Yet God passed by all these calamities of his people, as if his
eyes were shut; and for this reason Daniel now prays him to open his eyes. It is
profitable to notice these circumstances with diligence, for the purpose of
learning how to pray to God; first, when at peace and able to utter our
petitions without the slightest disquietude, and next, when sorrow and anxiety
seize upon all our senses, and darkness everywhere surrounds us; even then our
prayers should be steadily continued in the midst of these great obstacles. And
we gather at the same time, while God presses us to the very extremity of our
lives, how we ought to be still more importunate, because the new object; of
this our severe affliction, is to awaken us amidst our slothfulness. Thus it is
said in the Psalms,
(<193206>Psalm
32:6,) The saint will approach thee in an accepted time. Our opportunity arises
when the very vast necessities overwhelm us, because God then stirs us up, and,
as I have said, corrects our slowness. Let us learn, therefore, to accustom
ourselves to vehemence in prayer whenever God urges and incites us by stimulus
of this kind.
He next says,
Look upon our
desolation’s — of this we
have already said enough —
and on the city on which thy name
is called. Again Daniel sets before
himself the sure foundation of his confidence, — Jerusalem had been chosen
as God’s sanctuary. We know God’s adoption to have been without
repentance, as Paul says.
(<451129>Romans
11:29.) Daniel, therefore, here takes the very strongest method of appealing to
God’s honor, by urging his wish to be worshipped on Mount Zion, and by his
destining Jerusalem for himself as a royal seat. The phrase, to be called by
God’s name, means, reckoning either the place or the nation as belonging
to God. For God’s name is said to be called upon us, when we profess to be
his people, and he distinguishes us by his mark, as if he would openly shew to
the eyes of mankind his recognition of our profession. Thus God’s name was
called upon Jerusalem, because his election had been celebrated already for many
ages, and he had also gathered together one peculiar people, and pointed out a
place where he wished sacrifices to be offered.
He adds afterwards,
Because we do not pour forth our
prayers before thy face upon or through our own
righteousness,
(yk
ki, “but,” is in my opinion put adversatively here,)
but on account of thy many or
great mercies. Daniel more clearly
confirms what was said yesterday, shewing how his hope was founded in
God’s mercy alone. But I have stated how he expresses his meaning more
clearly by opposing two members of a sentence naturally contrary to each
other. Not in our
righteousness, says he,
but in thy
compassion’s. Although this
comparison is not always put so distinctly, yet this rule must be held —
whenever the saints rely upon the grace of God, they renounce at the same time
all their merits, and find nothing in themselves to render God propitious. But
this passage must be diligently noticed, where Daniel carefully excludes
whatever opposes God’s gratuitous goodness; and he next shews how, by
bringing forward anything of their own, as if men could deserve God’s
grace, they diminish in an equal degree from his mercy. Daniel’s words
also contain , another truth, manifesting the impossibility of reconciling two
opposite things, viz., the faithful taking refuge in God’s mercy, and yet
bringing anything of their own and resting upon their merits. As, therefore, a
complete repugnance exists between the gratuitous goodness of God and all the
merits of man, how stupid are those who strive to combine them, according to the
usual practice of the Papacy! And even now, those who do not yield willingly to
God and his word, wish to throw a covering over their error, by ascribing half
the praise to God and his mercy, and retaining the remainder as peculiar to man.
But all doubt is removed when Daniel places these two principles in opposition
to each other, according to my former remark — the righteousness of man
and the mercy of God. Our merits, in truth, will no more unite with the grace of
God than fire and water, mingled in the vain attempt to seek some agreement
between flyings so opposite. He next calls these mercies “great,” as
we previously remarked the use of a great variety of words to express the
various ways in which the people were amenable to his judgment. Here, therefore,
he implores God’s mercies as both many and great, as the people’s
wickedness had arrived at its very utmost pitch.
As for the following expression,
The people pour down their
prayers before God, Scripture seems in
some degree at variance with itself, through the frequent use of a different
metaphor, representing prayers as raised towards heaven. This phrase often
occurs, — O God, we elevate or raise our prayers to thee. Here also, as in
other places, the Spirit dictates a different form of expression, representing
the faithful as casting down upon the ground their vows and prayers. Each of
these expressions is equally suitable, because, as we said yesterday, both
repentance and faith ought to be united in our prayers. But repentance throws
men downwards, and faith raises them upwards again. At the first glance these
two ideas do not seem easily reconciled; but by weighing these two members of a
true and logical form of speech, we shall not find it possible to raise our
prayers and vows to heaven, without depressing them, so to speak, to the very
lowest depths. For on the one hand, when the sinner comes into the presence of
God, he must necessarily fall completely down, nay, vanish as if lifeless before
him. This is the genuine effect of repentance. And in this way the saints cast
down all their prayers, whenever they suppliantly acknowledge themselves
unworthy of the notice of the Almighty. Christ sets before us a picture of this
kind in the character of the publican, who beats on his breast aid begs for
pardon with a dejected countenance.
(<421813>Luke
18:13.) Thus also the sons of God throw down their prayers in that spirit of
humility which springs from penitence. Then they raise their prayers by faith
for when God invites them to himself, and gives them the witness to his
propitious disposition, they raise themselves up and overtop the clouds, yea,
even heaven itself. Whence this doctrine also shines forth Thou art a God who
hearest prayer, as we read in the Psalms.
(<196502>Psalm
65:2.) In consequence of the faithful determining God to be propitious, they
boldly approach his presence, and pray with minds erect, through an assurance
that God is well pleased with the sacrifice which they offer. It
follows:
|
DANIEL
9:19
|
|
19. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord,
hearken and defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people
are called by thy name.
|
19. Domine audi, Domine propitius esto, Domine
attende, vel, animadverte, et fac, ne moreris propter te, Deus mi, quia
nomen tuum invocatum est super urbem tuam, et super populum
tuum.
|
Here vehemence is better expressed, as I have
previously observed. For Daniel does not display his eloquence, as hypocrites
usually do, but simply teaches by his example the true law and method of prayer.
Without doubt, he was impelled by singular zeal for the purpose of drawing
others with him. God, therefore, worked in the Prophet by his Spirit, to render
him a guide to all the rest, and his prayer as a kind of common form to the
whole Church. With this intention, Daniel now relates his own conceptions. He
had prayed without any witness, but he now calls together the whole Church, and
wishes it to become a witness of his zeal and fervor, and invites all men to
follow this prescription, proceeding as it does not from himself but from God.
O Lord,
hear, says he; and next,
O Lord, be
propitious. By this second clause he
implies the continual and intentional deafness of the Almighty, because he was
deservedly angry with the people. And we ought to observe this, because we
foolishly wonder at God’s not answering our prayers as soon as the wish
has proceeded from our lips. Its reason, too, must be noticed. God’s
slowness springs from our coldness and dullness, while our iniquities interpose
an obstacle between ourselves and his ear.
Be
thou, therefore,
propitious, O Lord, that thou
mayest hear. So the sentence ought to be
resolved. He afterwards adds, O
Lord, attend. By this word Daniel means
to convey, that while the people had in many ways and for a length of time
provoked God’s anger, they were unworthily oppressed by impious and cruel
enemies, and that this severe calamity ought to incline God to pity them.
O
Lord, therefore, he says,
attend and do not
delay. Already God had cast away his
people for seventy years, and had suffered them to be so oppressed by their
enemies, as to cause the faithful the utmost mental despondency. Thus we
perceive how in this passage the holy Prophet wrestled boldly with the severest
temptation. He requests God not
to
delay or put off. Seventy years had
already passed away since God had formally cast off his people, and had refused
them every sign of his good will towards them.
The practical inference from this passage is the
impossibility of our praying acceptably, unless we rise superior to whatever
befalls us; and if we estimate God’s favor according to our own condition,
we shall lose the very desire for prayer, nay, we shall wear away a hundred
times over in the midst of our calamities, and be totally unable to raise our
minds up to God. Lastly, whenever God seems to have delayed for a great length
of time, he must be constantly entreated
not to
delay. He next adds,
For thine own sake, O , my
God. Again, Daniel reduces to nothing
those sources of confidence by which hypocrites imagine themselves able to
obtain God’s favor. Even if one clause of the sentence is not actually the
opposite of the other, as it was before, yet when he says,
for thy
sake, we may understand the inference to
be, therefore not for our own sakes. He confirms this view by the remainder of
the context, For thy sake, O my
God, because thy name has been invoked upon thy
city, says he,
and upon thy
people. We observe, then, how Daniel
left no means untried for obtaining his request, although he relied on his
gratuitous adoption, and never doubted God’s propitious feelings towards
his own people. He finds indeed no cause for them either in mortals or in their
merits, but he wishes mankind perpetually to behold his benefits and to continue
steadfast to the end. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:20-21
|
|
20. And whiles I was speaking, and praying,
and confessing my sin, and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my
supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my
God;
|
20. Et adhuc ego loquens,
f492
et precarer, et confiterer peecatum meum, et peccatum populi mei Israel, et
prosternerem,
f493
precationem meam coram Jehova Deo meo, super montem
f494
sanctuarii Dei me.
|
|
21. Yea, whiles I was speaking in
prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning,
being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening
oblation.
|
21. Cum, inquam, loquerer in precatione mea,
tunc vir Gabriel quem videram in visione principio voluntam volatu, tetigit me
circa tempus oblationis vespertinae.
|
As to the translation, some take it as I do; others
say “flying swiftly,” implying fatigue and alacrity. Some derive the
word for “flying” from
ãw[,
gnof, which signifies to fly, and they join it with its own participle,
which is common Hebrew; others again think it derived from
ã[y,
yegnef; signifying to fatigue, and then explain it metaphorically as
flying hastily.
f495
Here Daniel begins to shew us that his prayers were
by no means useless, nor yet without their fruit, as Gabriel was sent to elevate
his mind with confidence, and to lighten his grief by consolation. He next sets
him forth as a minister of the grace of God to the whole Church, to inspire the
faithful with the hope of a speedy return to their country, and to encourage
them to bear their afflictions until God should open a way for their return.
Next, as to ourselves, we need not wonder at God’s refusing at times an
answer to our prayers, because those who seem to pray far better than the rest
scarcely possess a hundredth part of the zeal and fervor required. On comparing
our method of prayer with this vehemence of the Prophet, surely we are in truth
very far behind him; and it is by no means surprising, if, while the difference
is so great, the success should be so dissimilar. And yet we may be assured that
our prayers will never be in vain, if we follow the holy Prophet at even a long
interval. If the limited amount of our faith hinders our prayers from emulating
the Prophet’s zeal, yet God will nevertheless listen to them, so long as
they are founded in faith and penitence. Daniel says, therefore,
While I was as yet speaking, and
praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people
Israel. First of all, we must notice how
the Holy Spirit here purposely dictated to the Prophet, how God’s grace
would be prepared for and extended to all the wretched who fly to it and implore
it. The Prophet, therefore, shews why we are so destitute of help, for if pain
occasions so much groaning, yet we never look up to God, from whom consolation
is always to be sought in all evils. He thus exhorts us to the habit of prayer
by saying his requests were heard. He does not bring forward any singular
example, but, as I have already said, he pronounces generally that the prayers
of those who seek God as a deliverer will never be either vain or unfruitful. I
have shewn how our supplications do not always meet with either the same or
equal attention, since our torpor requires God to differ in the help which he
supplies. But in this way the Prophet teaches us how those who possess true
faith and repentance, however slight, will never offer up their prayers to God
in vain.
He next adds what is necessary to conciliate
God’s favor, namely, that men should anticipate God’s judgment by
condemning themselves. So he asserts,
He confessed his sin and that of
his people. He does not speak here of
one kind of sin, but under the word
afj,
cheta, he comprehends all kinds of wickedness; as if he had said, when I
was confessing myself as steeped in sin and drowned in iniquity, I confessed the
same on behalf of my people. We must notice also the phrase,
the sin of my people
Israel. He might have omitted this noun,
but he wished to testify before God to the Church being guilty and without the
slightest hope of absolution, unless God, whom they had so deservedly offended,
was graciously pleased to reconcile them to himself. But the first clause is
more worthy of notice, where Daniel relates the confession of his own sins
before God. We know what Ezekiel says, or rather the Spirit speaking through his
mouth.
(<261414>Ezekiel
14:14.) For God names the three most perfect characters which had then existed
in the world, and includes Daniel among them, although he was then living.
Although Daniel was an example of angelic justice, and is celebrated by so
remarkable an honor, yet, if even he were before me, and were to entreat me for
this state, I would not listen to him, but I would free him only on account of
his own righteousness. As, therefore, God so extols his own Prophet, and raises
him on high as if he were beyond all the pollution and vices of the world, where
shall we find a man upon earth who can boast himself free from every stain and
failing? Let the most perfect characters be brought before us — what a
difference between them and Daniel! But even he confesses himself a sinner
before God, and utterly renounces his own righteousness, and openly bears
witness to his only hope of salvation being placed in the mere mercy of God.
Hence Augustine with much wisdom often cites this passage against the followers
of Pelagius and Celestius. We are well aware with what specious pretenses these
heretics obscured God’s grace, when they argued that God’s sons
ought not always to remain in prison, but to reach the goal. The doctrine indeed
is passable enough, that the sons of God ought to be free from all fault, but
where is such integrity really found? Augustine, therefore, with the greatest
propriety, always replied to those triflers by shewing that no one ever existed
so just in this world as not to need God’s mercy. For had there been such
a character, surely the Lord, who alone is a fitting judge, could have found
him. But he asserts his servant Daniel to be among the most perfect, if three
only are taken from the beginning of the world. But as Daniel casts himself into
the flock of sinners, not through any feigned pretense or humility, but when
uttering the fullness of his mind before God, who shall now claim for himself
greater sanctity than this? When,
therefore, I confess my sins before the face of my
God. Here surely there is no fiction,
whence it follows that those who pretend to this imaginary perfection are demons
in human shape, as Castalio and other cynics, or rather dogs like
him.
We must therefore cling to this principle: no man,
even if semi-angelic, can approach God, unless he conciliates his favor by
sincere and ingenuous confession of his sins, as in reality a criminal before
God. This, then, is our righteousness, to confess ourselves guilty in order that
God may gratuitously absolve us. These observations, too, respecting the
Israelites concern us also, as we observe from the direction which Christ has
given us to say, Forgive us our trespasses.
(<400612>Matthew
6:12;
<421104>Luke
11:4.) For whom did Christ wish to use this petition? Surely all his disciples.
If any one thinks that he has no need of this form of prayer, and this
confession of sin, let him depart from the school of Christ, and enter into a
herd of swine.
He now adds,
Upon the mountain of the
sanctuary of my God. Here the Prophet
suggests another reason for his being heard, namely, his anxiety for the common
welfare and safety of the Church. For whenever any one studies his own private
interests, and is careless of his neighbor’s advantage, he is unworthy to
obtain anything before God. If, therefore, we desire our prayers to be pleasing
to God, and to produce useful fruit, let us learn to unite the whole body of the
Church with us, and not only to regard what is expedient for ourselves, but what
will tend to the common welfare of all the elect people.
While,
therefore, says he,
I was yet speaking, and in the
midst of my prayer. It appears that
Daniel prayed not only with his affections, but broke forth into some outward
utterance. It is quite true that this word is often restricted to mental
utterance; for even when a person does not use his tongue, he may be said to
speak when he only thinks mentally within himself. But since Daniel said,
When I was yet speaking in my
prayer, he seems to have broken forth
into some verbal utterance; for although the saints do not intend to pronounce
anything orally, yet zeal seizes upon them, and words at times escape them.
There is another reason also for this: we are naturally slow, and then the
tongue aids the thoughts. For these reasons Daniel was enabled not only to
conceive his prayers silently and mentally, but to utter them verbally and
orally.
He next adds,
Gabriel
came; but I cannot complete my comments
on this occurrence to-day.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, that we may learn
more and more fully to probe ourselves, and to discover the faults of which we
are guilty: nay, may the serious weight of our wickedness truly humble us when
we come into thy sight, and call upon thee even from the lowest depths. May we
never cease to hope for thy grace; may we be elevated by that hope to the
highest heavens, and be firmly assured that thou wilt always prove thyself a
propitious Father to us. And as thou hast granted us a Mediator who may procure
favor for us from thee, may we never hesitate to approach thee familiarly,
through reliance on him. Whenever our miseries induce us to despair, may we
never succumb to it; but with unconquered fortitude of mind, may we persevere in
invoking thy name and imploring thy pity, until we perceive the fruit of our
prayers, and after being freed from all warfare, may we at length arrive at that
blessed rest which is laid up for us in heaven, by the same, Christ our Lord.
— Amen.
LECTURE FORTY
NINTH
In the last Lecture we explained the appearance of
the angel to Daniel, who satisfied the eagerness of his desires. For he prayed
with great earnestness when he perceived the time to have elapsed which God had
fixed beforehand by the mouth of Jeremiah, while the people still remained in
captivity.
(<242511>Jeremiah
25:11.) We have shewn how the angel was sent by God to the holy Prophet, to
alleviate his sorrow and to remove the pressure of his anxiety. He called the
angel a man, because he took the form of a man, as we have already
stated. One thing only remains — his saying,
the vision was offered to him
about the time of the evening sacrifice.
Already seventy years had passed away, during which Daniel had never
observed any sacrifice offered; and yet he still mentions sacrifices as if he
were in the habit of attending daily in the Temple, which was not really in
existence. Whence it appears how God’s servants, though deprived of the
outward means of grace for the present moment, are yet able to make them
practically useful by meditating upon God, and the sacrifices, and other rites,
and ceremonies of His institution. If any one in these days is cast into prison,
and even prohibited from enjoying the Lord’s Supper to the end of his
life, yet he ought not on that account to cast away the remembrance of that
sacred symbol; but should consider within himself every day, why that Supper was
granted us by Christ, and what advantages he desires us to derive from it. Such,
then, we perceive were the feelings of the holy Prophet, because he speaks of
these daily sacrifices as if then in actual use. Yet we know them to have been
abolished, and he could not have been present at them for many years, although
during that period the Temple was standing. Now let us go forward,
—
|
DANIEL
9:22
|
|
22. And he informed me, and talked with
me, and said, Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and
understanding.
|
22. Et docuit me, et loquutus est mecum, et
dixit, Daniel, nunc exivi ut te intelligere facerem intelligentiam.
f496
|
Here the angel prepares the Prophet’s mind by
saying, he came from
heaven to teach him. I went forth, says
he, to cause thee to
understand. For Daniel ought to
understand from this angel’s duty, what he ought himself to do. As God had
deigned to honor him so highly by setting before him one of his angels as his
master and teacher, the Prophet ought not to neglect so singular a favor, lest
he should seem ungrateful to God. We now understand why the angel testifies to
his coming to teach the
Prophet. And we also ought to reflect
upon this whenever we enter God’s Temple, or read any passage of holy
Scripture, and acknowledge teachers to be sent to us from God to assist us in
our ignorance, and to interpret the Scriptures for us. We ought also to admit
Scripture to be given to us to enable us to find there whatever would otherwise
be hidden from us. For God opens, as it were, his own heart to us, when he makes
known to us his secrets by means of the Law, and the Prophets, and his Apostles
also. Thus, Paul shews the gospel to be preached for the obedience of the faith,
(<450105>Romans
1:5;) as if he had said, we shall not escape with impunity, unless we obediently
embrace the doctrine of the gospel; otherwise, we do our utmost to frustrate the
designs of God and elude his counsels, unless we faithfully obey his word. It
follows, —
|
DANIEL
9:23
|
|
23. At the beginning of thy supplications the
commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art
greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the
vision.
|
23. Principio precationum tuarum exivit
verbum, et ego veni ut annuntiarem, quia tu desideriorum vir,
f497
itaque intellige in sermone, et intellige in visione.
|
Here the angel not only exacts docility from the
Prophet, but also exhorts him to greater attention. We shall afterwards perceive
that this singular and extraordinary prophecy needed no common study. This is
the reason why the angel not only commands Daniel to receive his message with
the obedience of faith, but also to pay greater attention than usual, because
this was an important and singular mystery. He states first of all —
the word went forth from the time
when the Prophet began to pray. I will
not delay by reciting the opinions of others, because I think I understand the
genuine sense of the passage; namely, God heard the prayers of his servant, and
then promulgated what he had already decreed. For by the word “went
forth” he expresses the publication of a decree which had formerly been
made; it was then issued just as the decrees of princes are said to go forth
when they are publicly spread abroad. God had determined what he would do,
directly Daniel had ceased, for God’s counsel would never fail of its
accomplishment; but he here points out the impossibility of the prayers of his
saints being in vain, because he grants them the very thing which he would have
bestowed had they not prayed for them, as if he were obedient to their desires,
and approved of their conduct. It is clear enough, that we can obtain nothing by
our prayer, without God’s previous determination to grant it; yet these
points are not contrary to each other; for God attends to our prayers, as it is
said in the Psalms, — -He performs our wishes, and yet executes what he
had determined before the creation of the world.
(<19E519>Psalm
145:19.) He had predicted by Jeremiah,
(<242511>Jeremiah
25:11,) as we have remarked before, the close of the people’s exile in
seventy years; Daniel already knew this, as he related at the beginning of the
chapter, yet he did not relax in his prayers, for he knew that God’s
promises afford us no ground or occasion for sloth or listlessness. The Prophet,
therefore, prayed, and God shews how his desires were by no means vain as they
concerned the welfare of the whole Church. He next states —
the word went forth as soon as
Daniel began to pray; that is, as soon
as he opened his lips he was divinely answered. He afterwards adds,
he came to make this known,
because, says he,
thou art a desirable
man. Some take the word
“desirable” actively, as if Daniel glowed with intense zeal; but
this is forced and contrary to the usage of the language. Without doubt, the
Prophet uses the word in the sense of acceptance with God, and the majority of
interpreters fully agree with me. The angel therefore announces his arrival on
behalf of Daniel, because he was in the enjoyment of God’s favor. And this
is worthy of notice, for we gather from the passage the impossibility of our
vows and prayers acquiring favor for us before God, unless we are already
embraced by his regards; for in no other way do we find God propitious, than
when we flee by faith to his loving-kindness. Then, in reliance upon Christ as
our Mediator and Advocate, we dare to approach him as sons to a parent. For
these reasons our prayers are of no avail before God, unless they are in some
degree founded in faith, which alone reconciles us to God, since we can never be
pleasing to him without pardon and remission of sins. We observe also, the sense
in which the saints are said to please God by their sometimes failing to obtain
their requests. .For Daniel was subject to continual groaning for many years,
and was afflicted by much grief; and yet he never perceived himself to have
accomplished anything worthy of his labors. he might really conclude all his
labor to be utterly lost, after praying so often and so perseveringly without
effect. But the angel meets him finally and testifies to his acceptance with
God, and enables him to acknowledge that he had not suffered any repulse,
although he had failed to obtain the object of his earnest desires. Hence, when
we become anxious in our thoughts, and are induced to despair through the
absence of all profit or fruit from our prayers, and through the want of an open
and immediate answer, we must derive this instruction from the angel’s
teaching, Daniel, who was most acceptable to God, was heard at length, without
being permitted to see the object of his wishes with his bodily eyes. He died in
exile, and never beheld the performance of the Prophet’s prophecies
concerning the happy state of the Church, as if immediately preparing to
celebrate its triumphs. At the end of the verse, as I have already mentioned,
the angel stimulates Daniel to greater zeal, and urges him to apply his mind and
all his senses attentively to understand the prophecy which the angel was
commanded to bring before him. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
9:24
|
|
24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy
people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end
of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting
righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most
Holy.
|
24. Septuaginta hebdomades finitae sunt super
populum tuum et super urbem tuam sanctum,
f498
ad claudendum scelus, et obsignandum peccatum, et expiandam iniquitatem, et
adducendam justitiam aeternam, et obsignandam visionem,
f499
et prophetiam, et ungendum sanctum sanctorum.
f500
|
This passage has been variously treated, and so
distracted, and almost torn to pieces by the various opinions of interpreters,
that it might be considered nearly useless on account of its obscurity. But, in
the assurance that no prediction is really in vain, we may hope to understand
this prophecy, provided only we are attentive and teachable according to the
angel’s admonition, and the Prophet’s example. I do not usually
refer to conflicting opinions, because I take no pleasure in refuting them, and
the simple method which I adopt pleases me best, namely, to expound what I think
delivered by the Spirit of God. But I cannot escape the necessity of
confuting’ various views of the present passage. I will begin with the
Jews, because they not only pervert its sense through ignorance, but through
shameful impudence. Whenever they’re exposed to the light which shines
from Christ, they instantly turn their backs in utter shamelessness, and display
a complete want of ingenuousness. They are like dogs who are satisfied with
barking. In this passage especially, they betray their petulance, because with
brazen forehead they elude the Prophet’s meaning. Let us observe, then,
what they think, for we should condemn them to little purpose, unless we can
convict them by reasons equally firm and certain. When Jerome relates the
teaching of the Jews who lived before his own day, he attributes to them greater
modesty and discretion then their later descendants have displayed. He reports
their confession, that this passage cannot be understood otherwise than of the
advent of Messiah. that perhaps Jerome was unwilling to meet them in open
conflict, as he was not fully persuaded of its necessity, and therefore he
assumed more than they had allowed. I think this very probable, for he does not
let fall a single word as to what interpretation he approves, and excuses
himself for bringing forward all kinds of opinions without any prejudice on his
part. Hence, he dares not pronounce whether or not the Jewish interpreters are
more correct than either the Greek or the Latin, but leaves his readers entirely
in suspense. Besides, it is very clear that all the Rabbis expounded this
prophecy of Daniel’s, of that continual punishment which God was about to
inflict upon his people after their return from captivity. Thus, they entirely
exclude the grace of God, and blame the Prophet, as if he had committed an error
in thinking that God would be propitious to these miserable exiles, by restoring
them to their homes and by rebuilding their Temple. According to their view, the
seventy weeks began at the destruction of the former Temple, and closed at the
overthrow of the second. In one point they agree with us, — in considering
the Prophet to reckon the weeks not by days but by years, as in Leviticus.
(<032508>Leviticus
25:8.) There is no difference between us and the Jews in numbering the years;
they confess the number of years to be 490, but disagree with us entirely as to
the close of the prophecy. They say — as I have already hinted — the
continual calamities which oppressed the people are here predicted. The Prophet
hoped the end of their troubles was fast approaching, as God had testified by
Jeremiah his perfect satisfaction with the seventy years of captivity. They say
also — the people were miserably harassed by their enemies again
overthrowing their second Temple; thus they were deprived of their homes, and
the ruined city became a sorrowful spectacle of devastation and disaster. In
this way, I shewed how they excluded the grace of God; and to sum up their
teaching shortly, this is its substance, — the Prophet is deceived in
thinking the state of the Church would improve at the close of the seventy
years, because seventy weeks still remained; that is, God multiplied the number
in this way, for the purpose of chastising them, until at length he would
abolish the city and the Temple, disperse their nation over the whole earth and
destroy their very name, until at length the Messiah whom they expected should
arrive. This is their interpretation, but all history refutes both their
ignorance and their rashness. For, as we shall afterwards observe, all who are
endued with correct judgment will scarcely approve of this, because all
historians relate the lapse of a longer period between the monarchy of Cyrus,
and the Persians, and the coming of Christ, than Daniel here computes. The Jews
again include the years which occurred from the ruin of the former Temple to the
advent of Christ, and the final overthrow of their city. Hence, according to the
commonly received opinion, they heap together about six hundred years. I shall
afterwards state how far I approve of this computation, and how far I differ
from it. Clearly enough, however, the Jews are both shamefully deceived and
deceive others, when they thus heap together different periods without any
judgment.
A positive refutation of this error is readily
derived from the prophecy of Jeremiah, from the beginning of this chapter, and
from the opinion of Ezra. That deceiver and impostor, Barbinel, who fancies
himself the most acute of all the Rabbis, thinks he has a convenient way of
escape here, as he eludes the subject by a single word, and answers only one
objection. But I will briefly shew how he plays with frivolous trifles. By
rejecting Josephus, he glories in an easy victory. I candidly confess that I
cannot place confidence in Josephus either at all times or without exception.
But what conclusions do Barbinel and his followers draw from this passage? Let
us come to that prophecy of Jeremiah which I have mentioned, and in which he
takes refuge. He says, the Christians make Nebuchadnezzar reign forty-five
years, but he did not complete that number. Thus he cuts off half a year, or
perhaps a whole one, from those monarchies. But what is this to the purpose?
Because 200 years will still remain, and the contention between us concerns this
period. We perceive then how childishly he trifles, by deducting five or six
years from a very large number, and still there is the burden of 200 years which
he does not remove. But as I have already stated, that prophecy of Jeremiah
concerning the seventy years remains immovable. But when do they begin? From the
destruction of the Temple? This will not suit at all.
Barbinel makes the number of the years forty-nine or
thereabouts, from the destruction of the Temple to the reign of Cyrus. But we
previously perceived the Prophet to be then instructed concerning the close of
the captivity. Now, that impudent fellow and his followers are not ashamed to
assert that Daniel was a bad interpreter of this part of Jeremiah’s
prophecy, because he thought the punishment completed, although some time yet
remained. Some of the Rabbis make this assertion, but its frivolous character
appears from this, Daniel does not here confess any error, but confidently
affirms that he prayed in consequence of his learning:from the book of Jeremiah
the completion of the time of the captivity. Then Ezra uses the following words,
— When the seventy years were completed, which God had predicted by
Jeremiah, he stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, to free the people
in the first year of his monarchy.
(<270101>Daniel
1:1.) Here Ezra openly states, that Cyrus gave the people liberty by the secret
impulse of the Spirit. Had the Spirit of God become forgetful, when he hastened
the people’s return? For then we must necessarily convict Jeremiah of
deception and falsehood, while Ezra treats the people’s return as an
answer to the prophecy. On the other hand, they cite a passage from the first
chapter of Zechariah,
(<380112>Zechariah
1:12,) Wilt thou not, O Lord, pity thy city Jerusalem, because the seventy years
are now at an end? But here the Prophet does not point out the moment at which
the seventy years were finished, but while some portion of the people had
returned to their country by the permission of Cyrus, and the building of the
Temple was still impeded, after a lapse of twenty or thirty years, he complains
of God not having completely and fully liberated his people. Whether or not this
is so, the Jews must explain the beginning of the seventy years from the former
exile before the destruction of the Temple; otherwise the passages cited from
Daniel and Ezra would not agree. We are thus compelled to close these seventy
years before the reign of Cyrus, as God had said he should then put all end to
the captivity of his people, and the period was completed at that
point.
Again, almost all profane writers reckon 550 years
from the reign of Cyrus to the advent of Christ.
I do not hesitate to suppose some error here, because
no slight difficulty would remain to us on this calculation, but I shall
afterwards state the correct method of calculating the number of years.
Meanwhile, we perceive how the Jews in every way exceed the number of 600 years,
by comprehending the .seventy years’ captivity under these seventy weeks;
and then they add the time which elapsed from the death of Christ to the reign
of Vespasian. But the facts themselves are their best refutation. For the angel
says, the seventy weeks were
finished. Barbinel takes the word
˚tj,
chetek, for “to cut off,” and wishes us to mark the continual
miseries by which the people were afflicted; as if the angel had said, the time
of redemption has not yet arrived, as the people were continually wretched,
until God inflicted upon them that final blow which was a desperate slaughter.
But when this word is taken to mean to “terminate” or
“finish,” the angel evidently announces the conclusion of the
seventy weeks here. That impostor contends with this argument — weeks of
years are here used in vain, unless with reference to the captivity. This is
partially true, but he draws them out longer than he ought. Our Prophet alludes
to the seventy years of Jeremiah, and I am surprised that the advocates of our
side have not considered this, as no one suggests any reason why Daniel reckons
years by weeks. Yet we know This figure to be purposely used, because he wished
to compare seventy weeks of years with the seventy years. And whoever will take
the trouble to consider this likeness or analogy, will find the Jews slain with
their own sword. For the Prophet here compares God’s grace with his
judgment; as if he had said, the people have been punished by an exile of
seventy years, but now their time of grace has arrived; nay, the day of their
redemption has dawned, and it shone forth with continual splendor, shaded,
indeed, with a few clouds, for 490 years until the advent of Christ. The
Prophet’s language must be interpreted as follows, — Sorrowful
darkness has brooded over you for seventy years, but God will now follow up this
period by one of favor of sevenfold duration, because by lightening your cares
and moderating your sorrows, he will not cease to prove himself propitious to
you even to the advent of Christ. This event was notoriously the principal hope
of the saints who looked forward to the appearance of the
Redeemer.
We now understand why the angel does not use the
reckoning’ of years, or months, or days, but weeks of years, because this
has a tacit reference to the penalty which the people had endured according to
the prophecy of Jeremiah. On the other hand, this displays God’s great
loving kindness, since he manifests a regard for his people up to the period of
his setting forth their promised salvation in his Christ.
Seventy
weeks, then, says he,
were finished upon thy people,
and upon thy holy city. I do not approve
of the view of Jerome, who thinks this an allusion to the rejection of the
people; as if he had said, the people is thine and not mine. I feel sure this is
utterly contrary to the Prophet’s intention. He asserts the people and
city to be here called Daniel’s, because God had divorced his people and
rejected his city. But, as I said before, God wished to bring some consolation
to his servant and all the pious, and to prop them up by this confidence during
their oppression by their enemies. For God had already fixed the time of sending
the Redeemer. The people and the city are said to belong to Daniel, because, as
we saw before, the Prophet was anxious for the common safety of His nation, and
the restoration of the city and Temple. Lastly, the angel confirms his previous
expression — God listened to his servant’s prayer, and promulgated
the prophecy of future redemption. The clause which follows convicts the Jews of
purposely corrupting Daniel’s words and meaning, because the angel says,
the time was finished for putting
an end to wickedness, and for sealing up sins, and for expiating
iniquity. We gather from this clause,
God’s compassionate feelings for His people after these seventy weeks were
over. For what purpose did God determine that time? Surely to prohibit sin, to
close up Wickedness, and to expiate iniquity. We observe no continuance of
punishment here, as the Jews vainly imagine; for they suppose God always hostile
to his people, and they recognize a sign of most grievous offense in the utter
destruction of the Temple. The Prophet, or rather the angel, gives us quite the
opposite view of the case, by explaining how God wished to finish and close up
their sin, and to expiate their iniquity He afterwards adds,
to bring in everlasting
righteousness. We first perceive how
joyful a message is brought forward concerning the reconciliation of the people
with God; and next, something promised far better and more excellent than
anything which had been granted under the law, and even under the flourishing
times of the Jews under David and Solomon. The angel here encourages the
faithful to expect something better than what their fathers, whom God had
adopted, had experienced. There is a kind of contrast between the
expiation’s under the law and this which the angel announces, and also
between the pardon here promised and that which God had always given to his
ancient people; and there is also the same contrast between the eternal
righteousness and that which flourished under the law.
He next adds,
To seal up the vision and the
prophecy. Here the word “to
seal” may be taken in two senses. Either the advent of Christ should
sanction whatever had been formerly predicted — and the metaphor will
imply this well enough — or we may take it otherwise, namely:, the vision
shall be sealed up, and so finally closed that all prophecies should cease.
Barbinel thinks he points out a great absurdity here, by stating it to be by no
means in accordance with God’s character, to deprive his Church of the
remarkable blessing of prophecy. But that blind man does not comprehend the
force of the prophecy, because he does not understand anything about Christ. We
know the law to be distinguished from the gospel by this peculiarity,-they
formerly had a long course of prophecy according to the language of the Apostle.
(<580101>Hebrews
1:1.) God spake formerly in various ways by prophets, but in these last times by
his only-begotten Son. Again, the law and the prophets existed until John, says
Christ.
(<401111>Matthew
11:11-13;
<421616>Luke
16:16;
<420728>Luke
7:28.) Barbinel does not perceive this difference, and as I have formerly said,
he thinks he has discovered an argument against us, by asserting that the gift
of prophecy ought not to be taken away. And, truly, we ought not to be deprived
of this gift, unless God desired to increase the privilege of the new people,
because the least in the kingdom of heaven is superior in privilege to all the
prophets, as Christ elsewhere pronounces. tie next adds,
that the Holy of Holies may be
anointed. Here, again, we have a tacit
contrast between the anointings of the law, and the last which should take
place. Not only is consolation here offered to all the pious, as God was about
to mitigate the punishment which he had inflicted, but because he wished to pour
forth the fullness of all his pity upon the new Church. For, as I have said, the
Jews cannot escape this comparison on the part of the angel between the state of
the Church under the legal and the new covenants; for the latter privileges were
to be far better, more excellent, and more desirable, than those existing in the
ancient Church from its commencement. But the rest to-morrow.
f501
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as through our
extreme blindness, we cannot gaze upon open daylight, that we may be enlightened
by thy Spirit. May we profit by all thy prophecies by which thou wishest to
direct us to thine only-begotten Son; embrace him with true and certain faith,
and remain obedient to him as our ruler and guide; and after we have passed
through this world, may we at length arrive at that heavenly rest which has been
obtained for us by the blood of the same thy Son. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTIETH
We began yesterday to shew how foolishly the Rabbis
corrupt by their comments this prophecy of which we are now treating; for they
suppose the angel to be treating of the continual wrath of God which the Jewish
people had partially experienced, and which was still to be of longer duration
and greater severity, according to their supposition. We have explained how
openly this is opposed to the words of Daniel, who here promises the return of
God’s favor to his people, and then shews the object and intention of the
Holy Spirit. By this consolation he wished to lighten the sorrow of the holy man
whom we have already seen to be extremely anxious about the state of the Church
which he then perceived to be so deplorable. The phrase on which we have already
commented confirms the same point, for the angel promises, at the arrival of the
predicted period, an end to sin
and wickedness, and iniquity, because iniquity should then be
expiated. He next promises
the approach of eternal
righteousness; and lastly adds,
the sealing of the vision and
prophecy, together with the spiritual anointing of the Holy of
Holies. Every one admits this to be a
promise of a blessing more excellent than anything under the law. No other
interpretation can possibly be received than that which refers it to the advent
of Christ, and the entire restoration of the Church of God. Other arguments
follow. For the Prophet adds what I shall repeat again, for I must explain more
fully what I now only casually run through.
|
DANIEL
9:25
|
|
25. Know therefore and understand, that
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: The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous
times.
|
25. Cognosces ergo et intelliges,
f502
ab exitu verbi de reditu,
f503
et de aedificanda Jerosolyma usque ad Christum ducem hebdomadas septam, et
hebdomadas sexaginta duas, et reducetur,
f504
et re-aedificabutur platea,
f505
et murus, idque in angustia temporum.
|
Daniel here repeats the divisions of time already
mentioned. He had previously stated seventy weeks; but he now makes two
portions, one of seven weeks, and the other of sixty-two. There is clearly
another reason why he wished to divide into two parts the number used by the
angel. One portion contains seven weeks, and the other sixty-two; a single week
is omitted which will afterwards be mentioned. The Jews reject seven weeks from
the rule of Herod to that of Vespasian. I confess this to be in accordance with
the Jewish method of speech; instead of sixty-two and seven, they will say seven
and sixty-two; thus putting the smaller number first. The years of man (says
Moses) shall be twenty and a hundred,
(<010603>Genesis
6:3) the Greeks and Latins would say, shall be a hundred and twenty years. I
confess this to be the common phrase among the Hebrews; but here the Prophet is
not relating the continuance of any series of years, as if he were treating of
the life of a single man, but he first marks the space of seven weeks, and then
cuts off another period of sixty-two weeks. The seven weeks clearly precede in
order of time, otherwise we could not sufficiently explain the full meaning of
the angel.
We shall now treat the sense in which
the going forth of the
edict ought to be received. In the
meantime, it cannot be denied that the angel pronounces this concerning the
edict which had been promulgated about the bringing back of the people, and the
restoration of the city. It would, therefore, be foolish to apply it to a period
at which the city was not restored, and no such decree had either been uttered
or made public. But, first of all, we must treat what the angel says,
until the Christ, the
Messiah. Some desire to take this
singular noun in a plural sense, as if it were the Christ of the Lord, meaning
his priests; while some refer it to Zerubbabel, and others to Joshua. But
clearly enough the angel speaks of Christ, of whom both kings and priests under
the law were a type and figure. Some, again, think the dignity of Christ
lessened by the use of the word
dygn,
negid, “prince” or “leader,” as if in his
leadership there existed neither royalty, nor scepter, nor diadem. This remark
is altogether without reason; for David is called a leader of the people, and
Hezekiah when he wore a diadem, and was seated on his throne, is also termed a
leader.
(<100502>2
Samuel 5:2;
<122005>2
Kings 20:5.) Without doubt, the word here implies superior excellence. All kings
were rulers over the people of God, and the priests were endowed with a certain
degree of honor and authority. Here, then, the angel calls Christ , leader, as
he far surpassed all others, whether kings or priests. And if the reader is not
captious, this contrast will be admitted at once.
He next adds,
The people shall return or be
brought back, and the street shall be built, and the wall, and that, too, in the
narrow limit of the times. Another
argument follows, — namely, after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be cut off.
This the Jews understand of Agrippa, who certainly was cut off when Augustus
obtained the empire. In this they seek only something to say; for all sound and
sensible readers will be perfectly satisfied that they act without either
judgment or shame, and vomit forth whatever comes into their thoughts. They are
quite satisfied when they find anything plausible to say. That trifler,
Barbinel, of whom I have previously spoken, thinks Agrippa has just as much
right to be called a Christ as Cyrus; he allows his defection to the Romans, but
states it to have been against his will, as he was still a worshipper of God.
Although he was clearly an apostate, yet he treats him as by no means worse than
all the rest, and for this reason he wishes him to be called the Christ. But,
first of all, we know Agrippa not to have been a legitimate king, and his
tyranny was directly contrary to the oracle of Jacob, since the scepter had been
snatched away from the tribe of Judah.
(<014910>Genesis
49:10.) He cannot by any means be called Christ, even though he had surpassed
all angels in wisdom, and virtue, and power, and everything else. Here the
lawful government of the people is treated, and this will not be found in the
person of Agrippa. Hence the Jewish arguments are altogether futile. Next,
another statement is added, he
shall confirm the treaty with many. The
Jews elude the force of this clause very dishonestly, and without the slightest
shame. They twist it to Vespasian and Titus. Vespasian had been sent into Syria
and the East by Nero. It is perfectly true, that though a wish to avoid a severe
slaughter of his soldiers, he tried all conditions of peace, and enticed the
Jews by every possible inducement to give themselves up to him, rather than to
force him to the last extremity. Truly enough, then, Vespasian exhorted the Jews
to peace, and Titus, after his father had passed over to Italy, followed the
same policy; but was this confirming the covenant? When the angel of God is
treating events of the last importance, and embracing the whole condition of the
Church, their explanation is trifling who refer it to the Roman leaders wishing
to enter into a treaty with the people. They attempted either to obtain
possession of the whole empire of the East by covenant, or else they determined
to use the utmost force to capture the city. This explanation, then, is utterly
absurd. It is quite clear that the Jews are not only destitute of all reason
when they explain this passage of the continual wrath of God, and exclude his
favor and reconciliation with the people, but they are utterly dishonest, and
utter words without shame, and throw a mist over the passage to darken it. At
the same time their vanity is exposed, as they have no pretext for their
comments.
I now come to the ANCIENT WRITERS. Jerome, as I
stated shortly yesterday, recites various opinions. But before I treat them
singly, I must answer in few words, the calumny of that impure and obstinate
Rabbi, Barbinel. To deprive the Christians of all confidence and authority, he
objects to their mutual differences; as if differences between men not
sufficiently exercised in the Scriptures, could entirely overthrow their truth.
Suppose, for instance, that I were to argue against him, the absence of consent
among the Jews themselves. If any one is anxious to collect their different
opinions, he may exult as a conqueror in this respect, as there is no agreement
between the Rabbis. Nay, he does not point out the full extent of the
differences which occur among Christians, for I am ready to concede far more
than he demands. For that brawler was ignorant of all things, and betrays only
petulance and talkativeness. His books are doubtless very plausible among the
Jews who seek nothing else. But he takes as authorities with us, Africanus and
Nicolaus de Lyra, Burgensis, and a certain teacher named Remond. He is ignorant
of the names of Eusebius,
f506
Origen, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Apollinaris, Jerome, Augustine, and other
similar writers. We here perceive how brazen this prater is, who dares to babble
about matters utterly beyond his knowledge. But as I have stated, I allow many
differences among Christians. Eusebius himself agrees with the Jews in referring
the word “Christ” to the priests, and when the angel speaks of the
death of Christ, he thinks the death of Aristobulus, who was slain, is intended
here. But this is altogether foolish. He is a Christian, you will say; true, but
he fell into ignorance and error. The opinion of Africanus is more to the point,
but the time by no means accords with that of Darius the son of Hystaspes, as I
shall afterwards show. He errs again on another chapter, by taking the years to
be lunar ones, as Lyranus does. Without doubt, this was only a cavil of his;
through not finding their own years suit, they thought the whole number might be
made up, by using intercalary years together with the 490. For before the year
was adjusted to the course of the sun, the ancients were accustomed to reckon
twelve lunar months, and afterwards to add another. The whole number of years
may be made up according to their imagination, if we add those additional
periods to the years here enumerated by the Prophet. But I reject this
altogether. Hippolytus also errs in another direction; for he reckons the seven
weeks as the time which elapsed between the death and resurrection of Christ,
and herein he agrees with the Jews. Apollinaris also is mistaken, for he thinks
we must begin at Christ’s birth, and then extends the prophecy to the end
of the world. Eusebius also, who contends with him in ,a certain passage, takes
the last. week for the whole period which must elapse till the end of the world
shall arrive. I therefore am ready to acknowledge all these interpretations to
be false, and yet I do not allow the truth of God to fail.
How, therefore, shall we arrive at any certain
conclusion? It is not sufficient to refute the ignorance of others, unless we
can make the truth apparent, and prove it by clear and satisfactory reasons. I
am willing to spare the names of surviving commentators, and of those who have
lived during our own times, yet I must say what will prove useful to my readers;
meanwhile, I shall speak cautiously, because I am very desirous of being silent
upon all points except those which are useful and necessary to be known. If any
one has the taste and the needful leisure to inquire diligently into the time
here mentioned, Oecolampadius rightly and prudently admonishes us, that we ought
to make the computation from the beginning of the world. For until the ruin of
the Temple and the destruction of the city, we can gather with certainty the
number of years which have elapsed since the creation of the world; here there
is no room for error. The series is plain enough in the Scriptures. But after
this they leave the reader to other sources of information, since the
computation from the overthrow of the Temple is loose and inaccurate, according
to Eusebius and others. Thus, from the return of the people to the advent of
Christ 540 years will be found to have elapsed. Thus we see how impossible it is
to satisfy sensible readers, if we only reckon the years in the way
Oecolampadius has done.
f507
Philip Melancthon, who excels in genius and learning,
and is happily versed in the studies of history, fakes a double
computation. He begins one plan from the second year of Cyrus, that is, from the
commencement of the Persian monarchy; but he reckons the seventy weeks to be
finished about the death of Augustus, which is the period of the birth of
Christ. When he arrives at the baptism of Christ, he adds another method of
reckoning, which commences at the times of Darius: and as to the edict here
mentioned, he understands it to have been promulgated by Darius the son of
Hystaspes, since the building of the Temple was interrupted for about sixty-six
years. As to this computation, I cannot by any means approve of it. And yet I
confess the impossibility of finding any other exposition of what the angel says
— until Christ the
Leader, unless by referring it to the
baptism of Christ.
These two points, then, in my judgment, must be held
as fixed; first, the seventy weeks begin with the Persian monarchy, because a
free return was then granted to the people; and secondly, they did not terminate
till the baptism of Christ, when he openly commenced his work of satisfying the
requirements of the office assigned him by his father. But we must now see how
this will accord with the number of years. I confess here, the existence of such
great differences between ancient writers, that we must use conjecture, because
we have no certain explanation to bring forward, which we can point out as the
only sufficient one. I am aware of the various calumnies of those who desire to
render all things obscure, and to pour the darkness of night upon the clearest
daylight. For the profane and the skeptical catch at this directly; for when
they see any difference of opinion, they wish to shew the uncertainty of all our
teaching. So if they perceive any difference in the views of various
interpreters, even in matters of the smallest moment, they conclude all things
to be involved in complete darkness. But their perverseness ought not to
frighten us, because when any discrepancies occur in the narratives of profane
historians, we do not pronounce the whole history fabulous. Let us take Grecian
history, — how greatly the Greeks differ from each other? If any should
make this a pretext for rejecting them all, and should assert all their
narrations to be false, would not every one condemn him as singularly impudent?
Now, if the Scriptures are not self-contradictory, but manifest slight
diversities in either years or places, shall we on that account pronounce them
entirely destitute of credit? We are well aware of the existence of some
differences in all histories, and yet this does not cause them to lose their
authority; they are still quoted, and confidence is reposed in
them.
With respect to the present passage, I confess myself
unable to deny the existence of much controversy concerning these years, among
all the Greek and Latin writers. This is true: but, meanwhile, shall we bury
whatever has already past, and think the world interrupted in its course? After
Cyrus had transferred to the Persians the power of the East, some kings must
clearly have followed him, although it is not evident who they were, and writers
also differ about. the period and the reigns of each of them, and yet on the
main points there is a general agreement. For some enumerate about 200 years;
others 125 years; and some are between the two, reckoning 140 years. Whichever
be the correct statement, there was clearly some succession of the Persian
kings, and many additional years elapsed before Alexander the Macedonian
obtained the monarchy of the whole East. This is quite clear. Now, from the
death of Alexander the number of years is well known. Philip Melancthon cites a
passage from Ptolemy which makes them 292; and many testimonies may be adduced,
which confirm that period of time. If any object, the number of years might be
reckoned by periods of five years, as the Romans usually did, or by Olympiads,
with the Greeks, I confess that the reckoning by Olympiads removes all source of
error. The Greeks used great diligence and minuteness, and were very desirous of
glory. We cannot say the same of the Persian empire, for we are unable
accurately to determine under what Olympiad each king lived, and the year in
which he commenced his reign and in which he died. Whatever conclusion we adopt,
my previous assertion is perfectly true, — if captious men are rebellious
and darken the clear light of history, yet, they cannot wrest this passage from
its real meaning, because we can gather from both the Greek and Latin
historians, the whole sum of the times which will suit very clearly this
prophecy of Daniel. Whoever will compare all historical testimony with the
desire of learning, and, without any contention, will carefully number the
years, he will find it impossible to express them better than by the expression
of the angel — seventy weeks. For example, let any studious person, endued
with acuteness, experience, and skill, discover whatever has been written in
Greek and Latin, and distinguish the testimony of each writer under distinct
heads, and afterwards compare the writers together, and determine the
credibility of each, and how far each is a fit and classical authority, he will
find the same result as that here given by the Prophet. This ought to be
sufficient for us. But, meanwhile, we must remember how our ignorance springs
chiefly from this Persian custom; whoever undertook a warlike expedition,
appointed his son his viceroy. Thus, Cambyses reigned, according to some, twenty
years, and according to others, only seven; because the crown was placed on his
head during his father’s lifetime. Besides this, there was another reason.
The people of the East are notoriously very restless, easily excited, and always
desiring a change of rulers. Hence, contentions frequently arose among near
relatives, of which we have ample narratives in the works of Herodotus. I
mention him among others, as the fact is sufficiently known. When fathers saw
the danger of their sons mutually destroying each other, they usually created
one of them a king; and if they wished to prefer the younger brother to the
elder, they called him “king” with the concurrence of their council.
Hence, the years of their reigns became intermingled, without any fixed method
of reckoning them. And, therefore, I said, even if Olympiads could never mislead
us, this could not be asserted of the Persian empire. While we allow much
diversity and contradiction united with great obscurity, still we must always
return to the same point, — some conclusion may be found, which will agree
with this prediction of the Prophet. Therefore I will not reckon these years one
by one, but will only admonish each of you to weigh for himself, according to
his capacity, what he reads in history. Thus all sound and moderate men will
acquiesce, when they perceive how well this prophecy of Daniel agrees with the
testimony of profane writers, in its general scope, according to my previous
explanations.
I stated that we must begin with the monarchy of
Cyrus; this is clearly to be gathered from the words of the angel, and
especially from the division of the weeks. For he says,
The seven weeks have reference to
the repair of the city and temple. No
cavils can in any way deprive the Prophet’s expression of its true
force:from the going forth of the
edict concerning the bringing back of the people and the building of the city,
until Messiah the Leader, shall be seven
weeks; and then,
sixty-two
weeks: afterward he adds,
After the sixty-two weeks Christ
shall be cut off. When, therefore, he
puts seven
weeks in the first place, and clearly
expresses his reckoning the commencement of this period from the promulgation of
the edict, to what can we refer these seven weeks, except to the times of the
monarchy of Cyrus and that of Darius the son of Hystaspes? This is evident from
the history of the Maccabees, as well as from the testimony of the evangelist
John; and we may collect the same conclusion from the prophecies of Haggai and
Zechariah, as the building of the Temple was interrupted during forty-six years.
Cyrus permitted the people to build the Temple; the foundations were laid when
Cyrus went out to the war in Scythia; the Jews were then compelled to cease
their labors, and his successor Cambyses was hostile to this people. Hence the
Jews say,
(<430220>John
2:20,) Forty-six years was this Temple in building, and wilt thou build it in
three days? They strive to deride Christ because he had:said, Destroy this
Temple, and I will rebuild it in future days, as it was then a common
expression, and had been handed down by their fathers, that the Temple had
occupied this period in its construction. If you add the three years during
which the foundations were laid, we shall then have forty-nine years, or seven
weeks. As the event openly shews the completion of what the angel had predicted
to Daniel, whoever wishes to wrest the meaning of the passage, only displays his
own hardihood. And must we not reject every other interpretation, as obscuring
so clear and obvious a meaning? We must next remember what I have previously
stated. In yesterday’s Lecture we saw that seventy weeks were cut off for
the people; the angel had also declared the going forth of the edict, for which
Daniel had prayed. What necessity, then, is there for treating a certainty as
doubtful? and why litigate the point when God pronounces the commencement of
this period to be at the termination of the seventy years proclaimed by
Jeremiah? It is quite certain, that these seventy years and seventy weeks ought
to be joined together. Since, therefore, these periods are continuous, whoever
refers this passage to the time of Darius Hystaspes, first of all breaks the
links of a chain of events all connected together, and then perverts the whole
spirit of the passage; for, as we yesterday stated, the angel’s object was
to offer consolation in the midst of sorrow. For seventy years the people had
been miserably afflicted in exile, and they seemed utterly abandoned, as if God
would no longer acknowledge these children of Abraham for his people and
inheritance. As this was the Almighty’s intention, it is quite clear that
the commencement of the seventy weeks cannot be otherwise interpreted than by
referring it to the monarchy of Cyrus. This is the first point.
We must now turn to the sixty-two weeks; and if I
cannot satisfy every one, I shall still content myself with great simplicity,
and I trust that all sound and humble disciples of Christ will easily acquiesce
in this exposition. If we reckon the years from the reign of Darius to the
baptism of Christ, sixty-two weeks or thereabouts will be found to have elapsed.
As I previously remarked, I am not scrupulous to a few days or months, or even a
single year; for how great is that perverseness which would lead us to reject
what historians relate because they do not all agree to a single year? Whatever
be the correct conclusion, we shall find about 480 years between the time of
Darius and the death of Christ. Hence it becomes necessary to prolong these
years to the baptism of Christ, because when the angel speaks of the last week,
he plainly states, The covenant
shall be confirmed at that time, and
then the Messiah shall be cut
off. As this was to be done in the last
week, we must necessarily extend the time to the preaching of the Gospel. And
for this reason Christ is called a “Leader,” because at his
conception he was destined to be king of heaven and earth, although he did not
commence his reign till he was publicly ordained the Master and Redeemer of his
people. The word “Leader” is applied as a name before the office was
assumed; as if the angel had said, the end of the seventy weeks will occur when
Christ openly assumes the office of king over his people, by collecting them
from that miserable and horrible dispersion under which they had been so long
ground down. I shall put off the rest till to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thy servants
before the setting forth of thine only-begotten Son were sustained by those
oracles which had not then been realized by the event, that we at; this day may
learn to put our trust in our Lord, who has so clearly revealed himself to us by
his Gospel. May we stand so firm and constant in the faith of that Gospel, that
we may never be tossed about by the disturbances and tumults of this world. May
we ever proceed in the course of thy holy calling, till at length we are
released from all contests, and arrive at that blessed rest which is laid up for
us in heaven, by the same our Lord Jesus Christ. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-FIRST.
In yesterday’s Lecture I explained my views of
the seventy weeks. I now return to the words of the Prophet, on which I touched
but briefly. He first says,
Seventy weeks have been cut off
upon thy people, and upon the holy city.
By these words he implies first, the Israelites should be under the care and
protection of God until the arrival of Christ; and next, Christ would come
before the completion of the seventy years. The angel announces these two
points, to assure the faithful of God’s perpetual remembrance of his
covenant, and to sustain them in the midst of all their anxieties and
distresses. A remarkable passage now follows concerning the office of Christ.
The angel foretells what they were to expect from Christ. First of all, he
announces remission of sins; for he points this out by the form of expression,
to prohibit or close up wickedness, to seal up sinfulness, and to
expiate iniquity. It does not surprise us to find the angel using many
phrases in a matter of such importance. Such repetition in the language seems to
us superfluous, but the knowledge of salvation is comprehended under this head.
We are thus informed how God is reconciled to us by gratuitous pardon, and this
is the reason why the angel insists on this subject by so many words.
(<420177>Luke
1:77.) But we must remember what I said the day before yesterday-there is a
tacit contrast between the remission now offered to us under the Gospel, and
that formerly offered to the fathers under the Law. From the creation of the
world no one could call upon God with a tranquil mind and with sure confidence,
unless by relying upon the hope of pardon. For we know the door of mercy to be
closed against us all through our being deservedly under God’s wrath.
Hence, unless the doctrine of gratuitous remission of sins shone forth, we
should enjoy no liberty of calling upon God, and all hope of salvation would be
at the same time extinct. It follows, therefore, the fathers under the Law had
this benefit in common with us, namely, a certain persuasion of God’s
being’ propitious to them, and of his pardoning their transgressions.
What, then, is the meaning of the phrase, Christ at his advent will seal up
sins, and expiate iniquities? Here, as I have said, a difference is shewn
between the condition of the old and the new Church. The fathers indeed had
hopes of remission of their sins, but their condition was inferior to ours in
two respects. Their teaching was not so plain as ours, nor were their promises
so full and steadfast. We excel them also in another respect. God bears witness
to us that he is our Father, and so we flee to him with the utmost freedom and
fearlessness; and, in addition to this, Christ has already reconciled us to the
Father by his blood.
(<450815>Romans
8:15;
<480406>Galatians
4:6.) Thus we are superior to them, not only in our instruction, but in effect
and completeness, since at this day God not only promises us the pardon of our
sins, but testifies and affirms their entire blotting out and becoming abolished
through the sacrifice of Christ his Son. This difference is openly denoted by
the angel when he says, Sins
should be closed up and sealed, and iniquities also
expiated when Christ came. Hence we
stated previously how something better was promised than the fathers experienced
before the manifestation of Christ.
We here perceive the sense in which Christ
shut up sins, and sealed
wickedness, and expiated iniquity; for
he not only introduced the doctrine of gratuitous pardon, and promised that God
would be entreated by the people, through his desire to pardon their iniquity,
but he really accomplished whatever was needful to reconcile men to God. He
poured forth his blood by which he blotted out our sins; he also offered himself
as an expiatory victim, and satisfied God by the sacrifice of his death, so as
entirely to absolve us from guilt. Moses often uses the word
afj,
cheta, when speaking of sacrifices; but the angel here teaches us indirectly
how all the expiation’s under the law were only figurative, and nothing
but shadows of the future; for, had sins been then really expiated, there would
have been no need of the coming of Christ. As, therefore, expiation was
suspended until the manifestation of Christ, there never was any true expiation
under the law, but all its ceremonies were but shadowy representations. He
afterwards adds, To bring in
eternal righteousness. This
righteousness depends on the expiation. For how could God reckon the faithful
just, or impute righteousness to them, as Paul informs us, unless by covering
and burying their sins, or purging them in, the blood of Christ?
(<450411>Romans
4:11.) Is not God himself appeased by the sacrifice of his Son? These phrases,
then, must be united, Iniquity
shall be expiated, and eternal righteousness brought manifestly
forward. No righteousness will ever be
found in mortal man, unless he obtain it from Christ; and if we use great
accuracy of expression, righteousness cannot exist in us otherwise than through
that gratuitous pardon which we obtain through the sacrifice of Christ.
Meanwhile, Scripture purposely unites together remission of sins and
righteousness, as also Paul says, Christ died for our sins, and rose again for
our justification.
(<450425>Romans
4:25.) His death procured satisfaction for us, so that we should not always
remain guilty, nor be subject to the condemnation of eternal death, and then by
his resurrection he procured righteousness for us, and also acquired eternal
life. The reason why the Prophet here treats justice as perpetual or “of
the ages,” is this: the fathers under the Law were compelled to please God
by daily sacrifices. There would have been no necessity for repeating
sacrifices, as the Apostle admonishes us, if there had been any inherent virtue
in a single sacrifice to appease the Almighty.
(<581001>Hebrews
10:1.) But since all the rites of the law tended to the same purpose of
foreshadowing Christ, as the one and perpetual victim for reconciling men to
God, daily sacrifices must necessarily be offered. Whence, as we formerly said,
these satisfactions were plainly insufficient for procuring righteousness.
Therefore Christ alone brought in eternal righteousness, — his death alone
sufficed for expiating all transgressions. For Christ suffered, not only to
satisfy for our sins, but he sets before us his own death in which we should
acquiesce. Hence this eternal justice depends upon the enduring effect of the
death of Christ, since the blood of Christ flowed as it were before God, and
while we are daily purged and cleansed from our pollution, God is also daily
appeased for us. We observe, then, how righteousness was not completely revealed
under the law, but is now set before us under the Gospel. It follows,
To seal up the vision and the
prophecy.
This clause may have two senses, because, as I said
before, Christ sealed up all visions and prophecies, for they are all yea and
amen in him, as Paul says.
(<470120>2
Corinthians 1:20.) As, therefore, God’s promises were all satisfied and
fulfilled in Christ for the salvation of the faithful, so with propriety the
angel affirms of his advent, It
shall seal up the vision and the prophecy.
This is one sense. The other is, the vision shall be sealed in the sense of
its ceasing, as if the angel had said, Christ shall put an end to prophecies,
because our spiritual position differs from that of the fathers. For God
formerly spoke in many ways, as the Church had to pass through a variety of
conflicting states and circumstances. But when Christ was manifested, we arrive
at the close of prophetic times. Hence his advent is called the fullness of
times,
(<480404>Galatians
4:4;
<580101>Hebrews
1:1;) and elsewhere Paul says, we have arrived at the last days,
(<461011>1
Corinthians 10:11,) since we are waiting for the second advent of Christ, and we
have no need of fresh prophecies as formerly. Then all things were very obscure,
and God governed his people under the dark shadow of a cloud. Our condition is
in these days different. Hence we are not surprised at the angel pronouncing
all the visions and prophecies
sealed up; for the law and the prophets
were until John, but from that time the kingdom of God began to be promulgated;
that is, God appeared much more clearly than before.
(<401113>Matthew
11:13;
<421616>Luke
16:16.) The very name of vision implies something obscure and doubtful.:But now
Christ, the Sun of righteousness, has shone upon us, and we are in meridian
brightness; the Law appears only like a candle in the government of our life,
because Christ points out to us in full splendor the way of salvation. Without
doubt, the angel here wished us to distinguish between the obscure teaching of
the Law, with its ancient figures, and the open light of the Gospel. Besides,
the name “prophecy” is taken as well for the prophetic office as for
the predictions delivered.
He afterwards adds,
To anoint the Holy of
Holies. The angel here alludes to the
rite of consecration which was observed under the Law; for the tabernacle with
its appendages was consecrated by anointing. It is here shewn how the perfect
and truly spiritual anointing was put off until the advent of Christ. He is
himself properly and deservedly called the Holy One of holy ones, or the
Tabernacle of God, because his body was really the temple of deity, and holiness
must be sought from him.
(<510209>Colossians
2:9.) The Prophet here reminds us of the anointing of the sanctuary under the
Law being only a figure; but in Christ we have the true exhibition of the
reality, although he was not visibly anointed with oil, but spiritually, when
the Spirit of God rested upon him with all his gifts. Wherefore he says,
(<431719>John
17:19,) For their sakes I sanctify myself.
It now follows,
Thou shalt know and understand,
from the going forth of a word, (or
decree,) for the bringing back of
the people and the building of Jerusalem, until Christ the Leader, shall be
seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks, and the people shall
returns, (or be brought back,)
and the street shall be built,
and the wall, (or trench,)
and that too, in the narrow
interval of the times; for thus I
resolve the copula. As we have already said, the time which had been fixed
beforehand for the perfect state of the Church is divided. In the first place,
he puts seven weeks by themselves; he then adds sixty-two weeks, and leaves one,
of which we shall afterwards speak. He immediately explains why he separates the
seven weeks from the rest, rendering every other interpreter unnecessary. Next,
as to the going forth of the edict, we have stated how inadmissible is any
interpretation but the first decree of Cyrus, which permitted the people freely
to return to their country. For the seven weeks which make up forty-nine years
clearly prove this assertion. From the beginning of the Persian monarchy to the
reign of Darius the son of Hystaspes, the hostility of all the neighboring
nations to the Jews is notorious, especially in interrupting the building of
their temple and city. Although the people had free permission to return to
their country, yet they were there harassed by hostilities, and were almost
induced to repine at this mark of God’s favor. A great part of them
preferred their former exile to a harassing and perplexing life spent among
their most cruel foes. This is the reason why the angel informs them of the
seven weeks to elapse after the people should be brought back, for they must not
expect to spend their life in peace, and build their city and temple without any
inconvenience; for he announces the occurrence of this event
in the narrowness of the
time. By the word
qwx,
tzok, he does not mean “shortness,” but rather signifies the
anxious nature of the times, in consequence of the numerous troubles which all
their neighbors should bring on the wretched people. It was worth while to
support the pious by this previous admonition, lest they should cast away the
desire of building the temple, or become utterly desponding through the weight
of the afflictions which they must bear. We know what glowing predictions the
prophets uttered concerning the happy state of the Church after its return; but
the reality was far different from this, and the faithful might have been quite
drowned in despair unless the angel had raised their spirits by this prophecy.
We thus perceive the great utility of this admonition, and at the same time it
may be applied as a practical example to ourselves. Although God’s
loving-kindness to us was wonderful, when the pure Gospel emerged out of that
dreadful darkness in which it had been buried for so many ages, yet we still
experience the troubled aspect of affairs. The impious still ceaselessly and
furiously oppose the miserable Church by both the sword and the virulence of
their tongues. Domestic enemies’, use clandestine arts in their schemes to
subvert our edifice; wicked men destroy all order, and interpose many obstacles
to impede our progress. But God still wishes in these days to build his
spiritual temple amidst the
anxieties of the times; the faithful
have still to hold the trowel in one hand and the sword in the other, as we find
it in the book of Nehemiah,
(<160417>Nehemiah
4:17,) because the building of the Church must still be united with many
contests. It afterwards follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:26
|
|
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall
Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall
come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be
with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolation’s are
determined.
|
26. Et post hebdomadas sexaginta duas
excidetur Christus, et nihil erit, et urbem et sanctuarium perdet populus ducis
venientis, et finis ejus cum inundatione erit, vel, in diluvio, et ad finem
belli definitio desolationum.
|
Here Daniel treats of the sixty-two weeks which
elapsed between the sixth year of Darius and the baptism of Christ, when the
Gospel began to be promulgated, but at the same time he does not neglect the
seven weeks of which he had been speaking. For they comprehend the space of time
which intervened between the Persian monarchy and the second edict which again
granted liberty to the people after the death of Cambyses.
After the sixty-two
weeks which should succeed the seven
former ones, Messiah shall be cut
off, says he. Here the angel predicts
the death of Christ. The Jews refer this to Agrippa, but this, as we have
already observed, is utterly nugatory and foolish. Eusebius and others refer it
to Aristobulus, but this is equally destitute of reason. Therefore the angel
speaks of the only Mediator, as in the former verse he had said,
until Christ the
Leader. The extension of this to all the
priesthood is both forced and absurd. The angel rather means this — Christ
should then be manifest to undertake the government of his people; or, in other
words, until Messiah shall appear and commence his reign. We have already
remarked upon those who erroneously and childishly explain the name
“Leader,” as if it were inferior in dignity to that of king. As the
angel had used the name “Christ” in the sense of Mediator, so he
repeats it in this passage in the same sense. And surely, as he had formerly
treated of those singular marks of God’s favor, by which the new Church
was to surpass the old, we cannot understand the passage otherwise than of
Christ alone, of whom the priests and kings under the Law were equally a type.
The angel, then, here asserts,
Christ should
die, and at the same time he specifies
the kind of death by saying,
nothing shall remain to
him. This short clause may be taken in
various senses, yet I do not hesitate to represent the angel’s meaning to
be this — Christ should so die as to be entirely reduced to nothing. Some
expound it thus, — -the city or the people shall be as nothing to him;
meaning, he shall be divorced from the people, and their adoption shall cease,
since we know the Jews to have so fallen away from true piety by their perfidy
as to be entirely alienated from God, and to have lost the name of a Church. But
that is forced. Others think it means, it shall be neither hostile nor
favorable; and others, nothing shall remain to him in the sense of being
destitute of all help; but all these comments appear to me too frigid. The
genuine sense, I have no doubt, is as follows, — the death of Christ
should be without any attractiveness or loveliness, as Isaiah says.
(<235302>Isaiah
53:2.) In truth, the angel informs us of the ignominious character of
Christ’s death, as if he should vanish from the sight of men through want
of comeliness.
Nothing,
therefore, shall remain to
him, says he; and the obvious reason is,
because men would think him utterly abolished.
He now adds,
The leader of the coming people
shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
Here the angel inserts what rather concerns the end of the chapter, as he
will afterwards return to Christ. He here mentions what should happen at
Christ’s death, and purposely interrupts the order of the narrative to
shew that their impiety would not escape punishment, as they not only rejected
the Christ of God, but slew him and endeavored to blot out his remembrance from
the world. And although the angel had special reference to the faithful alone,
still unbelievers required to be admonished with the view of rendering them
without excuse. We are well aware of the supineness and brutality of this
people, as displayed in their putting Christ to death; for this event occasioned
a triumph for the priests and the whole people. Hence these points ought to be
joined together. But; the angel consulted the interests of the faithful, as they
would be greatly shocked at the death of Christ, which we have alluded to, and
also at his ignominy and rejection. As this was a method of perishing so very
horrible in the opinion of mankind, the minds of all the pious might utterly
despond unless the angel had come to their relief. Hence he proposes a suitable
remedy, The leader of the coming
people shall destroy the city and the
sanctuary; as if he had said, There is
no encouragement for the unbelievers to please and flatter themselves, because
Christ was reduced to nothing after a carnal sense; vengeance shall instantly
overtake them; the leader of the
coming people shall destroy both the city and the
sanctuary. He names
a coming
leader, to prevent the unbelievers from
resting secure through self-flattery, as if God would not instantly stretch
forth his hand to avenge himself upon them. Although the Roman army which should
destroy the city and sanctuary did not immediately appear, yet the Prophet
assures them of the arrival of a leader with an army which should occasion the
destruction of both the city and the sanctuary. Without the slightest doubt, he
here signifies that God would inflict dreadful vengeance upon the Jews for their
murder of his Christ. That trifler, Barbinel, when desirous of refuting the
Christians, says — more than two hundred years elapsed between the
destruction of the Temple and the death of Christ. How ignorant he was! Even if
we were to withhold all confidence from the evangelists and apostles, yet
profane writers would soon convict him of folly. But such is the barbarity of
his nation, and so great their obstinacy, that they are ashamed of nothing. As
far as we are concerned, we gather with sufficient clearness from the passage
how the angel touched briefly upon the future slaughter of the city and the
destruction of the Temple, lest the faithful should be overwhelmed with trials
in consequence of Christ’s death, and lest the unbelievers should be
hardened through this occurrence. The interpretation of some writers respecting
the people of the coming leader, as if Titus wished to spare the most beautiful
city and preserve it untouched, seems to me too refined. I take it simply as a
leader about to come with his army to destroy the city, and utterly to overthrow
the Temple.
He afterwards adds,
Its end shall be in a
deluge. Here the angel removes all hope
from the Jews, whose obstinacy might lead them to expect some advantage in their
favor, for we are already aware of their great stupidity when in a state of
desperation. Lest the faithful should indulge in the same feelings with the
apostates and rebellious, he says,
The end of the
leader, Titus,
should be in a
deluge; meaning, he should overthrow the
city and national polity, and utterly put an end to the priesthood and the race,
while all God’s favors would at the same time be withdrawn. In this sense
his end should be in a
deluge. Lastly,
at the end of the war a most
decisive desolation. The word
txrjn,
nech-retzeth, “a completion,” can scarcely be taken otherwise
than as a noun substantive. A plural noun follows,
twmmç,
shem-moth, “of desolation’s” or
“devastation’s;” and taken verbally it means
“definite or terminated laying waste.” The most skillful grammarians
allow that the former of these words may be taken substantively for
“termination,” as if the angel had said: Even if the Jews experience
a variety of fortune in battle, and have hopes of being superior to their
enemies, and of sallying out and prohibiting their foes from entering the city;
nay, even if they repel them, still the end of the war shall result in utter
devastation, and their destruction is clearly defined. Two points, then, are to
be noticed here; first, all hope is to be taken from the Jews, as they must be
taught the necessity for their perishing; and secondly, a reason is ascribed for
this, namely, the determination of the Almighty and his inviolable decree. It
afterwards follows: —
|
DANIEL
9:27
|
|
27. And he shall confirm the covenant with
many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and
the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make
it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be
poured upon the desolate.
|
27. Et roborabit,
f508
foedus multis, hebdomade una: et dimidia hebdomade quiescere faciet
f509
sacrificium, et oblationem: et super extensionem
f510
abominationem obstupescet,
f511
et ad finem, et ad determinationem stillabit super stupentem.
|
The angel now returns to Christ. We have explained
why he made mention of the coming slaughter; first, to shew the faithful that
they had no reason for remaining in the body of the nation in preference to
being cut off from it; and next, to prevent the unbelievers from being satisfied
with their obstinacy and their contempt of their inestimable blessings, by their
rejecting the person of Christ. Thus this clause was interposed concerning the
future devastation of the city and temple. The angel now continues his discourse
concerning Christ by saying, he
should confirm the treaty with many for one
week. This clause answers to the former,
in which Christ is called a Leader. Christ took upon him the character of a
leader, or assumed the kingly office, when he promulgated the grace of God. This
is the confirmation of the covenant of which the angel now speaks. As we have
already stated, the legal expiation of other ritual ceremonies which God
designed to confer on the fathers is contrasted with the blessings derived from
Christ; and we now gather the same idea from the phrase, the confirmation of the
covenant. We know how sure and stable was God’s covenant under the law; he
was from the beginning always truthful, and faithful, and consistent with
himself. But as far as man was concerned, the covenant of the law was weak, as
we learn from Jeremiah.
(<243131>Jeremiah
31:31, 32.) I will enter into a new covenant with you, says he; not such as I
made with your fathers, for they made it vain. We here observe the difference
between the covenant which Christ sanctioned by his death and that of the Jewish
law. Thus God’s covenant is established with us, because we have been once
reconciled by the death of Christ; and at the same time the effect of the Holy
Spirit is added, because God inscribes the law upon our hearts; and thus his
covenant is not engraven in stones, but in our hearts of flesh, according to the
teaching of the Prophet Ezekiel.
(<261119>Ezekiel
11:19.) Now, therefore, we understand why the angel says,
Christ should confirm the
covenant for one week, and why that week
was placed last in order. In this week will he confirm the covenant
with
many. But I cannot finished this
exposition just now.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since all the
treasures of thy goodness and indulgence were so liberally diffused, when thine
only-begotten Son appeared, and are now daily offered to us through the Gospel:
Grant, I say, that we may not deprive ourselves of such important blessings by
our ingratitude. May we embrace thy Son with true faith; and enjoy the benefit
of the redemption which he has procured for us. Being cleansed and purged by his
blood, may we be acceptable in thy sight, and venture with full and certain
confidence to call thee Father. May we fly to thy pity and assistance in all our
miseries and troubles, until at length thou shalt gather us into that eternal
rest, which has been obtained for us through the blood of thine only-begotten
Son. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-SECOND.
In the last Lecture we explained how
Christ confirmed the covenant
with many during the last week; for he
gathered together the sons of God from their state of dispersion when the
devastation of the Church was so horrible and wretched. Although the Gospel was
not instantly promulgated among foreign nations, yet Christ is correctly said to
have confirmed the covenant with
many, as the nations were directly
called to the hope of salvation.
(<401005>Matthew
10:5.) Although he forbade the disciples to preach the Gospel then to either the
Gentiles or Samaritans, yet he taught them that many sheep were dispersed
abroad, and that the time at which God would make one sheep-fold was at hand.
(<431016>John
10:16.) This was fulfilled after his resurrection. During his lifetime he began
to anticipate slightly the calling of the Gentiles, and thus I interpret these
words of the Prophet, he will
confirm the covenant with many. For I
take the word “many” here,
µybr,
rebim, comparatively, for the faithful Gentiles united with the Jews. It
is very well known that God’s covenant was deposited by a kind of
hereditary right with the Israelites until the same favor was extended to the
Gentiles also. Therefore Christ is said not only to have renewed God’s
covenant with a single nation, but generally with the world at large. I confess,
indeed, the use of the word many for all, as in the fifth chapter of the
Epistle to the Romans, and in other places,
(<450519>Romans
5:19,) but there seems to be a contrast between the ancient Church, included
within very narrow boundaries, and the new Church, which is extended over the
whole world. We know how many, formerly strangers, have been called from the
distant regions of the earth by the gospel, and so joined in alliance to the
Jews as to be all in the same communion and all reckoned equally sons of
God.
The Prophet now subjoins,
He will make to cease the
sacrifice and offering for half a week. We
ought to refer this to the time of the resurrection. For while Christ passed
through the period of his life on earth, he did not put an end to the
sacrifices; but after he had offered himself up as a victim, then all the rites
of the law came to a close. By the words “sacrifice and offering”
the Prophet implies all ceremonies, a part being put for the whole; as if he had
said, after Christ had offered up one eternal sacrifice, all the customary
ceremonies of the Law were abolished; for otherwise Christ’s death would
have been superfluous, had he not put an end to all the old shadows of the Law.
Although the sacrifices were continued for many years after Christ’s
death, yet we can no longer call them “legitimate,” for no reason
can be offered why the sacrifices of the Law should be pleasing to God, except
their reference to that heavenly pattern which Moses saw on the mount.
(<022540>Exodus
25:40.) Hence, after Christ had appeared and expiated all the sins of the world,
it became necessary for all sacrifices to cease.
(<580805>Hebrews
8:5.) This is the Prophet’s intention when he says,
Christ should cause the
sacrifices to cease for half a week. He
embraces two points at the same time; first, Christ really and effectually put
an end to the sacrifices of the Law; and secondly, he proved it to the world in
the preaching of the Gospel by his Apostles. We observe, then, the sense in
which God testified by his Prophet
the cessation of sacrifices after
Christ’s resurrection. The veil of
the temple was then rent in twain; true liberty was proclaimed; the faithful
might then feel themselves to be full grown men, and no longer subject to that
government of childhood to which they had submitted under the
Law.
The second clause of the verse now follows: we have
read it before, but we now repeat it to refresh the memory.
And over the
extension, or expansion, of
abominations he shall cause
astonishment, or stupefaction;
and even to consumption and
determination he shall pour himself upon the
desolator. Some translate, It shall be
poured or shall distill: we shall treat the words afterwards. The passage is
obscure, and may be rendered in a variety of ways, and consequently interpreters
differ much from each other. Some take
ãnk,
knaph, “a wing,” for a “cherub;” then they change
the numbers from singular to plural, and think the Prophet alludes to winged
cherubim. This gives those who adopt this rendering a two-fold method of
explaining it. Some say the abomination shall be
above the
wings, that is, the ark of the covenant,
because the temple was profaned, and the abomination was so ruinous that it
destroyed even the very cherubim. Others take it causally — the
abominations shall be for the sake of the cherubim. But I leave these
subtleties, as they do not seem to me to have any solidity. Others, again,
follow the Greek version, as quoted by Christ in the 24th chapter of Matthew
(Matthew 24) and elsewhere, although Christ seems rather to refer to the 12th
chapter of our Prophet. But as these two passages refer to the same abomination,
I will not insist on this point; I will only remark upon the translation of one
word. Those who translate “the abominations of desolation” treat the
words of Daniel too carelessly, for there is no grammatical dependence of one
word on the other, or, technically speaking, no
state of
regimen. The preferable opinion is that
which considers the word “wing” to mean extremity or extension.
Others, again, treat “extremity” as if it meant a state of despair;
as if the angel had said, on account of the extremity of the abominations, as
evils should accumulate upon evils without end till matters came to the last
pitch of despair. Others, again, explain “the wing of abominations”
more simply for the expansion itself, as if the angel had stated, the temple
shall be openly profaned, and the pollution shall be apparent far and
wide.
Interpreters differ again about the words
µmçm,
rmesmem and
µmç,
sem-em usually translated “make desolate,” and
“desolation.” Some take the former transitively, and others as
neuter; the latter signifies to destroy and lay waste, and also to wonder and be
astonished. I think these two words ought to be used in the same sense; as if
the Prophet had said, all shall be astonished at the extent of the abominations;
when they shall perceive the temple worship, swept away as by a deluge, then
they shall be mightily astonished. He afterwards adds the calamity which
commenced when God shewed the pollution of the temple
shall
distill or pour itself
upon him who is
astonished. We will treat the occurrence
itself to enable us to understand the sense of the words better. I have no
hesitation in stating God’s wish to cut off all hope of restoration from
the Jews, whom we know to have been blinded by a foolish confidence, and to have
supposed God’s presence confined to a visible temple. As they were thus
firmly persuaded of the impossibility of God’s ever departing from them,
they ought to be deprived of their false confidence, and , no longer deceive
themselves by such flattering hopes. Thus the temporary pollution of the temple
was shewn by Ezekiel.
(<261018>Ezekiel
10:18.) For when the prophets constantly proclaimed the approach of their
enemies to destroy both the city and temple, the greater part of the people
derided them. In their opinion this would overthrow all their confidence in God,
as if he had been false to his word, in promising them perpetual rest on Mount
Zion.
(<19D214>Psalm
132:14.) Here Ezekiel relates his vision of God sitting in the temple — he
then vanished, and the temple was deprived of all its glory. This was but
temporary.
But we are now treating of a profanation of the
temple, which should prove, if I may use the phrase, eternal and irreparable.
Without the slightest doubt, this prophecy was fulfilled when the city was
captured and overthrown, and the temple utterly destroyed by Titus the son of
Vespasian. This satisfactorily explains the events here predicted. Some consider
the word “abominations” to be used metaphorically, and to signify
the overthrow of the city; but this seems to me forced. Others explain it of the
statue of Caligula erected in the temple; and others again, of the standard of
Tiberius, who ordered the eagles to be placed on the pinnacle of the temple. But
I interpret it simply of that profanation which occurred after the gospel began
to be promulgated, and of the punishment inflicted upon the Jews when they
perceived their temple subject to the grossest forms of desecration, because
they were unwilling to admit the only-begotten Son of God as its true glory.
Others, again, understand the impious doctrines and superstitions, as well as
the perverse errors with which the priests were imbued. But I think the passage
marks generally the change which took place directly after Christ’s
resurrection, when the obstinate impiety of the people was fully detected. They
were then summoned to repentance; although they had endeavored to extinguish all
hope of salvation through Christ, yet God stretched forth his hand to them, and
tried whether their wickedness was curable or not. After the grace of Christ had
been obstinately rejected, then the
extension of
abominations followed; that is, God
overwhelmed the temple in desecration, and caused its sanctity and glory to pass
utterly away. Although this vengeance did not take place immediately after the
close of the last week, yet God sufficiently avenged their impious contempt of
his gospel, and besides this, he shews how he had no longer need of any visible
temple, as he had now dedicated the whole world to himself from east to
west.
I now return again to the explanation of the words
separately. The angel says,
Upon the extension of
abominations, astonishment, or
astonishing; for some think it an adjective, and others a substantive; but the
meaning is, all should be
stupefied, or astonished. I do not.
altogether object to the meaning already referred to — namely, rendering
the word “wing” as “extremity;” for the sense will then
be — when the abominations come to their height or extremity; and the
sense is the same, if we use the word “expansion.” God intends to
shew us the extensive range of the pollutions,. — upwards, downwards, and
all around, they should obscure and bury the temple’s glory. Hence
on account of the
extremity or
expansion of abominations there
shall be astonishment, for all shall be
amazed. The angel seems to oppose this stupor to pride; for the Jews were
thoroughly persuaded of God’s being strictly bound to themselves, and of
the impossibility of his being torn away from his own temple where he had fixed
his eternal dwelling-place. He predicts the approach of this amazement instead
of their supine security.
He adds next,
And unto
consumption.
,hlk
keleh, signifies “end” and “perfection,” as well as
“destruction.” I take it here for consumption or destruction.
It shall flow even unto
astonishment. I have already remarked
upon the words implying this astonishment; slaughter, or something like it,
ought to be understood before the verb. There is no doubt at all about the
Prophet’s meaning. He says this slaughter should be like a continual
shower, consuming the whole people. He speaks of the people as astonished by
their calamities, and deprived of all hope of escape from them; for the
slaughter shall flow forth upon the astonished people. Meanwhile he shews how
foolishly the Jews indulged in pride and how fallaciously they flattered
themselves in supposing the Almighty permanently attached and bound to
themselves and their visible temple.
The slaughter shall flow forth
even to consumption, meaning, until the
whole people should perish. He adds also another noun,
even to a determined
end. We have already unfolded the
meaning of this noun. Here the Prophet explains the cause of that eternal
distinction which the Almighty had determined and decreed to be
irrevocable.
CHAPTER 10
The tenth chapter now follows, which Daniel
introduces as a preface to the eleventh and twelfth. He relates the manner in
which he was affected, when the last vision was presented to him. This he
briefly explains as referring to events about to occur until the advent of
Christ; and then he extends it to the final day of the resurrection. God had
previously predicted to his Prophet the future condition of the Church from its
return from Babylon to the advent of Christ, but in the eleventh chapter he more
distinctly and clearly points with the finger to every event, as we shall
perceive in proceeding with our comments. In this chapter Daniel assures us that
the prophecies which he is about to discuss are worthy of more than ordinary
attention; when the angel appeared, he was immediately affected with sorrow and
grief; then he was one moment astonished, and the next cast down by the secret
instinct of the Spirit; he lay like a dead man, till he was restored again and
again by the angel of God. We shall observe these points as we proceed. He first
says —
|
DANIEL
10:1
|
|
1. In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a
thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the
thing was true, but the time appointed, was long: and he
understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
|
1. Anno tertio Cyri regis Persarum sermo
revelatus fuit Danieli, cujus nomen Beltsazar, et veritas sermo,
f512
et tempus magnum,
f513
et intellexit sermonem, et intelligentia ei fuit in visione.
|
We observe the Prophet by no means content with the
usual method of address, for the purpose of stirring up the attention of the
pious, and of assuring them how worthy of special notice are the prophecies
which follow. He marks the time, the third year of King Cyrus, as the Jews were
then forbidden by a new edict to build their temple, although liberty to do so
had been previously granted to them. He says, “a
word” was
made known to him, and he adds,
the word was
true, although the time was long. The
time is treated more at length in the next verse. By
saying, a word was manifested to
him, he is thought to distinguish this
prophecy from others, as it was not offered to him by either a dream or a
vision. He uses the word
harm,
merah, a “vision,” at the end of this
verse, but I do not see why the noun “word” should be taken
in so restricted a sense. Interpreters, again, seek for a reason why he mentions
his own name as Belteshazzar; some think it celebrates some honor to which he
was raised; others treat it as commending the superiority of his abilities, as
the name implies — descended from heaven; while others bring forward
various conjectures. I have no hesitation in stating Daniel’s wish to
erect some illustrious monument of his vocation among the Medes, Persians, and
Chaldeans. There, most probably, he was usually called Belteshazzar, and the
name Daniel was almost buried in oblivion, and so he wished to testify to his
being no stranger to the people of God, although he suffered a foreign name to
be imposed upon him; for we have already seen the impossibility of his avoiding
it. I therefore think the Prophet had no other intention than to render this
prophecy notorious throughout all those regions in which he was well known under
the name of Belteshazzar. Besides this, he wished to testify to his
fellow-countrymen that he was not entirely cut off from the Church through being
called Belteshazzar by the Chaldees; for he was always the same, and while
banished from his country, was endued with the Spirit of prophecy, as we have
previously seen. As the name of Daniel was almost unknown in Chaldea, he wished
to make known the existence of both his names.
It now follows,
And there is truth in the
word. Daniel here commends the certainty
of the prophecy, as if he had said, I bring nothing before you but what is firm
and stable, and whose actual performance the faithful ought confidently to
expect. There is truth in the
word, says he; meaning, there was no
room for doubting his assertions, for he had been divinely instructed in events
which should be fulfilled in their own time. I understand what follows to mean,
although the time should be long. Some of the Rabbis take
abx,
tzeba, for the angelic hosts, which is quite absurd in this place. The word
signifies “army” as well as an appointed time, but the exposition
which they thrust upon the passage cannot stand its ground. The particle
“and,” as I think, must here be taken adversatively, in the sense of
“although.” Thus the Prophet proclaims our need of calmness of mind,
and patient endurance, until God shall really complete and perform what he has
verbally announced. This feeling ought to be extended to all prophecies. We know
how ardent are the dispositions of men, and how hastily they are carried away by
their own desires. We are compelled, therefore, to curb our impetuosity, if we
wish to make progress in the school of God, and we must admit this general
principle: If a promise should tarry, wait for it; for it will surely come, and
will not delay. (Habakkuk 2:3) Here Daniel affirms in a special sense,
the time will be
long this would restrain the faithful
from rushing headlong with too much haste; they would command their feelings,
and remain tranquil till the full maturity of the period should
arrive.
He afterwards adds,
He understood the
vision; by this assertion he confirms
the prophecy which he is about to explain, and thus assures us of his not
uttering anything either perplexed or obscure. He also induces all the pious to
hope for the exercise of the same understanding as he had himself
attained; as if he had said, I know what God wished; he has explained to me by
his angel various events which I will now set forth in their own order; let
every one peruse these prophecies attentively and reverently, and may God grant
him the same gift of understanding, and lead him to certain knowledge. The
information conveyed by the Prophet belongs to all the pious, to deter
them from sluggishness and despair. At the first glance this teaching may appear
very obscure, but they must seek from the Lord that light of manifestation which
he deigned to bestow upon the Prophet himself. It now follows,
—
|
DANIEL
10:2-3
|
|
2. In those days I Daniel was mourning three
full weeks.
|
2. Diebus illis ego Daniel dedi me luctui
tribus hebdomadibus dierum.
|
|
3. 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.
|
3. Panem deliciarum
f514
non comedi: et caro et vinum non intravit in os meum: et unguendo non fui unctus
donec impletae sunt tres hebdomades dierum.
|
We gather from this passage why the angel appeared to
the Prophet in the third year of Cyrus. He says,
he was then in the greatest
sorrow; and what was the cause of it? At
that period we know an interruption of the work of rebuilding the temple and
city to have taken place. Cyrus was gone to a distance; he had set out for Asia
Minor, and was carrying on war with the Scythians. his son Cambyses was
corrupted by his couriers, and forbade the Jews to proceed with the rebuilding
of their city and temple. The freedom of the people might then seem in vain. For
God had promised the Jews in glowing language a return to their country with
their standards unfurled. Besides this, we know the splendid language of the
prophets respecting the glory of the second temple. (Isaiah 52:12; Haggai 2:9,
and elsewhere.) When thus deprived of all opportunity of rebuilding their
temple, what could the Jews determine except that they had been deluded
after returning to their country, and God had made a shew of disappointing
expectations which had turned out a mere laughing-stock and deception? This was
the cause of the grief and anxiety which oppressed the holy Prophet. We now
understand why he mentions the third year of Cyrus, as the circumstances
of that period, even at this day, point out the reason of his abstinence from
all delicacies.
He says,
He was in affliction for three
weeks of days. The Hebrews often use the
phrase weeks or times of days for complete periods. Very possibly, Daniel uses
the word “days” here, to prevent a mistake which might easily
occur through his so lately speaking of weeks of years. The distinction is thus
more clearly marked between the seventy weeks of years previously explained, and
these three weeks of days here mentioned. And the angel appears to have dwelt
purposely on the completion of these three weeks, as this was the third year of
King Cyrus’s reign. He says,
He did not eat delicate bread,
and he abstained from flesh and wine,
implying his practice of uniting fasting with mourning. The holy Prophet is
here represented as freely using flesh and other food, while the Church of God
remained in a state of tranquillity; but when there was danger, lest the few who
had returned home should be diminished, and many were still suffering at Babylon
those grievous calamities to which they were subject during their exile from
neighboring enemies, then the Prophet abstained from all delicacies. In the
beginning of this book, he had stated the contentment of himself and his
companions with bread, and pulse, and water for meat and drink. This statement
is not contrary to the present passage. There is no necessity to fly to that
refinement, which allows an old man to use wine, which he never touched in his
youth and the flower of his age. This comment is far too frigid. We have shewn,
how at the beginning of his exile the only reason for the Prophet’s
abstaining from the delicacies of the palace, was the desire of preserving
himself free from all corruption. For what was the object of the king’s
designing shrewdness in commanding Daniel and his companions to be treated thus
daintily and luxuriously? He wished them to forget their nation by degrees, and
to adopt the habits of the Chaldeans, and to be withdrawn by such enticements
from the observance of the law, from the worship of God, and from the exercises
of piety. When Daniel perceived the artful manner in which he and his companions
were treated, he requested to be fed upon pulse, he refused to taste the
king’s wine, and despised all his dainties. His reason, therefore,
concerned the exigencies of the times, as I then pointed out at full length.
Meanwhile, we need not hesitate to suppose, that after giving this proof of his
constancy, and escaping from these snares of the devil and of the Chaldean
monarch, he lived rather freely than frugally, and made use of better bread, and
fresh, and wine than before. This passage, then, though it asserts his
abstinence from flesh and wine, need not imply actual fasting. Daniel’s
method of living was clearly after the common practice of the Chaldeans, and by
no means implies the rejection of wine, or flesh, or viands of any kind. When he
says, he did not eat delicate
bread, this was a symbol of sorrow and
mourning, like abstinence from flesh and wine. Daniel’s object in
rejecting delicate bread and wine during those three weeks, was not merely the
promotion of temperance, but suppliantly to implore the Almighty not to permit a
repetition of those sufferings to his Church under which it had previously
labored. But I cannot here treat at any length the object and use of fasting. I
have done so elsewhere; even if I wished to do so, I have no time now.
To-morrow, perhaps, I may say a few words on the subject, and then proceed with
the rest of my observations.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou settest
before us so remarkable an example in thy holy Prophet, whom thou didst adorn in
so many ways that he wrestled to even extreme old age with various and almost
innumerable trials, and yet was never mentally broken down: Grant us to be
endowed with the same untiring fortitude. May we proceed in the course of our
holy calling without the slightest despondency through whatever may happen. When
we see thy Church upon the brink of ruin, and its enemies plotting desperately
for its destruction, may we constantly look for that liberty which thou hast
promised. May we strive with unbroken courage, until at length we shall be
discharged from our warfare, and gathered into that blessed rest which we know
to be laid up for us in heaven, through Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-THIRD
We yesterday stated the reason why Daniel abstained
from flesh and wine for three weeks. It was the sorrowful and depressed
condition of the Church while the Jews were prohibited from building their
Temple. We have stated the fallacious views of those who think him to have been
always so abstemious in the flower of his age. Though he lived on bread and
pulse, it was only for the purpose of remaining pure without any leaning towards
the habits of the Chaldees, as it was the king’s design to withdraw both
himself and his companions from God’s people, as if they had originally
sprung from Chaldea. That, therefore, was but a temporary reason. But he now
states, He had not tasted
delicate bread, that is, made of fine
flour, and had not tasted either
wine or flesh, during the time in which
the building of the Temple had been impeded. We must diligently notice this; for
many celebrate fasting as if it were a principal part of the worship of God.
They think it an act of obedience peculiarly pleasing to God. But this is a
gross error, since fasting by itself ought to be treated as a matter unimportant
and indifferent. It deserves no praise unless with reference to its object. Now
the objects of fasting are various; the principal one is this, to enable the
faithful suppliantly to deprecate God’s wrath with the solemn testimony of
their repentance, and to stimulate each other to more fervor in their prayers.
Ordinary daily prayers do not require fasting; but when any great necessity
presses upon us, that exercise is added by way of help, to increase the
alertness and fervor of our minds in the pouring forth of prayer. For this
reason the Scriptures often connect fasting with sorrow, and Daniel here follows
the usual practice. We perceive then the reason of his rejecting all delicacies
in meat and drink, through his desire to withdraw himself entirely from all
hindrances, and to become more intent upon his prayers. I now touch but briefly
upon fasting, because I cannot stop on casual passages like these. We should
notice, however, how foolishly and absurdly fasting is observed in these days
among the Papists, who think they have discharged that duty by eating but once
in the day, and abstaining from flesh. The rule of fasting among the Papists is,
to avoid flesh and not to partake of either supper or dinner. But real fasting
requires something far different from this, namely, perfect abstinence from all
delicacies. For Daniel extends this fasting even to bread. He says,
He did not taste
wine, meaning he abstained from all
wine. Then, as to the word “flesh,” he does not mean only that of
oxen, or calves, or lambs, or fowls, or birds in general, but all food except
bread is included under the term flesh. For Daniel did not trifle childishly
with God, as the Papists do at this day, who feed without any religious scruple
on the best and most exquisite viands, so long as they avoid flesh. This appears
more clearly from the statement
— he did not eat
pleasant bread, that is, made of fine
flour or the very best of the wheat. He was content with plain bread to satisfy
his necessities. This abundantly proves the superstition of those who
distinguish between flesh, and eggs, and fish. Now, fasting consists in this
— the imposition of a bridle upon men’s lusts, eating only sparingly
and lightly what is absolutely necessary, and being content with black bread and
water. We now understand how fasting in this and similar passages is not taken
for that temperance which God recommends to us throughout the whole course of
our lives. The faithful ought to be habitually temperate, and by frugality, to
observe a continual fast; they ought not to indulge in immoderate food and
drink, and in luxurious habits, lest they should debilitate the mind and weaken
the body by such indulgences. As a mark of mourning and an exercise of humility,
the faithful may impose upon themselves the law of fasting beyond their ordinary
habits of sobriety, when they feel any sign of God’s wrath, and desire to
stimulate themselves to fervor in prayer, according to our former statements,
and to confess themselves in the face of the whole world guilty before the
tribunal of God. Such was Daniel’s intention in not permitting himself to
taste pleasant bread, or to drink wine, or to eat flesh. It now follows,
—
|
DANIEL
10:4
|
|
4. And in the four and twentieth day of the
first month, as I was by the side of the great river, which is
Hiddekel.
|
4. Die vicessima quarta mensis primi, ego fui
super ripam fluvii magni, nempe Hidekel.
f515
|
Daniel now narrates the acceptance of his prayers,
because all angel appeared and instructed him in the future condition of the
Church. Without the slightest doubt, the fasting already described was a
preparation for prayer, as we have stated before, and as we may gather from many
passages of Scripture, especially from the assertion of Christ, where he says,
the demon could not be cast out except by prayer and fasting. (Matthew 17:21.)
Daniel, therefore, did not abstain from all food, and wine, and luxuries, with
the view of rendering any obedience to God, but of testifying his own grief:
then he was anxious to rouse himself to prayer, and by that mark of humility, to
prepare far better for repentance. He says now —
on the twenty-fourth day of the
first month — meaning
March, the first month of the Jewish year —
he stood on the bank of the great
river, namely, the Tigris. The word
dy,
yid, is metaphorically used for the bank, and interpreters are agreed in
identifying Hiddekel with the Tigris. Geographers state the name of this
river to be in some places, and especially near its fountain, Digliton,
which answers to the common Hebrew name Hidekel. Without doubt, this river
is called Phison by Moses, since the Tigris has three names among profane
nations. Its usual name is Tigris, and in one part of its course it becomes the
Hidekel, and has also the names of Pasitigris and Phasis, which is
equivalent to Phison. The Prophet relates,
his standing on the bank of this
great river. It is uncertain whether he
was then in that part of the world, or whether God set before him the prospect
of the river, as we have seen elsewhere. I rather incline to the opinion of his
being rapt in the prophetic spirit, and obtaining vision of the river, and not
to his being really there. Possibly, that province might have been placed under
his government in the course of the great changes which took place in those
times. While Belshazzar lived, he could not have been at Susan, and so we were
compelled to explain his former language by the prophetic rapture. And as to the
present passage, I shall not quarrel with the opinion of any one who supposes
Daniel to have dwelt in that district, but, as I have stated before, I think it
most probable, that this spectacle was offered to the holy Prophet when far
distant from the river’s bank, and only able to behold it in commenced his
abstinence from flesh, and food, and all pleasant viands, and then
relaxed his fast for three weeks, as he here marks the date on the twenty-fourth
day. But I leave this doubtful, through the impossibility of ascertaining the
point with certainty. Let us now proceed, —
|
DANIEL
10:5-6
|
|
5. Then I lifted up mine eyes, and
looked, and behold a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were
girded with fine gold of Uphaz:
|
5. Et levavi oculos meos, et vidi, et ecce vir
unus indutus lineis, vestibus scilicet, et lumbi ejus accincti auro
Uphaz.
|
|
6. His body also was like the beryl,
and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and
his arms and his feet like in color to polished brass, and the voice of his
words like the voice of a multitude.
|
6. Et corpus ejus sieut tharsis, et facies
ejus quasi lampades ignis: et brachia ejus, et pedes ejus quasi conspectus aeris
politi,
f516
et vox sermonum ejus quasi vox multitudinis.
f517
|
As to the word
Uphaz,
some think it to be a pearl or precious stone, and they take the word
µtk,
kethem, which precedes it, for pure gold. Others take
uphaz
adjectivally, for pure gold. I do not suppose it to be an
epithet, but I rather subscribe to the view of those who understand it as the
proper name of a place, because this view is in accordance with the phraseology
of the tenth chapter of Jeremiah. There is another opinion which is unsuitable.
Uphaz is said to be derived from the noun Phaz, and is called
“pure,” the letter Aleph being redundant. The above mentioned
passage of Jeremiah is sufficient to prove my assertion, that it signifies a
certain region; and so some have translated it by ophir. The word
ççrt,
tharsis, is thought to mean chrysolite: some think it denotes the color
of the sea, and then, by a figure of speech, take it generally for any sea. It
is also said to mean sky-colored.
Daniel now begins to relate the manner in which the
vision was offered to him. He says, when he stood on the bank of the river a man
appeared to him, different from the common order of men. He calls him a man, but
shews him to be endued, or adorned with attributes which inspire full confidence
in his celestial glory. We have elsewhere stated, how angels are called men,
whenever God wished them to put on this outward form. The name of men is
therefore used metaphorically whenever they assumed that form by God’s
command, and now Daniel speaks after the accustomed manner. Meanwhile, some
absurdly imagine angels to have been really men, since they assumed this
appearance, and were clothed in a human body. We ought not to believe them to be
really men, because they appeared under a human form. Christ, indeed, was really
man, in consequence of his springing from the seed of Abraham, David, and Adam.
But as regards angels, God clothes them for a single day or a short period in
bodies, for a distinct purpose and a special use. Wherefore, I assert the gross
error of those who suppose angels to become men, as often as they are
corporeally visible in a human form. Still they may be called men, because
Scripture accommodates itself to our senses, as we know sufficiently well.
Daniel therefore says, he saw a
man, and afterwards distinguishes him
from the human race, and shews fixed and conspicuous marks inscribed upon him,
which discover him to be an angel sent down from heaven, and not a mere earthly
mortal. Some philosophize with subtlety on the word
raised,
as if Daniel so raised his eyes upwards as to be unconscious of all earthly
objects; but this does not appear to me sufficiently certain. The Prophet wishes
to impress the certainty of the vision; not only was his mind composed and
collected, but he applied all his senses to the one object before him —
the attainment of some consolation from God. The Prophet, therefore, denotes the
earnestness of his desire, for when he looked round he found himself subject to
many cares and anxieties. Again, with reference to the marks by which Daniel
might infer the object of his vision to be neither earthly nor mortal, he first
says, he was clothed in
linen. This kind of garment was common
enough among the people of the East. Those regions are remarkably warm, and
their inhabitants need not protect themselves against the cold, as we are
necessarily compelled to do. They seldom wear woolen clothing. But on special
occasions when they wish to use more splendid attire, they put on linen tunics,
as we learn not only from many passages of Scripture, but also from profane
writers. Hence I take this passage as if Daniel had said, the man appeared to
him in splendid apparel. For
µydb,
bedim, is supposed not to mean common linen, but a more exquisite kind of
fabric. This is one point.
He next says,
He was girt with pure
gold; that is, with a golden belt. The
Orientals were formerly accustomed to gird themselves with belts or girdles, as
their garments were long and reached almost down to the feet. Hence it became
necessary for those who wished to move expeditiously to gird themselves with
belts. When the angel appeared with raiment of this kind, the difference between
himself and other men was displayed to the Prophet. Some refer the linen garment
to the priesthood of Christ, and treat the girdle as an emblem of rigor. But
these are mere refinements, and seem to me destitute of all reality. I therefore
am content with the simple opinion on which I have touched, namely, this form of
clothing distinguished the angel from ordinary mortals. But this will appear
clearer from the following verse. For Daniel says,
His body was
sky-colored, or like the precious stone
called beryl, of a golden hue Without doubt, the Prophet beheld something
different from a human form, for the purpose of his clearly ascertaining the
vision not to be a man, but an angel in the form of man. I leave the allegory
here, although it proceeds throughout the whole verse. I am aware of the
plausible nature of allegories, but when we reverently weigh the teachings of
the Holy Spirit, those speculations which at first sight pleased us exceedingly,
vanish from our view. I am not captivated by these enticements myself, and I
wish all my hearers to be persuaded of this, — nothing can be better than
a sober treatment of Scripture. We ought never to fetch from a distance subtle
explanations, for the true sense ,will, as I have previously expressed it, flow
naturally from a passage when it is weighed with maturer deliberation. He says,
His face was like the appearance
of lightning. This, again, assured the
Prophet of his being an more than earthly mortal. His eyes would lead to the
same conclusion; they were like
lamps of fire; then
his arms and feet were like
polished or burnished brass;
lastly, the voice of his
words was the voice of a tumult, or noise,
or multitude. The sum of the whole is this, — the angel, though clad
in human form, possessed certain conspicuous marks by which God separated him
from the common crowd of men. Thus Daniel clearly perceived the divine mission
of the angel, and God wished to establish the confidence and certainty of those
prophecies which will afterwards follow in the eleventh chapter. Let us
proceed:
|
DANIEL
10:7
|
|
7. And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the
men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so
that they fled to hide themselves.
|
7. Et vidi ego Daniel solus visionem, et viri
qui erant mecum, non viderunt visionem, imo
f518
terror magnus irruit super eos, et fugerunt in latebras.
f519
|
He pursues his own narrative in which he appears
prolix, but not without design. This prophecy required all kinds of sanction for
the purpose of inspiring unhesitating confidence in it, not only with those Jews
of that generation, but with all posterity. Although the predictions of the
eleventh chapter have been fulfilled, yet their utility is manifest to us as
follows: first, we behold in them God’s perpetual care of his Church;
secondly, we observe the pious never left destitute of any necessary
consolation; and lastly, we perceive, as in a glass or in a living picture, the
Spirit of God speaking in the prophets, as I have observed before, and shall
have occasion to remark again. Daniel, therefore, has good reasons for
impressing us with the certainty of the vision, and with whatever tends to prove
its reality. He says, I alone saw
the vision; but the men who were with me did not see
it; just as the companions of Paul did
not hear Christ’s voice, but only a confused sound: they did not
understand his language, as Paul alone was permitted to comprehend it.
(<440907>Acts
9:7) This is related to promote belief in the prophecy. Daniel’s power of
hearing was not superior to his companions, but God intended to address him
alone. Thus the voice, although like the voice of a multitude, did not penetrate
the ears of those who were with him. He alone was the recipient of these
prophecies, as he alone was endued with the power of predicting future events,
and of consoling and exhorting the pious to live them a knowledge of futurity
even to the last day. Should any one inquire how he carried his companions with
him while he was probably lying on his bed at a distance from the bank of the
river, the answer is easy. He had his domestics with him; the river’s bank
only existed in the vision, and he was carried completely out of himself, and
thus his family would be acquainted with the ecstasy without being aware of the
cause. Daniel then continued at. his own home, and only visited the bank of the
river during the vision; although many witnesses were present, God struck them
all with astonishment, while Daniel only perceived what is afterwards narrated.
God deemed him worthy of this singular honor to fit him to become a teacher and
instructor to others. The men who
were with me, says he,
saw not the vision; but a great
terror fell upon them. This distinction,
as I have stated, shews Daniel to have been selected as the sole listener to the
angel’s voice, and as receiving the information which he was afterwards to
convey to others. Meanwhile, God intended many witnesses to notice
Daniel’s entire freedom from any delusion through either a dream or a
passing imagination. His
companions, then,
were
fright-eyed. This terror proves the
Prophet to have been divinely instructed and not to have labored under any
delirium. They
fled, therefore,
into
hiding-places. It afterwards follows:
—
|
DANIEL
10:8
|
|
8. Therefore I was left alone, and saw this
great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned
into corruption, and I retained no strength.
|
8. Et ego relictus fui solus, et vidi visionem
magnam hanc, et non fuit residuum in me robur
f520
atque etiam decor
f521
meus eversus fuit super me, in me, ad corruptiones
f522
et non retinui vigorem.
|
This language all tends to the same purpose —
to assure us that Daniel did not write his own comments with rashness, but was
truly and clearly taught by the angel on all the points which he committed to
writing, and thus all hesitation is removed as to our embracing what we shall
afterwards perceive, as he is a faithful interpreter of God. He first states
he saw a vision. He had said so before, but he repeats it to produce a
due impression; he calls the vision great, to arouse our attention to its
importance. He adds, he was
deprived of all vigor; as if he had been
rendered lifeless by the blast of the Spirit. Thus we gather the object of the
exhibition of all these outward signs; they not only bring before us God
speaking by the mouth of his angel, but they prepared the Prophet himself, and
trained him to reverence. God, however, does not terrify his sons, as if
our disquiet was with him an object of delight, but solely because it is
profitable for us; for unless our carnal feelings were utterly subdued, we
should never be fit to receive improvement. Tiffs necessarily requires violence,
on account of our inborn perverseness; and this is the reason why the Prophet
was reduced to this state of lifelessness. Even
my
comeliness, or beauty, or appearance,
was turned to
corruption; meaning, my deformity was
similar to that induced by death. He adds lastly,
I did not retain my
vigor. He uses a variety of
phrases to shew himself depressed by the heavenly blast, for but a slight amount
of vitality remained, and he was scarcely preserved from actual death. We ought
to learn to transfer this instruction to ourselves, not by the vanishing of our
rigor or the changing of our appearance whenever God addresses us, but by all
our resistance giving way, and all our pride and loftiness becoming prostrate
before God. Finally, our carnal disposition ought to be completely reduced to
nothing, as true docility will never be found in us until all our senses are
completely mortified; for we must always remember how hostile all our
natural thoughts are to the will of God. It afterwards follows; — but I
cannot proceed further to-day; I must delay my comment on the next verses till
to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as thou didst
formerly appear to Daniel thy holy servant, and to the other prophets, and by
their doctrine didst render thy glory conspicuous to us at this day, that we may
reverently approach and behold it. When we have become entirely devoted to thee,
may those mysteries which it has pleased thee to offer by means of their hand
and labors, receive from us their due estimation. May we be cast down in
ourselves and be raised by hope and faith towards heaven; when prostrate before
thy face, may we so conduct ourselves in the world, as in the interval to become
free from all the depraved desires and passions of our flesh, and dwell mentally
in heaven. Then at length may we be withdrawn from this earthly warfare, and
arrive at that celestial rest which thou hast prepared for us, through the same
Jesus Christ our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-FOURTH.
|
DANIEL
10:9-10
|
|
9. Yet heard I the voice of his words: and
when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and
my face toward the ground.
|
9. Et audivi vocem sermonum ejus, et cum
audirem vocem sermonum ejus, tunc ego fui sopitus super faciem meam,
f523
et facies mea in terram, projecta fuit scilicet.
|
|
10. And, behold, an hand touched me which set
me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands.
|
10. et ecce manus tetigit me,
f524
et movere me fecit super genui mea, et palmas, aut volas, manum
mearum.
|
In yesterday’s Lecture Daniel confessed himself
astonished at the sight of the angel, and deprived of all inward strength. He
afterwards adds, On hearing the
sound of his words he threw himself on the
ground; for this is the sense of the
ninth verse, as we have just read it. he represents himself as being
in a
swoon and in the unconscious state which
usually occurs when all our senses are paralyzed by excessive fear. While lying
thus senselessly on the ground,
Behold,
he adds, hands touched me,
and placed me upon my knees and the palms of my
hands. He mentions his being partially
raised by the angel, not only through the sound of his voice, but by the touch
of his hand. He implies that he was not yet raised to either the standing or
sitting posture; he was only placed upon his knees with his hands upon the
ground, this posture being the sign of his dejection. Thus he was partially
relieved, and fear no longer seized upon either his mind or his limbs. From this
passage we should learn that when prostrated by the voice of God, we cannot be
restored otherwise than by his strength. We know the hand to be the symbol of
strength. Unless God himself stretches out his hand to us, we shall always
remain apparently dead. This is one lesson. The Prophet next adds the address of
the angel to him, —
|
DANIEL
10:11
|
|
11. 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.
|
11. Et loquutus est ad me, Daniel vir
desideriorum intellige, attentus sis, ad verba quae loquor tecum et sta
super stare tuum: quia nunc missus sum ad te. Et cum loqueretur mecum sermonem
hunc, steti tremens, vel, trepidus.
|
He here relates how he was strengthened, by the
angel’s exhortation. He now begins to raise himself from his former
position, and the angel now orders him to raise his drooping spirits, and calls
him a man greatly
beloved. We have previously discussed
this word, which some refer to Daniel’s zeal, and take it passively,
because he was inspired with a most invincible ardor through anxiety for the
common welfare of the Church. I rather incline to the opposite view, thinking
him so called through the force of his desires, because he was dear and precious
to God. By This epithet the angel wished to animate the holy Prophet, and to
calm and quiet his mind for listening to what he so ardently expected.
Understand,
therefore, he says, or attend to,
the words which I shall speak
to thee, and stand upright. Some
translate it, in thy station, but “station” does not refer to the
position of the body. I have already shewn how the Prophet was not now quite
prostrate; his face was towards the earth, while he was supported by his hands
and knees; and we now perceive him raised another step. This doctrine is
profitable to us, because many think themselves utterly neglected and deserted
by God, unless they immediately regain their mental rigor. But God does not all
at once restore to life those whom he has rendered all but lifeless, but he
conveys new life by degrees, and inspires the dead with fresh animation. We
perceive this to have been done in Daniel’s case. Therefore I am never
surprised when God raises us gradually by distinct steps, and cures our
infirmity by degrees; but if even a single drop of his virtue is supplied to us,
we should be content with this consolation, until he should complete what
he has begun within us. Lastly, this passage unfolds to us how God works in his
servants, by not rendering them perfect all at once, but allowing some infirmity
to remain until the completion of his own work.
Daniel afterwards adds,
When he heard this address, he
stood up. We here observe the effect.
and fruit of the angel’s exhortation, as Daniel no longer needed to
support himself on his hands and knees. He could stand upright, although he
adds, he remained
trembling. Although thus erect in
body, he was not entirely free from feelings of dread; and, though he stood upon
his feet, he was not yet relieved from all trepidation, even at the
angel’s command. This confirms my previous remark — God leaves in
his servants some signs of fear, to remind them of their infirmity; they venture
to raise themselves by hope above the world, but they do not forget they are but
dust and ashes, and so restrain themselves within the bounds of humility and
modesty. It now follows: —
|
DANIEL
10:12
|
|
12. 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.
|
12. Et dixit ad me, ne timeas Daniel, quia a
die primo quo adjecisti cor tuum ad, intelligendum, et affigendum te, vel,
humiliandum, coram facie Dei tui, exaudita sunt verba tua: et ego veni in
verbis tuis, hoc est, propter verba tua.
|
By the angel’s commanding the Prophet to be of
a serene and tranquil mind, we gather the continuance of his fright, and his
being as yet unable to listen with composure. And yet this trembling improved
his teachableness. Without the slightest doubt, God desired to prepare his
servant in this way to render him more attentive to his disciples, and yet this
very terror prevented Daniel from summoning all his senses to listen to the
address of the angel. The remedy is exhibited in these words,
O Daniel, fear
not. The angel did not wish to remove
all fear from the Prophet’s mind, but rather to calm it, lest his
trembling should prevent him from giving due attention to the prophecies which
we shall soon discuss. I have already said enough on the subject of this
address. As God knows fear to be useful to us, he does not wish us to be
entirely free from it, as too great self-confidence would immediately produce
slothfulness and pride. God, therefore, wishes our fears to restrain us like
a bridle, but meanwhile he moderates this dread in his servants, lest their
minds become stricken and disturbed, and thus disabled from approaching
him with calmness.
The angel
adds, From the first day on which
thou didst begin to apply thy mind to understanding, and to afflict thyself
before God, thy prayers were heard. This
reason sufficiently shews in what sense and with what intention the angel
forbade the Prophet’s fears — because, says he,
thy prayers have been
heard. He was unwilling to banish all
fear, but he offered some hope and consolation; and relying on this expectation,
he might wait for the revelation which he so earnestly desired. He states
his prayers to have been heard
from the time of his applying his mind to understanding, and from his afflicting
himself before God. These two points may
be noticed: first, by the word “understanding” the angel informs us
of God’s being propitious to the prayers of his servant, because they were
sincere and legitimate. For what spectacle did Daniel behold? He saw the
condition of the Church entirely confused, and he desired the communication of
some mark of favor, which might assure him of God’s being still mindful of
His covenant, and of his not despising those wretched Israelites whom he had
adopted. As this was the object of the Prophet’s prayer, he so far
obtained his request, and the angel bears witness to God’s being entreated
by him. We are taught then by this passage, if we are anxious for our
supplications to be both heard and approved by God, not to give way to those
foolish lusts and appetites, which solicit and entice us. We ought to observe
the rule here prescribed by the angel, and fashion our entreaties according to
God’s will. We know, says John, that if we ask anything according to his
will, he will hear us.
(<620514>1
John 5:14.) This is the first point. The second is the addition of penitence to
fervor in devotion, when the angel says,
Daniel’s mind was
afflicted or humbled. A second condition
of true prayer is here set before us, when the faithful humble themselves before
God, and being touched with true penitence, pour out their groans before him.
The angel, therefore, shews how Daniel obtained his requests, by suppliantly
afflicting himself before God. He did not utter prayers for the Church in a mere
formal manner, but as we have previously seen, he united fasting with entreaty,
and abstained from all delicacies. For this reason God did not reject his
petitions. He says, before thy
God; this expression of the
angel’s implying that the Prophet’s supplication sprang from true
faith. The prayers of the impious, on the other hand, always repel the Almighty,
and they can never be sure of his being propitious to them. In consequence of
the hesitation and vacillation of unbelievers, this testimony to true faith is
set before Daniel — he
prayed to his own
God. Whoever approaches God, says the
Apostle,
(<581106>Hebrews
11:6,) ought to acknowledge his existence, and his being easily entreated by all
those who seek and invoke him. We ought diligently to notice this, as this fault
is most manifest in all ages, men often pray to God, but yet through their
hesitation they pour forth their petitions into the air. They do not realize God
as their Father. Another passage also reminds us how useless is the hope of
obtaining anything by prayer, if we are agitated and tossed about in our
emotions. (James 1:6, 7.) Unless faith shine forth, we must not feel surprise at
those who call upon God losing all their labor through their profanation of his
name. Lastly, by this expression, the angel shews us how Daniel’s prayer
was founded on faith; he had not sought God with rashness, but was clearly
persuaded of his being welcomed among the sons of God.
He
prayed, therefore,
to his own
God, and for this reason, his petitions
were heard. Then the angel adds,
he came at his
words; as it is said in the Psalms.
(Psalm 145:19.) God inclines with desire towards those who fear him; and in this
sense the angel waits upon Daniel. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
10:13
|
|
13. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia
withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes,
came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
|
13. Et Princeps regni Persarum stetit coram
me, vel, e regione, viginti diebus et uno. Et ecce Michael unus principum
primorum
f525
venit ad opem ferendam mihi,
f526
et ego residuus
f527
fui apuds reges Persarum, vel, Persidis.
|
The angel now assigns a reason why he did not appear
at once, and at the very first moment to the Prophet, who might complain as
follows, — “What treatment is this, to suffer me to consume away
through grief for so long a period?” for Daniel had remained through three
weeks in succession in the severest affliction. God had heard him, indeed, from
the very first day; how, then, could he still behold this wretched man thus
prostrate in mourning? why did not God cause it to appear openly and really that
he had not prayed in vain? The angel now meets this objection, and shews how he
had been otherwise occupied in promoting the Prophet’s welfare. We ought
carefully to notice this, because delay often disturbs us when God does not
immediately extend his help, and for a long time hides from us the fruit of our
prayers. Whenever our passions burst forth with a strong impetuosity, and we
easily manifest tokens of impatience, we must notice this expression of the
angel, for our prayers may be already heard while God’s favor and mercy is
concealed from us. The experience of Daniel is daily fulfilled in every member
of the Church, and without the slightest doubt the same discipline is exercised
towards all the pious. This is our practical reflection. We must notice,
secondly, God’s condescension in deigning to explain himself by the angel
to his own Prophet. He offers a reason for the delay of the angel’s
return, and the cause of this hindrance was, as I have already stated, his
regard for the safety of his elect people. The wonderful clemency of the
Almighty is here proved by his offering an excuse so graciously to his Prophet,
because he did not shew himself easily entreated on the very day when prayer was
offered to him. But we ought to derive another practical benefit from the
passage, — God does not cease to regard us with favor even while he may
not please to make us conscious of it, for he does not always place it before
our eyes, but rather hides it from our view. We infer from this, God’s
constant care for our safety, although not exhibited exactly in the way which
our minds may conceive and comprehend. God surpasses all our comprehension in
the way in which he provides for our safety, as the angel here relates his
mission in quite another direction, and yet in the service of the Church. It now
appears how Daniel obtained an answer to his prayers from the very first day of
their offering, and yet remained unconscious of it, until God sent him some
consolation in the midst of his troubles. A very different interpretation of
this verse has been proposed, for some expounders think the angel sent into
Persia to protect that kingdom. There is some probability in this explanation,
because the Israelites were still under the Persian monarchy, and God may have
furnished some assistance to the kings of Persia for the sake of his own people.
But I think the angel stood in direct opposition and conflict against Cambyses,
to prevent him from raging more fiercely against God’s people. He had
promulgated a cruel edict, preventing the Jews from building their temple, and
manifesting complete hostility to its restoration. He would not have been
satisfied with this rigorous treatment, had not God restrained his cruelty by
the aid and hand of the angel.
If we weigh these words judiciously, we shall readily
conclude, that the angel fought rather against the king of the Persians than for
him. The
prince, says he,
of the kingdom of the
Persians, meaning Cambyses, with his
father Cyrus, crossed over the sea and contended with the Scythians, as well as
in Asia Minor. The prince of the kingdom of Persia was ranged against him, as if
he had said, — He detained me from reaching you, but it was for the good
of your race, for had not God used me in assisting you, his cruelty would have
been aggravated, and your condition would have been utterly desperate.
You perceive, then, how there has been no want of zeal on my part, for God was
never deaf to your entreaties.
The prince of the kingdom of the
Persians stood against me for twenty-one
days; meaning, from the period of your
beginning to pour forth your prayers before God, I have never flinched from any
attack or assault, by which I might defend thy people.
The prince of the kingdom of the
Persians stood against me; meaning, he
was so hot against the Israelites, as to intend to pour forth the very dregs of
his wrath, unless the help which I afforded you had been divinely
interposed.
He adds next,
Behold! Michael, one of the chief
leaders or princes, came to strengthen me.
Some think the word Michael represents Christ, and I do not object to this
opinion. Clearly enough, if all angels keep watch over the faithful and elect,
still Christ holds the first rank among them, because he is their head, and uses
their ministry and assistance to defend all his people. But as this is not
generally admitted, I leave it in doubt for the present, and shall say more on
the subject in the twelfth chapter. From this passage we may clearly deduce the
following conclusion, — angels contend for the Church of God both
generally and for single members, just as their help may be needed. This we know
to be a part of the occupation of angels, who protect the faithful according to
Psalm 34 (Psalm 34:8.) They fix their camp in a circuit round them. God,
therefore, plants his angels against all the endeavors of Satan, and all the
fury of the impious who desire to destroy us, and are ever plotting for our
complete ruin. If God were not to protect us in this way, we should be utterly
undone. We are aware of Satan’s horrible hatred to us, and of the mighty
fury with which he assails us; we know how skillfully and variously he contrives
his artifices; we know him as the prince of this world, dragging and hurrying
the greater part of mankind along with him, while they impiously pour forth
their threats against us. What prevents Satan from daily absorbing a hundred
times over the whole Church both collectively and individually? It clearly
becomes necessary for God to oppose his fury, and this he does by angels. While
they are contending for us and for our safety, we do not perceive this hidden
malice, because they conceal it from us.
We may now treat this passage a little more in
detail. The angel was stationed in Persia to repress the audacity and cruelty of
Cambyses, who was not content with a single edict, but would have forcibly
dragged the wretched Israelites back again to a fresh exile. And he must have
succeeded, had not first one angel and then another confronted him. The angel
now informs us how Michael, one of the chief leaders, came up with the requisite
supplies. The defense of one angel might have been sufficient, for angels
have no further power than what is conferred upon them. But God is not bound to
any particular means, he is not limited to either one or a thousand, as when
Jehoshaphat speaks of a small army, he states, It matters not before God,
whether we be few or many. (2 Chronicles 14:11; 1 Samuel 14:6.) For God can save
his people by either a small force or a mighty one; and the same also is true of
angels. But God is anxious to testify to the care which he bestows upon the
welfare of his people, and to his singular loving-kindness towards the
Israelites displayed by the mission of a second angel. He doubled his
re-enforcement to bear witness to his love towards these wretched and
innocent ones, who were oppressed by the calumnies of their enemies, and by the
tyranny of that impious king. Finally, the angel says,
he was left among the Persian
kings, for the purpose of removing the
numerous obstacles in the way of the chosen people; for, unless God had
withstood that deluge of weapons with his own shield, the Jews would have been
buried beneath it on the spot. Let us proceed —
|
DANIEL
10:14
|
|
14. Now I am come to make thee understand what
shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for
many days.
|
14. Et veni ut tibi patefacerem
f528
quod occurret populo tuo
f529
in extremitate dierum, diebus postremis, quia adhuc visio ad
dies.
|
The angel follows up the same sentiment. He states
his arrival for the purpose of predicting to Daniel coming events, and those,
too, for a long period of time. He further proves the prayers of Daniel to have
been neither vain nor fruitless, as they produced this conflict with the kings
of Persia, both father and son. He now brings forward another proof of this,
because God wished his Prophet to be instructed in patiently waiting for the
arrival of the events, after being made fully aware of the elect people
being under God’s care and protection. This he would readily acknowledge
from the prophecies of the next chapter. He next adds,
at the end of the
days. By this expression the angel
commends God’s grace towards the Prophet, as he was its special minister.
His mission was not only to announce to him the occurrences of three or four
years, or of any brief period, but he had to extend his predictions over many
years, even to the extremity of the days. I willingly refer this period to the
renovation of the Church which happened at the advent of Christ. The Scriptures
in using the phrase, the last days, or times, always point to the manifestation
of Christ, by which the face of the world was renewed. It is exactly similar to
the angel saying he would make Daniel fully acquainted with all future events,
until the final redemption of the people, when Christ was exhibited for the
salvation of his Church. Hence the angel embraces the 490 years of which he had
spoken. For Christ’s advent determined the fullness of times, and the
subjoined reason suits the passage exceedingly well.
The vision is yet for
days, says he; thus frigidly some
expounders take these words. I feel persuaded that the angel intends to shew how
God is now opening future events to his servant, and thus these prophecies
become like a lamp ever shining in the Church. The faithful complain in the 74th
Psalm
(<197409>Psalm
74:9) of the absence of all signs, because no prophets are left. We see no
signs, say they, no Prophet exists among us. This was an indication of God
having rejected and deserted them. However faintly the light of his doctrine may
shine upon us, the slightest glimmer ought to be sufficient to produce patience
and repose. But when all the light of the Word is extinguished, we seem
completely enveloped in tartarean darkness. As the Israelites suffered so many
afflictions for nearly 500 years, this remedy ought completely to restore them;
for when the angel testifies, the
vision is yet for days, it means,
although God permits his people to be miserably afflicted, yet by this new proof
he shews that he had not entirely cast them off. Some vision remained; that is,
by the light of prophecy he will always manifest his care for his chosen,
and they may even anticipate a happy issue out of all their sorrows. We now
understand the angel’s meaning when he says,
the vision is yet for
days. Prophecies, indeed, ceased soon
afterwards, and God no longer sent other prophets to his people, yet their
teaching always remained permanent like a finger-post, for in it was completed
the whole series of times up to the advent of Christ. His children were never
destitute of all necessary consolation; for although there were no prophets
surviving who could instruct the people in God’s commands by the living
voice, yet Daniel’s teaching flourished for nearly 500 years after his
death. It also performed its part in supporting the courage of the pious, and
shewing them the firmness of God’s covenant not withstanding all
opposition. Although the Church was agitated in a variety of ways, yet God is
consistent in all his promises, until the complete redemption of his Church by
the advent of his only-begotten Son.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as the weakness of
our faith is such that it almost vanishes on the very least occasion: Grant, I
say, that we may not hesitate to derive support from this remarkable and
memorable example which thou wishest to propose to us in Daniel, although for a
time thou hidest thy face from us, and we lie prostrate in darkness. Still do
thou remain near us; and with undoubting hope may we be steadfast in our prayers
and groaning, until at length the fruit of our prayers shall appear. Thus may we
constantly make war with all kinds of trials, and persist unconquered until thou
shalt stretch forth thine hand from heaven to us, and raise us to that blessed
rest which is there laid up for us by Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-FIFTH.
|
DANIEL
10:15
|
|
15. And when he had spoken such words unto me,
I set my face toward the ground, and I became dumb.
|
15. Et cum loqueretur mecum secundum verba
haec, posui faciem meam in terram, et obmutui.
|
Daniel again signifies by these words that he was so
inspired by reverence for the angel as to be unable to stand. This tends to
recommend the prophecy to our notice, — to shew us how the holy Prophet
was not only instructed by the angel, but to confirm what he will afterwards
record in the 11th chapter, and free it from all doubt. Lastly, he enables us to
confide in the angel’s words, which were not uttered in an ordinary way,
but were so obviously divine as to cast Daniel headlong upon the earth. In my
judgment those expounders of the phrase,
he became
dumb, are in error when they refer it to
his repenting of his prophetic office, through supposing his prayers to have
been disregarded. This is much too forced, because the Prophet expresses nothing
more than his seizure by fear, causing both his feet and his tongue to refuse
their usual duties. Thus he was apparently carried beyond himself. By becoming
prostrate on the ground, he manifested his reverence, and by becoming dumb
displayed his astonishment. I have already briefly explained the object of all
these assertions — to prove to us how the angel was adorned with his own
attributes, and what full authority should be assigned to his words. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
10:16-18
|
|
16. And, behold, one like the
similitude of the sons of men touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, and
spake, and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by the vision my
sorrows are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength.
|
16. Et ecce secundum similitudinem filiorum
hominis,
f530
tetgit labia mea, et aperui os meum, et loquutus sum; et dixi ad eum qui stabat
ad conspectum meum,
f531
Domine, in visione conversi sunt dolores mei super me, et non continui
robur.
|
|
17. For how can the servant of this my lord
talk with this my lord? for as for me, straightway there remained no strength in
me, neither is there breath left in me.
|
17. Et quomodo poterit servus Domini mei hujus
loqui cum domino meo hoc? Et exinde non stetit in me
f532
robur; et anima, halitus, non fuit residuus in me.
|
|
18. Then there came again and touched me one
like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me.
|
18. Et addidit, hoc est, secundo,
tetigit me secundum similitudinem
f533
hominis, et roboravit me.
|
Daniel here narrates how the angel who inflicted the
wound at the same time brought the remedy. Though he had been cast down by fear,
yet the touch of the angel raised him up, not because there was any virtue in
the mere touch, but the use of symbols we know to be keenly encouraged by God,
as we have previously observed. Thus the angel raised the Prophet not only by
his voice but by his touch. Whence we gather the oppressive nature of the terror
from the difficulty with which he was roused from it. This ought to be referred
to its own end, which was to stamp the prophecy with the impress of authority,
and openly to proclaim Daniel’s mission from God. We are aware, too, how
Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, (2 Corinthians 11:14;) and
hence God distinguishes this prediction, by fixed marks, from all the fallacies
of Satan. Lastly, by all these circumstances the Prophet shews God to be the
author of the prophecy to be afterwards uttered, as the angel brought with him
trustworthy credentials, by which he procured for himself favor, and openly
proved his mission to Daniel. He says he appeared
after the likeness of a
man, or of the sons of man. He seems
here to be speaking of another angel; but as we proceed we shall perceive the
angel to be the same as at first. He had formerly imposed upon him the name of a
man; now, to distinguish him from men, and to prove him to be only human in form
and not in nature, he says he bore the similitude of the sons of a man. Some
restrict this to Christ, but I fear this is too forced; and when all points
shall have been more accurately discussed, I have already anticipated the
result, as most probably the same angel is here designated of whom Daniel has
hitherto spoken. We have already stated him not to be the Christ, because this
interpretation is better suited to that Michael who has been already mentioned,
and will be again at the end of this chapter. Whence it is more simple to
receive it thus: the angel
strengthened Daniel by touching
his lips; and the angel, formerly called a man,
was only one in appearance, wearing the human figure and image, yet not
partaking of our nature. For allowing God to have sent his angels clad
frequently in human bodies, he never created them men in the sense in which
Christ was made man; for this is the special difference between angels and
Christ. We have formerly stated how Christ was depicted for us under this
figure. And there is nothing surprising in this, because Christ assumed some
form of human nature before he was manifested in flesh, and angels themselves
have put on the human appearance.
He says afterwards,
he opened his mouth and
spake. By these words he explains more
fully what we previously stated, for he was quite stupefied by terror, and to
all appearance was dead. Then he began to open his mouth, and was animated to
confidence. No wonder, then, if men fall down and faint away, when God shews
such signs of his glory; for when God puts forth his strength against us, what
are we? At his appearance alone the mountains melt, at his voice alone the whole
earth is shaken. (Psalm 104:32.) How, then, can men stand upright who are only
dust and ashes, when God appears in his glory? Daniel, then, was prostrate, but
afterwards recovered his strength when God restored his courage. We ought to
understand the certainty of our being compelled to vanish into nothing whenever
God sets before us any sign of his power and majesty; and yet he restores us
again, and shews himself to be our father, and bears witness of his favor
towards us by both words and other signs. The language of this clause might seem
superfluous — he
opened his mouth, and spake, and said;
but by this repetition he wished, as I have stated, to express plainly his
own recovery of the use of speech after being refreshed by the angel’s
touch.
He says he spoke to
him who stood
opposite. This phrase enables us to
conclude the angel here sent to be the same as the previous one; and this will
appear more clearly from the end of the chapter, and as we proceed with our
subject. Then he says, O my Lord,
in the vision my distresses are turned upon me, and I have not retained my
strength. He here calls the angel
“Lord,” after the Hebrew custom. Paul’s assertion was true
under the law — there is but one Lord, (1 Corinthians 8:6,) but the
Hebrews use the word promiscuously when they address any one by a title of
respect. It was no less customary with them than with us to use this phrase in
special cases. I confess it to be a weakness; but as it was a common form of
expression, the Prophet uses no ceremony in calling angels lords. The angel,
then, is called lord, simply for the sake of respect, just as the title
is applied to men who excel in dignity.
In the vision
itself, that is, before thou didst begin
to speak, I was buried in grief and deprived of strength. How then, says he, am
I able to speak now? Thou by thy very appearance hast depressed me; no wonder I
was utterly dumb; and now if I open my mouth, I know not what to say, as the
fright which thy presence occasioned me held all my senses completely
spellbound. We perceive the Prophet to be but partially erect, being still
subject to some degree of fear, and therefore unable to utter freely the
thoughts of his mind. Therefore he adds,
And how shall the servant of this
my Lord be able to speak with that my Lord?
The demonstrative
hz,
zeh, seems to be used by way of amplifying, according to the phrase
common enough in our day, with such a one. Daniel does not simply point
out the angel’s presence, but wishes to express his rare and singular
excellence. Dispute would be both superfluous and out of place should any one
assert the unlawfulness of ascribing such authority to the angel. For, according
to my previous remark, the Prophet uses the common language of the times. He
never intended to detract in any way from the monarchy of God. He knew the
existence of only one God, and Christ to be the only prince of the Church;
meanwhile, he freely permitted himself to follow the common and popular form of
speech. And truly we are too apt either to avoid or neglect religious ceremony
in the use of words. Although we maintain that the Prophet followed the
customary forms of expression, he detracted noting from God by transferring it
to the angel, as the Papists do when they manufacture innumerable patron saints,
and despoil Christ of his just honor. Daniel would not sanction this, but
treated the angel with honor, as he would any remarkable and illustrious mortal,
according to my previous assertion. He knew him to be an angel, but in his
discourse with him he did not give way to any empty scruples. As he saw him
under the form of a man, he conversed with him as such; and with reference to
the certainty of the prophecy, he was clearly persuaded of the angel’s
mission as a heavenly instructor.
He next adds,
Henceforth my strength did not
remain within me, and my breath was no longer left in
me. Some translate this in the future
tense, — it will not stand; and certainly the verb
dmgy
ignemed, “shall stand,” is in the future tense; but then
the past tense follows when he says,
no breath was left in
me. Without doubt, this is but a
repetition of what we observed before; for Daniel was seized not only by fear,
but also by stupor at the sight of the angel. Whence it appears how utterly
destitute he was of both intellect and tongue, both to understand and express
himself in reply to the angel. This is the full sense of the words. He adds,
secondly, he was strengthened by
the touch of him who wore the likeness of a
man; for
he touched
me, says he. By these words Daniel more
clearly explains how he failed to recover his entire strength at the first
touch, but was roused by degrees, and could only utter three or four words at
first. We perceive, then, how impossible it is for those who are prostrated by
God to collect all their strength at the first moment, and how they partially
and gradually recover the powers which they had lost. Hence the necessity for a
second touch, to enable Daniel to hear the angel speaking to him with a mind
perfectly composed. And here again he inspires us with faith in the prophecy, as
he was by no means in an ecstasy while the angel was discoursing concerning
future events. If he had always lain prostrate, his attention could never have
been given to the angel’s message, and he could never have discharged
towards us the duty of prophet and teacher. Thus God joined these two conditions
— terror and a renewal of strength — to render it possible for
Daniel to receive with calmness the angel’s teaching, and to deliver
faithfully to us what he had received from God through the hand of the angel. It
follows: —
|
DANIEL
10:19
|
|
19. And said, O man greatly beloved, fear not:
peace be unto thee; be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had spoken
unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast
strengthened me.
|
19. Et dixit, ne timeas vir desideriorum,
f534
Pax tibi, comfortare, et confortare.
f535
Et cum loqueretur mecum, roboravi me: tunc dixi, Loquatur dominus meus, quia
roborasti me.
|
He first explains how he recovered his spirits at the
angel’s exhortation; for he refers to this encouragement as a command to
be of good courage. Fear
not, therefore,
O man of
desires. The angel here addresses Daniel
soothingly, to calm his fears, for he needed some enticement when oppressed with
fear at both the words and aspect of the angel. This is the reason why he calls
him a man to be
desired. He adds,
peace to
thee, a customary salutation with the
Hebrews, who mean by the phrase the same as the Latin expression, May it be well
with thee. Peace, as the Jews used it, means a state of prosperity, happiness,
and quiet, and everything of this kind. Peace, therefore, to thee,
meaning, May you prosper. By this word the angel declares his arrival in the
Prophet’s favor to bear witness to God’s merciful feelings towards
the Israelites, and to the reception of his own prayers. We ought diligently to
notice this, because, as I have already remarked, whenever God puts forth any
sign of his majesty, we necessarily become frightened. No other remedy is equal
to the favor of God fully manifested towards us, and his testimony to his
drawing near us as a father. The angel expresses this feeling by the phrase
which he uses, shewing with what justice Daniel fell down lifeless through
reverence for God’s presence, and the necessity for his being calm and
collected when he knew himself sent forth to bear witness to God’s favor.
Peace,
therefore, to
thee. He next adds,
be strong, be
strong. By this repetition, the angel
teaches how strong an effort was required to arouse the Prophet; if he had been
but slightly terrified, one word would have been enough to recover him. But as
he was carried beyond himself, and all his senses had failed him, the angel
inculcates twice the same exhortation to be strong.
Be
strong, then,
be
strong; that is, recover your spirits;
and if this cannot be done in a moment, persevere in recovering that alacrity
which may render you a fitting disciple; for, while you thus remain astonished,
I should address you in vain. There are two reasons why we must notice the
Prophet’s informing us again how dejected he was. First, it proves how
free from ambiguity this revelation really was, and how clearly it was stamped
with marks of genuineness. Secondly, we must learn how formidable God’s
presence is to us, unless we are persuaded of the exercise of his paternal love
Towards us. Lastly, we must observe how, when once we are struck down, we cannot
immediately and completely recover our spirits, but we must be satisfied if God
gradually and successively inspires us with renewed strength.
Daniel afterwards says,
he was strengthened, and said,
Let my lord speak, for thou hast made me
strong. By these words he indicates his
peace of mind after the angel had roused him by touching him twice, and by
giving him courage by means of his exhortation. It is very useful to us to take
due notice of this mental tranquillity, because the Prophet ought first to
become a diligent scholar to enable him afterwards to discharge for us the once
of a faithful teacher. With the greatest propriety, he repeats his assertion
about the recovery of his strength, which enabled him to address the angel with
facility. It now follows: —
|
DANIEL
10:20
|
|
20. Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I
come unto thee? And now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and
when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
|
20. Et dixit, An cognoscia, scisne,
quare venerim ad te, et nunc revertar ad pugnandum cum principe Persarum; et ego
egrediens, hoc est ubi egressus fuero, tunc ecce princeps Javan, hoc
est, Graecorum, veniet.
|
The angel appears here to lead the Prophet in vain
through a winding course; for he might directly and simply have told him why he
had come. It was necessary to recall the Prophet to his senses, as he was at one
time scarcely master of his actions. He was not indeed permanently injured in
his mind, but the disturbance of feeling through which he had passed had
temporarily disarranged the calmness of his thoughts. This event both occurred
and is narrated for our advantage. This is the reason why the angel again uses
this preface, Dost thee
know? as if he wished to gather together
the Prophet’s senses which were formerly wandering and dispersed. He urges
him to pay great attention. And now, says he, I will return; that
is, after I shall have explained to thee what thou wilt afterwards hear,
I will return again to
contend with the prince of the Persians. Here
the angel indicates the reason for the delay of his mission, not because God
neglected the groans and prayers of his Prophet, but the fit time had not yet
arrived. The angel had formerly stated how the Persian prince had stood before
him; meaning, he detained me, and I was obliged to enter into conflict with him,
for his cruelty to the people had become far more formidable and insolent. This
is the account which he gives of his occupation. But he now adds,
I will return to fight with the
prince of the Persians; implying, God
sent me purposely to unfold to thee future occurrences, but you now know how far
I was from being at leisure or shall be hereafter. I now come to be God’s
witness and herald of his good will towards thyself and thy people. In reality,
I am the defender of thy safety, since I have constantly to fight for thee with
the prince of the Persians. He means Cambyses. I follow my former interpretation
of an engagement between the angel and the king of Persia, whom wicked men had
stimulated to cruelty; for he had revoked the edict of his father. The angel
resisted the king’s fury, who was naturally very turbulent, and profane
writers have described his character in a similar way.
He now adds,
I will go to fight against the
prince of the Persians; for
µ[,
gnem, has the force of “against” here and in many
other passages. He next adds, And
when I shall depart, that is, when I am
gone, the prince of Greece shall
approach, says he; that is, God shall
exercise him in another way. He does not mean this to refer to Cambyses, but to
other Persian kings, as we shall state in the proper place. It is quite correct
to suppose the king of Macedon to have arrived by God’s permission; but
the angel simply means to state the existence of various methods by which God
hinders the cruelty of kings whenever they attempt to injure his people. He
shall send the prince of the Greeks, says he. God, therefore, thus restrained
Cambyses by the angel’s assistance, and then he protected his people from
the cruelty exercised by Alexander, king of Macedon. God is always providing for
the safety of his people, and always has a variety of methods in operation. The
angel desired to teach us this with all simplicity. At length he adds:
—
|
DANIEL
10:21
|
|
21. But I will shew thee that which is noted
in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in
these things, but Michael your prince.
|
21. Verum indicabo tibi quod exeratum est in
Scriptura veraci: et non unus qui se roboret, vel, qui viriliter agat,
mecum in his, nisi Michael princeps vester.
|
I omit the interpretation of those who say that after
the departure of the angel the prince of the Greeks came forward, because God
ceased to afford assistance to the kingdom of the Persians. This is altogether
different from the Prophet’s sense, and we must hold the explanation which
I have adopted. The angel now adds the object of his mission — to make
Daniel acquainted with what he will afterwards relate. He again attracts our
confidence towards his message, not only for the sake of the Prophet privately,
but to assure all the pious how free Daniel’s writings were from any human
delusion or invention, and how fully they were inspired from above.
I will
announce, therefore,
what has been
engraven, or ensculptured,
in the Scripture of
truth. By this phrase, “the
Scripture of truth,” he doubtless means the eternal and inviolable decree
of God himself. God needs no books; paper and books are but helps to our memory,
which would otherwise easily let things slip; but as he never suffers from
forgetfulness, hence he needs no books. We are aware how often holy Scripture
adopts forms of speech according to human customs. This clause implies the same
as if the angel had said, he brought nothing but what God had already determined
before, and thus the Prophet would expect a full and complete
accomplishment
He next adds,
There is no one who supports me
in this duty except Michael, whom he calls
prince of the elect
people. It is surprising why the angel
and Michael alone fought for the safety of the people. It is written, Angels
pitch their camp in a circuit around those who fear God, (Psalm 34:7,) and then
but one Church existed in the world. Why, then, did not God commit this charge
to more angels than one? Why did he not send forth mighty forces? We acknowledge
that God does not confine himself to any fixed rule; he can help us as well by
many forces as by a single angel or by more. And he does not make use of angels
as if he could not do without them. This is the reason of that variety which we
observe: he is first content with one angel, and then joins more with him. He
will give to one man a great army, as we read of Elisha, and as other passages
in Scripture afford us examples. (2 Kings 6:17.) the servant of Elisha saw the
air full of angels. Thus also Christ said, Can I not ask my Father, and he will
send me, not one angel only, but a legion? (Matthew 26:53.) Again, the Spirit of
God assigns many angels to each of the faithful. (Psalm 91:11.) Now, therefore,
we understand why God sends more angels, not always with the same purpose or
intention, to inform us that he is sufficient to afford us protection, even if
no other help should be supplied. He provides for our infirmities by bringing us
help by means of his angels, who act like hands to execute his commands. But I
have previously remarked this is not an invariable practice, and we ought not to
bind him by any fixed conditions to supply our wants always in the same manner.
God seemed, at least for a time, to leave his people without help, and
afterwards two angels were sent to contend for them; first, a single one was
sent to Daniel, and then Michael, whom some think to be Christ. I do not object
to this view, for he calls him a prince of the Church, and this title seems by
no means to belong to any angels, but to be peculiar to Christ. On the whole,
the angel signifies that God did not put forth his full strength in contending
for his Church, but shews himself to be a servant to promote its safety till the
time of deliverance should arise. He afterwards adds — for the next verse
may be treated shortly, and ought to be connected with this in one
context.
CHAPTER 11
|
DANIEL
11:1
|
|
1. Also I, in the first year of Darius the
Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.
|
1. Et ego anno primo Darii medi steti in
roboratorem, et auxilium illi.
f536
|
Interpreters explain this verse in various ways. Some
think the angel fought for the Persian king, and follow up their opinion,
because he did not for the first time begin now to defend that monarchy in favor
of the chosen people, but had done so from the very beginning. Others refer this
to Michael, as the angel declares that he introduced the assistance of Michael.
But that is forced and cold. I do not hesitate to state the argument to be from
the greater to the less, and we have an instance of this in a tragedy of
Ovid’s. I have been able to preserve you; do you ask whether I can destroy
you? Thus the angel says, I have erected the Persian monarchy; I have not the
slightest doubt of my present power to restrain these kings, lest they should
pour forth their fury upon the people. The full meaning is this, the king of the
Persians is nothing, and can do nothing except through me. I was God’s
servant in transferring the monarchy of the Medes and Chaldeans to the Persians,
as well as that of the Babylonians to the Medes. God, says he, entrusted me with
that office, and so I placed Darius upon the throne. You now see how completely
I have him in my power, and how I can prevent him from injuring my people should
he be so inclined. When the angel boasts
of his standing forward to help
Darius, he claims nothing to himself,
but speaks as it were in the person of God. For angels have no power distinct
from God’s when he uses their agency and assistance. There is no reason
for any inquiry whether the angel ought to use this boastful language and claim
anything for himself. For he does not claim anything as really his own, but he
skews himself to have been an agent in the change of dynasty when Babylon was
subdued by the Medes, and the empire transferred to Darius. For although, as we
have previously shewn, Cyrus obtained the victory, yet he transferred the honors
of government to his uncle Cyaxares. The Hebrews are accustomed to consider him
as king for the first two years; Cyrus began to reign after this period; and
now, when the angel appears to Daniel, the third year had arrived, as we saw at
the beginning of the chapter.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as thou daily and
familiarly deignest to grant us the light of heavenly doctrine, that we may come
to thy school with true humility and modesty. May our docility be really
apparent; may we receive with reverence whatever proceeds from thy lips, and may
thy majesty be conspicuous among us. May we taste of that goodness which thou
dost manifest to us in thy word, and be enabled to rejoice in thee as our
Father; may we never dread thy presence, but may we enjoy the sweet testimony of
thy paternal grace and favor. May thy word be more precious to us than gold and
worldly treasures, and, meanwhile, may we feed upon its sweetness, until we
arrive all that full satiety which is laid up for us in heaven through Christ
our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFY-SIXTH
|
DANIEL
11:2
|
|
2. And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold,
there shall stand up yet Three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far
richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall
stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
|
2. Et nunc veritatem annuntio tibi: ecce adhuc
tres reges stabunt in Perside, et quartus ditabitur opibus mignis,
f537
prae omnibus et secundum fortitudinem suam, in, inquam, opibus suis,
f538
excitabit omnes contra regnum
Graecorum.
|
We must now understand God’s intention in thus
informing his servant Daniel of future events. He was clearly unwilling to
gratify a vain curiosity, and he enlarged upon events necessary to be known,
thus enabling the Prophet not only privately to rely on God’s grace,
through this manifestation of his care for his Church, but also to exhort others
to persevere in the faith. This chapter seems like a historical narrative under
the form of an enigmatic description of events then future. The angel relates
and places before his eyes occurrences yet to come to pass. We gather from this
very clearly how God spoke through his prophets; and thus Daniel, in his
prophetic character alone, is a clear proof to us of God’s peculiar favor
towards the Israelites. Here the angel discusses, not the general state of the
world, but first the Persian kingdom, then the monarchy of Alexander, and
afterwards the two kingdoms of Syria and Egypt. From this we cleverly perceive
how the whole discourse was directed to the faithful. God did not regard the
welfare of other nations, but wished to benefit his Church, and principally to
sustain the faithful under their approaching troubles. It was to assure them of
God’s never becoming forgetful of his covenant, and of his so moderating
the convulsions then taking place throughout the world, as to be ever protecting
his people by his assistance. But we shall have to repeat this again, and even
more than once, as we proceed.
First of all, the angel states,
Three kings shall yet stand up in
Persia. With respect to the clause,
Behold! I announce to you the
truth, I explained in yesterday’s
Lecture how frequently he confirmed his prophecy whenever he treated events of
the greatest importance, which seemed almost incredible.
I shall tell you the real truth;
three kings shall stand up. The Jews are not
only very ignorant of everything, but very stupid also- then they have no sense
of shame, and are endued with a perverse audacity; for they think there were
only three kings of Persia, and they neglect all history, and mingle and
confound things perfectly clear and completely distinct. There were eight kings
of Persia of whom no mention is made here. Why, then, does the angel say,
three kings should stand
up? This was the first year of Darius,
as we saw before. Hence, in their number of kings, Cyrus, the first monarch, is
included, together with his son Cambyses. When these two kings have been decided
on, a new question will arise again; for some add Smerdis to Cambyses, though he
was only an impostor; for the Magi falsely thrust him in as the son of Darius,
for the purpose of acquiring the sovereignty to themselves. Thus he was
acknowledged as king for seven months; but when the cheat was discovered he was
slain by seven of the nobles, among whom was Darius the son of Hystaspes, and
he, according to the common narrative, was created king by the consent of the
others on the neighing of his horse. The variations of interpreters might hinder
us from reading them, and so we must gather the truth from the event. For
Smerdis, as I have stated, cannot be reckoned among the kings of Persia, as he
was but an impostor. I therefore exclude him, following the prudence of others
who have considered the point with attention.
We must now observe why Daniel mentions four kings,
the fourth of
whom, he states,
should be very
rich. Cambyses succeeded Cyrus, who was
reigning when the prophecy was uttered. He was always moving about to distant
places; he scarcely allowed himself rest for a single year; he was exceedingly
desirous of glory, insatiable in his ambition, and ever stirring up new wars.
Cambyses, his son, who had slain his brother, died in Egypt, and yet added this
country to the Persian empire. Darius, the son of Hystaspes, succeeded, and
Xerxes followed him. They are deceived who think Darius, the son of Hystaspes,
is the fourth king; without doubt the Prophet meant Xerxes, who crossed the sea
with a mighty army. he led with him 900,000 men; and, however incredible this
may appear, all historians constantly affirm it. He was so puffed up with pride
that he said he came to put fetters upon the Hellespont, while his army covered
all the neighboring country. This is one point; the four kings were Cyrus,
Cambyses, Darius the son of Hystaspes, and Xerxes, omitting Smerdis. We may now
inquire why the angel limits the number to four, as the successor of Xerxes was
Artaxerxes, or Darius Longimanus, the long-handed, and some others after him.
This difficulty is solved by the following probable method, — Xerxes
destroyed the power of the Persian empire by his rashness; he escaped with the
greatest disgrace, and was scarcely saved by the baseness of his flight. He
brought away but few companions with him hastily in a small boat, and could not
obtain a single transport, although the Hellespont had been previously covered
with his ships. His whole army was almost cut to pieces, first at Thermopylee,
then at Leuctra, and afterwards at other places. From that period the Persian
empire declined, for when its warlike glory was annihilated, the people gave
themselves up to sloth and idleness, according to the testimony of Xenophon.
Some interpreters expound the phrase,
three kings stood
up, of the flourishing period of the
Persian monarchy: they take the words “stood up” emphatically, since
from that period the nation’s power began to wane. For Xerxes on his
return was hated by the whole people, first for his folly, then for his putting
his brother to death, for his disgraceful conduct towards his sister, and for
his other crimes; and as he was so loaded with infamy before his own people, he
was slain by Artabanus, who reigned seven months. As the power of Persia was
then almost entirely destroyed, or at least was beginning to decline, some
interpreters state these three kings to stand up, and then add Xerxes as the
fourth and the most opulent. But suppose we take the word “stood
up” relatively, with respect to the Church? For the angel states that
the Persian prince, Cambyses, stood before him, in an attitude of hostility and
conflict. The angel seems rather to hint
at the standing up of four kings
of Persia, for the purpose of reminding
the Jews of the serious evils and the grievous troubles which they must suffer
under their sway. In this sense I interpret the verb “to stand,”
referring it to the contests by which God harassed the Church until the death of
Xerxes. For at that period, when the power of the Persians declined, a longer
period of rest and relaxation was afforded to the people of God. This is the
reason why the angel omits and passes over in silence all the kings from
Artabanus to Darius the son of Arsaces; for Arsaces was the last king but one,
and although Ochus reigned before him, we know from profane historians how his
posterity were reduced to the lowest rank under the last Darius, whom Alexander
conquered, as we shall see by and bye. For this reason I think this to be the
genuine sense of the passage, — from Cyrus to Xerxes kings of Persia
should stand up against the Israelites, and during the whole of that period the
contests should be renewed, and the Jews would almost perish through despair
under that continued series of evils. Some say, four kings should stand forth
until all the Jews were led out; and we know this never to have been completed,
for a small portion only returned. As to my own opinion, I am unwilling to
contend with others, yet I hesitate not to enforce the angel’s wish to
exhort all the pious to endurance, for he announced
the standing up of these four
kings, who should bring upon them
various tribulations. As to the fourth king, the statement of this passage suits
Xerxes exactly. The
fourth, he says,
shall be enriched with
wealth; for the noun is of similar
meaning with the verb, as they both spring from the same root. Truly enough
Darius the son of Hystaspes determined to carry on war with Greece; he made the
attempt but without success, especially at the battle of Marathon. He was cut
off by sudden death when his treasures were prepared and many forces were
collected. He thus left the material of war for his son. Xerxes, in the
flower of his age, saw every preparation for war made ready to his hands; he
eagerly embraced the occasion, and gave no heed to sound advice. For, as
we have already stated, he destroyed himself and the whole monarchy, not by a
single slaughter only, but by four. And this power of raising an army of 900,000
men was no ordinary occurrence. If he had only carried with him across the sea
100,000 men, this would have been a large force. But his power of feeding such
large forces while he passed through so many provinces, and then of passing them
across the sea, exceeds the ordinary bounds of our belief. We are not
surprised, then, at the angel’s predicting the extreme wealth of this
king.
He adds,
In his fortitude and in his
riches he shall stir them all up against the realm of the Greeks.
This was not accomplished by Darius the son of
Hystaspes. According to my former statement, he attacked certain Grecian cities,
but without producing confusion throughout the whole East, as Xerxes his
successor did. As to the phrase, the kingdom of Javan, I willingly subscribe to
their opinion who think the word equivalent to the Greek word Ionia. For Javan
went forth in that direction, and dwelt there with his posterity in the Grecian
territory, whence almost the whole of Greece obtained its present name. The
whole Grecian nation is often called “Chittim,” and some see good
reason for their being termed “Machetae,” from Chittim the son of
Jayan, and thus by the addition of a letter we arrive at the Macedonians. For
the conjecture is probable that this people were first called Maketae, and
afterwards Macedonians. Without doubt, in this passage and in many others,
Javan. is put for the whole of Greece, since Ionia was the portion of the
country most celebrated in Judea and throughout the East generally. Xerxes
then stirred up against the realm of Javan — meaning Greece —
all the people of the East; for it is very well known how his empire spread far
and wide in every direction. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
11:3
|
|
3. And a mighty king shall stand up, that
shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
|
3. Et stabit rex fortis, et dominabitur
dominatione magna, et faciet secundum voluntatem suam.
f539
|
This refers to Alexander of Macedon. I have already
shortly stated the reason why the angel passed over all the Persian kings from
Artabanus to the last Darius, they did not engage in any contests with the Jews
up to
Xerxes.
But when Alexander invaded Asia, he struck the Jews with terror, as well as
all other nations. He came like lightning, and it is by no means surprising that
the Jews should be frightened at his arrival, because, as we formerly
expressed it, he flew with amazing swiftness. Alexander then rose up, not only
by the riches and might of his warlike preparations, but he necessarily inspired
the Jews with trepidation when they perceived their inability to resist him, and
thus he was deservedly hostile to them, because, from the very beginning, they
had despised his empire. Josephus also informs us how he was moved at the sight
of the high priest, and how he determined to mitigate his rage against the Jews.
For when he was at home, before passing over into Asia, the vision of the high
priest was offered to him, for God had sent his angel under that disguise.
f540
Alexander supposed it to be some deity; but when the high priest met him in
procession, the vision returned to his
recollection,
and he was struck as if he had seen God appearing to him from heaven.
Whatever was the object of this occurrence, Alexander clearly came into
Judea with the intention of utterly destroying the whole nation. This is the
reason why the angel carefully predicts this change.
A brave
king,
therefore, shall stand up,
and rule with extensive dominion, and do according to his
pleasure; that is, he shall succeed
as if he had all the events of the war under his own hand and according to
his own pleasure, as the event itself most fully proved. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
11:4
|
|
4. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom
shall be broken, and divided shall be divided toward the four in winds of
heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled:
for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides
those.
|
4. Et ubi constiterit, frangetur, vel, conteretur, regnum
ejus, et dividetur in quatuor ventos coelorum, hoc est, in quatuor plagas
mundi, et non posteritati ejus, et non secundum dominationem ejus, qua
dominatus fuerit: quia extirpabitur, radicitus evelletur, regnum ejus, et
aliis absque illis.
|
This language is concise, but there is no ambiguity
in the sense. First of all the angel says, After that brave king had stood up,
his empire should be broken in pieces: for when Alexander had arrived at his
height, he suddenly fell sick, and shortly afterwards died at Babylon.
Ambassadors had assembled round him from every quarter. He was quite intoxicated
by prosperity, and very probably poisoned himself. Historians, however, have
viewed him as a remarkable example of singular valor, and so they have pretended
and have related, because at least they thought so, that he was deceitfully
poisoned by Cassander. But we all know how intemperately and immoderately he
indulged in drinking; he almost buried himself in wine, and was seized with
disease amidst his cups, and sank under it, because no remedy was found for him.
This, then, was Alexander’s poison. Whichever way we understand it, he
fell suddenly, almost as soon as he began to stand. After conquering nearly the
whole East, he came to Babylon, and was uncertain in his plans as to the
employment of his forces, after he had procured peace for the whole East. He was
then anxious to transfer his armies to either Europe or Africa. The angel says,
After he had stood
up, meaning, after he had acquired the
monarchy of the whole East, his
kingdom should be broken up. He uses
this simile, because the whole power of Alexander was not so much extinguished
as broken into separate parts. We know how the twelve chiefs who were his
generals drew the spoils to themselves; every one took a portion of his kingdom,
and divided it among themselves, as we have previously stated, just as if it
were torn from their master’s body. All consented in raising his brother
Aridaeus to the dignity of king, and they called him Philip, that, while his
sons were young, the memory of his father might commend them to the world. But
four kingdoms at length issued from Alexander’s monarchy. It is
unnecessary here to refer to what we may read at our leisure in the writings of
historians.
The Prophet only touches shortly on those points
which relate to the instruction of the Church; he does not relate in order or in
detail the events narrated in history; he only says,
His empire shall be broken, and
shall be divided, says he,
towards the four winds of
heaven. The angel omits that partition
which assigned the treasure to one, and gave the office of counselor to Philip:
Perdiccas was the guardian of his son, and he with others obtained a portion of
his dominions. Seleucus obtained Syria, to whom his son Antiochus succeeded;
Antigonus became prefect of Asia Minor; Cassander, the father of Antipater,
seized the kingdom of Macedon for himself; Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, who had
been a common soldier, possessed Egypt. These are the four kingdoms of which the
angel now treats. For Egypt was situated to the south of Judea, and Syria to the
north, as we shall afterwards have occasion to observe. Macedonia came
afterwards, and then Asia Minor, both east and west. But the angel does not
enter into any complicated details, but shortly enumerates whatever was
necessary for the common instruction of the elect people. The common consent of
all writers has handed down these facts, — four kingdoms were constituted
at length out of many portions, after the chiefs had been so mutually slain by
one another that four only survived, namely, Ptolemy, Seleucus, Antigonus, and
Cassander. Afterwards the kingdom of Antiochus was extended when Antigonus was
conquered; for Antiochus added Asia Minor to the kingdom of Syria. But Antiochus
stood only for a time, and hence the angel truly and properly states this empire
to have been divided into four parts.
He next adds,
And not to his
posterity. No one could have guessed
what the angel predicted so many years before Alexander’s birth; for he
was not born till a hundred years after this period. Those who know the boldness
of his warlike schemes, the rapidity of his movements, and the success of his
measures, would never be persuaded of this result, — the complete
destruction of all his posterity, and the utter extinction of his
race.
Had Alexander lived quietly at home, he might have
married, and have become the father of children who would have been his
undisputed successors. He died young, soon after reaching the age of thirty;
still he might have married, and have had heirs to his throne. He had a brother,
Aridaeus, and other relations, among whom was his uncle Pyrrhus, king of Epirus,
and a royal offspring might thus have been preserved, and a successor prepared
for him. After he had subdued both upper and lower Asia, he became master of
Syria, Egypt, and Judea, and extended his power to the Persians, while his fame
extended over Africa and Europe. Since no one dared to raise a finger against
him, as he possessed a most magnificent army, and all his generals were bound to
him by most important benefits, and so many of his prefects were enriched by his
extreme liberality, who would have thought that all his posterity and relations
would be thus blotted out? He left; two sons, but they were slain as well as his
brother Aridaeus, while his wives and his mother, aged eighty years, shared the
same fate. Nor did Cassander spare her, for she intrigued against him. At
length, as if God would punish so many slaughters committed by Alexander, he
wished his whole posterity to be extinguished. And yet, as I have stated,
no foreign enemy was the agent in inflicting such heavy punishments. He
had subjugated the whole East, and his bearing was such, as if the whole
monarchy of that portion of the world had descended to him from his ancestors by
hereditary right. As the world contained no enemy for him, his foes sprang from
his own home; they slew his mother, his wives, his children, and all his
relatives, and utterly rooted out all his race. We observe, then, with what
clearness and certainty the angel predicts events entirely concealed from that
age, and for hundred years afterwards, and such as would never be, credited by
mankind. There seems a great contrast in the language;
his kingdom shall be broken, it
shall be divided towards the four winds of heaven, and not to his posterity;
that is, although the four kingdoms should
spring up in the four quarters of the world, yet, none of Alexander’s
posterity should remain in a single place, or obtain even the least portion of
his dominions. This was a remarkable proof of God’s wrath against the
cruelty of Alexander; not that he was savage by nature, but ambition seized upon
him, and made him bloodthirsty, and indisposed him to desire any end to his
warfare. God, therefore, avenged that grasping disposition of Alexander’s,
by allowing the whole of his race thus to perish with disgrace and horrible
cruelty. On this account that. pride of his which wished to be thought a son of
Jupiter, and which condemned to death all his friends and followers who would
not prostrate themselves before him as a god; — that pride, I say, never
could secure a single descendant to reign in his place, or even to hold a single
satrapy. Not to his
posterity, says the angel,
and not according to his
dominion.
He passes to the four kings of which he had spoken:
It Shall not break forth, he says, namely, from the four kings. he had already
stated their foreign extraction, not in any way derived from the family of that
king; for none of the four should equal his power, because his kingdom should be
expired. Here the angel seems to omit intervening events, and speaks of an
ultimate destruction. We know how the past king Perseus was conquered by the
Romans, and how the kingdom of Antiochus was partly destroyed by war, and partly
oppressed by fraud. And the angel seems to mark this. We may interpret it more
to the point, by considering the cessation of Alexander’s empire, with
reference to his own race, as if the angel had stated that none of his
successors should acquire equal power with himself. And why so? Not one of them
could accomplish it. Alexander acquired so mighty a name that all people
willingly submitted to his sway, and no single successor could sustain the
burden of the whole. Hence his kingdom, as far as it related to himself and His
posterity, was divided, and no one succeeded to his power and his
opulence. And it shall be given
to others. The angel here explains his
meaning. The destruction of the kingdom ought not to be explained particularly
of single parts, for each seized his own portion for himself, and his successors
were all strangers. And to others
besides those; meaning, his kingdom
shall be seized upon by officers who are not of his posterity; that is,
strangers shall rush into Alexander’s place, and no successor shall
arise from his own kindred. It afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:5
|
|
5. And the king of the south shall be strong,
and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his
dominion shall be a great dominion.
|
5. Et roborabitur rex austri, et ex principibus ejus, et roborabitur
adversus eum, et dominabitur: dominatio magna, dominatio ejus.
|
Here the angel begins to treat of the kings of Egypt
and of Syria. He does not mention the king of Syria yet, but will do so in the
next verse; but he begins with the king of Egypt, the neighboring monarchy to
that of Israel. He says, the king of the south, meaning, the king of Egypt,
would be brave. He next adds, and
one of his princes. Many take this in
one context; but I think the angel transfers his discourse to Antiochus the son
of Seleucus. And one of his
princes, he says, meaning, one of
Alexander’s princes, shall strengthen himself against him. For the letter
w,
vau, is taken in the sense of opposing, and implies an opposition between
Ptolemy the son of Lagus, and Antiochus king of Syria.
Hence the king of the south shall
grow strong — another of
Alexander’s chiefs shall grow strong against him, and shall have dominion.
We know how much larger and more wealthy the kingdom of Syria was than that of
Egypt, especially when Asia Minor was added to it. Without doubt, the angel was
acquainted with the future superiority of Antiochus to Ptolemy, when these two
kings are mutually compared. But the rest to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou not only
deignedst to unfold future events to thy servant Daniel, and to the pious who
waited for the advent of thine only-begotten Son, that they might be prepared
for all sufferings, and might perceive the Church to repose under thy care and
protection, but also wishedst these prophecies to profit us at this day, and to
confirm us in the same doctrine: Grant us to learn how to cast all our cares and
anxieties on thy paternal providence. May we never doubt thy oversight of the
cares of thy Church in these days, and thy protection against the fury of the
ungodly who try all means of destroying it. May we repose in peace under that
guardianship which thou hast promised us, and struggle on under the standard of
the cross; and possess our souls in patience, until at length thou shalt appear
as our Redeemer with outstretched hand, at the manifestation of thy Son, when he
returns to judge the world. — Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-SEVENTH
|
DANIEL
11:5
|
|
6. And in the end of years they shall join
themselves together; for the king’s daughter of the south shall come to
the king of the north to make all agreement: but she shall not retain the power
of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and
they that brought her, and he that beget her, and he that strengthened her in
these times.
|
6. Et in fine annorum sociabuntur,
convenient inter se, et filia regis austri veniet ad regem aquilonis ut
faciat recta: et non retinebit vires brachii, et non stabit ipse, neque semen
ejus, et dabitur ipsa, et qui adduxerit eam, et qui genuerit ipsam, et roborabit
eam temporibus illis, vel, roboraverit.
|
As to the explanation of the words, the king of the
south, we have stated to be the king of Egypt, and that of the north, of Syria.
To do right things, means to make mutual peace; he shall not retain the strength
of his arm, is, his arm shall not retain its strength; he shall not stand refers
to his father Ptolemy, or Antiochus Theos, as we shall afterwards see. And then
we must take the
w,
vau, negatively, and read, nor his seed, which some translate his arm.
She shall be delivered up, implies being given up to death, while some
understand her parent, to be her mother or her nurse. Here, then, the angel
prophesies the state of the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria; and still he has
respect to the Church of God, as we stated yesterday, which was placed in the
midst of these two nations. We must always strive to ascertain the intention of
the Holy Spirit. He wished to support the pious under those convulsions by which
they would be agitated and afflicted. Their confidence might have been utterly
subverted unless they had been persuaded that nothing happens at random, since
all these events were proclaimed beforehand. Again, God had sent his angel to
Daniel, which proved both his power and his determination to defend his Church,
and he would accomplish this, because he wished the faithful admonished
beforehand neither rashly nor yet without profit. But we must first relate the
history — the angel says,
At the end of the times two kings
should enter into covenant and friendship.
He had announced the superiority of the king of Syria; for when Antigonus
was conquered, and his son was dead, Seleucus the first king of Syria far
surpassed Ptolemy in his power and the magnitude of his dominion. But a mutual
rivalry arose between them, and there were some slight skirmishes on both sides,
till the condition of Ptolemy became weakened, and then Seleucus rushed
tumultuously, with the ferocity of a robber rather than the magnanimity of a
king. After they had continued the contest for some time, Berenice the daughter
of the second Ptolemy, named Philadelphus, was given in marriage to Antiochus
Theos. She is also called Beronice and Bernice. He was so blinded with pride, as
to take the name of Theos, which means God; he was the third of that name, the
former king being called Soter, meaning preserver For, as Seleueus had acquired
so many and such mighty possessions, his sons did not consider their authority
fully established, and so they assumed these magnificent titles for the sake of
inspiring all nations with the terror of their frame. Hence the first Antiochus
was called Sorer, and the second Theos. Now the second Ptolemy, named
Philadelphus, gave his daughter in marriage to Antiochus Theos. By this bond
peace and friendship were established between them, just as at Rome, Pompey
married Julia the daughter of Caesar. And we daily observe similar occurrences,
for when one king has in his power a daughter, or niece, or other relatives,
another king finds himself possessed of male and female relations, by whose
intermarriage they confirm a treaty of peace. It was so in this case, although
historians attribute some degree of craft to Philadelphus in bestowing his
daughter on Antiochus Theos. He supposed this to be a means by which he might
ultimately acquire the dominion over all Syria, and over the other provinces
under the sway of Antiochus. Whether this really was so or not, profane
historians prove the fulfillment of the angel’s prediction. Without the
slightest doubt, God, in his wonderful counsels, dictated to these historians
what we read at the present time, and made them witnesses of his own truth. This
thought, indeed, never entered their minds, but when God governs the minds and
tongues of men, he wishes to establish clear and convincing testimony to this
prophecy, for the purpose of shewing the real prediction of every occurrence.
At the end of the
years, says he,
they shall become
united.
He next states,
And the daughter of the king of
the south, meaning Bernice, whom we have
mentioned, shall come to the king
of the north, meaning the king of Syria,
Antiochus Theos. This alliance was contracted in defiance of justice. For
Antiochus repudiated his wife Laodice, who was the mother of two sons whom she
had born to Antiochus; namely, Seleucus Callinicus, and Antiochus the younger,
named Hierax, a hawk, on account of his rapacity. We perceive, then, how he
contracted a second marriage, after an unjust and illegal divorce of his first
wife. Hence it is not surprising if this alliance was cursed by the Almighty. It
turned out unhappily for both the kings of Egypt and Syria. Ptolemy ought not to
have thrust his daughter upon Antiochus, who was already married, nor yet to
have allowed her to become a second wife, while the king’s real wife was
divorced. We perceive, then, how God became the avenger of these crimes, while
the plans of Antiochus and Philadelphus turned out in. Some think that Antiochus
was fraudulently poisoned by his first wife, but as the point is doubtful, I
pronounce no opinion. Whether it was so or not, Antiochus had a son by Bernice,
and died immediately after being reconciled to his former wife. Some historians
state, that after she had recovered her dignity and rank as queen, having once
experienced her husband’s fickleness and perfidy, she took sure means of
preventing another repudiation. When Antiochus was dead, this woman was enflamed
with vengeance, and in the perverseness of her disposition, she impelled her son
to murder her rival, especially stimulating Seleucus Callinicus who succeeded to
his father’s throne. Hierax was then prefect of Asia Minor; hence she
stimulated her son with fury to murder her rival. For, although Antiochus Theos
had been reconciled to her, yet some degree of rank and honor still attached to
Bernice the daughter of Ptolemy. And her son perpetrated this murder with the
greatest willingness, and with the basest cruelty and perfidy; for he persuaded
her to entrust herself to his care, and then he murdered both her and her
son.
The angel now says,
When the daughter of the king of
the south shall come to the king of the north, his arm shall not retain his
strength. The language is metaphorical,
as that marriage was line a common arm to both sides; for the king of Egypt
stretched forth his hand to the king of Syria for mutual protection.
That
arm, then,
did not retain its
strength; for Bernice was most wickedly
slain by her stepson, Seleucus Callinicus, as we have stated. He says, also,
she should come to make
alliances. Here, by way of concession,
the angel calls that conjugal bond
µydçym,
misrim, “rectitudines,” “conditions
of agreement,” because at first all parties thought, it would tend to
that result. But. Antiochus had already violated his marriage vow, and departed
from his lawful alliance. Nothing, therefore, was right on his side. Without the
slightest doubt he derived some advantage from the plan, as kings are always in
the habit of doing. And with respect to Ptolemy, many historians, as we have
already mentioned, suppose him to have longed for the kingdom of Syria. Whether
or not this was so, their mutual transactions were not sincere, and so the word
signifying “rectitude” is used, as we have said, only by concession.
The angel does not speak in their praise, or excuse the, perfidy of either, but
he rather enlarges upon their crime, and from this we gather how they abused the
sanctity both of marriage and of treaties, which God wished to be held sacred by
all mankind. Hence, though the word is honor-able in itself, yet it is used in a
disgraceful sense, to shew us how the angel condemned King Ptolemy for this base
prostitution of his daughter, and Antiochus for rejecting his wife, and marrying
another who was not a real wife, but only a concubine. And, perhaps, God wished
to use the lips of his angel to point out the tendency of all royal treaties.
They always have the most specious appearances — national, quiet public
peace, and similar objects which can be dexterously made prominent. For kings
always court favor and praise for themselves from the foolish vulgar, whenever
they make treaties of peace. Thus all these alliances have no other
tendency than to produce social deception, and at length they degenerate
into mutual perfidy, when one party plots insidiously and wickedly against
another.
The angel adds next,
He shall not
stand; using the masculine gender, and
most probably referring to Antiochus, as well as to Ptolemy his father-in-law.
Neither he nor his seed shall
stand, meaning his son by Bernice the
daughter of Ptolemy. I dare not translate it “arm,”
because in my opinion the letter
w,
vau, is needed in the word for “arm;” so I take it to denote
“seed.” He afterwards
adds, And she shall be delivered
up — thus returning to Berenice —
either by treachery or to death; and
those who led her
forth — meaning her companions.
Whenever any incestuous marriage is contracted, some persons of disgraceful
character are sure to be concerned in bringing his new wife to the king. And
very probably there were factions in the palace of Antiochus; one party being
more attached to Seleucus and his brother, and his mother Laodice; while others
desired a change of government, according to the usual state of affairs. The
advisers of the marriage between Antiochus and Bernice were sent as a guard of
honor to attend them to Syria, and the angel states all these to have been
delivered up together with the queen. He afterwards adds,
And those who were her
parents. From the absence of a
grammatical point under the letter
h,
he, many think the noun to be of the feminine gender. And as it may mean
mother, they treat it as if her nurse was intended, but I leave the question in
doubt. He now adds, and those who
strengthened her at those times. He,
doubtless, intends to designate all those who wished to curry favor with the
king, and thus took part in this marriage between him and the daughter of the
king of Egypt. The whole of that faction perished, when Berenice was slain by
Seleucus Callinicus. If, then, he did not spare his stepmother, much less would
he spare the faction by which he was deprived of his hope of the kingdom, and
through whom his mother Laodice had suffered the disgrace of a divorce. It now
follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:7
|
|
7. But out of a branch of her roots shall
one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall
enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them,
and shall prevail.
|
7. Et stabit ex germine, vel, surculo,
radicum ejus, nempe Berenice,
f541
in gradu suo,
f542
et veniet cum exercitu,
f543
et veniet in munitionem regis Aquilonis, et faciet in illis,
f544
et praevalebit.
|
The angel treats here of Ptolemy Euergetes, the third
king of Egypt, who succeeded his father Philadelphus. He collected large forces
to revenge the insult offered to his sister, and thus carried on the war with
Seleucus Callinicus, who had become king after his father’s death. The
angel, therefore, now touches shortly on this war, by saying,
There shall stand up a shoot from
the root of that queen. Very possibly he
was younger than his sister Berenice. He says,
He shall stand in his own
degree, meaning, in the royal rank. The
interpretation of those who translate, He shall stand in his father’s
rank, is forced. What is it then?
He shall stand in his own
rank; that is, he shall arrive at his
own rank by hereditary right. Although, therefore, at first all thought the
death of Berenice would be unrevenged through her father being dead, here the
angel announces that her brother should be like a branch, and become the avenger
of this great wickedness. He
shall stand, then, in his rank,
meaning, he shall arrive at the royal throne,
from
the
branch
or germ of her
root, namely, Berenice.
He shall come with an army
against Callinicus. Profane writers bear
witness to this. And he shall
come even to the fortification of the king of the
north. He entered Syria, and caused so
great a terror that many fortified cities surrendered themselves to him. During
this war he drew to himself many cities which seemed impregnable; whence it is
not surprising to find the angel stating his arrival at the fortifications. Some
translate it “dwelling-place,” but without reason, and
thus injure the Prophet’s meaning.
He shall come unto the very
fortification, meaning, he shall arrive
in Syria, and shall posses many fortified cities.
He next adds,
And he shall work on
them, meaning, he shall prosper; for
this word when used without any addition, implies in Hebrew performing great
exploits. He shall
proceed and acquire power over the
greater part of Syria, and shall
prevail. By this last word he explains
how superior he should be to Callinicus. For this king sent for his younger
brother whose fidelity he suspected, and thought it the safest course to treat
with his enemy. But young Hierax, the hawk, determined to use that expedition to
his own advantage. He was not content with his own province of Asia Minor, but
he anticipated being his father’s sole heir, especially as he had hired
some troops from Gaul, who had invaded Asia Minor, Bithynia, and other
provinces. He was greatly puffed up, and betrayed his own covetousness. Seleucus
Callinicus preferred making peace with his enemy to fostering his
brother’s resources. At length Hierax more and more developed the
perversity of his mind. For he openly declared war against his brother, to whose
assistance he pretended to have come, after having been sent for according to
agreement. His brother Seleucus had promised him a portion of Asia as far as
Mount Taurus; and when he saw himself the victim of his impious and disgraceful
snares, he openly waged war with his brother. But he was conquered at length,
and thus received the reward of his impiety. Thus Ptolemy Euergetes prevailed,
while he departed from Syria after spoiling his enemy, according to what follows
—
|
DANIEL
11:8
|
|
8. And shall also carry captives into Egypt
their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of silver
and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the
north.
|
8. Atque etiam deos ipsorum cum conflatibus
ipsorum, et cum vasis pretiosis ipsorum,
f545
auri et argenti in captivatem ducent in AEgyptum,
f546
et ipse pluribus annis stabit quam rex aquilonis.
|
The angel explains more fully what he had already
stated briefly, namely, Ptolemy should be the conqueror, and spoil the whole of
Syria almost according to his pleasure. Profane writers also shew us the great
number of images which were taken away, and how Egypt recovered its gods of
silver and gold which it had lost a long time ago. Thus the event proved the
truth of the angel’s prophecy. The particle
µg
gem, is interposed for the sake of amplifying the subject, to inform us of
the unequal condition of the peace, and how Ptolemy exercised the rights of a
conqueror in spoiling the whole of Syria according to his lust. It is added,
He shall stand for more years
than the king of the north. Some restrict this
to the duration of the life of each king, and others extend it farther.
Probably the angel speaks of Ptolemy Euergetes, who reigned forty-six years. As
God extended his life so long, we are not surprised at the angel’s saying
it should last longer than the king of Syria’s. This explanation is
applicable to the present case, for if he had died before, Callinicus might have
recovered the effects of the war; but as Ptolemy survived, he dared not attempt
any-thing, being assured of the utter fruitlessness of any effort against the
king who had vanquished him. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
11:9
|
|
9. So the king of the south shall come into
His kingdom, and shall return into his own land.
|
9. Et veniet in rename rex austri, et redibit
in terram suam.
|
This clause belongs to the former verse; as if he had
said, Ptolemy shall return by a peaceful march after this hostile invasion of
Syria. For he might have some fears lest his enemy should not be completely
prostrated. But as he departed as conqueror, the angel announces his safe
arrival in his own land. The words “come” and “return”
are used emphatically, implying the absence of all harass, fear, and danger.
f547
He returned to his kingdom and his own land, since he could not trust to the
quietness of the enemies whom he had laid prostrate. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
11:10-11
|
|
10. But his sons shall be stirred up, and
shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall certainly come, and
overflow, and pass through; then shall he return, and be stirred up, even
to his fortress.
|
10. Et filii ejus provocabuntur, et congregabunt multitudinem
copiarum magnarum: et veniendo veniet, inundabit et transibit: revertetur et
incitabitur usque ad munitionem ejus.
|
|
11. And the king of the south shall be moved
with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king
of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall
be given into his hand.
|
11. Tum exacerbabitur rex austri, et egressus
pugnabit adversus eum, adversus regem aquilonis, et stare faciet,
statuet, multitudinem magnam, tradeturque multitudo illa in manum
ejus.
|
Here the angel passes to the third war, namely, that
which the son of Callinicus stirred up against Ptolemy Philopator. After the
death of Euergetes, the two sons of Callinicus united their forces, and
endeavored to recover Syria, and especially that part of it of which they had
been deprived. When they were already on their expedition, and their forces were
on their march, the elder Seleucus died, and his surviving brother was
Antiochus, called the Great. Ptolemy, called Philopator, which means a lover of
his father, was then alive. He was so called in consequence of the parricide of
which he was guilty, having put to death both parents, together with his
brother. The word is used by way of ridicule, and a sense the opposite to that
expressed is implied by this epithet, which is honorable in itself, and
expresses the virtue of filial piety. But he slew his father, mother, and
brother, and on account of all these impious murders, the name of Philopator was
applied to him as a mark of disgrace. As, therefore, he was so thoroughly hated
by his own people, the sons of Callinicus, namely, Seleucus Ceraunus the elder,
and Antiochus the Great, thought the time had arrived for the recovery of the
lost cities of Syria. For he was detested and despised in consequence of his
numerous crimes. They therefore anticipated little trouble in recovering their
possessions, when their enemy was thus branded with infamy, and had many
domestic foes. This is the reason why the angel says of the sons of Callinicus,
They shall be provoked, and shall
lead a multitude of great armies; it may
mean “great forces,” as some historians relate the collection of two
very strong armies. Unless I am mistaken, Antiochus the Great had 70,000 foot
and 5000 horse. Ptolemy excelled in cavalry as he had 6000 horse but only 62,000
foot, as Polybius informs us in his fifth book.
f548
They were nearly equal in forces, but the confidence of the two sons of
Callinicus, of whom alone the angel now speaks, was increased when they beheld
their wicked enemy so greatly detested in consequence of his parricide.
He afterwards says, He shall come. He changes the number, since the elder
brother, being the eldest son of Callinicus, namely, Seleucus Ceraunus, died
while they were preparing for the war, and they say he was slain by his
attendants in passing through Asia Minor. Whether this was so or not, all
historians unite in stating that Antiochus the Great alone carried on the war
with Philopator. He shall
come
so as to overflow and pass
through. He recovered that part of Syria
which he had lost, and when he approached Egypt, then Philopator met him.
Profane historians state him to have been a coward, and never to have obtained
power by open bravery, but by fear alone. He was too late in preparing
his forces for resisting his enemy.
This is the reason why the angel says,
The king of
Syria, or of the north,
should come, even to the
citadels, or fortifications; for at
length Philopator roused himself from slumber, for he never put on his arms to
repel an enemy except when compelled by the direst necessity. Hence he adds,
The king of the south shall be
irritated, or exasperated. He uses the
word “exasperated,” because, as I have just said, he would never
have opposed himself to his enemy Antiochus except lie had perceived his own
kingdom placed in great jeopardy. He might have taken patiently the loss of
Syria, so long as Egypt had been safe; but when his life and all his possessions
were in danger, he became sufficiently exasperated to attack his foe; and yet he
prevailed, as we shall afterwards see. I cannot complete this subject to-day,
and so I shall draw to a close. Philopator became victorious, and yet he was so
sluggish that he distrusted his friends and foes alike, and was forced by this
very fear to make peace with his enemy, although he was really the conqueror.
Not only could he have driven back his enemy whom he had vanquished, but
he might have taken possession of his territories; but he did not dare to do
this. he was conscious of being a parricide, and knew to his cost how hateful
his name was among all men. Hence, although superior in strength, and
actually the conqueror of his enemy in battle, he dared not proceed further. But
we will explain the remainder another time.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as thou hast
deigned to set before our eyes as in a glass that peculiar providence of thine
by which thou defendest thy Church: Grant, that being confirmed by these
examples, we may learn to repose entirely upon thee. Amidst the numerous
disturbances by which the world is at this time agitated, may we remain quiet
under thy protection. May we so commit our safety to thee as never to hesitate,
whatever may happen, as to our future safety and security. Whatever we may
suffer, may it all issue in our salvation, while we are protected by thy hand;
thus will we call upon thy name with sincerity of mind, and thou wilt in return
shew thyself as our Father in thine only-begotten Son. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-EIGHTH
In our last Lecture we explained why the angel
mentions the exasperation of King Ptolemy. Unless he had been dragged into the
war, his disposition was so sluggish that he would have suffered many cities to
be wrested from him, and he would never have been moved by either the disgrace
or the loss. But at length he took up arms, on seeing with what a stern and bold
enemy he had to deal. he afterwards adds,
He shall go out to battle against
the king of the North, meaning Antiochus
king of Syria. And he shall set
in array a large multitude. This may be
referred to either of them, for Antiochus then brought into the field a large
army; he had 5000 horse and 70,000 foot. Ptolemy was superior in his cavalry,
which amounted to 6000 men. This clause will suit the case of Antiochus.
He shall bring into the field a
great multitude, and the multitude shall be given into his
hand, meaning Ptolemy’s. The
context seems thus to flow on more easily: yet if any one prefers considering it
as applicable to Ptolemy himself, I will not contend the point. It is not of
much consequence, because the angel simply pronounces the superiority of Ptolemy
in this battle, in which he conquered Antiochus the Great. Besides, we must
notice, that he was not the conqueror by his own industry, or valor, or counsel,
or military skill; but because the Lord, who regulates the events of battles,
wished at that time to subdue the pride of Antiochus the Great. It now follows,
—
|
DANIEL
11:12
|
|
12. And when he hath taken away the
multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten
thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it.
|
12. Et tolletur multitudo illa, hoc est,
sese attollet, et elevabitur cor ejus, et dejiciet myriades, hoc est,
magnas copias, et non roborabitur.
|
The angel here marks the close of the war. Had
Ptolemy’s valor seconded his good fortune, he might easily have seized
upon the whole kingdom of Syria, as profane historians report. But he was so
given up to his own lusts, that he willingly entered into treaty with his enemy.
On his return to his kingdom he slew his wife Eurydice, and was guilty of other
enormities; he suffered a wicked woman, the sister of Agathocles, a victim of
his passions, to rule over his kingdom, and lastly, he became a very foul
example of a very cruel and degraded man. Therefore, the angel says at the
beginning, his army should raise
him aloft; his heart should be elevated,
in consequence of his prosperity. He not only caused terror to Antiochus,
but through all the neighboring regions. Where he might have drawn to himself
the whole power of the East, he then declined in his course. He subdued, indeed,
a hostile army, and in this exploit he was in no slight degree assisted by his
sister Arsinoe, as historians relate, but yet after great slaughters he did not
retain his position. And what was the obstacle? His idleness and drunkenness,
and his caring for nothing but banquets and debaucheries, and the most obscene
pleasures. This caused his fall, after he had been raised even to the clouds by
his victories. It afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:13-14
|
|
13. For the king of the north shall return,
and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, shall certainly come
after certain years with a great army, and with much riches.
|
13. Et redibit rex aquilonis, rex Syriae, et statuet
multitudinem magnam praeut antea, f549
et circiter finem f550 temporum annorum,
ad verbum, veniendo veniet cum exercitu magno, et cum opibus magnis.
f551
|
|
14. And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of
the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish
the vision; but they shall fall.
|
14. Et temporibus illis multi stabunt contra
regem AEgypti, et filii dissipatores populi tui sese attollent, ad stabiliendam
visionem, et corruent.
|
Here the angel prophesies of other wars. For he first
describes the war which was carried on by Antiochus against the Egyptians, after
the death of Philopater, who left as his heir, a little son named Ptolemy
Epiphanes. When, therefore, he perceived the land deprived of its king, he drew
up an army and invaded Egypt. As the Egyptians had no strength to resist him, an
embassy was sent to Rome; and we know how eager the Romans were to become
involved in all the business of the world. With the view of extending their
empire still further and wider, they sent immediately to Antiochus the Great,
and commanded him to desist from the war; but after many trials he failed of
success, until he engaged in a very desperate battle with Scopas, and at length
obtained a victory. In the meantime, the Egyptians were far from idle: although
they hoped to be able to subdue the empire of Antiochus by the assistance of the
Senate, yet they carefully fitted out an armament of their own under their
General Scopas, who was successful in many of his plans, but was finally
defeated in the borders of Judea. The angel now describes this war.
The king of Syria shall
return, he says; meaning, after the
death of Ptolemy Philopator, he rested for a while, because he had been
unsuccessful with his forces, and they were so entirely disorganized that he had
no confidence in the success of any expedition. But he thought Egypt would give
him no trouble, as it had lost its head and was like a lifeless corpse. Then he
was elevated with fresh confidence, and returned to Egypt.
And he shall arrange a greater
multitude than at the first. He had a
large and powerful army, as we have said, and a noble armament of cavalry: he
had 70,000 foot, and was still collecting greater forces. The angel signifies
the future arrival of the king of Syria, after the interval of a certain time.
At the end of the times of the
years he shall surely come, that is he
shall break forth. The angel seems to use this expression for the sake of
increasing its certainty; for he at first despised the Romans in consequence of
their great distance from him, and he had no fear of what afterwards occurred.
He never supposed they had such boldness in them as to cross the sea against
him.
He afterwards
adds, And in those times many
shall stand against the king of the South,
or Egypt. The angel hints, that Antiochus the Great would not be his only
enemy; and historians inform us of his treaty and alliance with Philip king of
Macedon, for carrying on this war. Without doubt, the two kings stirred up the
whole of Asia Minor, and they were so unitedly powerful, that many were excited
to take part with them. It seemed to be all over with the kingdom of Egypt, and
thus the angel says, many should
stand up against the king of the South.
He adds, and his sons
dissipation. The Hebrews call
“robbers”
µyxyrp
pheritzim. The root of this word is
≈rp,
pheretz, which signifies to break or dissipate, and sometimes to destroy.
Without doubt, the angel here uses the word to imply factious men, for the
people had no other chance of standing, except by remaining quiet and united.
The word then applies to those who violated that unity; for when any one
attached himself to foreign monarchs, Judea became exposed as a prey to either
the Syrians or Egyptians. Some interpreters apply this passage to the younger
Onias, who seized on Heliopolis, and drew some exiles with him, and there built
a temple, as we learn from Josephus and the Book of Maccabees. For he pretended
to have the prophecy in Isaiah 19, on his side, where it is said, And there
shall be an altar to God in the midst of Egypt,
(<231919>Isaiah
19:19.) Without doubt, the Prophet here predicts the enlargement of God’s
kingdom through the propagation of his religion throughout the whole world. As
Egypt was to the last degree devoted to idolatry, Isaiah here shews how the pure
and perfect worship of God should prevail in Egypt. As if he had said, Even the
Egyptians who have, hitherto endeavored to abolish true and sincere piety, shall
be added to God’s people, and shall worship him acceptably. We know the
Prophet to be here treating figuratively of the spiritual reign of Christ, and
to be always bringing forward the shadows of his own time. By the word
“altar” he simply means the worship of God. That impostor, Onias,
when he erected his profane temple and polluted the sacred altar, boasted in his
fulfillment of this prophecy of Isaiah.
This then is the meaning of the passage.
The sons — dissipaters of
thy people — shall exalt themselves to establish the
vision; that is, under a fallacious
pretext of fulfilling Isaiah’s prediction,
and yet they shall
fall. It may also have all indefinite
meaning, as if the angel declared that; these multitudes should not come forth
unless by God’s secret counsel. We know how much this thought tends to
lighten the sorrow of the pious, and how much consolation it brings, when we
recognize all the tumults of the world as springing from the fixed counsel of
God. Nothing then appears to happen at random, but mortals are agitated because
God desires to inflict his punishments upon them, and the Church is often shaken
because God wishes to prove and examine the patience of his people. We may,
therefore, take this prophecy absolutely; as if the angel had said. These
apostates and dissipaters never proposed to fulfill this prophecy of
Isaiah’s, and yet there was nothing confused, or out of order in all these
events, as God was fulfilling what he had testified by his own Prophets.
Wherefore we may receive this prediction simply, just as we do other similar
ones scattered throughout the prophets. We have already heard how the Prophet
was forewarned of the many distresses of the Church, on purpose to lead the
faithful to acquiesce in the providence of God, when they saw things so
disturbed throughout the world. It afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:15
|
|
15. So the king of the north shall come, and
cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities; and the arms of the south
shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any
strength to withstand.
|
15. Et veniet rex aquilonis et fundet aggerem,
F552
et capiet urbem munitionum; et brachia austri, hoc est, AEgypti,
non stabunt, neque populus electorum ejus, neque virtus erit ad
standum.
|
The angel follows up the same sentiment. He says,
When Antiochus the Great shall burst forth, there shall be no valor in the
Egyptians to resist him, for he shall take a fortified city. There is a change
of number here, for he means fortified cities. For he should recover the cities
which he had formerly lost, and should arrive at the city Raphia in Egypt. The
explanation follows, The arms of
Egypt shall not stand, nor the people of its
levies. This relates to Scopas, who was
sent forth with large forces: at first he prospered, but he was afterwards
vanquished in the conflict, and had no courage to persevere in resistance. It
afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:16
|
|
16. But he that cometh against him shall do
according to his own will, and none shall stand before him; and he shall stand
in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.
|
16. Et faciet veniens ad eum pro beneplacito suo, hoc est, pro
suo libidine, et nullus stabit coram facie ejus, et stabit in terra
desiderabili, et consumetur, alii nomen esse volunt, consumptio, in manu
ejus.
|
The angel proceeds with the same discourse. He says,
Antiochus the Great should accomplish his wishes, and should spread the terror
of his arms in every direction, and thus no one would dare to oppose him.
He shall
do therefore
according to his
will, he says,
and none shall stand before his
face; and he shall stand in the desirable
land; meaning, he shall bring his
victorious army into Judea, and
there shall be a great consumption under his
hand, or Judea shall be consumed and
ruined under his hand. We originally stated, that the angel’s mission did
not authorize him to great these events as military exploits are usually
narrated by historians. Enough is revealed to lead the faithful to acknowledge
God’s continual regard for their safety. Experience also assures us of
every occurrence being divinely foreseen, and thus they would acknowledge how
everything tended to promote their welfare. God’s predictions of future
events were never in vain, and the angel now declares the future coming of
Antiochus to the desirable
land. We have previously given the
reason for the use of this epithet as applied to Judea, — not
through any natural excellence over other lands, but because God had chosen
it for himself as his seat and dwelling-place. The excellence of this
land depended entirely on the gratuitous beneficence of God. It might
seem inconsistent to grant such license to an impious tyrant and robber, and to
allow him to overrun Judea, which God had marked out with peculiar honor, in
adopting it as his dwelling-place, and calling it his residence. (Psalm 132:14.)
But we know that the Church, while on its pilgrimage in this world, enjoys no
freedom from many infliction’s; for it is profitable for the sons of God
to be humbled under the cross, lest they should grow restive in the world, and
give themselves up to luxuries, and sleep upon the desires of the flesh. The
angel, indeed, omits the reason why God suffered Antiochus thus cruelly to
oppress the sacred land; but the faithful had been taught by the Law and the
Prophets how the Church was subject to various tribulations. It is sufficient,
then, to relate the event with simplicity:
and the pleasant land shall be
consumed under his hand, or there shall
be a consumption. It matters but little which way we read it as far as the sense
is concerned. The angel here encourages Daniel and all others to the
exercise of patience, lest they should faint under this divine scourge; for he
permitted Antiochus to wander about like a robber, and to exercise severe
tyranny and cruelty against the Jews. I need not discuss these events at
greater length, as they are found in the Books of the Maccabees. I will
only touch on one point briefly; Antiochus did not of his own accord harass the
Jews by leading his army into their country, but he was stirred up by
impious priests. So great was their perfidy and barbarity that they willingly
betrayed God’s Temple, and exposed their nation to the most distressing
calamities. That was a severe trial: hence God consulted the interests of his
own worshippers by predicting events which might weaken their confidence and
cause them to indulge in despair. It follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:17
|
|
17. He shall also set his face to enter with
the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do:
and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her; but she shall not
stand on his side, neither be for him.
|
17. Et ponet faciem suam
f553 ad veniendum cum potentia totius
regni, et rectitudines cum eo: f554 et
faciet, et filiam mulierum dabit illi ad perdendum eam, sed non stabit ipsa, et
non erit ipsa ei. f555
|
He here describes the second war of Antiochus against
Epiphanes, who was then growing old; and so he gave, him his daughter Cleopatra
in marriage, hoping in this way, by subtle contrivances, to subdue the kingdom
of Egypt. For he thought his daughter would remain faithful to his interests;
but she rather preserved her conjugal fidelity to her husband, and hesitated not
to espouse her husband’s quarrel against her father. She faithfully
adhered to her husband’s interests according to her duty, and never
listened to the cunning designs of Antiochus. Thus he was deprived of his
expectation, and his daughter never became the means of his acquiring authority
over Egypt. Before this marriage of his daughter with Ptolemy, he had tried the
effect of war, bug in this he failed; and when he perceived the interposition of
the Romans, he desisted from future hostilities, and consoled himself with the
thought which we have already expressed, of receiving immediate assistance
against Egypt through his daughter.
He
turns, therefore,
to come with the power of his
whole kingdom; meaning, he collects all
his forces to overwhelm Ptolemy Epiphanes, who was then but a young man, and had
neither obtained any great authority, nor arrived at sound wisdom and
discretion. When he perceived his want of success in the fortune of war,
he gave him the daughter of
women, referring to her beauty. This is
the explanation of interpreters, who suppose the phrase to imply her remarkable
beauty.
As to the next clause, those who translate it,
and the upright with
him, think the Jews are intended,
for Antiochus had received them in surrender, and there were many who
openly espoused his cause. They think the Jews so called as a mark of
honor, and as upright with respect to the worship of God. But This appears to me
too forced. I hesitate not to suppose the angel to signify the superior
character of the agreement between Antiochus and Ptolemy, when the former found
the impossibility of obtaining his adversary’s kingdom by open warfare.
Although the Romans had not yet sent forth any armament, yet Antiochus began to
fear them, and he preferred the use of cunning in providing for his own
interests. Besides this, as we lately mentioned, he was longing for other booty,
for he immediately transferred the war into Greece, as the angel will inform us.
But he first announces, his
giving away his daughter to destroy her.
He here reproves the artifice of Antiochus the Great, in thus basely selling
his (laughter, as if she were a harlot. As far as he possibly could, he induced
her to slay her husband either by poison or by other devices. Hence,
he gave up his daughter to
destroy her, but she did not stand by him, and was not for him;
meaning, she did not assent to her
father’s impious desires, and was unwilling to favor such monstrous
wickedness. We read in profane writers the fulfillment of these predictions of
the angel, and thus it more clearly appears how God placed before the eyes of
the pious, a mirror in which they might behold his providence in ruling and
preserving his Church. It now follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:18
|
|
18. After this shall he turn his face unto the
isles, and shall take many: but a prince for his own behalf’ shall cause
the reproach by him to cease; without his own reproach he shall cause it
to turn.
|
18. Et vertet faciem suam ad insulas, et capiet multas, et quiescere
faciet, hoc est, retorquebit, princeps opprobrium ejus apud ipsum. Ideo
non torquebit opprobrium suum in ipsum.
|
There is some obscurity in these words, but the
history will afterwards determine the angel’s meaning. First, as to the
word “islands,” he doubtless means Asia Minor and the maritime
coasts; also Greece, Cyprus, and all the islands of the Mediterranean Sea. It
was a Jewish custom to call all places beyond the sea “islands,” as
they were not very well skilled in navigation. Therefore he says,
He will turn his face to the
islands; that is, he shall turn to the
opposite regions of the world. The Mediterranean Sea is known to be between
Syria and Asia Minor; Cilicia, too, is between them, which was also under the
dominion of Antiochus, although the seed of his power was Syria. Hence he calls
Asia Minor, and Greece, and the Mediterranean islands, all “isles,”
with respect to Syria and Judea. This occurred when the AEtolians renewed
the war after the defeat of Philip. The Romans were the originators of this war
in Greece, and they had the honorable pretext of liberating the whole of Greece
after Philip of Macedon had seized upon many cities most skillfully fortified.
But the Etolians were proud and puffed up with the desire of superiority, as the
event ultimately proved. They boasted themselves to be the liberators of
Greece; they used the help of the Romans, but professed to be the
principal leaders in the war, and when they saw Chalcis and other cities held by
the Romans, the spirit of envy took possession of them. Titus Flaminius withdrew
his garrisons from their cities, but yet the AEtolians were not
satisfied; for they wished for the sole pre-eminence and the entire departure of
the Romans. With this view they sent their ambassadors to Nabis the tyrant of
the Lacedaemonians, to king Philip, and also to Antiochus. Thoas was the
principal author of this contention, for after stirring up the neighboring
nations, he set out himself to Antiochus. When the AEtolians were
puffed up by the large promises which he brought back, they expected to produce
peace throughout Greece without the slightest trouble. Meanwhile Antiochus only
advanced as far as Asia Minor with but a small force. He led Hannibal with him,
whose fame alone inspired the Romans with dread; and had he taken his advice, he
would certainly have had no difficulty in expelling the Romans. But the
flatterers of His court did not allow Hannibal’s advice to prevail with
this foolish king. Then Villius also cunningly rendered Antiochus suspicious of
his advice: for he had been sent as ambassador into Asia Minor, had insinuated
himself into his favor, and had acquired his friendship, and was so engaged in
daily conference with him, that Antiochus suspected the fidelity of
Hannibal to his interests. Hence he carried on that war entirely without method,
or plan, or perseverance. When he arrived at Chalcis, he was smitten with the
passion for a damsel there, and celebrated a foolish marriage with her, as if he
had been completely at peace. Thus he had citizen of Chalcis for his
father-in-law, while he was mighty monarch, unequaled by any throughout the
world. Although he conducted himself thus he considerately, yet the celebrity of
his fame rather than his personal exertions, enabled him at first to take many
cities, not only in Asia Minor and on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, but
also in Greece itself. He recovered Chalcis and other cities which had been
seized upon by the Romans. The angel relates this as if the event had already
occurred, and yet we are aware of them all being as yet future.
He will turn his face to the
islands, and will take many, and a general shall cause him to cease, and shall
turn his reproach against himself.
Antiochus often fought against the Romans, and always without success,
although he sometimes thought himself superior; but from the time when Attilius
the prefect of the fleet intercepted his supplies, and thus stopped his
progress, M. Acilius the consul began to gain the mastery by land, and his power
became gradually more and more enfeebled. When conquered in a naval engagement
by Livius the praetor, he suffered a severe loss, and then when too late he
acknowledged his error in not obeying the counsels of Hannibal; but he had lost
the opportunity of renewing the war. Hence the angel here says,
A leader should make his reproach
return upon himself. This signifies how
Antiochus should be puffed up with foolish pride, and how his insane boastings
should rebound upon his own head, as he had vomited them forth with open mouth
against the Romans. When he speaks here
of his
disgrace, I interpret it actively, as
making his reproach remain; for the word
tprj
cherepheth, means reproach, but there are two ways of interpreting it,
actively and passively. But as I have already said, the angel more probably
speaks of his foolish boasting, for he had despised the Romans with contempt and
insult. We know how foolishly he insulted them by his ambassadors among all the
assemblies of Greece. A leader, then, either Acilius or Lucius Scipio,
who drove him beyond Mount Taurus,
made his disgrace rest upon
himself, and he shall not turn away his own
disgrace; that is, Antiochus vomited
forth his reproaches against the Romans with swollen cheeks, but with utter
futility. All these disgraceful speeches came to nothing, and never injured the
Romans in the least; but that leader, either Lucius Scipio or Acilius,
according to my statement, returned these reproaches upon himself by which he
hoped to lay the Romans prostrate, but they turned out nothing but wind. The
angel therefore derides the pride of Antiochus by saying,
A leader should come who should
throw back these reproaches upon himself,
and prevent them from returning upon either this leader or the Romans. He
takes the head as representing. the whole body.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since it pleases
thee to exercise our confidence by not allowing us any fixed or stable rest upon
earth, that we may learn to rest in thee while the world rolls over and over
even a hundred times. May we never doubt either our protection under thy hand,
or the perpetual issue of all things in our good. Although we are not beyond the
reach of darts, yet may we know the impossibility of our suffering under any
deadly wound, when thou puttest forth thy hand to shield us. May we have full
confidence in thee, and never cease to march under thy standard with constant
and invincible courage, until at length thou shalt gather us into that happy
rest which is laid up for us in heaven, by Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
FIFTY-NINTH
|
DANIEL
11:19
|
|
19. Then he shall turn his face toward the
fort of his own land: but he shall stumble, and fall, and not be
found.
|
19. Et vertet faciem suam ad munitiones terrae suae, et impinget, et
cadet, neque invenietur.
|
Here either the base end of Antiochus is denoted, who
was slain in a popular tumult while spoiling the temple of Belus, or else the
event of the war between him and the Romans is described. This war was conducted
under the auspices of Lucius Scipio, because Cneius Scipio, the conqueror of
Africa, had offered himself as his brother’s lieutenant-general, and after
his death that province was committed to him. But, as we have said, the
resources of Antiochus had been cut off before this. He had lost, the cities of
Asia, and if he had ceded them at first, he might have quietly retained the
greater part of Asia Minor. But as he extended his wings over Greece, and hoped
by this means to become completely master of the whole of Greece and Macedonia,
he could not be induced to withdraw his garrisons from those cities, but at
length was compelled to give up Asia Minor. In this way, then, the angel
describes the progress of the war by saying,
He will turn his face towards the
fortifications of his own land; that is,
when compelled to relinquish Greece, he will betake himself to fortified places.
He was very safe there, and in a region sufficiently at peace; he had almost
impregnable towns on all sides, and appeared to be free from warfare. Historians
relate this to have been done by the skill of Cneius Scipio. For his son was
then a captive under Antiochus, and he knew him to have greater authority than
his brother, although he only possessed the title of lieutenant-general. They
record his persuading Antiochus not to try his fortune by any decisive
engagement. However it was, it is quite evident that he delayed fighting till he
was compelled by a sense of shame, as all men accused him of cowardice in not
daring to try the issue of an engagement, when he possessed so large an army.
The Romans had scarcely ever taken the field against so strong a force, and yet,
according to the narrative of Titus Livius, they never displayed less terror or
concern. The extent of the forces of Antiochus is readily apparent from the
slaughter which occurred; in one day 50,000 men perished; and this would be
almost incredible, unless it were borne out by numerous and trustworthy
testimonies. In this way the angel said,
Antiochus should
return, as he did not go forth to meet
Lucius Scipio, but suffered him to pass on. Had he given the least sign of
resistance, without doubt Philip had in iris hand and power the whole force of
the Romans. Many indeed pronounced the conduct of L. Scipio to be rash, in
daring to allow Philip such license, as he had been lately conquered, and was
still exasperated in consequence of the loss and disgrace which he had
suffered. For if Antiochus had been on the alert to restrain the enemy, it would
have been all over with the Roman army in those narrow and rugged defiles; but,
as we have stated, he kept his army in idleness and luxury among fortified
towns. If another and a probable sense is preferred, the sentence applies to his
base retreat to further Asia, where he fell, slain by the rustic
population. He shall fall, and
shall not be found. Antiochus in truth
continued to reign from the period of the destruction of his army and of his
acceptance of the conditions which the Romans imposed. He obtained peace,
but not without the payment of a heavy fine while he retained the name of king.
Although he united with the Romans in an honorable treaty, yet he was forced to
retire beyond Mount Taurus, to pay a large sum of money on account of the
expenses of the war, to give hostages, and to divide the ships equally with the
Romans. In this latter case he was grossly and fraudulently deluded, for L.
Scipio commanded all the ships to be cut to pieces, and delivered the
materials to Antiochus, to whom they were utterly worthless. He knew the
man to be deceptive and restless, and so he treated him with barbarity,
according to his deserts. As far as the hostages are concerned, we find
Antiochus and Demetrius his sons as hostages at Rome even after his death. He
was left in peace indeed, but was deprived of the cities of Asia Minor, and was
ordered to betake himself beyond Mount Taurus. Those ravines were the boundary
of his empire; a part of Asia was assigned to Eumenes, and many cities became
independent. Antiochus, by way of concealing his disgrace, made a joke of it,
saying he had managed cleverly, for the government of Asia Minor was a great
trouble to him. He had another ample and opulent kingdom with which he might
well be content: I have hitherto been but a steward in Asia, he used to say, and
the Romans have relieved me of that encumbrance.
When, therefore, the angel says,
After his fall, he should be no
longer king; this may be understood of
his ignominious death which followed shortly afterwards. His avarice was
insatiable, and when compelled to pay a large tribute to the Romans, he
pretended to be reduced to extreme poverty; then he wished to spoil the temple
of Jupiter Dodoneus, and was slain there during a tumult. This last word ought
properly to be referred to this event, for King Antiochus was not found, because
these rustics slew him in the tumult which arose. Thus far concerning Antiochus
the Great; Seleucus now follows, who was his first successor. He had three sons,
Seleucus whom many call Ceraunus, then Antiochus Epiphanes, and Demetrius.
Concerning Seleucus the angel speaks as follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:20
|
|
20. Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser
of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be
destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.
|
20. Et stabit super locum ejus transire
faciens exactorem in honore regni,
f556
et diebus paucis conteretur, idque non ira, neque in praelio.
|
Seleucus, it is well known, did not long survive his
father, for he was put to death either by poison, or by his domestics. Suspicion
fell upon his brother Antiochus, who was sent back to his country after his
father’s death was known. Demetrius alone was retained, who afterwards
escaped by flight, for he left the city under the pretense of hunting, and
followed the bank of the Tiber as far as Ostia, where he embarked on a small
vessel, preferring to run all risks to remaining in perpetual banishment.
Concerning Seleucus, the angel says,
he shall stand in his
place, meaning, he shall succeed by
hereditary right to the office of Antiochus the Great. Thus
he shall cause the exactor to
pass over. Some translate, He shall take
away the exactor; for the verb
rb[
gneber, in Hiphil, signifies to take away. The Hebrews use the verb of
this clause in the sense of excluding. Some interpreters think this language
implies the praise of Seleucus for lessening the tributes imposed by his father,
but historians shew this view to be false, and condemn his avarice and rapacity.
In some points he was superior to his brother Antiochus; although both lustful
and cruel to those around him. Through indulgence in great expenses, he could
not be moderate and lenient towards his subjects; for luxury and prodigality
always draw with them cruelty in the exaction of tribute. For he who is thus
profuse, must necessarily extract the very blood from his people. As Seleucus
was thus devoted to self-indulgence, this sense is more appropriate —
he made the exactor to pass
through, meaning, he laid new and fresh
taxes on all his subjects. Nothing but this is said of him, since he was
immediately put to death, as the second clause of the verse informs. us. If we
prefer taking the words — the glory of the kingdom — by way of
opposition, Seleucus will be praised as an honor and an ornament. But I think we
must supply the letter
l,
l, and understand the passage thus, —
He who shall cause the exactor to
pass through shall stand in his place, and shall be destroyed in a few
days. By the word
“destroyed,” he signifies a bloody death. But not in
anger, says he. I wonder why some translate it “in mutual
conflict,” because the Hebrews imply “anger”
by this word; meaning, he should not perish in open warfare, or in the
course of a battle, but by the hands of his domestics. Historians differ as to
the kind of death which he died, some saying he was poisoned, and others, slain
by the sword. But this difference is of no consequence. Antiochus Epiphanes next
succeeds him.
|
DANIEL
11:21
|
|
21. And in his estate shall stand up a vile
person, to whom they shall not give the honor of the kingdom: but he shall come
in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
|
21. Et stabit super locum ejus probrosus, et non dabunt ei
f557 decorem regni,
f558 et veniet cum pace, et apprehendet
regnum per blanditias.
|
Historians agree in representing Antiochus Epiphanes
to have been of a very crafty disposition, and some state his departure from
Rome to have been by stealth. He was most probably dismissed by the Romans, on
the news of his father’s death, as they were content with his brother
Demetrius. They had other hostages besides, who were among the chief nobles of
the land, as well as this third son of the king. However this was, all are
agreed in relating his cunning. He was so cruel and fierce, that Polybius says
he was called Epimanes by way of a nickname, and as he assumed the name of
Illustrious, he was called the Madman, on account of his turbulent disposition.
He was a monster puffed up with various vices; being of a slavish and flattering
temperament, he endeavored to acquire the favor of Rome by artifice, as we shall
afterwards discover. But when he was not actuated by fear, his cruelty and
ferocity were beyond all bounds. For this reason he is called contemptible.
He was held in some esteem at Rome, and was received by a portion of
his people with great applause. But he was not endued with any heroic or even
regal qualities, for he always flattered the Romans, and insinuated himself into
the favor of the citizens in this way, until he came to his kingdom as a
suppliant; and then the angel calls him a contemptible or despicable person.
Another reason equally probable may be brought forward, namely, his seizing upon
the throne by fraud and wickedness, after setting aside the legitimate heir. For
Seleucus left a successor whom this perfidious plotter deprived of his rights,
and thus fraudulently acquired the kingdom for himself. We know of what
importance God makes every one’s calling, and how he restrains men from
rashly arrogating anything to themselves, as they ought always to be satisfied
with that station which is assigned them by God. As, therefore, Antiochus seized
on the kingdom without any right to it, and drove out the lawful heir, he was
contemptible before God, and would never have been king at all except; by
violence and tyranny on his part, as well as by deceit. and cunning devices. I
have no hesitation in stating that the angel here censures the perverse conduct
of Antiochus, by calling him despised through the absence of all
nobleness of feeling.
He next adds,
They shall not confer upon him
the honor of royalty. By these words he
announces the injustice of his reign through not being chosen by the votes of
the people. We have stated that the son of Seleucus ought to have reigned
without any dispute, but the very person who should have been his nephew’s
guardian, wickedly deprived his ward of his paternal inheritance. Hence the
angel speaks of him rather as a robber than as a king, because he seized upon
the kingdom, and was not elected by the popular choice. It follows, —
he shall come in peace, and seize
the kingdom by flatteries. This is the
explanation of the last clause. It might be asked, how did he deprive his nephew
of his kingdom? the reply is —
he shall come
peacefully, meaning, he shall lay aside
everything which he was agitating in his mind, and should not openly boast of
his being king, but should deceitfully act in the character of guardian until he
had the power of ruining his ward.
He shall
come, then, peacefully,
and shall seize the kingdom by
flatteries. Thus we see the
angel’s meaning in these words. Besides, although Daniel did not see all
these things, nor even many of the chosen people, yet they tasted enough of
these prophecies to satisfy them, and to banish anxiety from their minds. They
were permitted to perceive God speaking through his angel, and experience taught
them the truth of everything which is contained here, even if many events should
be hidden from them. But it was God’s object to support the spirits of the
pious, even to the advent of Christ, and to retain them in tranquillity amidst
the greatest disturbances. Thus they would acknowledge the value of the promise
of the Redeemer, after he had been set forth, as will be mentioned at the close
of the chapter. I will now proceed to the next words.
|
DANIEL
11:22
|
|
22. And with the arms of a flood shall they be
overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, the prince of the
covenant.
|
22. Et brachia inundatione obruentur, ad
verbum, inundabuntur, a conspectu ejus, et conterentur, atque etiam dux
foederis.
|
We may naturally conjecture that the dominions of
Antiochus were not immediately at peace, because a portion of his court favored
the lawful heir. As it always happens in every change of government, there were
many tumults in Syria before Antiochus could remove his adversaries out of his
way. For although the kingdom of Egypt was then destitute of a head, as Ptolemy,
called Philometor, was then only a boy, his counselors were in favor of the son
of Seleucus, and so by secret supplies afforded their aid to the faction opposed
to Antiochus. He had much trouble not only with his own people, but also with
the neighboring nations. All pitied the lot of his ward, and his being quite
undeserving of it moved many to render him every possible help. The boy was
aided by the favor of Egypt, and of other nations. Thus Antiochus was subject to
many severe commotion’s, but the angel announces his final conquest.
The
arms, he says,
shall be
inundated. This is a metaphorical
expression; for whatever aid the son of Seleucus acquired, was not by his own
efforts, for he could use none, but by that of his friends.
The
arms, then, meaning, all the auxiliaries
which should assist in the restoration of the son of Seleucus,
should be overwhelmed by an
inundation. This is another metaphor,
signifying, they shall be drowned as by a deluge; and by this figure the angel
hints not only at the victory of Antiochus, but at its great facility. It was
like a deluge, not by its own strength, but because God wished to use the hand
of this tyrant in afflicting the Israelites, as we shall afterwards see, and
also in harassing both Egypt and Syria. Antiochus was in truth God’s
scourge, and is thus compared to a deluge. Hence he says, out of his sight.
He shews the terror of Antiochus to be so great, that at his very appearance
he should dispirit and prostrate his enemies, although he was without forces,
and was neither a bold nor a persevering warrior.
And they shall be
broken, says he,
and also the leader of the
covenant; meaning, Ptolemy shall take
the part of His relative in vain. For the son of Seleueus was the cousin of
Ptolemy Philometor, since, as we have said, Cleopatra had married Ptolemy
Philopator, whence this Philometor was sprung, and Seleueus was the brother of
Cleopatra. He, then, was the
leader of the
covenant. Ptolemy, indeed, who was but a
boy, could neither undertake nor accomplish anything by his own counsel, but
such was his dignity in the kingdom of Egypt, that he was deservedly called
leader of the
covenant, since all others followed the
power of that king. The event fully proved with what ill success all who
endeavored to eject Antiochus from his possessions, contended against him. It
now follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:23
|
|
23. And after the league made with him
he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a
small people.
|
23. Et a conjunctione cum eo faciet dolum, et
ascendet, et praevalebit cum exigua gente, vel, manu.
|
The angel points out some interruption of the wars,
because Antiochus would be content for a time with Syria, and would not make an
attempt of Egypt. It was a great point to repel the attempts of all those who
wished to recover the rights of his nephew. There is no doubt that the whole
country was impoverished and exhausted with the continual expense of these wars;
for whenever fresh commotion’s arose, it was necessary to draw new levies
from these provinces, and This occasioned very great expense. It is not
surprising, then, if Antiochus, who was of a cunning disposition, negotiated a
temporary peace with his nephew Ptolemy Philometor the king of Egypt. His sister
Cleopatra still survived, and this was an honorable excuse. The angel, then,
states first, the proposal of a truce leading to settled peace between the two
sovereigns. He adds, however, the perfidious conduct of Antiochus in his
friendships.
During,
or after these
agreements, he shall
deal treacherously with
him. Although, therefore, he pretended
to be the friend and ally of his nephew, yet he conducted himself deceitfully
towards him. And he shall ascend,
and shall prevail by a small band;
meaning, he shall attack the boy suddenly. For when Ptolemy anticipated a
lasting friendship with his uncle, Antiochus took the opportunity of
fraudulently attacking some cities with a small force: He thus deceived his
enemy, who thought all things would be tranquil with him; and so when Ptolemy
had no fear of his uncle, he suddenly lost some of his cities. The angel means
this; he shall rise by deceit, and
shall prevail without large
forces, because there shall be no
suspicion of warfare. It is easy enough to oppress an enemy in a state of
tranquillity, and in the absence of all fear. It is afterwards added,
—
|
DANIEL
11:24
|
|
24. He shall enter peaceably even upon the
fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers
have not done, nor his fathers he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil,
and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong
holds, even for a time.
|
24. In pace, et in pinguedinibus regionis, aut provinciae,
veniet, hoc est, in deliciis, et faciet quae non fecerunt patres ejus, et
patres patrum ejus: spolia et praedam, et substantiam illis dispertiet,
f559 et super munitiones cogitabit
cogitationes suas, idque ad tempus.
|
The history is here continued: The angel shews how
Antiochus in a short time and with a small band should acquire many cities,
as he should come in peace upon
the fatness of the province, implying
his oppressing them while sleeping in security. He shews also how he should
become conqueror, not by any hostile invasion of Egypt, but by cunning and
stealth he should deprive King Ptolemy of his cities when he least expected it.
There should be no appearance of war; hence he says,
he shall come in peace upon the
fatness of the land. The word
“fatness” is used metaphorically for “richness.”
When the Egyptians supposed all danger to be far removed, and were persuaded of
the friendship of Antiochus towards them, and relied on him as an ally should
any adversity arise, they indulged themselves in luxuries till Antiochus came
suddenly and subdued them. He next adds,
He shall despise the spoil, and
prey, and goods, which belonged to them.
Some take the words for spoil and prey in the sense of
“soldiers,” and join it with the verb
rwzby
ibzor, “he shall disperse,” meaning, he shall
distribute their possessions among his soldiers, to conciliate their good will,
and to prepare them for new wars, as we know how easily soldiers are enticed
when they receive the rewards of their service; for they are actuated solely by
covetousness and avarice. Some writers expound it in this way — Antiochus
shall divide the prey among his soldiers, but I prefer the other sense —
he shall disperse the prey, and
the spoil, and the goods, of the Egyptians.
After suddenly oppressing the Egyptians, he shall proceed to spoil them like
a robber.
He afterwards adds,
And against the fortifications
shall he devise machinations, meaning,
he shall lay his plans for seizing the fortified cities. For at; first he
penetrated as far as certain cities, and occupied first Coelo-Syria, and
afterwards Phoenica, but could not quickly possess the fortified towns; hence he
deferred the execution of his plans to a more suitable time. Therefore, the
angel says, he shall arrange his
plans against the fortified cities, but only for the
time; meaning, he shall not immediately
bring forward his intentions, hoping to oppress his nephew when off his guard.
Thus under the disguise of peace an access to these cities would always be open
to him, and he would reconcile to himself all whom he could corrupt by either
gifts or other devices. We perceive, then, how a summary is here presented to us
of the arts and schemes by which Antiochus should deprive his nephew of a
portion of his territory and its towns, how suddenly he should invade some of
the weakest in a state of unsuspecting tranquillity; and how by degrees he
should invent machinations for seizing upon the stronger towns as well as he
could. He also says, for the
time. The cunning and malice of
Antiochus was always apparent throughout these transactions. He did not engage
in open warfare, but was always endeavoring to add to his possessions by
indirect frauds, — a course which was not without its
success.
When it is
said, He shall do what neither
his fathers nor his fathers’ fathers
did, this must be restricted solely to
Egypt. For Seleucus the first king of Syria enjoyed a wide extent of dominion,
then he prospered in warfare, and his fame flourished even to a good old age,
and though at last he was unsuccessful in battle, yet on the whole he was a
superior and celebrated warrior. Besides this we know him to have been one of
the chief generals of Alexander the Great. As to his son Antiochus, we have
previously observed the wide extent of his dominion, and how highly he was
esteemed for prudence and valor. The angel does not compare Antiochus Epiphanes
generally with either his fat, her, or grandfather, or great-grandfather, but
only with respect to Egypt. For his ancestors always longed after Egypt, but
their designs against it were entirely frustrated; he, however, was more
successful in his aggression where his ancestors had failed in their attempts.
Hence it becomes manifest how God overrules the events of war, so that the
conqueror and the triumphant hero is not the man who excels in counsel, or in
prudence, or valor, but he who fights under the heavenly leader. It pleases God
at one time to afflict nations, and at another to set over them kings who are
really his servants. So he wished to punish Egypt by the hands of this robber.
It afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
11:25
|
|
25. And he shall stir up his power and his
courage against the king of the south with a great army; and the king of the
south shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he
shall not stand: for they shall forecast devices against him.
|
25. Et excitabit robur suum, et cor suum
adversus regem austri, cum exercitu magno: et rex austri irritabitur ad praelium
cum exercitu magno, et robusto valde: et non stabit, quia cogitabunt contra eum
cogitationes.
f560
|
The angel here announces how Antiochus Epiphanes
after prevailing by fraud, should become bolder in his daring. he should venture
to levy a hostile army and invade Egypt openly, without any further
dissimulation. He therefore says,
at length he shall rouse his
strength and his courage. He had
previously crept along through hiding-places and fastnesses, and had. not roused
either his strength or his courage when remaining quiet at home; meanwhile he
obtained the possession of various towns by treachery and other artifices. This
was only creeping on by burrowing underground. But he now openly declares war,
and brings his forces into the field of battle, and thus
stirs up his strength and his
courage. As I have already said, his new
method of warfare is here described as unusual with him, as his audacity,
doubtless, gradually increased through that series of success which he had
enjoyed, and by which he had become more powerful than his nephew, through the
practice of deceit. He afterwards adds, with a great army. He had
mentioned a small band, he now places opposite to it a large army; for it
required a long space of time to collect extensive pecuniary resources for
carrying on the war, and also for enlarging and extending his own boundaries. He
was thus able to enroll fresh levies, while his prosperity induced many to
become his auxiliaries. As he found himself in every way superior to his nephew,
he collected a great army. The
king of the south also shall be irritated;
that is, he shall not dare to harass his own uncle Antiochus, but shall be
forced to open warfare. He shall
come, then, with a great army, very
great, strong, and powerful, says he,
but he shall not stand, because
they shall devise devices against him;
meaning, he shall be conquered by treachery. Here the angel signifies that
Ptolemy should have sufficient courage to resist, had he not been betrayed by
his adherents. We shall more clearly perceive this in the next verse
to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, that we may remain
quiet under thy shelter and protection, hi the midst of those numerous
disturbances which thou ever submittest to our eyes in this world. May we never
lose our courage when an occasion is given to Satan and our enemies to oppress
us, but may we remain secure trader thy protection, and every hour and every
moment may we fly to thy guardianship. Relying on thine unconquered power, may
we never hesitate so to pass through all commotion’s, as to repose with
quiet minds upon thy grace, till at length we are gathered into that happy and
eternal rest which thou hast prepared for us in heaven, by Jesus Christ our
Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTIETH
|
DANIEL
11:26
|
|
26. Yea, they that feed of the portion of his
meat shall destroy him, and his army shall overflow; and many shall fall down
slain.
|
26. Et qui comedent portionem cibi ejus, conterent eum, et exercitus
ejus obruetur, et cadent vulnerati multi.
|
The angel predicted, yesterday, that Ptolemy should
not stand forth in battle, through the treachery of his own adherents. He now
expresses the kind of treachery, for his chief courtiers or counselors should be
the authors of this perfidy. He opposes the common soldiers to their leaders,
for in the second clause, he shews how the soldiers should discharge their duty
without sparing either their life or their blood. We now understand the Holy
Spirit’s intention in this verse, for he says the authors of this perfidy
should not be ordinary men, but the chief among the counselors. They are said to
eat at the king’s table, as in the first chapter we saw how a portion was
given to Daniel, and to his companions, from the royal food at the king’s
table. Thus he shews how dishonorable this perfidy was, as they eat at his
table, and were his intimate companions.
They shall destroy
him, says he,
and his army shall be
overwhelmed. He shews that many were
prepared for this duty, who would boldly and freely expose their lives to danger
for their king’s safety and their country’s defense,
but many should fall
wounded. He signifies that there should
be a great slaughter in his army, and the issue of the battle would not be
according to his wish, because his generals would not preserve their fidelity to
their sovereign. By this example the angel describes to us the ordinary
situation of kings. They choose their counselors not by their honesty, but by
the mere appearance of congeniality in their affections and tastes. If a king is
avaricious, or cunning, or cruel, or sensual, he desires to have friends and
attendants who will not check either his avarice or his craftiness, his cruelty
or his lust. Hence they deserve the conduct which they receive, and experience
treachery from those whom they ought not to treat with so much honor, if they
considered themselves in duty bound to God and to their people. It now
follows,-
|
DANIEL
11:27
|
|
27. And both these kings’ hearts
shall be to do mischief, and in they shall speak lies at one table; but
it shall not prosper: for the end shall be at the time
appointed.
|
27. Et duorum regum cor ipsorum, hoc est,
et cor his duobus regibus, in malum: et in mensa eadam, una,
mendacium loquentur, et non prospere eveniet, quia adhuc finis ad tempus
statutum.
|
The angel here narrates that the close of this war
should be by treaties and a hollow pretense of peace after the slaughter which
Ptolemy had sustained. Although Antiochus might have followed up his own good
fortune, yet he durst not venture to push his advantage to the extremity, but
according to his disposition, he thought it more to his interest to make peace
with his enemy. We have already alluded to his craftiness and his want of
openness and integrity. The angel predicts the existence of bad faith in both
these kings; the uncle and nephew will meet, says he, and sup together, and
pretend the greatest friendship,
but they shall speak
lies, says he,
at the same
table; meaning, they shall plot against
each other, and each shall act fraudulently for his own ends. This prophecy
indeed seems to be of little consequence to the faithful; but it was needful to
shew that in such a state of confusion they could not hold out without being
furnished with all kinds of support. If the angel had only said generally, first
there shall be war, and then a temporary peace, this would not have been
sufficient to sustain the minds of the pious; but when the details are so
clearly pointed out, a remarkable confirmation is afforded them. Thus the
faithful have no reason for doubting that God has spoken, when the angel
predicts the future so exactly, and so openly narrates it, as if a matter of
history.
He next adds,
Yet it shall not prosper, because
the end is for the time, says he. The
angel recalls the faithful to the providence of God, as our minds always
naturally rest in the midst of earthly things. We apprehend with our minds only
as far as we see with our eyes. We always ask the reasons “why this
happens” and “why that course of proceeding has not turned out
well,” entirely omitting the will of God. Hence the angel meets this fault
and stupidity of men by saying, that whatever these kings were plotting should
fail of success, since the end
was for the time; meaning, God would
hold many occurrences in suspense. While, therefore, we are considering only
second causes, we perceive how the supreme power resides with God alone, and he
governs by his will the mutual transactions of mankind. No slight advantage
would result to the faithful from this instruction, because, while kings are
devising many schemes, and using great cunning and all the perverse artifices of
diplomacy, God still restrains their minds. He holds events by his secret
bridle, and allows nothing to happen without his heavenly decree. Although we
may gather this general instruction from this passage, yet the angel doubtless
restricts what I have said to the historical events immediately before us. The
end had not yet approached, yet the fitting time was fixed beforehand by
God’s secret counsel, so that Antiochus conquers at one period and
retreats at another, as we shall see. It follows: —
|
DANIEL
11:28
|
|
28. Then shall he return into his land with
great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he
shall do exploits, and return to his own land.
|
28. Et revertetur in terram suam cum opibus magnis, et cor ejus ad
foedus sanctitatis, et faciet, et revertetur in terram suam.
|
Here the angel predicts the calamitous nature of that
peace for the people of God, because Antiochus should turn his arms against
Jerusalem and the whole Jewish people. It is said,
He shall return to his own
land, because he shall not possess
Egypt. This return implies the victory of Antiochus, and yet his betaking
himself within the boundaries of his own realm. When he adds, with great pomp,
or great
riches, he shews the source whence
that wealth should be
derived,
— his heart should be
against the holy covenant. He partially
destroyed Jerusalem and the temple of God. He was compelled to leave the temple
and many treasures, through either shame, or reverence, or a miracle, as we read
in the 2nd Book of Maccabees (Maccabees 5:2.) He would willingly have stripped
the whole temple, but God then restrained him, while he had gathered for himself
great wealth. Hence the angel joins the two events, he should return to Syria
with great wealth, and his heart should be against the holy covenant. Some refer
this to persons, as if the angel meant the people who were in covenant with God.
But the simpler sense pleases me better, — he should carry on war against
God, because he was not enriched with such ample spoils as he had expected. We
have mentioned his making peace with his enemy: lest, therefore, this expedition
should be fruitless, he spoiled the temple of God. Thus
his heart was elated against God
and against his holy covenant. The other
exposition is too cold and too forced.
And he shall do it and shall return
to his own land. This return at the end
of the verse is taken in a different sense from that at the beginning, as now he
should use his own will as a conqueror, and no one should oppose his arrival in
his own territories. These two expressions are to be read
together, — he shall do it
and return to his own dominions. The
meaning of the word for “do” we have already explained. The
angel signifies the absence of every obstacle which could prevent the
destruction of the city and temple by Antiochus. This was a severe trial, and
would cause the minds of the faithful to be disturbed and tossed about because
God gave up his temple to this cruel tyrant, and permitted the sacred vessels
and the hidden treasures to be carried off with the greatest ignominy. It was
necessary, then, to inform the faithful beforehand of this grievous slaughter,
lest its novelty should astonish them and overthrow the constancy of their
faith. Hence we gather this practical instruction — God often predicts
many sorrowful events for us, and yet this instruction ought not to embitter our
feelings; for he wishes to fortify us against the trial which the novelty of the
event, must occasion. Thus the angel, while treating of occurrences by no means
agreeable, was a useful herald of all the calamities which must happen, lest
anything unusual or unexpected should fall upon the pious. Thus they would
acknowledge the affliction to proceed from God’s hand; and while they were
exposed to the lust of Antiochus, yet God by his certain and incomprehensible
counsel allowed much license to this impious tyrant. It afterwards
follows
|
DANIEL
11:29-30
|
|
29. At the time appointed he shall return, and
come toward the south but it shall not be as the former, or as the
latter.
|
29. Ad tempus revertetur et veniet in AEgyptum: et non erit ut
prius, it a posterius. f561
|
|
30. For the ships of Chittim shall come
against him; therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation
against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have
intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.
|
30. Et venient contra eum naves Cithim, et
debilitabitur,
f562
et revertetur, et indignabitur adversus foedus sanctitatis, et faciet, et
revertetur, et intelliget,
f563
ad desertores foederis sanctitatis.
|
First of all, the angel says, Antiochus should return
a short time afterwards and take possession of Egypt. This was the fruit of that
pretended peace and perfidious friendship which has already been mentioned. For
the uncle and nephew banqueted together in mutual distrust, as the angel has
already stated, and as we found in the 27th verse of this chapter. This
deception was shortly afterwards dissolved, when Antiochus, without any
reasonable impulse, returned to Egypt. In this way he shewed his want of nothing
but an opportunity for breaking the truce, and he only delayed it for a time,
because he had no wish to oppress his nephew in haste. This, then, is one point.
We may take the word
d[wm
mogned, “time,” for a period divinely predetermined; but.
as this explanation may seem too forced, I am contented with the common one.
He shall
return, then,
for a time, and shall
come, says
he, to Egypt; but the latter
exposition shall not be like the former;
for the whole preparation for war which had struck such terror into Egypt
should lose its effect. He had seized on a portion of the kingdom, and King
Ptolemy Philometor was besieged when Publius Popilius arrived, of whom the angel
will presently speak. For the cause of his return is added,
— ships shall come from
Chittim. We have explained this word
elsewhere. By comparing all the passages of Scripture in which the word occurs,
we shall find all the Gentiles denoted by it, from Macedon through the whole of
Greece, as far as Illyricum and Italy. The ancients used another term for the
Macedonians; they call them Maketoe, and some think the letter M a
useless addition. But whether this be so or not, the circumstances shew the
Macedonians, and Greeks, and other transmarine nations, to have been called
Chittim. If any one still disputes about this word, let us desist from all
contention; still, we cannot help observing what the perpetual tenor of
Scripture enables us to discover, — that the Macedonians, Greeks, and
Italians are included under this term. This passage is free from all doubt,
because Antiochus was restrained not by the Greeks but by the Romans.
Ambassadors were sent by them, not for this purpose alone, but to investigate
the whole state of Greece and Asia Minor. The affairs of Greece were then very
unsettled, and the Romans were turning their attention towards Achaia, for they
thought the Achaean league would become too powerful. Among these ambassadors
was P. Popilius, a stern man, as we may venture to conjecture, but austere and
barbarous. When he met with Antiochus, who was then besieging Alexandria, and
held the boy-king in captivity, he addressed him after his own manner. King
Antiochus received him graciously, and mildly, and even blandly, and wished even
to salute him, for, as we have already stated, his disposition was naturally
servile. Popilius rejected all these advances, and ordered him to keep his
familiarities for private intercourse; for Antiochus had been intimate with him
when a hostage at Rome, during his father’s lifetime. He rejected all
these acts of courtesy, and explained to him the commands of the Senate, and
ordered him instantly to depart from Egypt. The king said he would consult with
his friends. But he was unable to lay aside his accustomed sternness; he drew a
circle with the wand which he held in his hand, and ordered the king to summon
his counselors, and to deliberate on the spot, otherwise he must declare war at
once. When the king perceived this barbarian acting so decisively, he dared no
longer to hesitate or dissemble, but threw himself at once into the power of the
Senate, and suddenly retired from the country. This history is now described by
the angel. All these events were as yet unperformed, but God set before the eyes
of the pious what was then entirely concealed and contrary to the expectation of
mankind. The angel therefore states the reason wily that expedition of Antiochus
should be quite unlike the last one.
There shall come against
him, says he,
ships of
Chittim, meaning Italy,
and he shall grieve and
return; that is, he shall obey, although
he shall feel indignant at such imperious treatment, and be compelled to retreat
with every mark of disgrace. It was unworthy of a king to demean himself so
humbly at the mere word of his adversary.
This accounts for his indignation:
But he shall return and be
indignant against the covenant of holiness;
meaning, he shall turn his rage against the temple and city of God. This
second return involved the Jews in a far longer period of slaughter than the
former one. Antiochus was then unwilling to return home, unless laden with
spoil, after pretending to establish peace; but now he was compelled to retreat
with great disgrace, and this only exasperated and enraged him. Hence he acted
most outrageously towards both the people and the temple of God. Thus the angel
says, He shall be indignant
against the holy covenant, and shall do so and
return. He repeats the same language
twice as if he had said, Antiochus should return to Syria without effecting his
object, through obeying the Roman Senate, or rather his old friend whom he had
known at Rome. We have already stated the reason, which we shall afterwards more
fully explain, why the angel predicted the fury of the king as turned
against the holy
covenant. It is this, — the
confidence of the pious would naturally be injured by observing the divine
permission granted to the tyrant for spoiling the temple.
He next adds,
And he shall act with
intelligence towards the forsakers of the holy
covenant. The angel here points out the
manner in which secret agreements should take place between Antiochus and those
apostates who should desert God’s holy covenant. It is quite clear that he
was summoned to Jerusalem, first, by Jason, and then by Menelaus. (2 Maccabees
4:19-23.) I shall touch but briefly events recorded in history. Profane authors
inform us accurately of these occurrences, and besides this, a whole book of
Maccabees gives us similar information, and places clearly before us what the
angel here predicts. Every one who wishes to read these prophecies with profit,
must make himself familiar with these books, and must try to remember the whole
history. Onias the elder was a holy man; his son has been previously mentioned.
(2 Maccabees 3:1.) For, with the view of escaping from snares, he set out for
Egypt and built a temple, as Josephus informs us, and pretended to fulfill that
passage in Isaiah which says, There shall be an altar to God in Egypt. But Onias
the elder, who discharged faithfully and sacredly the office of high priest, was
put to flight, and eventually put to death. Then Jason, whom he had sent to
appease Antiochus, assumed the high priesthood, and betrayed the temple and the
whole nation, as well as the worship of God. (2 Maccabees 4:35-37; also 7.) He
afterwards met with the reward which he deserved, for he was slain, and then
Menelaus succeeded him, and conciliated the favor of Antiochus. (2 Maccabees
5:9; 4:27.) The authority of the priesthood prevailed so far as to enable him to
draw with him a great portion of the people. Here, then, the angel predicts how
Antiochus, on approaching the city, should have deserters and apostates as His
companions. The words are, He
shall apply his mind to the forsakers of the holy
covenant, and the sense is by no means
obscure. Antiochus should not make open war against the Jews, but one faction
should go forth to meet him and ingratiate themselves with him. I run through
these events briefly, because when I afterwards arrive at a general summary, it
will be far more convenient to elicit the general improvement. The angel says
next:
|
DANIEL
11:31-32
|
|
31. And arms shall stand on his part, and they
shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily
sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh
desolate.
|
31. Et brachia ab ispso stabunt, et profanabunt sanctuarium roboris, aut
virtutis, et abolebunt juge, sacrificium scilicet, et ponent
abominationem quae obstupefaciet.
f564
|
|
32. And such as do wickedly against the
covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God
shall be strong, and do exploits.
|
32. Et impie agentes contra foedus abducet in errorem blanditiis,
f565 et populus intelligentes
f566 Deum suum roborabuntur et
facient.
|
Here the angel describes the intestine evils of the
Church, and more fully explains what he touched on in the last verse. He says,
The arms shall stand up for
Antiochus. Some explain this of the
garrison which that tyrant imposed on Jerusalem. But it is seems too
far-fetched. I do not hesitate to suppose the angel to refer here to the
apostates and forsakers of the Law.
Arms,
then, shall stand up from
him, meaning, he shall not contend in
his own strength, but shall rely upon the people’s assistance. Many should
offer themselves in obedience to him, and thus Antiochus would find a party
devoted to himself at Jerusalem, which should willingly prostitute itself to his
will. He afterwards adds, They
shall profane the sanctuary of strength.
The angel here joins together Antiochus and these impious apostates. (2
Maccabees 5:2.) To favor him, the temple is said to be polluted, and this was
fulfilled when the statue of Jupiter Olympius was erected there. The tyranny and
violence of Antiochus continued long afterwards, as we shall see in its own
place. He brought the statue of the Olympian Jove into the temple, for the
purpose of overthrowing the worship of God, and then he introduced other
corruption’s, which vitiated the purity of God’s service. He might
in one moment have overthrown the whole Law, but he first tried to mingle many
superstitions with God’s Law, and thus to estrange the Jews by degrees
from true and sincere piety. The angel speaks of
the sanctuary of
power, to shew the faithful that
Antiochus is not the conqueror of God, who was never deprived of his power, but
continued the guardian and keeper of his temple even unto the end. He uses this
epithet for the temple, to assure the pious that God had not given way to the
violence of the tyrant. His authority stood untouched and untainted, although
his temple was exposed to such foul pollution.
Lastly, he wished the faithful to retain by this
teaching a sense of God’s unconquered power in choosing that temple for
his dwelling-place, although for a time Antiochus was so insulting, and was
permitted to profane it with his impious crew. This instruction urged the pious
to look upon God’s power with the eye of faith, although it was then
hidden from their view, and was trampled under foot by the impious in the pride
of their audacity. Sorrowful indeed was the spectacle of this statue erected
within the temple, for God, according to our previous statement, promised to be
the defender of that sacred mountain. When the impious were raging thus
insultingly, who would not have thought God to be altogether conquered and
unable to defend his residence any longer? The angel then here encourages the
faithful to cultivate far different thoughts from those suggested by the
prospect before them. The temple, then, seemed weak and deprived of every
protection, and yet with respect to God it was still a sanctuary of strength. He
next adds, And they shall abolish
the continual sacrifice, which really
occurred; but I pass it over shortly now, as I shall have another opportunity of
explaining it suitably and fully.
And they shall
place, or set up,
that abomination which shall
cause astonishment. For who would not
have been astonished when he saw the temple deserted by the Almighty? For if God
cared for the temple services, why did he not resist rage like this? Why did he
suffer himself to be subjected to such disgraceful indignity? The angel meets
such temptations as these by saying, even if the very best men are astonished at
such disgrace, yet nothing happens by chance; for God had already foreseen and
decreed all things. They would not have been predicted, unless God had wished to
prove the people’s faith, and to exact the penalty for their ingratitude.
But I cannot complete the subject to-day.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, that as we are
instructed by thy Spirit and armed by thy sacred teaching, we may carry on the
war bravely with open enemies and with all who boldly oppose true religion. May
we also constantly despise all domestic foes and apostates, and resist them
manfully. May we never be disturbed, even if various tumults should arise in thy
Church. May we fix our eyes upon thee, and always expect a happier issue than
appears possible at the time, until at length thou shalt fulfill thy promises.
And may all events which now seem contrary to us, issue in our salvation, when
thy Son our Redeemer shall appear. — Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-FIRST
We stated in the last Lecture, the seriousness of the
test by which God proved the faithfulness of his people, in allowing Antiochus
such unbounded liberty to pollute the Temple, and to abolish, for a time, all
the sacrifices and services. He next set up in the midst of the Temple that
abomination which cast down the spirits of the pious; for that prodigy could not
be witnessed without the most profound astonishment. No one could suppose it
possible, that God would expose his own sanctuary to such dishonor, as it was
the only one which he had chosen in the whole world. It now follows,
And he shall deceive the
transgressors of the covenant with blandishment, but a people knowing their God
will retain it firmly and practice it.
Here Daniel more clearly expresses what he had previously said of the
corruption and overthrow of God’s worship, as Antiochus should enticingly
win over to himself a perfidious portion of those who were nominally, at, least,
God’s people. He thus repeats what we observed before. These hypocrites
were like the arms of Antiochus; for had he captured the city by the force of
arms, still he would not have dared to offer these insults to God’s
Temple, unless he had received assistance from those apostates who rejected all
fear of the Almighty, and whom ambition and avarice alone had impelled to unite
with that impious tyrant, who was the avowed and professed enemy of their
religion. The angel, then, here confirms what he had previously said, shewing
how the wicked and impious despisers of the covenant should be tools in the hand
of this robber. For the first word of verse 32 is derived from
[çr
reshegn, “to do wickedly,” and refers to that special act of
sinfulness, their despising God’s covenant. This refers to those intestine
enemies who had previously boasted themselves to be sons of Abraham, and who
were masked by circumcision, the sign of that covenant. He does not here point
out any of the mere dregs of the people, but the impious priests, Menelaus,
Jason, and others like them, as the passage has already been explained. He says
then, these should be deceived by
the blandishments of Antiochus. He
doubtless offered to the priests and to others what he thought they would value
most; one he set over the Temple, another he deceived with vain and fallacious
promises for a time, by distributing a variety of gifts among them. In this way
he corrupted them all by his flatteries. To these the Prophet opposes the
sincere worshippers of God, and the Hebrew copula ought to be understood here as
implying this contrast. He had already spoken of many as deceived by vain
promises, and had called them transgressors of the covenant: he now adds,
But the people who know God shall
strengthen themselves and shall do it.
The angel means that the perfidy of those of whom he had spoken, should not
prevail with the pious to lead them into the same alliance of wickedness, and to
hurl them headlong into the same snares. Although such was the perfidy of these
revolters, yet all who know
God, says he,
shall strengthen
themselves.
This passage is specially worthy of notice, as
experience teaches how very few stand their ground, when many fall away. The
example of one often draws with it a hundred into the same rule; but the
constancy of a hundred is scarcely sufficient to retain one in his position. In
this case we behold the depth of our natural depravity. For we are not only
moved, but shaken by the very slightest breezes, and even when God sets before
us a firm resting-place, still we do not cease our vacillation. When an Apostle
sets before us the examples of the saints, he says, a cloud of witnesses is ever
gazing upon us, with the view of retaining us in the fear of God, and in the
pure confession of our faith. (Hebrews 12:1.) But that cloud vanishes too soon
from our view. Meanwhile, if any trifler whom we know to be a man of no weight,
and whom we have ourselves condemned, — if such a one should decline even
so little from the right way, we think such an example sufficient to excuse us.
Wherefore, I had good reason for stating how this passage lays open to us our
perverse and malignant disposition. We can scarcely be attracted towards God by
a multiplicity of appliances, but we are easily dragged towards the devil to our
own destruction. Hence we ought diligently to meditate upon this passage, and
continually to reflect upon the Prophet’s language. Although apostates may
be deceived by flatteries and reject God’s worship, betray the Church and
throw off all semblance of piety, yet all the pious shall stand fast in the
faith. Let no one therefore quote the example of the thoughtless to excuse his
fault, if he trait are the perfidious, the double-minded, and the hypocritical.
The angel here depicts to us a picture of the Church, by shewing how many should
prove backsliders; but this levity, inconsistency, and perfidy ought never to be
an obstacle to the foes of God to impede their progress in faith and
piety.
We should also notice the epithet which designates
the pious. They are called a
people knowing their God. The people may be
supposed to mean the vulgar, but this is forced. It may also be simply opposed
to the profane Gentiles; but I think there is here an implied contrast between
the true and genuine sons of Abraham, and the false Israelites, who boasted
themselves to be members of the Church when they had nothing but the empty
title. For in the prophets as in the writings of Moses, the name
“people” is often used in a favorable sense for that elect
nation which God had adopted as peculiarly his own. All the Israelites who were
descendants of Abraham after the flesh, used to boast with much vanity in their
being the elect people, and thus the word was ever on their lips. Wherefore the
Prophet reproves the foolish boasting of those who were a. accustomed to shelter
themselves under the name of God, and without having anything real in
themselves. Hence the
people, meaning God’s people,
shall strengthen
themselves; but, by way of correcting
any erroneous view, he adds, who
shall know God, as in the 73d Psalm,
(<197301>Psalm
73:1) How good is the God of Israel to those who are upright in heart! Here the
Prophet restricts the name of Israel to the elect sons of Abraham who cultivate
piety seriously and heartily, as it had become a prevalent habit carelessly to
misuse this name of God. So here,
the people who shall know their
God, means his true people — those
whom he acknowledges as his elect. The angel here makes a distinction between
the pious sons of Abraham and the pious worshippers of God. It is worthy of
careful observation, that the angel assigns their knowledge of God as the cause
and foundation of their constancy. How then, we may ask, does it come to pass,
that some few are left, when the apostates thus prostitute themselves? Because
their knowledge of God shall prevail, and enable them to overcome these attacks,
and bravely to repel them, and to become superior to any temptations. We see,
then, the source whence our own fortitude is derived — the knowledge of
God. This acknowledgment is no vain and cold imagination, but springs from that
faith which spreads its living root in our hearts. Hence it follows, we do not
really acknowledge God, unless we boldly contend when we are put to the test,
and remain firm and stable, although Satan endeavors, by various machinations,
to weaken our faithfulness. And unless we persist in that firmness which is here
described, it is quite clear, that God has never been truly and really
acknowledged by us. The relation too is not without its weight in the phrase,
the people who shall know their
God. Here is a silent reproof, since God
revealed himself to the Israelites as far as was sufficient to retain their
allegiance. No one, therefore, could offer any excuse without being guilty of
impiety, sacrilege, and perfidy, after being so fully instructed by the Law and
the prophets. This instruction must now be applied to our own
times.
We observe in these days how many fall off from the
Church. Persecution sifts all those who profess to belong to Christ, and thus
many are winnowed like chaff, and but a small portion remain steadfast. Their
backsliding ought not to overthrow our faithfulness when they so carelessly
forsake all piety, either through being enticed by the allurements of Satan, or
deceived by the conduct of the ungodly. Let us bear in mind the assertion of the
angel, and thus the true knowledge of God will reign supreme in our hearts, and
we shall still proceed in the course we have pursued. And to shew how
consistently the faithful progress in the teaching of the Law and the Gospel, he
says, they shall strengthen
themselves and shall do it. Here the
word “to do” is taken in the sense of to
“execute” — “exploiter,” as we say
in France; meaning, they shall summon their courage to discharge their duty; for
the word “to do,” or “to execute,” is
referred to the vocation of the pious; they should not be sluggish or slothful
in the discharge of their duty, says the Prophet, but should gather courage for
these contests. And whence? from the acknowledgment of God. We observe, too,
that faith is no idle feeling or cold imagination, lying suffocated in our
minds, but an energizing principle. For we may say that from faith springs
strength, and from strength execution, and thus we avoid all slothfulness hi our
calling. It follows —
|
DANIEL
11:33-34
|
|
33. And they that understand among the people
shall instruct many; yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by
captivity, and by spoil, many days.
|
33. Et intelligentes populi docebunt multos,
et cadent in gladio, et flamma, et exilio, vel, captivitate, et
direptione, diebus multis.
|
|
34. Now, when they shall fall, they shall be
holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with
flatteries.
|
34. Et in cadendo, f567
juvabuntur auxilio f568 modico: et
adjungent se illis multi in blanditiis.
|
With reference to the words, they mean,
those who shall be taught among
the people shall make many understand.
Some take the first word of the verse transitively, as “those
who shall instruct,” but this is wrong; and they shew their ignorance
by supposing the relative pronoun understood before the next verb, as if it
were, “and those who shall teach.” The simple sense is,
“Those who shall be wise among the people shall teach many.” Here
the Prophet, under the angel’s guidance, predicts the multitude of
apostates as well as the existence of some of an opposite character, who should
retain the people within the pure worship and fear of God. Without doubt, he
speaks specially of the priests. The greater part were defaulters, and they
implicated the foolish vulgar in their wickedness. We observe similar effects at
this day in the Papacy, as they corrupt the whole world by their sacrifices. At
that time the priests laid snares for the people, and drew them almost all with
them into the same impiety. The angel here allows the existence of some wise men
among the people; I do not restrict this entirely to the priests, although I
suppose the angel to begin with them. A small portion of them taught the truth,
and God joined a party with them, but yet the angel predicts the existence of
another remnant. Yet afterwards, in the second place, he embraces others who
were truly proficient in God’s law, and although the obligations of the
priesthood did not bind them, yet they labored to recall the wandering into the
way of salvation. He says, then,
Whosoever should be skillful
should teach many. There is also here a
tacit contrast between the honest servants of God and those fictitious teachers
who pride themselves on their titles; as we observe an instance of this in these
days in the Papacy. For bishops and cardinals, abbots and pretenders of this
kind, strut about with insolence and stupefy the miserable vulgar. What? do not
we represent the Church? Is not judgment with us, as well as the interpretation
of the Law and of Scripture? As, therefore, in these times these impostors
arrogate to themselves all knowledge and wish to be thought equal to the angels,
so we know it came to pass among the ancient people. The Prophet, therefore,
here chastises that foolish confidence by saying,
Those who shall be understanding
among the people; meaning, the truly wise. As
if he had said, those masked hypocrites acquire reputation for themselves, but
without the slightest reason. God considers those only intelligent who remain in
the pure doctrine of his Law, and practice piety with simplicity and sincerity.
Hence he calls these, the
intelligent among the people. He repeats
the word “people,” in the same sense as before, implying that all
who use this name are not true Israelites before God, as true knowledge of him
is required. What kind of knowledge or skill is meant, we easily ascertain from
the next verse. For all knowledge which men think they possess without this
acquaintance with God, is nothing but vanity. These, therefore,
shall teach
many. This prediction of the angel not
only asserts the existence of some among the people who should remain constant
amidst such grievous assaults, and should preserve the integrity of their faith,
but says they should be the directors of others; as if he had said, God will
grant to each of his elect, not only the power of a bold resistance and of
preserving himself pure and uncontaminated amidst every corruption, but at the
same time he will render these good men the supporters of others, either in
preventing their decline, or if they have fallen off, in bringing them back into
the right path.
Lastly, the angel signifies how small a seed
God should preserve in his Church as the teachers and rulers of others, though
but few in number; as Isaiah says, God shall consume his people, but that
consumption should leave some remnant, and then it shall flow forth. (Isaiah
10:22.) The sentiment of this passage is the same; even if many should
degenerate and depart from the faith, and this spirit should extend to the whole
people, yet some few should stand firm perhaps ten in a thousand — and
these should be God’s ministers in gathering together a new Church; and
thus the land which was formerly sterile, should profit by this irrigation and
produce new seed.
Those,
therefore, who shall be wise
among the people shall teach many. While
the angel is here predicting the future, we ought to take to ourselves this
admonition: the more each of us becomes a proficient in the faith, the more he
ought to exert his utmost endeavors to teach his rude and ignorant neighbors
according to this exhortation of the angel. God does not stretch forth his hand
to us to lead each of us to follow his own course, but to assist others and to
advance their spiritual progress. We read therefore here, a condemnation of the
slothfulness of those on whom God has bestowed much knowledge and faith, when
they fail to use the trust committed to them for the edification of their
brethren. This prediction of the angel ought to influence each of us, as a law
and rule, to seek the profit of his brethren according to the measure of his
intelligence. The angel adds, — these should not be teachers of
shadows, who prescribe men’s duty at their ease, and dispute without
inconvenience, danger, or personal trouble, about what is right in itself and
pleasing to God, but they should be strenuous warriors for the truth. Here,
therefore, the angel joins his instruction with fortitude, as by this measure it
would overcome all dangers, anxieties, and terrors. The passage becomes, in this
way, most useful to us in these days, if we only learn to reflect upon what God
delivers to us by his angel and his prophet. In conclusion then, the angel
demonstrates how God never approves of any teachers as true and legitimate,
unless they deliver their message as if ready to defend it, and prepared to seal
it with their blood whenever it shall be necessary. We must read the two clauses
together, Those who teach many
the worship of God shall fall by the sword and the
flame; meaning, they would rather fall
or perish a hundred times by the sword and the flame than desist from their
office of teaching. Besides, the angel here mentions the various kinds of death,
for the sake of exhortation; for, had he mentioned only the sword, he
would not have fully expressed the usefulness of this instruction. Whatever
teachers God sets over his Church, they are not fully proved in the discharge of
their duty by overcoming a single form of temptation, but they must contend with
foes on the right hand and on the left, and must not allow the variety of their
perils to weaken either their constancy or their fortitude. If the sword
threaten them on one side, and fire on the other, — if they must suffer
the spoiling of their goods and banishment from home, nevertheless these
teachers must persevere in their course. We observe, then, the multiplicity of
conflicts here enumerated by the angel, to teach us the strength of the grace of
the Spirit in supporting the teachers and rulers of the Church, and in
preventing them from yielding to any temptations while contending even with the
sword, and fire, and exile, and the spoiling of their goods.
He adds,
And that too for many
days. This circumstance possesses great
weight, as we observe many endure for a time with a manly and intrepid courage,
who afterwards languish, and then vanish away and become utterly unlike their
former selves. The angel, however, here promises to those who should be
sustained by the Spirit of God an invincible constancy. They should
gather fresh courage for fresh conflicts, not only for a single day, or month,
or year, but it should never fail them. He adds next,
And when they shall
fall, or shall have fallen,
they shall be
strengthened, or assisted,
with a small
help. Without the slightest doubt, the
angel here speaks of the Maccabees, by whose assistance the faithful were
gathered together and
completely
separated from those apostates who had betrayed God’s temple and
worship. He calls the help small, and truly it was so. For what could the
Maccabees do to resist Antiochus? The powerful influence of this king is well
known; and what was Judea when compared with Syria? The Jews indeed had
destroyed their own power; we have already seen how they violated treaties, and
corrupted the majority of their own people. there was neither skill, nor plan,
nor concert among them. The help,
then,
was
small, which God sent them. But then the
angel shews how God would afford succor to his people when in distress, and
allow them some alleviation from the cruelty of the tyrant.
He adds next,
Many shall join themselves to
them by flatteries. Even from this small
number the angel cuts off the greater part, and informs them of the miserable
condition of the Church, because very few should dare to oppose the madness of
the tyrant, and out of these few many should be hypocrites. The whole of
this chapter must be interpreted of Antiochus, and yet doubtless God
wishes to promote our improvement by these prophecies. They belong equally to
us; for as God governs his Church in a variety of ways, so he always sustains it
under its various crosses and trials.
Besides this, the old enemy the devil, who formerly
opposed the Church, is equally troublesome to us. He assails us partly by
enemies without and partly by enemies within. Such teaching as this was useful,
not only to the ancients, but, to us also in the present day. First of all, the
angel predicts the assistance to be received by the faithful as small.
Let us learn, then, when God wishes to succor and to help us, — that
he does not always exert the fullness of his power. He does not thunder from
heaven and overthrow our enemies by the first stroke of his lightning; but he
enables us to contend successfully with our cross, and thus we are far separated
from the reprobate by our firmness in resistance. Again, from the second clause
we must notice the absolute certainty of many hypocrites being found mingled
with the souls of God, and when God purges his Church, but a small portion will
remain sincere, just as in these days the very counterpart of this prophecy is
exhibited before our eyes. The whole Papacy is called the Church of God; we are
but few in number, and yet what a mixture exists even among us? How many in
these days profess attachment to the Gospel, in whom there is nothing either
solid or sincere! If God should search narrowly into small Churches, still among
these few, some would be found deceivers. It never has been otherwise, or shall
be different. until the end of the world. Here, then, we are admonished to
desire, as far as lies in our power, the purity of the Church, and to avoid all
impurity, because, in desiring auxiliaries too eagerly on the pressure of any
urgent necessity, we shall be certain to become sprinkled with many stains which
may ultimately cover us with confusion. The angel doubtless here reproves a
fault in the conduct of the Maccabees. Although God stirred them up to afford
some consolation to his Church, their proceedings are not to be approved; for it
does not follow that all their actions were praiseworthy because their cause was
pious and holy. But I must defer this subject till to-morrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as at this day thou
dost try the faith of thy people by many tests, that they may obtain strength
from the unconquered fortitude of thy Holy Spirit. May we constantly march under
thy standard, even to the end, and never succumb to any temptation. May we there
join intelligence with zeal in building up thy Church: as each of us is endowed
with superior gifts, so may he strive for the edification of his brethren with
greater boldness, manliness, and fervor, while he endeavors to add numbers to
the cause. And should the number of those who are professed members of thy
Church diminish, yet may some seed always remain, until abundant produce shall
flow forth from it, and such fruitfulness arise as shall cause thy name to be
glorified throughout the whole world, in Jesus Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-SECOND
We began yesterday to explain what the angel said
about the future persecution of the Church, and its subsequent consolation. He
first shewed how all the intelligent among the people should be subject to the
cruelty of their enemies, in consequence of their manly perseverance in teaching
others. We have shewn how inefficient those teachers whom God has set over his
Church would be, if they discharged their duties at ease and in the shade, and
were unprepared to undergo all contests, and intrepidly to expose their lives to
a variety of dangers. This, then, is a living and efficacious method of
touching, when we do not cease to discharge our duties in the midst of sword and
flame. But, on the other hand, we must notice how much this instruction is
sought for when these fatal conflicts arise. Many in these days listen to
our instruction concerning Christ; only they must continue without injury or
annoyance. We observe many greedily drinking in the evangelical doctrines; but
yet when anything disperses the crowd they flee immediately, and with as little
consideration as when they first joined the assembly. That conduct which we
daily observe was equally common in former times. Clearly enough this fault has
been rampant throughout all ages, and it is innate in men not only to escape the
cross and all things vexatious, but especially to disclose their own
infirmities, because they are unwilling to undergo any danger for the worship of
God and the free confession of the truth. This passage, then, must be noticed,
since the Prophet not only exhorts the learned and the wise to instruct others,
but he prescribes a rule for the infirm and unlearned, urging them to strengthen
theme-selves against all temptations, when they see all things in confusion, and
Satan plotting for the complete annihilation of piety. As this is the
angel’s language, we must diligently notice the circumstances of the
times, for he was not here instituting a peaceful school, and discoursing like
philosophers at their ease concerning virtue without any practical contest; but
he enforces the duty of both learning and teaching, even if a variety of deaths
should be placed before our eyes. He speaks next, as I have lately stated, the
language of consolation. God shews how he would afford help to his elect,
although it might possibly seem of no consequence to them. For he dwells on
the smallness of the
assistance — which literally
happened. Without doubt the angel referred to Mattathias and his sons, usually
called the Maccabees. (1 Maccabees 2:1.) A restriction is put upon that help by
an allusion to the members who should prove hypocritical out of that small band.
We are fully aware how the Church would be reduced in its extent, for all would
not prove sound in the faith, but the greater part would be drawn aside by those
fallacies which the angel here calls blandishments. This was a very
grievous trial to the faithful when they perceived their own fewness and
weakness in the face of their enemies. Besides, they dared not trust those
allies who had pledged their faith to them and made wonderful promises, since
many were deceived by these flatteries, and abandoned the cause through want of
sincerity of mind.
We have already adverted to the usefulness of such
instruction for our own times.; for we ought to apply it personally to
ourselves, as our circumstances are similar to those of the ancients. Out of the
great multitude of those who wish to be esteemed Christians, we observe how very
few retain the pure and uncorrupted worship of God. The Papists treat their own
community, which is defiled with filth of all kinds, as the only Church; there
piety is utterly subverted or else contaminated with the multitude of
superstitions. And even in that small company which has withdrawn itself from
the Papal idolatries, the greater part is full of perfidy and deceit. They
pretend to remarkable zeal, but if you thoroughly examine them, you will find
them full of deception. For if God should probe his Church to the quick,
as he did some years ago in Germany, and as he may do shortly in our own case,
in all these serious conflicts, and amidst these persecutions, many will boast
in the bravery of their championship, and yet their zeal will quickly ooze away.
When the Lord, therefore, exercises us by methods similar to those by which he
proved the ancient Church, this ins6ruetion ought always to occur to our
remembrance, lest our minds should grow dull and languid.
This passage may lead us to inquire whether the angel
approved of all the exploits of the Maccabees. We may reply to the question in
two opposite ways. First of all, if any one persists in contending from the
angel’s words for God’s approval of every action of the Maccabees,
this view is by no means correct. God might use the Maccabees in succoring the
wretched Israelites, and yet it does not follow that they conducted the
good cause properly and lawfully. It very often occurs, when the faithful offer
their services to God, and have one object set before them, that they fail
either through inconsiderate zeal, or through partial ignorance. Whether we take
this view or not, our object is often good when our manner of proceeding is
objectionable. And thus it was with the Maccabees; God, doubtless, stirred up
Mattathias to collect the dispersed remnant of the people, to restore his
worship, and to purge his temple from the abominations which Antiochus had set
up. Yet in the troublous times which occurred, his sons, doubtless, failed in
many points of duty. The cause which they undertook was just, while particular
actions of theirs cannot be approved by us. It now follows
—
|
DANIEL
11:35
|
|
35. And some of them of understanding
shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, to the
time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.
|
35. Et ex intelligentibus cadent ad probandum
f569
in ipsis,
f570
et mundandos,
f571
et dealbandos usque ad tempus finis, id est, finitum, quoniam adhuc usque
ad praefixum tempus.
|
The angel pursues the same sentiment as before
shewing us how the children of God, in their eagerness to defend the cause of
piety, should be subject to many grievous persecutions.
Some of the learned shall
fall; meaning, that calamity shall not
be for a single moment only; for those who earnestly desired to defend the true
worship of God should perish by the sword, and by fire, and by other methods of
destruction, and their successors, too, should suffer the same calamities. The
phrase, the learned should
fall, implies the perishing of the very
flower of the Church. There will always be much refuse among a people, and the
greater part of it flies off and revolts when their religion requires of them
the sacrifice of their life. A few remain, here called intelligent, who, as we
stated yesterday, are not wise after the flesh. Making provision for the flesh,
implies taking care of themselves, and of their own interests, running no risks,
and avoiding all troubles; while those are called intelligent, who, forgetful of
their own lives, offer themselves in sacrifice to God. They do not hesitate to
incur universal hatred, and are prepared to meet death with fortitude. The
angel, therefore, predicts the perishing of the flower of the Church. For who
could have expected the name of God to have existed upon earth when all His
sincere worshippers were thus murdered with impunity? The severity of the
despotism of Antiochus is notorious, no one dared to utter a word, all the
sacred books were burnt, and he thought the worship of God entirely abolished.
Women with their children were promiscuously seized for burning, and the
satellites of this tyrant did not spare the mothers with infants hanging on
their breasts. (1 Maccabees 1.) During the progress of such atrocious cruelty,
who would not have thought the whole seed of God to have been extinct? But the
angel here shews the true result to have been different, namely,
that the sons of God should be
purged, cleansed, and whitened. He
signifies that all events should not prove so destructive, but should rather
promote their salvation. This passage unfolds to us the nature of true prudence
in the sight of God; for we ought to be prepared for death, rather than be
turned aside from the free and ingenuous profession of the heavenly doctrine,
and from the true worship of God. For this necessity is imposed on the sons of
God — to fall either by the sword or by fire, and to suffer the spoiling
of their goods, and banishment from their homes. The angel points out from the
result how persecutions which seem to issue in the destruction of the Church,
are yet profitable and salutary to the sons of God, as This is the method of
their being purified, and
cleansed, and whitened. But we must
always remember how some defiling dregs, which require clearing out, remain in
the elect, nay, even among the holy Martyrs. The angel does not here treat of
hypocrites, or of ordinary believers, but of whatever is most conspicuous and
most perfect in the Church, and yet asserts their need of purification. None,
therefore, he concludes, possess such sanctity and purity as to prevent the
remnant of some pollution which requires to be removed. Hence it becomes
necessary for them to pass through the furnace, and to be purified like gold and
silver. This is extended to all God’s martyrs.
This reminds us of the great folly of the Papists, in
imagining the merits of saints to be transferred to us, as if they had more than
they required for themselves. Indulgences, as they call them, depend upon this
error, according to the following reasoning, — had Peter lived to the
ordinary period of human life, he would have proved faithful to the end, and
then would have merited the crown of the heavenly kingdom; but when he went
beyond this, and poured out his blood in martyrdom, some merits were
superabundant; these ought not to be lost, and hence the blood of Peter and Paul
profit us at this day for the remission of sins. This is the Papal theology, and
these miserable sophists are not ashamed of these gross blasphemies, while they
vomit forth such foul sacrilege. But the angel’s teaching is far
different; — the martyrs themselves are benefited by meeting death for
their adherence to the truth, because God purges, and cleanses, and
refines, and whitens them. The angel would not have said this except some
admixture of dross still defiled the purity of the saints. But this doctrine
ought to be more than enough to animate us to undergo all dangers, when we see
ourselves stained and polluted with hidden dross; besides this, we ought
certainly to determine that death would be profitable in this sense, as God will
then purge us from those vices by which we are both infected and defiled. Whence
the value of the repetition here; the angel does not simply say
to
purge them, but adds,
to cleanse and whiten
them. Whatever holiness may shine forth
in the best of men, yet many stains and much defilement he concealed within
them; and thus in consequence of their many failings, persecution was always
useful to them.
The angel mitigates whatever might seem exceedingly
bitter, by saying, until the time
of an end, meaning, a fixed and definite
time. These words imply the merciful character of God, in not urging his people
beyond their strength, as Paul also states his faithfulness in granting them a
happy issue out of their trials, and in not pressing’ us beyond the
measure of that strength and fortitude which he has conferred upon us.
(<461013>1
Corinthians 10:13.) The angel predicts an end to these evils, and confirms this
opinion by saying, even to a
determined time. In the last clause he
signified the temporary nature of the persecutions of which he had spoken; for
they should not cease directly, nor yet for two or three years. By the words,
as yet even to a time
determined, he urges the sons of God to
prepare themselves for new contests, as they should not reach the goal for the
space of a year. But if God wished to humble them for three, or ten, or a
hundred years, they should not despond, but wait for the time divinely
predetermined, without depending on their own will. This is the substance of the
instruction conveyed. It now follows:
|
DANIEL
11:36
|
|
36. And the king shall do according to his
will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall
speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the
indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be
done.
|
36. Et faciet secundum voluntatem suam,
vel, libidinem, rex: et extollet se, et magnificabit se supra omnem Deum,
et contra Deum deorum loquetur mirabilia, et prospere aget usque ad
consummationem irae, quoniam decisio facta est, vel decisa est, nempe
consumptio.
|
This passage is very obscure, and has consequently
been explained in very opposite ways by interpreters. And whatever is obscure,
is usually doubtful, and there would be little utility and no termination, if I
were to narrate the opinions of them all. I shall therefore follow another
method, and omitting all superfluous labor, I shall simply inquire the
angel’s meaning. I must, however, refer briefly to opinions received by
the consent of the majority, because they occupy the minds of many, and thus
close the door to the correct interpretation. The Jews, for instance, are not
agreed among themselves, and their difference of opinion only serves to produce
and perpetuate darkness, rather than to diffuse the clearness of light. Some
explain it of Antiochus, and others of the Romans, but in a manner different to
that which I shall afterwards state. The Christian expositors present much
variety, but the greater number incline towards Antichrist as fulfilling the
prophecy. Others, again, use greater moderation by supposing Antichrist to be
here obliquely hinted at, while they do not exclude Antiochus as the type and
image of Antichrist. This last opinion has great probability, but. I do not
approve of it, and can easily refute it. Antiochus did not long survive the
pollution of the Temple, and then the following events by no means suit the
occurrences of this time. Nor can his sons be fairly substituted in his place,
and hence we must pass on to some other king, distinct from Antiochus and his
heirs. As I have already stated, some of the Rabbis explain this of the Romans,
but without judgment, for they first apply the passage to Vespasian, and Titus
his son, and then extend it to the present times, which is utterly without
reason, as they chatter foolishly, according to their usual custom. Those who
explain it of Antichrist, have some color of reason for their view, but there is
no soundness in their conclusion, and we shall perceive this better in the
progress of our exposition. We must now discover what king the angel here
designates. First of all, I apply it entirely to the Roman Empire, but I do not
f572
consider it to begin at the reign of the Caesars, for this would be unsuitable
and out of date, as we shall see. By the word “king” I do not think
a single person indicated, but an empire, whatever be its government, whether by
a senate, or by consuls, or by proconsuls. This need not appear either harsh or
absurd, as the Prophet had previously discussed the four monarchies, and when
treating of the Romans he calls their power a kingdom, as if they had but a
single ruler over them. And when he spoke of the Persian monarchy, he did not
refer to a single ruler, but included them all, from Cyrus to the last Darius,
who was conquered by Alexander. This method of speech is already very familiar
to us, as the word “king” often means “kingdom.” The
angel, then, when saying, a king shall do anything, does not allude to
Antiochus, for all history refutes this. Again, he does not mean any single
individual, for where shall we find one who exalted himself against all gods?
who oppressed God’s Church, and fixed his palace between two seas, and
seized upon the whole East? The Romans alone did this. I intend to shew more
clearly to-morrow how beautifully and appositely everything related by the angel
applies to the Roman empire; and if anything should appear either obscure or
doubtful, a continued interpretation will bring it to light and confirm
it.
We lay this down at once; the angel did not prophesy
of Antiochus, or any single monarch, but of a new empire, meaning, the Roman. We
have the reason at hand why the angel passes directly from Antiochus to the
Romans. God desired to support the spirits of the pious, lest they should be
overwhelmed by the number and weight of the massacres which awaited them and the
whole Church even to the advent of Christ. It was not sufficient to predict the
occurrences under the tyranny of Antiochus; for after his time, the
Jewish religion was more and more injured, not only by foreign enemies, but by
their own priesthood. Nothing remained unpolluted, since their avarice and
ambition had arrived at such a pitch, that they trod under foot the whole glory
of God, and the law itself. The faithful required to be fortified against such
numerous temptations, until Christ came, and then God renewed the condition of
his Church. The time, therefore, which intervened between the Maccabees and the
manifestation of Christ ought not to be omitted. The reason is now clear enough
why the angel passes at once from Antiochus to the Romans.
We must next ascertain how the Romans became
connected with the elect people of God. Had their dominion been limited to
Europe alone, the allusion to them would have been useless and out of place. But
from the period of the kings of Syria being oppressed by many and constant
devastation’s in war, both at home and abroad, they were unable to injure
the Jews as they had previously done; then new troubles sprang up through the
Romans. We know, indeed, when many of the kings of Syria were indulging in
arrogance, how the Romans interposed their authority, and that, too, with bad
faith, for the purpose of subjecting the east to themselves. Then when Attalus
made the Roman people his heir, the whole of Asia Minor became absorbed by them.
They became masters of Syria by the will of this foolish king, who defrauded his
legal heirs, thinking by this conduct to acquire some regard for his memory
after his death. From that period, when the Romans first acquired a taste of the
wealth of these regions, they never failed to find some cause for warfare. At
length Pompey subdued Syria, and Lucullus, who had previously carried on war
with Mithridates, restored the kingdom to Tigranes. Pompey, as I have already
remarked, subjected Syria to the Romans. He left, indeed, the Temple untouched,
but we may conjecture the cruelty which he exercised towards the Jews by the
ordinary practice of this people. The clemency of the Romans towards the nations
which they subdued is notorious enough. After Crassus, the most rapacious of all
men, had heard much of the wealth of the Jews, he desired that province as his
own. We know, too, how Pompey and Caesar, while they were friends, partitioned
the whole world among themselves. Gaul and Italy were assigned entirely to
Caesar; Pompey obtained Spain, and part of Africa and Sicily; while Crassus
obtained Syria and the regions of the east, where he miserably perished, and his
head, filled with gold, was Carried about in mockery from place to place. A
second calamity occurred during that incursion of Crassus, and from this time
the Jews were harassed by many and continual wars. Before this period, they had
entered into an alliance with the Romans, as we are informed by the books of the
Maccabees, as well as by profane writers. Therefore, when they granted liberty
to the Jews, (1 Maccabees 8, and 14) it; was said
f573
they were generous at the expense of others. This was their ordinary and usual
practice; at first they received with friendship all who sought their alliance
by treaty, and then they treated them with the utmost cruelty. The wretched Jews
were treated in this way. The angel then alludes to them first, and afterwards
speaks of Antiochus. All these points, thus briefly mentioned, we must bear in
mind, to enable us to understand the context, and to shew the impossibility of
interpreting the prophecy otherwise than of the Romans.
I now proceed to the words,
The king shall do according to
his will. I have stated that we need not
restrict this expression to a single person, as the angel prophesies of the
continued course of the Roman
monarchy. He shall raise himself
and magnify himself, says he, above
every god. This will be explained by and bye, where the king is said to be a
despiser of all deities. But with reference to the present passage, although
impiety and contempt of God spread throughout the whole world, we know how
peculiarly this may be said of the Romans, because their pride led them to pass
an opinion upon the right of each deity to be worshipped. And, therefore, the
angel will use an epithet for God, meaning fortitude’s and munitions,
µyz[m
megnezim as in
<271138>Daniel
11:38. That passage, I shall show you to-morrow, has been badly explained; for
interpreters, as we shall discover, are utterly “at sea” as
to its meaning.
f574
But here the angel, by attributing contempt of the one God and of all deities to
the Romans, implies their intense pride and haughtiness, in which they surpassed
other profane nations. And, truly, they did not preserve even a superstitious
fear of God; and while they vauntingly paraded the superior piety of both their
ancestors and themselves, yet, an accurate perusal of their writings will
disclose what they really thought. They made a laughingstock of all divinities,
and ridiculed the very name and appearance of piety, and used it only for the
purpose of retaining their subjects in obedience. The angel then says most truly
of his empire, it shall magnify
itself against all deities; and
it shall speak wonderful things
against the God of gods, by which the
Jewish religion is intended. For before they had passed into Asia Minor, and
penetrated beyond Mount Taurus, they were ignorant of the law of God, and had
never heard of the name of Moses. They then began to take notice of the worship
of some peculiar god by that nation, and of the form of their piety being
distinct from that of all other people. From the period of the knowledge of the
peculiarities of the Jewish religion being spread among the Romans, they began
to vomit forth their blasphemies against
the God of
gods. We need not gather together the
proof of this from their histories; but Cicero in his oration for Flaccus,
(section. 28,) tears most contemptuously to pieces the name of the true God; and
that impure slanderer — for he deserves the name — so blurts out his
calumnies, as if the God who had revealed himself to His elect people by his
law, was unworthy of being reckoned with Venus or Bacchus, or their other idols.
Lastly, he treats the numerous massacres to which the Jews were exposed, as a
proof of their religion being hated by all the deities; and this he thinks ought
to be a sufficient sign of the detestable character of their religion. The angel
then has every reason to declare the Romans puffed up with pride and
haughtiness, as they did not hesitate to treat the name of the true God with
such marked contempt.
He shall
utter, says he,
remarkable things against the God
of gods. The angel seems to refer to a
single individual, but we have stated his reference to be to this empire. He
adds next, And he shall prosper
until the consumption, or completion, or
consummation of the indignation,
since the determination has been made.
Here also the angel treats of a long succession and series of victories,
which prevent the application of the passage to Antiochus. For he died
immediately after he had spoiled the Temple; all his offspring perished by each
other’s hands; and the Romans, to their great disgrace, acquired
possession of Syria and that portion of the East. We must necessarily explain
this of the Romans, as they notoriously prospered in their wars, especially on
the continent of Asia. And if they were sometimes in difficulties, as we shall
see to-morrow when treating the words which the angel will then use, they soon
recovered their usual success. The angel here says,
This king shall prosper till the
end of the indignation; meaning, until
God should punish the hypocrites, and thus humble his Church. I refer this to
God, as I shall explain more at length tomorrow.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as in these days
the affairs of the world are in a state of disturbance, and as wherever we turn
our eyes we see nothing but horrible confusion: Grant, I pray, that we may be
attentive to thy teaching. May we never wander after our own imaginations, never
be drawn aside by any cares, and never turn aside from our stated course. May we
remain fixed in thy word, always seeking thee and always relying on thy
providence. May we never hesitate concerning our safety, as thou hast undertaken
to be the guardian of our salvation, but ever call upon thee in the name of
thine only-begotten Son. — Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-THIRD
We yesterday commenced an explanation of the
prophecy, in which the angel begins to treat of the Roman Empire. I then shewed
the impossibility of applying any other exposition to the passage, as it would
have been absurd to pass by the point most necessary to be known. At the very
beginning, we stated that God did not inform Daniel of other occurrences for the
purpose of pandering to the foolish and vain curiosity of the many, but to
fortify his servants, and to prevent their falling away in the midst of these
most grievous contests. But after the death of Antiochus, we know by what
various and grievous machinations Satan had endeavored to overthrow the faith of
all the pious. For this reason their courage required propping up. If the whole
of this period had been passed over in silence, God would have appeared to have
neglected his servants. Therefore either our yesterday’s subject of
comment would have been useless, or else this clause ought to be added, lest the
prophecy should appear either defective or mutilated. And we previously
observed, while the angel was predicting future changes, there was no omission
of the Roman Empire, which is again introduced here. Let us remember, then, that
the angel is not now speaking of Antiochus, nor does he make a leap forwards to
Antichrist, as some think, but he means a perpetual series. Thus the faithful
would be prepared for all assaults which might be made upon their faith, if this
rampart had not been interposed. The remainder of the verse now remains to be
explained, Even to the end of the
wrath, because the decision has been made.
The angel had narrated the perverseness of this king in not sparing the
living God, but in darting his calumnies against him. He now adds,
He shall prosper even to the end
of the wrath. The angel doubtless here
meets the next trial which might utterly overwhelm the faithful, unless they
hoped for some termination to it. By
wrath
he does not mean the rage of those who were sent as proconsuls into Asia and
the East, or even the bitterness and rigor of the Roman people and Senate, but
the word refers to God. We must remember, then, what I have previously
impressed, namely, the sons of God are called upon to examine their faults, to
humble themselves before God, without either murmuring or complaining when
chastised by his rods. We know how impatient human nature is in bearing
adversity, and how grudgingly men submit to the cross, not only stubbornly
refusing it, but openly rebelling against God. Hence those who are oppressed by
his hand are always outrageous, unless he displays himself as their judge. The
angel then here presents us with a reason why God did not rashly expose his
Church to the lust of the impious; he only wished to exact the punishment due to
their sins; and judgment ought always to begin at the house of God, as we learn
from another prophet.
(<231012>Isaiah
10:12;
<242529>Jeremiah
25:29;
<600417>1
Peter 4:17.)
The conclusion, then, the angel, in the first place,
exhorts the pious to repentance, and shews them how deservedly God laid his hand
upon them, because it was absolutely necessary. He then mitigates what would
otherwise have been too severe, by adding,
till the
end, or completion. The word signifies
both consumption and end, but it here means end, or completion. The explanation
next follows, since the
determination, or decision,
has been
made, says he. This means, God will not
pursue his children to extremities without moderation, but will bring their
punishment to an end after they have been humbled. As we read in the 40th
chapter of Isaiah, the time of their warfare was completed, when God pitied his
Church, and freed it from the tyranny of its enemies.
(<234002>Isaiah
40:2.) Isaiah there speaks in the person of God; the Church had received double,
meaning, sufficient punishment had been exacted. It almost implies his being
displeased with himself for having been too severe against his Church, as we are
familiar with the indulgence with which he usually treated his children. He
says, then, in this passage, Even
to the end of the wrath; meaning, the
punishment should be but temporary, as God had prescribed a certain termination
which should put an end to all their troubles and anxieties. It follows:
—
|
DANIEL
11:37
|
|
37. Neither shall he regard the God of his
fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify
himself above all.
|
37. Et ad deos patrum suorum non attendet, et ad desiderium, vel,
amorem, mulierum, et ad ullum Deum non attendet, quia super omne, super
omnia, sese magnificabit.
|
I do not wonder at those who explain this prophecy of
Antiochus, experiencing some trouble with these words; for they cannot satisfy
themselves, because this prediction of the angel’s was never accomplished
by Antiochus, who did neither neglect all deities nor the god of his fathers.
Then, with regard to the love of women, this will not suit this person. But it
is easy to prove by other reasons already mentioned, the absence of all allusion
here to Antiochus. Some refer this prophecy to the Pope and to Mohammed, and the
phrase, the love of women, seems to give probability to this view. For Mohammed
allowed to men the brutal liberty of chastising their wives, and thus he
corrupted that conjugal love and fidelity which binds the husband to the wife.
Unless every man is content with a single wife, there can be no love, because
there can be no conjugal happiness whenever rivalry exists between the inferior
wives. As, therefore, Mohammed allowed full scope to various lusts, by
permitting a man to have a number of wives, this seems like an explanation of
his being inattentive to the love of women. Those who think the Pope to be
intended here remind us of their enforcing celibacy, by means of which the honor
of marriage is trodden under foot. We know with what foulness the Roman Pontiffs
bark when marriage is hinted to them, as we may see in the decrees of Pope
Siricius, in the seventh chapter of the first volume of the Councils.
f575
They quote the passage, Those who are in the flesh cannot please God; and thus
compare marriage with fornication, thereby disgracefully and reproachfully
throwing scorn upon an ordinance sanctioned by God. We observe, then, some
slight correspondence, but the remaining points will not suit this idea. Some
assert that as Mohammed invented a new form of religion, so did the Pope; true
indeed, but neither of them are intended here, and the reason is, because God
wished to sustain the spirits of his people until the first coming of Christ.
Hence he predicts by his angel the sufferings to be endured by the Church until
Christ was manifest in the flesh. We must now come to the Romans, of whom we
began to explain the passage.
The angel says,
The king shall pay no regard to
the gods of his fathers. The application
of this clause is at first sight obscure; but if we come to reflect upon the
outrageous pride and barbarity of the Romans, we shall no longer doubt the
meaning of the Prophets words. The angel states two circumstances; this king
should be a despiser of all deities, and yet he should worship one god, while
the singular and magnificent pomp displayed should exceed all common practices.
These two points, so apparently opposite, were found united in the Romans. Our
explanation will appear clearer by adding the following verses,
|
DANIEL
11:38-39
|
|
38. But in his estate shall he honor the God
of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and
silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant desirable
things.
|
38. Et Deum fortitudinum, vel, munitionum, in loco suo
honorabit: et Deum quem non cognoverunt patres ejus honorabit cum auro, et
argento, et lapide pretioso, et desiderabilibus,
f576 hoc est, rebus omnibus
pretiosis.
|
|
39. Thus shall he do in the most strong holds
with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory:
and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for
gain.
|
39. Et faciet adversus munitiones fortitudinum cum Deo alieno, quem
agnoverit, multiplicabit gloriam, et dominari faciet eos in multis, et terram
dividet pretio.
|
As I have already hinted, at the first glance these
statements seem opposed to each other; the king of whom we are now treating
shall despise all deities, and yet shall worship a certain god in no ordinary
way. This agrees very well with the Romans, if we study their dispositions and
manners. As they treated the worship of their deities simply as a matter of
business, they were evidently destitute of any perception of the divinity, and
were only pretenders to religion. Although other profane nations groped their
way in darkness, yet they offered a superstitious worship to some divinities.
The Romans, however, were not subject to either error or ignorance, but they
manifested a gross contempt of God, while they maintained the appearance of
piety. We gather this opinion from a review of their whole conduct. For although
they fetched many deities from every quarter of the world, and worshipped
in common with other nations Minerva, Apollo, Mercury, and others, yet we
observe how they treated all other rites as worthless. They considered Jupiter
as the supreme deity. But what was Jupiter to them in his own country? Did they
value him a single farthing, or the Olympian deity? Nay, they derided both his
worshippers and himself. What then really was their supreme god? why the glow of
the Capitol; without the additional title of Lord of the Capitol, he was nobody
at all. That title distinguished him as specially bound to themselves. For This
reason the Prophet calls This Roman
Jupiter a god of
bulwarks, or of powers. The Romans could
never be persuaded that any other Jupiter or Juno were worthy of worship; they
relied upon their own inherent strength, considered themselves of more
importance than the gods, and claimed Jupiter as theirs alone. Because his seat
was in their capital, he was more to them than a hundred heavenly rulers, for
their pride had centered the whole power of the deity in their own capital. They
thought themselves beyond the reach of all changes of fortune, and such was
their audacity, that every one fashioned new deities according to his pleasure.
There was a temple dedicated to fortune on horseback; for this gratified the
vanity of the general who had made good use of it is cavalry, and obtained a
victory by their means; and in building a temple to equestrian fortune, he
wished the multitude to esteem himself as a deity. Then Jupiter Stator was a
god, and why? because this pleased somebody else; and thus Rome became full of
temples. One erected an image of fortune, another of virtue, a third of
prudence, and a fourth of any other divinity, and every one dared to set up his
own idols according to his fancy, till Rome was completely filled with them. In
this way Romulus was deified; and what claim had he to this honor? If any one
object here — other nations did the same — we admit it, but we also
know in what a foolish, brutal, and barbarous state of antiquity they continued.
But; the Romans, as I have already intimated, were not instigated to this
manufacture of idols by either error or superstition, but by an arrogant vanity
which elevated themselves to the first rank among mankind, and claimed
superiority over all deities. For instance, they allowed a temple to be erected
to themselves in Asia, and sacrifices to be offered, and the name of deity to be
applied to them. What pride is here! Is this a proof of belief in the existence
of either one god or many? Rome is surely the only deity, — and she must
be reverently worshipped before all others!
We observe then how the expression of this verse is
very applicable to the Romans;
they worshipped the god of
bulwarks, meaning, they claimed a divine
power as their own, and only granted to their gods what they thought useful for
their own purposes. With the view of claiming certain virtues as their own, they
invented all kinds of deities according to their taste. I omit the testimony of
Plutarch as not quite applicable to the present subject. He says in his
problems, it was unlawful to utter the name of any deity under whose protection
and guardianship the Roman State was placed. He tells us how Valerius Soranus
was carried off for foolishly uttering that deity’s name, whether male or
female. These are his very words. And he adds as the reason, their practice of
using magical incantations in worshipping their unknown divinity. Again, we know
in what remarkable honor they esteemed “the good goddess.”
The male sex were entirely ignorant of her nature, and none but females entered
the house of the high priest, and there celebrated her orgies. And for what
purpose? What was that “good goddess?” Surely there always existed
this god of
bulwarks, since the Romans
acknowledged no deity but their own selves. They erected altars to themselves,
and sacrificed all kinds of victims to their own success and good fortune; and
in this way they reduced all deities within their own sway, while they offered
them only the specious and deceptive picture of reverence. There is nothing
forced in the expression of the angel, —
he will pay no attention to the
gods of his fathers; meaning, he will
not follow the usual custom of all nations in retaining superstitious ceremonies
with error and ignorance. For although the Greeks were very acute, yet they did
not dare to make any movement, or propose any discussions on religious matters.
One thing we know to be fixed among them, to worship the gods which had been
handed down by their fathers. But the Romans dared to insult all religious with
freedom and petulance, and to promote atheism as far as they possibly could.
Therefore the angel says, he
should pay attention to the god
of his fathers. And why? They will have
regard to themselves, and acknowledge no deity except their own confidence in
their peculiar fortitude. I interpret the phrase,
the desire of
women, as denoting by that figure of
speech which puts apart for the whole, the barbarity of their manners. The love
of women is a scriptural phrase for very peculiar affection; and God has
instilled this mutual affection into the sexes to cause them to remain united
together as long as they retain any spark of humanity. Thus David is said to
have loved Jonathan beyond or surpassing the love of women.
(<100126>2
Samuel 1:26.):No fault is there found with this agreement, otherwise the love of
David towards Jonathan would be marked with disgrace. We know how sacred his
feelings were towards him, but “the love of women” is here used
par excellence, implying the exceeding strength of this affection.
As therefore God has appointed this very stringent bond of affection between the
sexes as a natural bond of union throughout the human race, it is not surprising
if all the duties of humanity are comprehended under this word by a figure of
speech. It is just as if the angel had said; this king of whom he prophesies
should be impious and sacrilegious, in thus daring to despise all deities; then
he should be so evil, as to be utterly devoid of every feeling of charity. We
observe then how completely the Romans were without natural affection, loving
neither their wives nor the female sex. I need not refer to even a few examples
by which this assertion may be proved. But throughout the whole nation such
extreme barbarity existed, that it ought really to fill us with horror. None can
obtain an adequate idea of this, without becoming thoroughly versed in their
histories; but whoever will study their exploits, will behold as in a mirror the
angel’s meaning. This king, then, should cultivate neither piety nor
humanity.
And he shall not pay attention to
other gods, because he shall magnify himself against them
all. The cause is here assigned why this
king should be a gross despiser of all deities, and fierce and barbarous against
all mortals, because he should
magnify himself above them all. That
pride so blinded the Romans, as to cause them to forget both piety and humanity;
and so this intolerable self-confidence of theirs was the reason why they paid
no honor to any deity, and trampled all mortals under foot. Humility is
certainly the beginning of all true piety; and this seed of religion is
implanted in the heart of man, causing them whether they will or not to
acknowledge some deity. But the Romans were so puffed up by self-consequence,
as to exalt themselves above every object of adoration, and to treat all
religions with contemptuous scorn; and in thus despising all celestial
beings, they necessarily looked down on all mankind, which was
literally and notoriously the fact. Now, the second clause is opposed to this,
He shall worship or honor the god
of fortitude’s. He had previously
used this word of the Temple, but this explanation does not seem suitable here,
because the angel had before expressed the unity of God, while he now enumerates
many gods. But the angel uses the word “fortitude’s,” or
“munitions,” for that perverse confidence by which the Romans
were puffed up, and were induced to treat both God and men as nothing hi
comparison to themselves. How then did these two points agree — the
contempt of all deities among the Romans, and yet the existence of some worship?
First, they despised all tradition respecting the gods, but afterwards they
raised themselves above every celestial object, and becoming ashamed of their
barbarous impiety, they pretended to honor their deities. But where did they
seek those deities, as Jupiter for instance, to whom all the tribe of them were
subject? why, in their own capitol. Their deities were the offspring of their
own imaginations, and nothing was esteemed divine but what pleased themselves.
Hence
it is said, He shall honor
him in his own place. Here the angel
removes all doubt, by mentioning the place in which this god of
fortitude’s should be honored. The Romans venerated other deities wherever
they met with them, but this was mere outward pretense. Without doubt
they limited Jupiter to his own capitol and city; and whatever they professed
respecting other divinities, there was no true religion in them, because they
adored themselves in preference to those fictitious beings. Hence
he shall worship the god of
ramparts in his place, and shall honor a strange god whom his fathers knew
not.
f577
Again,
He shall honor him in gold, and
silver, and precious stones, and all desirable
things; meaning, he shall worship his
own deity magnificently and with remarkable pomp. And we know how the riches of
the whole world were heaped together to ornament their temples. For as soon as
any one purposed to erect any temple, he was compelled to seize all things in
every direction, and so to spoil all provinces to enrich their own temples.
Rome, too, did not originate this splendor for the sake of superstition, but
only to raise itself and to become the admiration of all nations; and thus we
observe how well this prophecy is explained by the course of subsequent events.
Some nations, in truth, were superstitious in the worship of their idols, but
the Romans were superior to all the rest. When first they became masters of
Sicily, we know what an amount of wealth they abstracted from a single city. For
if ever any temples were adorned with great and copious splendor and much
riches, surely they would confess the extreme excellence of those of Sicily. But
Marcellus stripped almost all temples to enrich Rome and to ornament the shrines
of their false deities. And why so? Was it because Jupiter, and Juno, and
Apollo, and Mercury, were better at Rome than elsewhere? By no means; but
because he wished to enrich the city, and to turn all sorts of deities into a
laughingstock, and to lead them in triumph, to shew that there was no other
deity or excellence except at Rome, the mistress of the world. He afterwards
adds, He shall
perform. Here, again, the angel seems to
speak of prosperity. Without doubt he would here supply courage to the pious,
who would otherwise vacillate and become backsliders when they observed such
continued and incredible success, in a nation so impious and sacrilegious, and
remarkable for such barbarous cruelty. Hence he states how the Romans should
obtain their ends in whatever they attempted, if their fortitude should prevail,
as if it were their deity. Although they should despise all deities, and only
fabricate a god for themselves through a spirit of ambition; yet even this
should bring them success. This is now called a foreign deity. Scripture
uses this word to distinguish between fictitious idols and the one true God. The
angel seems to say nothing which applies especially to the Romans. For the
Athenians and Spartans, the Persians and the Asiatics, as well as all other
nations, worshipped strange gods. What, then, is the meaning of the name? for
clearly the angel did not speak after the ordinary manner. He calls him
strange, as he was not handed down from one to another; for while they
boasted vainly in their veneration of the idols received from their ancestors,
together with all their sacred institutions and their inviolable rites, yet they
inwardly derided them, and did not esteem them worth a straw, but only wished to
retain some fallacious form of religion through a sense of shame. We remember
the saying of Cato concerning the augurs, “I wonder when one meets another
how he can refrain from laughing!” thus shewing how he ridiculed them. If
any one had asked Cato either in the senate or privately, What think you of the
augurs and all our religion? he would reply, “Ah! let the whole world
perish before the augurs; for these constitute the very safety of the people and
of the whole republic: we received them from our ancestors, therefore let us
keep them for ever!” Thus that crafty fellow would have spoken, and thus
also would all others. But while they prated thus to each other, they were not
ashamed to deny the existence of a Deity, and so to ridicule whatever had been
believed from the very beginning, as entirely to reduce to nothing the
traditions received from their forefathers. It does not surprise us to find the
angel speaking of a strange god which was worshipped at Rome, not, as I
have said, through superstition or mistake, but only to prevent their barbarity
from becoming abominable throughout the world.
That
God, says he,
whom he had
acknowledged: great weight is attached
to this word. The angel means, that the whole divinity rested on the opinion and
will of the sovereign people, because it was agreeable to its inclination, and
promoted its private interest. As the plan of worshipping any gods would be
approved, and they would pride themselves in their own pleasure, they should
boast with great confidence, that there could be no piety but at Rome. But why
so? Because they acknowledge strange gods, and determine and decree the form of
worship which was to be preserved. The angel thus places the whole of the
religion of Rome in lust, and shews them to be impure despisers of
God.
He afterwards says,
He shall multiply the
glory. This may be referred to God, but
I rather approve of a different interpretation. The Romans should acquire great
wealth for themselves, and should increase wonderfully in opulence, in the
magnitude of their empire, and in all other sources of strength. Therefore
they shall multiply the
glory, meaning, they shall acquire new
territories, and increase their power, and accumulate a multitude of treasures.
This explanation fits in very well with the close of the verse, where he
adds, he shall make them rule far
and wide. This is a portion of that
glory which this king shall heap upon himself, for he should be superior to the
kings over many lands, and should distribute the booty which he had acquired,
and that, too, for a
price. He says, therefore, he
shall make them rule over
many; for the relative is without a
subject, which is a frequent practice of the Hebrews. Whom, then, should the
Roman king, or the Roman empire, thus cause to have dominion? Whoever rendered
them any assistance should receive his reward from a stranger, as we know
Eumenes to have been enriched by the booty and spoil of Antiochus. The provinces
also were distributed according to their will. The island was given up to the
Rhodians, while a kingdom was wrested from another, and the AEtolians
enlarged their dominions. As each party labored hard for their benefit, and
incurred large expenses, so the Romans conferred riches upon them. After
conquering Antiochus, they became the more liberal towards Attalus and Eumenes,
and thus they became masters of the greater part of Asia. Again, when they had
deprived Nabis, the tyrant of Sparta, of the greater part of his territories,
those who had taken care to gratify the Romans, were favored with the spoils
they had seized from him. We have another instance in the favor’s
conferred upon Massinissa after the conquest of Carthage; for after being
expelled from his own kingdom, his dominion extended far and wide throughout the
continent of Africa: after being deprived of his paternal sovereignty, he had
not a spot in the world on which to plant his foot until they bestowed upon him
what they had seized from the Carthaginians. And how did they manage this?
They shall divide the soil for a
price, says the angel; thus obliquely
reproving the cunning of the senate and Roman people, because they did not give
away these ample dominions gratuitously; they would willingly have devoured
whatever they had acquired, but they found it better policy to sell them than to
retain them. They did not sell at any fixed price — for the word
“price” here need not be restricted to a definite sum of
money — but displayed their avarice, and sold and distributed for the sake
of gain, just as much as if all these territories had been immediately reduced
into provinces of their empire. They had need of great resources; it was
objectionable to continue their garrison in perpetuity in the cities of Greece,
and hence they proclaim perfect freedom through them all. But what sort of
liberty was this? Each state might choose its senate according to the pleasure
of the Romans, and thus as each acquired rank and honor in his own nation, he
would become attached and enslaved to the Roman people. And then, in this
condition of affairs, if any war should spring up, they sought aid from these
friends and allies. For had they been only confederate, the Romans would never
have dared to exact so much from each tributary state. Let us take the case of
the Carthaginians. After being reduced by many exaction’s to the lowest
pitch of poverty, yet when the Romans made war against Philip and Macedon, and
against Antiochus, they demanded ships from these allies. They demanded besides,
as a subsidy, an immense quantity of gold, silver, provisions, garments, and
armor, till at length these wretched Carthaginians, whose very life-blood the
Romans had drained, still sent for the war whatever gold they had remaining, and
all they could scrape together. Thus Philip king of Macedon is compelled to
destroy himself, by plunging his own sword into his body; for every state of
Greece was forced to contribute its own portion of the expenses of the
war.
We perceive, then, how
the lands were divided for a
price, each with regard to its own
utility, not by fixing a certain defined money value, but according to the
standard of political expediency. And what kind of bargaining did they
afterwards mutually execute? We have an instance of it in the prevalence of
proscription among the Romans, by which they turned their rapacity against their
own vitals. They had previously confiscated the goods of their enemies. Philip,
for instance, was forced to pay a large sum of money to repurchase the name of
king and the portion of territory which remained his own. Antiochus and the
Carthaginians were subject to the same hardship. The Romans, in short, never
conquered any one without exhausting both the monarch and his dominions
to satisfy their insatiable avarice and cupidity. We now perceive
how they divided the lands for a
price, holding all kings in subjection
to themselves, and bestowing largesses upon one from the property of
another.
We now perceive the angel’s meaning throughout
this verse, The King should be so
powerful as to bestow dominion on whomsoever he pleased in
many and ample territories, but not
gratuitously. We have had examples of some despoiled of their royal dignity and
power, and of others restored to the authority of which they had been deprived.
Lucullus, for instance, chose to eject one king from his dominions, while
another general restored him to his possessions. A single Roman citizen could
thus create a great monarch; and thus it often happened. Claudius proposed to
the people to proscribe the king of Cyprus, although he was of the royal race;
his father had been the friend and ally of the Roman people, he had committed no
crime against the Roman empire, and there was no reason for declaring war
against him. Meanwhile he remained in security at home, while none of those
ceremonies by which war is usually declared took place. He was proscribed in the
market-place by a few vagabonds, and Cato is immediately sent to ravage the
whole island. He took possession of it for the Romans, and this wretched man is
compelled to cast himself into the sea in a fit of despair. We observe, then,
how his prediction of the angel was by no means in vain; the Roman proconsuls
distributed kingdoms and provinces,
but yet for a
price, for they seized everything in the
world, and drew all riches, all treasures, and every particle of value into the
whirlpool of their unsatisfied covetousness. We shall put off the
remainder.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as in all ages the
blindness of mankind has been so great as to lead them to worship thee
erroneously and superstitiously, and since they manifest such duplicity and
pride as to despise thy name, and also the very idols which they have fashioned
for themselves: Grant, I pray thee, that true piety may be deeply rooted in our
hearts. May the fear of thy name be so engraven within us, that we may be
sincerely and unreservedly devoted to thee. May each of us heartily desire to
glorify thy name, and may we endeavor to lead our brethren in the same course.
Do thou purge us more and more from all dissimulation, until at length we arrive
at that perfect purity which is laid up for us in heaven, through Jesus Christ
our Lord. — Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-FOURTH
|
DANIEL
11:40
|
|
40. And at the time of the end shall the king
of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like
a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall
enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
|
40. Et im tempore finis configet cum eo rex austri, et tanquam turbo
iruet rex aquilonis, cum curru et equitibus, et navibus multis: et veniet in
terras, et exundabit, et transibit, pervadet
|
As to the time here mentioned, it is a certain or
predetermined period’ the kings of the south and the north we have already
shewn to refer to Egypt and Syria, such being their position with respect to
Judea. The word
jgn
neech, confliget, is literally he shall “push with the
horns,” while the word translated, “he shall rush as a
whirlwind,” is deduced from
r[ç
segner, “to be stormy.” The angel here predicts the
numerous victories by means of which the Romans should extend their empire far
and wide, although not without great difficulties and dangers. He states,
The king of the south should
carry on war with the Romans for a definite
period. I dare not fix the precise time
intended by the angel. So great was the power of Egypt, that had the kings of
that country relied upon their native resources, they might have summoned
courage to make war upon the Romans. Gabinius the proconsul led his army there
for the sake of restoring Ptolemy. He expelled Archelaus without much trouble,
and then like a mercenary he risked his life and his fame there, as well as his
army. Caesar was in danger there, after vanquishing Pompey; then Antony next
made war upon Augustus, assisted by the forces of Cleopatra; then Egypt put
forth all her strength, and at his failure was reduced herself to a province of
Rome. The angel did not propose to mark a continued series of times, but only
briefly to admonish the faithful to stand firm amidst those most grievous
concussions which were then at hand. Whatever be the precise meaning, the angel
doubtless signified the difficult nature of the struggle between the Romans and
the Egyptians. I have already stated the witness of history to the fact, that
the Egyptians never made war against the Romans in their own name; sometimes
events were so confused that the Egyptians coalesced with the Syrians, and then
we must read the words conjointly — thus the king of the south, assisted
by the king of the north, should carry on war with the Romans. The angel thus
shews us how the king of Syria should furnish greater forces and supplies than
the Egyptian monarch, and this really happened at the beginning of the
triumvirate. He states next, The
king of the south should come
with chariots and horses and many
ships. Nor is it necessary here to
indicate the precise period, since the Romans carried on many wars in the east,
during which they occupied Asia, while a part of Libya fell to them by the will
of its king without arms or force of any kind.
With reference to these two kingdoms which have been
so frequently mentioned, many chiefs ruled over Syria within a short period.
First one of the natives was raised to the throne and then another, till the
people grew tired of them, and transferred the sovereignty to strangers. Then
Alexander rose gradually to power, and ultimately acquired very great
fame: he was not of noble birth, for his father was of unknown origin. This
man sprang from an obscure family, and at one period possessed neither authority
nor resources. He was made king of Syria, because he pretended to be the son of
Seleucus, and was slain immediately, while his immediate successor reigned for
but a short period. Thus Syria passed over to the Romans on the death of this
Seleucus. Tigranes the king of Armenia was then sent for, and he was made ruler
over Syria till Lucullus conquered him, and Syria was reduced to a province. The
vilest of men reigned over Egypt. Physcon, who was restrained by the Romans when
attempting to wrest Syria from the power of its sovereign, was exceedingly
depraved both in body and mind and hence he obtained this disgraceful
appellation. For the word is a Greek one, equivalent to the French andouille;
for physce means that thicker intestine into which the others are
usually inserted. This deformity gave rise to his usual name, signifying
“pot-bellied,” implying both bodily deformity and likeness to the
brutes, while he was not endowed with either intellect or ingenuity. The last
king who made the Romans his son’s guardians, received the name of
Auletes, and Cicero uses this epithet of “flute-player,”
because he was immoderately fond of this musical instrument In each kingdom
then there was horrible deformity, since those who exercised the royal authority
were more like dogs or swine than mankind. Tigranes, it is well known, gave the
Romans much trouble. On the other side, Mithridates occupied their attention for
a very long period, and with various and opposite success. The Romans throughout
all Asia were at one period put to the sword, and when a close engagement was
fought, Mithridates was often superior, and he afterwards united his forces with
those of Tigranes, his father-in-law. When Tigranes held Armenia, he was a king
of other kings, and afterwards added to his dominions a portion of Syria. At
length when the last Antiochus was set over the kingdom of Syria by Lucullus, he
was removed from his command by the orders of Pompey, and then, as we have
stated, Syria became a province of Rome. Pompey crossed the sea, and subdued the
whole of Judea as well as Syria’ he afterwards entered the Temple, and
took away some part of its possessions, but spared the sacred treasures. Crassus
succeeded him — an insatiable whirlpool, who longed for this province for
no other reason than his unbounded eagerness for wealth. He despoiled the Temple
at Jerusalem; and lastly, after Cleopatra was conquered, Egypt lost its royal
race, and passed into a Roman province. If the Romans, had conquered a hundred
other provinces, the angel would not have mentioned them here; for I have
previously noticed his special regard to the chosen people. Therefore he dwells
only on those slaughters which had more or less relation to the wretched Jews.
First of all he predicts the great contest which should arise between the kings
of Egypt and Syria, who should
come on like a whirlwind, while the
Romans should rush upon the lands
like a deluge, and pass over them. He
compares the king of Syria to a whirlwind, for at first he should rush on
impetuously, filling both land and sea with his forces. Thus he should possess a
well-manned fleet, and thus excite fresh terrors, and yet vanish away rapidly
like a whirlwind. But the Romans are compared to a deluge. The new king of whom
he had spoken should come, says he,
and
overflow, burying all the forces of both
Egypt and Syria; implying the whole foundations of both realms should be swept
away when the Romans passed over them.
He shall pass
over, he says; meaning, wherever they
come, the way shall be open for them and nothing closed against them. He will
repeat this idea in another form. He does not speak now of one region only, but
says, they should come over the
lands, implying a wide-spread
desolation, while no one should dare to oppose them by resisting their
fury.
|
DANIEL
11:41-42
|
|
41. He shall enter also into the glorious
land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out
of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of
Aremort.
|
41. Et veniet in terram desiderii, et multae, regiones
scilicet, cadent, et hae evadent e manu ejus, Edom, Moab, et principium
filiorum Ammon.
|
|
42. He shall stretch forth his hand also upon
the countries; and the land of Egypt shall not escape.
|
42. Et mittet, hoc est, extendet, manum suam in terras, et
terra AEgypti non erit in evasionem.
f578
|
The land of Judea is called the pleasant or desirable
land, because God thought it worthy of his peculiar favor. He chose it for his
dwelling-place, called it his resting-place, and caused his blessing to remain
in it. In this verse also, regions are treated, and not merely cities, as the
regions of Edom and of Moab. After the angel had briefly predicted the
occurrence of the most grievous wars with the Romans, he now adds what he had
briefly commenced in the last verse, — namely their becoming conquerors of
all nations. They shall
come, he says,
into the desirable
land. This is the reason why the angel
prophesies of the Roman empire, for he was not sent to explain to Daniel the
history of the whole world, but to retain the faithful in their allegiance, and
to persuade them under the most harassing convulsions to remain under the
protection and guardianship of God. For this reason he states, —
they shall come into the
desirable land. This would be a dreadful
temptation, and might overthrow all feelings of piety, as the Jews would be
harassed on all sides, first by the Syrians and then by the Egyptians. And we
know with what cruelty Antiochus endeavored not only to oppress but utterly to
blot out the whole nation. Neither the Syrians nor the Egyptians spared them.
The Romans came almost from the other side of the globe; at first they made an
alliance with these states, and then entered Judea as enemies. Who would have
supposed that region under God’s protection, when it was so exposed to all
attacks of robbery and oppression? Hence it was necessary to admonish the
faithful not to fall away through this utter confusion.
They shall
come, then,
into the desirable land, and many
regions shall fall; meaning, no hope should
remain for the Jews after the arrival of the Romans, as victory was already
prepared to their hand. The angel’s setting before the faithful this
material for despair was not likely to induce confidence and comfort, but. as
they were aware of these divine predictions, they knew also that the remedy was
prepared by the same God who had admonished them by means of the angel. It was
in his power to save his Church from a hundred deaths. This prophecy became an
inestimable treasury, inspiring the faithful with the hope of the promised
deliverance. The angel will afterwards add the promise intended to support and
strengthen and revive their drooping spirits. But he here announces that
God’s aid should not immediately appear, because he would give the Romans
full permission to exercise a cruel sway, tyranny, and robbery, throughout the
whole of Asia and the East. He says,
The lands of Edom, Moab, and a
portion of Ammon should escape from their
slaughter. This trial would in no slight
degree affect the minds of the pious: What does he mean? He suffers the land
that he promised should be at rest, to be now seized and laid waste by its
enemies! The land of Moab is at peace and enjoys the greatest tranquillity, and
the condition of the sons of Ammon is prosperous! We should here bear in mind
what the prophets say of these lands: Esau was banished into the rugged
mountains, and God assigned to the Moabites a territory beyond the borders of
the land of blessings.
(<390103>Malachi
1:3.) The Jews alone had any peculiar right and privilege to claim that
territory in which the Lord had promised them perfect repose. Now, when Judea is
laid waste and their foes according to their pleasure not only seize upon
everything valuable in the city and the country, but seem to have a special
permission to ravage the land at their will, what could the Jews conjecture? The
angel therefore meets this objection, and alleviates these feelings of anxiety
to which the faithful could be subject from such slaughters. He states that the
territories of Edom and Moab, and of the
children of
Ammon, should be tranquil and safe from
those calamities. By the expression,
to the beginning of the children
of Ammon, he most probably refers to
that, retreat whence the Ammonites originated. For doubtless the Romans would
not have spared the Ammonites unless they had been concealed among the
mountains, for every district in the neighborhood of Judea was subject to the
same distress. Those who interpret this passage of Antichrist, suppose safety to
be extended only to that portion of the faithful who shall escape from the world
and take refuge in the deserts. But there is no reason in this opinion, and it
is sufficient to retain the sense already proposed as the genuine one. He
afterwards adds, The Romans
should send their army into the land, and even in the land of Egypt, they should
not escape. The angel without doubt here
treats of the numerous victories which the Romans should obtain in a short time.
They carried on war with Mithridates for a long period, and then Asia was almost
lost; but they soon afterwards began to extend their power, first over all Asia
Minor, and then over Syria; Armenia was next added to their sway, and Egypt
after that: meanwhile this was but a moderate addition, till at length they
ruled over the Persians, and thus their power became formidable. Wherefore this
prophet was fulfilled by their
extending their power over many regions, and by the land of Egypt becoming a
portion of their booty. It
follows:
|
DANIEL
11:43
|
|
43. But he shall have power over the treasures
of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the
Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.
|
43. Et dominabitur thesauris auri, et argenti, et omnibus
desiderabilibus f579 AEgypti, et Lybiae,
et Aethiopiae ingressibus suis.
|
I have previously stated that though the language
applies to a single king, yet a kingdom is to be understood, and our former
observations are here confirmed. Although many nations should endeavor to resist
the Romans, they should yet be completely victorious, and finally acquire
immense booty. Their avarice and covetousness were perfectly astonishing; for he
says, they should acquire
dominion over the treasures of gold and silver, and should draw to themselves
all the precious things of Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia; and that, too, in their
footsteps. In these words he more
clearly explains our previous remarks upon the emblem of the deluge. All lands
should be laid open to them; although the cities were fortified, and would thus
resist them by their closed gates, yet the way should be open to them, and none
should hinder them from bursting forth over the whole east, and subduing at the
same time cities, towns, and villages. This we know to have been actually
accomplished. Hence there is nothing forced in the whole of this context, and
the prophecy is fairly interpreted by the history. He afterwards adds, —
|
DANIEL
11:44
|
|
44. But tidings out of the east and out of the
north shall trouble him therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy,
and utterly to make away many.
|
44. Rumores vero, f580 terrebunt
eum ab oriente, et ab aquilone: egredieturque cum ira magna, ut perdat et
internecione deleat multos.
|
The angel’s narrative seems here to differ
somewhat from the preceding one, as the Romans should not succeed so completely
as to avoid being arrested in the midst of their victorious course. He says,
they shall be frightened by
rumors, and the events suit this case,
for although the Romans subdued the whole east with scarcely any trouble,
and in a few years, yet they were afterwards checked by adversity. For Crassus
perished miserably after spoiling the temple, and destroyed himself and the
flower of the Roman army; he was conquered at Carrse, near Babylon, in an
important engagement, through betrayal by a spy in when he had placed too much
confidence. Antony, again, after dividing the world into three parts
between himself, and Octavius, and Lepidus, suffered miserably in the same
neighborhood against the Parthians. We are not surprised at the angel’s
saying, The Romans should be
frightened from the east and the north,
as this really came to pass. Then he adds,
they should come in great
wrath; meaning, although they should
lose many troops, yet this severe massacre should not depress their spirits.
When their circumstances were desperate, they were excited to fury like savage
beasts of prey, until they rushed upon their own destruction. This
came to pass more especially under the reign of Augustus; for a
short period he contended successfully with the Parthians, and
compelled them to surrender. He then imposed upon them conditions of
peace; and as the Roman eagles had been carried into Persia, much to their
disgrace, he compelled this people to return them. By this compulsion he blotted
out the disgrace which they had suffered under Antony. We see, then, how
exceedingly well this suits the context, —
the Romans shall come with
great wrath to destroy many; as the
Parthians expected to enjoy tranquillity:for many ages, and to be perfectly free
from any future attempt or attack from the Romans. It now follows,
—
|
DANIEL
11:45
|
|
45. And he shall plant the tabernacles of his
palaces between the seas in the glorious holy mountain: yet he shall come to his
end, and none shall help him.
|
45. Et figet tabernacula palatii sui inter
maria ad montem desiderii sanctitatis, et veniet ad finem suum, et non
auxiliator ei.
|
The angel at length concludes with the settled sway
of the Romans in Asia Minor and the regions of the coast, as well as in Syria,
Judea, and Persia. We have already shewn how everything here predicted is
related by profane historians, and each event is well known to all who are
moderately versed in the knowledge of those times. We must now notice the
phrase, The Roman king should fix
the tents of his palace. This expression
signifies not only the carrying on of the war by the Romans in the east, but
their being lords of the whole of that region. When he had said they should fix
their tents according to the usual practice of warfare, he might have been
content with the usual method of speech, but he contrasts the word
“palace” with frequent migrations, and signifies their not measuring
their camp according to the usage of warfare, but their occupying a fixed
station for a permanence. Why then does he speak of tents? Because Asia was not
the seat of their empire; for they were careful in not attributing more dignity
to any place than was expedient for themselves. For this reason the proconsuls
took with them numerous attendants, to avoid the necessity of any fixed palace
they had their own tents, and often remained in such temporary dwellings as they
found on their road. This language of the angel —
they shall fix the tents of their
palace — will suit the Romans
exceedingly well, because they reigned there in tranquillity after the east was
subdued; and yet they had no fixed habitation, because they did not wish any
place to become strong enough to rebel against them. When he says,
between the
seas, some think the Dead Sea
intended, and the Lake of Asphalt, as opposed to the Mediterranean Sea. I do not
hesitate to think the Persian Sea is intended by the angel. He does not say the
Romans should become masters of all the lands lying between the two seas, but he
only says they should fix the
tents of their palace between the seas;
and we know this to have been done when they held the dominion between the
Euxine and the Persian Gulf. The extent of the sway of Mithridates is well
known, for historians record twenty-two nations as subject to his power.
Afterwards, on one side stood Asia Minor, which consisted of many nations,
according to our statement elsewhere, and Armenia became theirs after Tigranes
was conquered, while Cilicia, though only a part of a province, was a very
extensive and wealthy region. It had many deserts and many stony and
uncultivated mountains, while there were in Cilicia many rich cities, though it
did not form a single province, like Syria and Judea, so that it is not
surprising when the angel says the Romans
should fix their tents between
the seas, for their habitation was
beyond the Mediterranean Sea. They first passed over into Sicily and then into
Spain; thirdly, they began to extend their power into Greece and Asia Minor
against Antiochus, and then they seized upon the whole east. On the one shore
was Asia Minor and many other nations; and on the other side was the Syrian Sea,
including Judea as far as the Egyptian Sea. We observe, then, the tranquillity
of the Roman empire between the
seas, and yet it had no permanent seat
there, because the proconsuls spent their time as foreigners in the midst of a
strange country.
At length he
adds, They should come to the
mountain of the desire of holiness. I
have already expressed the reason why this prophecy was uttered; it was to
prevent the novelty of these events from disturbing the minds of the pious, when
they saw so barbarous and distant a nation trampling upon them, and ruling with
pride, insolence, and cruelty. When, therefore, so sorrowful a spectacle was set
before the eyes of the pious, they required no ordinary supports lest they
should yield to the pressure of despair. The angel therefore predicts future
events, to produce the acknowledgment of nothing really happening by chance; and
next, to shew how all these turbulent motions throughout the world are governed
by a divine power. The consolation follows,
they shall come at length to
their end, and no one shall bring them help.
This was not fulfilled immediately, for after Crassus had despoiled the
temple, and had suffered in an adverse engagement against the Parthians, the
Romans did not fail all at once, but their monarchy flourished even more and
more under Augustus. The city was then razed to the ground by Titus, and the
very name and existence of the Jewish nation all but; annihilated. Then, after
this, the Romans suffered disgraceful defeats; they were east out of nearly the
whole east, and compelled to treat with the Parthians, the Persians, and other
nations, till their empire was entirely ruined. If we study the history of the
next hundred years no nation will be found to have suffered such severe
punishments as the Romans, and no monarchy was ever overthrown with greater
disgrace. God then poured such fury upon that nation as to render them the
gazing-stock of the world. Tim angel’s words are not in vain,
their own end should soon
come; after they had devastated and
depopulated all lands, and penetrated and pervaded everywhere, and all the world
had given themselves up to their power, then the Romans became utterly ruined
and swept away. They should have
gone to help them. Without doubt this
prophecy may be here extended to rite promulgation of the gospel; for although
Christ was born about one age before the preaching of the gospel, yet he truly
shone forth to the world by means of that promulgation. The angel therefore
brought up his prophecy to that point of time. He now subjoins,
—
CHAPTER 12
|
DANIEL
12:1
|
|
1. And at that time shall Michael stand up,
the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people; and there shall
be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even, to
that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one
that shall be found written in the book.
|
1. Et tempore illo stabit Michael princeps, magnus stans pro filiis
populi tui, et erit tempus afflictionis, quale non fuit abesse gentem, hoc
est, ex quo coeperunt esse gentes, ad tempus illud usque: et tempore illo
servabitur populus tuus quicunque inventus fuerit scriptus in libro.
|
The angel no longer relates future occurrences
specially, but proclaims God to be in general the guardian of his Church, so as
to preserve it wonderfully amidst many difficulties and dreadful
commotion’s, as well as in the profound darkness of disaster and death.
This is the meaning of this sentence. This verse consists of two parts: the
first relates to that most wretched period which should be full of various and
almost numberless calamities; and the second assures us of God’s
never-failing protection and preservation of his Church by his own innate power.
In this second part the promise is restricted to the elect, and thus a third
clause may be distinguished, but it is only an addition to the second just
mentioned. At the close of the verse, the angel presents us with a definition of
the Church, as many professed to be God’s people who were not really so.
He says, Michael, the prince of
the people, should stand up. Then he
states the reason, The calamities
of that period should be such as were never witnessed from the beginning of the
world. As he addresses Daniel, he says,
sons of thy
people; for he was one of the sons of
Abraham, and the nation from which Daniel sprang was in that sense
“his.” From this it follows that the calamities of which he
will by and bye treat, belong to the true Church, and not to the profane
nations. The singular aid of Michael would not have been needed, unless the
Church had been oppressed with the most disastrous distresses. We perceive,
then, the angel’s meaning to be according to my explanation. The Church
should be subject to most numerous and grievous calamities until the advent of
Christ, but yet it should feel God’s propitious disposition, ensuring its
own safety under his aid and protection. By Michael many agree in understanding
Christ as the head of the Church. But if it seems better to understand Michael
as the archangel, this sense will prove suitable, for under Christ as the head,
angels are the guardians of the Church. Whichever be the true meaning, God was
the preserver of his Church by the hand of his only-begotten Son, and because
the angels are under the government of Christ, he might entrust this duty to
Michael. That foul hypocrite, Servetus, has dared to appropriate this passage to
himself; for he has inscribed it as a frontispiece on his horrible comments,
because he was called Michael! We observe what diabolic fury has seized him, as
he dared to claim as his own what is here said of the singular aid afforded by
Christ; to his Church. He was a man of the most impure feelings, as we have
already sufficiently made known. But this was a proof of his impudence and
sacrilegious madness — to adorn himself with this epithet of Christ
without, blushing, and. to elevate himself into Christ’s place, by
boasting himself to be Michael, the guardian of the Church, and the mighty
prince of the people! This fact is well known, for I have the book at hand
should any one distrust my word.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since we are placed
in similar distresses to those of which thou dost wish to warn us by thy angel,
as well as thine ancient people, that thy light may shine upon us by means of
thy only-begotten Son. May we feel ourselves always in safety under his
invincible power. May we dwell securely under his shadow, and contend earnestly
and boldly unto the end, against Satan and all his impious crew. And when all
our warfare is over, may we arrive at last at that blessed rest where the fruit
of our victory awaits us, in the same Christ our Lord. —
Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-FIVE.
The twelfth chapter commenced, as we stated in
yesterday’s Lecture, with the angel’s prediction as to the future
state of the Church after the manifestation of Christ It was to be subject to
many miseries, and hence this passage would soothe the sorrow of Daniel, and of
all the pious, as he still promises safety to the Church through the help of
God. Daniel therefore represented Michael as the guardian of the Church, and God
had enjoined this duty upon Christ, as we learn from the 10th chapter of John,
(<431028>John
10:28, 29.) As we stated yesterday, Michael may mean an angel; but I embrace the
opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the
subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect
people. He is called the mighty prince, because he naturally opposed the
unconquered fortitude of God to those dangers to which the angel represents the
Church to be subject. We well know the very slight causes for which terror often
seizes our minds, and when we begin to tremble, nothing can calm our tumult and
agitation. The angel then in treating of very grievous contests, and of the
imminent danger of the Church, calls
Michael the mighty
prince. As if he had said, Michael
should be the guardian and protector of the elect people, he should exercise
immense power, and he alone without the slightest doubt should be sufficient for
their protection. Christ confirms the same assertion, as we just; now saw, in
the 10th chapter of John. He says all his elect were given him by his father,
and none of them should perish, because his father was greater than all; no one,
says he, shall pluck my sheep out of my hand. My father, who gave them me, is
greater than all; meaning, God possesses infinite power, and displays it for the
safety of those whom he has chosen before the creation of the world, and he has
committed it to me, or has deposited it in my hands. We now perceive the reason
of this epithet, which designates
Michael as the great
prince. For in consequence of the
magnitude of the contest, we ought to enjoy the offer of insuperable strength,
to enable us to attain tranquillity in the midst of the greatest
commotion’s. It was in no degree superfluous for the angel to predict such
great calamities as impending over the Church, and in the present day the, same
expressions are most useful to us. We perceive then how the Jews imagined
a state of happiness under Christ, and the same error was adopted by the
Apostles, who, when ,Christ discoursed on the destruction of the temple and the;
city, thought the end of the world was at hand, and this they connected with
their own glory and triumph.
(<402403>Matthew
24:3.) The Prophet then is here instructed by the angel how God should direct
the course of his Church when he should manifest to them his only-begotten Son.
Still the severity of distress awaited all the pious; as if he had said, The
time of your triumph is not yet arrived; you must still continue your warfare,
which will prove both laborious and harassing. The condition of the new people
is here compared with that of the ancient one, who suffered many perils and
afflictions at God’s hands. The angel therefore says, even although the
faithful suffered very severely under the law and the prophets, yet a more
oppressive season was at hand, during which God would treat his Church far more
strictly than before, and submit it to far more excruciating trials. This is the
meaning of the passage, a season
full of afflictions should arise, such as the nations had never seen since they
began to exist. This may refer to the
creation of the world, and if we refer it to the people themselves, the
exposition will prove correct; for although the Church had in former periods
been wretched, yet after the appearance of Christ, it should suffer far more
calamities than before. We remember the language of the Psalmist: The impious
have often opposed me from my youth; they have drawn the plough across my back.
(<19C901>Psalm
129:1-3.) Through all ages then God subjected his Church to really evils and
disasters. But a comparison is here instituted between two different states of
the Church, and the angel shews how after Christ’s appearance it should be
far from either quietness or happiness. As it should be oppressed with heavier
afflictions, it is not surprising that the fathers should wish us to be
conformed to the image of his only-begotten Son.
(<450829>Romans
8:29.) Since the period of Christ’s resurrection, even if a more harassing
warfare awaits us, we ought to bear it with great equanimity, because the glory
of heaven is placed before our eyes far more clearly than it was before
theirs.
At length he adds,
At that time thy people shall be
preserved. By this expression the angel
points out to us the great importance of the protection of Michael: He promises
certain salvation to his elect people, as if he had said, although the Church
should be exposed to the greatest dangers, yet with respect to God himself, it
should always be safe and victorious in all contests, because Michael should be
superior to every enemy. The angel then, in thus exhorting the faithful to bear
their cross, shews how free they should be from all doubt as to the event, and
the absolute certainty of their victory. Although at first sight this prophecy
might inspire us with fear and dismay, yet this comfort ought to be sufficient
for us: “We shall be conquerors amidst fire and sword, and amidst
many deaths we are sure of life.” As perfect safety is here set before us,
we ought to feel secure, and to enter with alacrity into every engagement. We
are in truth obliged to fight, but Christ has conquered for us, as he says
himself, Trust in me, I have overcome the world.
(<431633>John
16:33.) But the angel restricts what he had said generally by way of correction.
Many professed to belong to the people of God, and every one naturally sprung
from the stock of Israel boasted of being the, offspring of divine seed. As all
wished promiscuously to belong to God’s people, the angel restricts his
expression by a limiting phrase, all people, says he,
who were found written in the
book. This clause does not mean all
Israel after “the flesh,”
(<450906>Romans
9:6-8,) but such as God esteems to be real Israelites according to gratuitous
election alone. He here distinguishes between the carnal and spiritual children
of Abraham, between the outward Church and that inward and true community which
the Almighty approves. Upon what then does the difference depend between those
who boast of being Abraham’s children, while they are rejected by God, and
those who are really and truly his sons? On the mere grace and favor of God. He
declares his election when he regenerates his elect by his Holy Spirit,
and thus inscribes them with a certain mark, while they prove the reality of
this sonship by the whole course of their lives, and confirm their own adoption.
Meanwhile we are compelled to go to the fountain at once; God alone by
his gratuitous election distinguishes the outward Church, which has nothing but.
the title, from the true Church, which can never either perish or fall away.
Thus we observe in how many passages of Scripture hypocrites are rejected
in the midst of their swelling pride, as they have nothing in common with
the sons of God but the external symbols of profession.
We ought to notice this restriction, which assures us
of the utter uselessness of outward pomp, and of the unprofitable nature of even
a high station in the outward Church, unless we are truly among God’s
people. This is expressed fully in Psalm 15 and 24, while Psalm 73 confirms the
same sentiments. How good is God to Israel, especially to the upright in heart!
In these passages of the Psalms the cause is not stated to be the secret
election of God, but the outward testimony of the conduct; and this although
inferior in degree, is not contrary to the first cause which produces it. This
has its proper place, but God’s election is always superior. The word
book refers to that eternal counsel of God, whereby he elected us
and adopted us as his sons before the foundation of the world, as we read in the
first chapter of Ephesians,
(<490104>Ephesians
1:4.) In the same sense Ezekiel inveighs against the false prophets who deceived
the people of Israel, (Ezekiel 8:9.) My hand, says God, shall be upon those
prophets who deceive my people: they shall not therefore be in the secret
assembly of my people, nor shall they be found in the roll of the house of
Israel. The word signifying to write is used here, — they shall not be
written in the enrollment of the house of Israel. The word book is here
used in the same sense and yet we need not adopt the gross idea, that the
Almighty has any need of a book. His book is that eternal counsel which
predestinates us to himself, and elects us to the hope of eternal salvation. We
now understand the full sense of this instruction, as the Church shall remain in
safety amidst many deaths, and even in the last stage of despair it shall escape
through the mercy and help of God. We must also remember this definition of a
church, because many boast of being God’s sons, who are complete strangers
to him. This leads us to consider the subject of election, as our salvation
flows from that fountain. Our calling, which is his outward testimony to it,
follows that gratuitous adoption which is hidden within himself; and thus God
when regenerating us by his Spirit, inscribes upon us his marks and signs,
whence he is able to acknowledge us as his real children. It follows,
—
|
DANIEL
12:2
|
|
2. And many of them that sleep in the dust of
the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and
everlasting contempt.
|
2. Et multi ex dormientibus in terra pulvere, evigilabunt hi in
vitam seculi, hoc est, perpetuo, hi vero in opprobium et in abominationem
perpetuam.
|
As to the translation of the first words, it is
literally , many who sleep in the earth of dust, or who are in earth and dust;
for the genitive is used as an epithet, though it may be read as if in
opposition with the former word sleep, meaning those who are reduced to earth
and dust.
The angel seems here to mark a transition from the
commencement of the preaching of the gospel, to the final day of the
resurrection, without sufficient occasion for it. For why does he pass over the
intermediate time during which many events might be the subject of prophecy? He
unites these two subjects very fitly and properly, connecting the salvation of
the Church with the final resurrection and with the second coming of Christ.
Wheresoever we may look around us, we never meet with any source of salvation on
earth. The angel announces the salvation of all the elect. They are most
miserably oppressed on all sides, and wherever they turn their eyes, they
perceive nothing but confusion. Hence the hope of the promised salvation could
not be conceived by man before the elect raise their minds to the second coming
of Christ. It is just as if the angel had said, God will be the constant
preserver of his Church, even unto the end; but the manner in which he will
preserve it must not be taken in a carnal sense, as the Church will be like a
dead body until it shall rise again. We here perceive the angel teaching the
same truth as Paul delivers in other words, namely, we are dead, and our life is
hidden with Christ; it shall then be made manifest when he shall appear in the
heavens.
(<510303>Colossians
3:3.) We must hold this first of all, God is sufficiently powerful to defend us,
and we need not hesitate in feeling ourselves safe under his hand and
protection. Meanwhile it is necessary to add this second point; as long
as we fix our eyes only on this present state of things, and dwell upon what the
world offers us, we shall always be like the dead. And why so? Our life ought to
be hid with Christ in God. Our salvation is secure, but we still hope for it, as
Paul says in another passage.
(<450823>Romans
8:23, 24.) What is hoped for is not seen, says he. This shews us how
completely seasonable is the transition from this doctrine respecting
God’s elect to the last advent of Christ. This then is enough with
respect to the context. The word many seems here clearly put for
all, and this is not to be considered as at all absurd, for the angel does not
use the word in contrast with all or few, but only with one. Some of the Jews
strain this expression to mean the restoration of the Church in this world under
themselves, which is perfectly frivolous. In this case the following
language would not be correct, —
-Some shall rise to life, and
others to disgrace and contempt. Hence
if this concerned none but the Church of God, certainly none would rise to
disgrace and condemnation. This shews the angel to be treating of the last
resurrection, which is common to all, and allows of no exceptions. I have lately
explained why he calls our attention to the advent of Christ. Since all flyings
in the world will be constantly confused, our minds must necessarily be raised
upwards, and gain the victory over what we observe with our eyes, and comprehend
with our outward senses.
Those who sleep in the earth and
the dust; meaning, wherever the earth
and dust exist, nevertheless they shall rise, implying the hope of a
resurrection not founded on natural causes, but depending upon the inestimable
power of God, which surpasses all our senses. Hence, although the elect as well
as the wicked shall be reduced to earth and dust, this shall by no means form an
obstacle to God’s raising them up again. He uses
earth and
dust. In my judgment
tmda,
admeth, “of the earth,” is the genus, and
rp[,
gnepher, “dust,” is the species, meaning, although
they are only putrid carcasses, yet they shall be reduced to dust, which is
minute particles of earth. God, then, is endued with sufficient power to call
forth the dead to newness of life. This passage is worthy of especial notice,
because the prophets do not contain any clearer testimony than this to the last
resurrection, particularly as the angel distinctly asserts the future rising
again of both the righteous and the wicked. Eternity is here opposed to those
temporal miseries to which we are now subjected. Here we may notice the
admonition of Paul, that those momentary afflictions by which God tries us,
cannot be compared with that eternal glory which never shall cease.
(<450818>Romans
8:18.) This, therefore, is the reason why the angel so clearly expresses, that
eternal life awaits the elect, and eternal disgrace and condemnation will be the
lot of the ungodly. He afterwards subjoins, —
|
DANIEL
12:3
|
|
3. And they that be wise shall shine as the
brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the
stars forever and ever.
|
3. Et prudentes fulgebunt quasi fulgor
expansionis,
f581
et qui justificant multos,
f582
sicut stellae in seculum et seculum, id est, in
perpetuum.
|
The word “prudent” means endued with
intellect. Some take it transitively, and in this passage their opinion is
probably correct, because the office of justifying will soon be assigned to
these prudent ones. But the former sense suits chapter 11 better, and in verse
10 it will be put absolutely. Hence it means those who are endued with
understanding. The angel here confirms what I have lately expressed concerning
the final resurrection, and shews how we shall enjoy its fruits, because eternal
glory is laid up for us in heaven. We ought not to complain of being treated
unworthily, whenever we seem to suffer harshness at God’s hands, because
we ought to be satisfied with the glory of heaven, and with the perpetual
existence of that life which has been promised to us. He says then, the
teachers, or those who excel in understanding,
shall shine forth as the light of
heaven. If the word
“teachers” is thought preferable, there will be a figure of
speech, a part being put for the whole, and, therefore, I follow the usual
explanation. He applies the phrase, “endued with understanding,” to
those who do not depart from the true and pure knowledge of God, as will be
afterwards explained more fully. For the angel contrasts the profane who proudly
and contemptuously rage against God, and the faithful whose whole wisdom is to
submit themselves to God, and to worship him with the purest affection of their
minds. We shall say more on this subject to-morrow. But he now says, those who
retained sincere piety should be like
the light of the
firmament; meaning, they shall be heirs
of the kingdom of heaven, where they shall enjoy that glory which surpasses all
the splendor of the world. No doubt, the angel here uses figures to explain what
is incomprehensible, implying, nothing can possibly be found in the world which
answers to the glory of the elect people.
And those who shall justify
many shall be
like
stars, says he. He repeats the same
thing in other words, and now speaks of stars, having formerly used the
phrase, the brightness of the
firmament, in the same sense; and
instead of “those who are endued with understanding,” he
says, those who shall have
justified. Without doubt, the angel here
especially denotes the teachers of the truth, but in my opinion he embraces also
all the pious worshippers of God. No one of God’s children ought to
confine their attention privately to themselves, but as far as possible, every
one ought to interest himself in the welfare of his brethren. God has deposited
the teaching of his salvation with us, not for the purpose of our privately
keeping it to ourselves, but of our pointing out the way of salvation to all
mankind. This, therefore, is the common duty of the children of God, — to
promote the salvation of their brethren. By this word “justifying,”
the angel means, not that it is in the power of one man to justify another, but
the property of God is here transferred to his ministers. Meanwhile, we are as
clearly justified by any teaching which brings faith within our reach, as we are
justified by the faith which springs from the teaching. Why is our justification
ever ascribed to faith? Because our faith directs us to Christ in whom is the
complete perfection of justification, and thus our justification may be ascribed
equally to the faith taught and the doctrine which teaches it. And those who
bring before us this teaching are the ministers of our justification. The
assertion of the angel, in other words, is this, — The sons of God, who
being devoted entirely to God and ruled by the spirit of prudence, point out the
way of life to others, shall not only be saved themselves, but shall possess
surpassing glory far beyond anything which exists in this world. This is the
complete explanation. Hence, we gather the nature of true prudence to
consist in submitting ourselves to God in simple teachableness, and in
manifesting the additional quality of carefully promoting the salvation of our
brethren. The effect of this our labor ought to increase our courage and
alacrity. For how great is the honor conferred upon us by our Heavenly Father,
when he wishes us to be the ministers of his righteousness? As James says, We
preserve those about to perish if we bring them back into the right way.
(<590519>James
5:19.) James calls us preservers, just as the angel calls us justifiers; neither
the angel nor the apostle wish to detract from the glory of God, but by these
forms of speech the Spirit represents us as ministers of justification and
salvation, when we unite in the same bonds with ourselves all those who have
need of our assistance and exertions. It follows next: —
|
DANIEL
12:4
|
|
4. But thou, Daniel, shut up the words, and
seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro,
and knowledge shall be increased.
|
4. Et tu Daniel, claude, vel, obsera verba, sermones,
et obsigna librum ad tempus finis; discurrent multi, et augebitur
scientia.
|
We have already explained “the time of the
end” is a period previously fixed on by God, and settled by his own
counsel. The following word refers to tracing out and:running to and fro, but
not necessarily in a bad sense, while it also signifies to investigate.
Interpreters explain the angel’s meaning, as if many should be unworthy to
receive this prophecy from Daniel; and hence it was to be closed up and only
enigmatically delivered to a few, because scarcely one in a hundred would attend
to what he had delivered. I think the Holy Spirit has a different intention
here. The angel’s advice is this, There is no reason why this prophecy
should cause despondency or dismay, because few should receive it. Although it
should be universally despised and ridiculed,
nevertheless shut it
up like a precious treasure. Isaiah has
a passage nearly similar,
(<230816>Isaiah
8:16,) Close up nay law, seal the testimony among my disciples. Isaiah’s
spirit would be broken when he perceived himself an object of universal
derision, and God’s sacred oracles trodden under foot; thus he might lose
all courage and decline the office of a teacher. But God affords him comfort:
Close up, says he, nay law among my disciples, and do not notice this profane
crew; although they all despise thy teaching, do not suppose thy voice deserves
their ridicule; close it up, close it up among my disciples, says he; how few
soever may embrace thy teaching, yet let it remain sacred and laid up in the
hearts of the pious. The Prophet afterwards says, Behold nay children with me.
Here he boasts in his contentment with very few, and thus triumphs over the
impious and insolent multitude. Thus at the present time in the Papacy and
throughout the whole world, impiety prevails so extensively that there is
scarcely a single corner in which the majority agree in true obedience to God.
As God foresaw how very few would embrace this prophecy with becoming reverence,
the angel desired to animate the Prophet, lest he should grow weary, and esteem
this prophecy as of little value, in consequence of its failing to command the
applause of the whole world.
Close up the
book, then but what does the phrase
imply? Not to hide it from all men, but to satisfy the Prophet when he saw but
few reverently embracing the teaching so plainly laid before him by the angel.
This is not properly a command; the angel simply tells Daniel to hide or seal up
this book and these words, offering him at the same time much consolation. If
all men despise thy doctrine, and reject what thou dost set before them, —
if the majority pass it by contemptuously,
shut it up and seal
it, not treating it as valueless, but
preserving it as a treasure. I deposit it with time, do thou lay it up among my
disciples. Thou,
Daniel; here the Prophet’s name is
mentioned. If thou thinkest thyself to be alone, yet companions shall be
afterwards added to thee who shall treat this prophecy with true piety.
Shut
up, then,
and seal it, even, till the time
of the end; for God will prove by the
event that he has not spoken in vain, and experience will shew me to have been
sent by him, as every occurrence has been previously predicted. It now follows,
—
Many shall investigate, and
knowledge shall increase. Some writers
take this second clause in a contrary sense, as if many erratic spirits should
run about with vague speculations, and wander from the truth. But this is too
forced. I do not hesitate to suppose the angel to promise the arrival of a
period when God should collect many disciples to himself, although at the
beginning they should be very few and insignificant.
Many,
then, shall
investigate; meaning, though they are
most careless and slothful, while boasting themselves God’s people, yet
God should gather to himself a great multitude from other quarters. Small indeed
and insignificant is the apparent number of the faithful who care for the truth
of God, and who shew any eagerness to learn it, but let not this scantiness move
thee. The sons of God shall soon become increased.
Many shall investigate, and
knowledge shall increase. This prophecy
shall not always be buried in obscurity; the Lord will at length cause many to
embrace it to their own salvation. This event really came to pass. Before
Christ’s coming, this doctrine was not esteemed according to its value.
The extreme ignorance and grossness of the people is notorious, while their
religion was nearly overthrown till God afterwards increased his Church. And at
the present time any one who will carefully consider this prediction will
experience its utility. This can scarcely be fully expressed in words; for,
unless this prophecy had been preserved and laid up like an inestimable
treasure, much of our faith would have passed away. This divine assistance
affords us strength, and enables us to overcome all the attacks of the world and
of the devil.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, as we have to
engage in battle through the whole course of our lives, and our strength is
liable to fail in various ways, that we may be supported by thy power and thus
persevere unto the end. May we never grow weary, but learn to overcome the whole
world, and to look forward to that happy eternity to which thou invitest us. May
we never hesitate while Christ thy Son fights for us, in whose hand and power
our victory is placed, and may he ever admit us into alliance with himself in
that conquest which he has procured for us, until at length he shall gather us
at the last day into the enjoyment of that triumph in which he has gone before
us. — Amen.
LECTURE
SIXTY-SIXTH.
|
DANIEL
12:5-7
|
|
5. Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there
stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on
that side of the bank of the river.
|
5. Et aspexi ego Daniel, et ecce duo alii stantes, unus hac ad ripam
fluminis, et unus, id est, alter, illac ad ripam fluminis.
f583
|
|
6. And one said to the man clothed in
linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be
to the end of these wonders?
|
6. Et dixit ad virum qui indutus erat lineis, vestibus
subaudiendum est, qui erat supra aquas fluminis,
f584 Quousque finis mirabilium?
|
|
7. And I heard the man clothed in linen, which
was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his
left hand unto heaven, and swear by him that liveth forever, that it shall be
for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to
scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be
finished.
|
7. Et audivi virum indutum lineis, qui erat supra aquas fluvii, et
sustulit dextram suam, et sinistram suam versus coelos, et juravit per viventem
in aeternum, quod ad tempus praefixum, tempora praefixa, et dimidium: et ut
consumpserint, vel, compleverint, dispersionem, vel, contritionem,
manus populi sancti, complebuntur omnia haec.
|
Daniel here relates his vision of other angels
standing on each bank of the river. He alludes to the Tigris which he had
previously mentioned, as the vision was offered to him there. He says,
One asked the other, How long
will it be to the end? He who was asked,
swore, with hands upraised to heaven, by the living God, that no single
prediction was in vain, since the truth would be evident in its own period, and
men must wait for the time,
times, and half a time. This is a
summary of the passage. When he says
he
beheld, he commends to our notice the
certainty of the vision. Unless he had been attentive, and had applied his mind
seriously to these mysteries, his narrative would have failed to produce
confidence. But as his mind was completely calm, and he was desirous of
receiving the instruction conveyed by God through his angel, not the slightest
doubt can be thrown upon what he so faithfully delivers to us. He speaks of
angels as if they were men, for the reason previously assigned. He does not
imply their being really men, but uses that expression in consequence of their
outward appearance, for as they had a human face, they were called men. I do not
assert their bodies to be merely imaginary, nor will I say Daniel saw only
special forms and human shapes, for God might have clothed his angels in real
bodies for the time, and yet they would not on that account become men. For
Christ took upon Him our flesh and was truly man, while He was God manifest in
flesh.
(<540316>1
Timothy 3:16.) But this is not true of angels, who received only a
temporary body while performing the duties of their office. There is no
doubt of this assertion, — the name of “men” cannot properly
belong to angels, but it suits yew well the human form or likeness which they
sometimes wore.
It does not surprise us to find one angel questioning
another. When Paul is extolling the mystery of the calling of the Gentiles,
which had been hidden from the preceding ages, he adds, — it was an object
of wonder to angels, as they had never hoped for it, and so it had not been
revealed to them.
(<490310>Ephesians
3:10.) So wonderfully does God work in his Church, that he causes admiration
among the angels in heaven, by leaving many things unknown to them, as Christ
testifies concerning the last day.
(<402436>Matthew
24:36.) This is the reason why the angel uses the interrogation,
How long is it to the end of
these wonders? God doubtless here urged the
angel to inquire into an event veiled in obscurity, for the purpose of waking up
our attention. Absurd indeed would it be for us to pass by these things with
inattention, when angels themselves display such anxiety by their questions,
while they perceive traces of the secret power of God. Unless we are remarkably
stupid, this doubt of the angel ought to stir us up to greater
diligence
and attention. This also is the force of the word
twalp
phlaoth, “wonderful things;” for the angel calls
everything which he did not understand, wonderful. If the comparison be
allowable, how great would be our ingratitude not to give our whole attention to
the consideration of these mysteries which angels are compelled to
confess to be beyond their grasp! The angel, as if he were astonished, calls
those things “wonderful” which were hidden not only from the minds
of men, but also from himself and his companions.
But the other
answers; whence some difference,
although not a perpetual one, exists between the angels. The philosophy of
Dionysius ought not to be admitted here, who speculates too cunningly, or
rather too profanely, when treating the order of angels. But I only state the
existence of some difference, because God assigns various duties to certain
angels, and he dispenses to each a certain measure of grace and revelation,
according to his pleasure. We know there is but one teacher of men and angels,
— the Son of God, who is his eternal wisdom and truth. This passage may be
referred to Christ, but as I cannot make any positive assertion, I am content
with the simple statement already made. He states
this angel’s clothing to
have been linen garments, implying
splendor. Linen garments were then of great value; hence an ornament and
decoration is here applied to angels, as God separates them from the common herd
of men. Thus Daniel would the more easily comprehend these persons not to be
earth-born mortals, but angels clad by God for a short period in the human
form.
He says,
This angel raised up his hands to
heaven. Those who consider this action
as a symbol of power are mistaken, for without doubt the Prophet intended to
manifest the usual method of swearing. They usually raised the right hand,
according to the testimony of numerous passages of Scripture. I have raised my
hand towards God.
(<011422>Genesis
14:22.) Here the angel raises both his hands, wishing by this action to express
the importance of the subject. Thus to raise both hands, as if doubling the
oath, is stronger than raising the right hand after the ordinary manner. We must
consider then the use of both hands as intended to confirm the oath, as the
subject was one of great importance. It follows,
for a time, times, and half a
time. I have stated my objection to the
opinion of those who think one year, and two, and a half, to be here intended. I
confess the passage ought to be understood of that pollution of the Temple which
the Prophet has already treated. History clearly assures us that the Temple was
not cleansed till the close of the third year, and seven or eight months
afterwards. That explanation may suit its own passage, but with reference to the
doctrine here delivered, its meaning is very simple, time means a long
period, times, a longer period, and a half means the end or
closing period. The sum of the whole is this’ many years must elapse
before God fulfills what his Prophet had declared. Time therefore
signifies a long period; times, double this period; as if he had said,
While the sons of God are kept in suspense so long without obtaining an answer
to their petitions, the time will be prolonged, nay, even doubled. We see then
that a time does not mean precisely one year, nor do times signify two years,
but an indefinite period. With respect to the half of a time, this is
added for the comfort of the pious, to prevent their sinking under the delay,
because God does not accomplish their desire. Thus they rest patiently until
this “time” as well as “the times” pass away.
Besides, the issue is set before them by the words
half a
time, to prevent them from despairing
through excessive weariness. I admit the allusion to years, but the words are
not to be understood literally but metaphorically, signifying, as I have already
stated, an indefinite period.
He afterwards adds,
And in the
complement or consumption of
the
dispersion or contrition
of the hand of God’s
people, all these things shall be fulfilled:
first, the time must pass away, next, the times must be added, then the half
time must follow; all these things must arrive at their accomplishment, and when
they are thoroughly completed, says he, then will
come the contrition of the hand
of the holy people. The angel again
proclaims how the Church of God should be oppressed by many calamities; and thus
the whole of this verse contains an exhortation to endurance, to prevent the
faithful from becoming utterly hopeless, and completely losing their spirits, in
consequence of their suffering severe and multiplied cares, not for a few months
merely, but for a lengthened duration. He uses this phrase,
the wearing down of the hand of
the holy people — if you please to
read it so — metaphorically, meaning, the holy people should be deprived
of strength, just as if their hands were completely worn down. Whatever agility
men possess is usually shewn in the hands, and they were given to men by God for
the special purpose of being extended to all parts of the body, and for
executing the ordinary operations of mankind. This metaphor is now very
suitable, as the people were so mutilated, as to be deprived of all strength and
rigor. This is a slight sketch of the meaning of the clause.
If we read “dispersion” according to the
common signification, it will suit very well, since the hand of the holy people
should be dispersed; meaning, the Church should be a stranger in the world, and
be dispersed throughout it. This was continually fulfilled from that day to the
present. How sad is the dispersion of the Church in these days! God indeed
defends it by His power, but this is beyond human expectation For how does the
body of the Church now appear to us? how has it appeared throughout all ages?
surely it has ever been torn in pieces and dispersed. Hence the angel’s
prediction is not in vain, if we adopt the interpretation — the hand of
the holy people should be dispersed — but yet the end should be
prosperous, as he had previously announced, when treating of its resurrection
and final salvation. It now follows:
|
DANIEL
12:8
|
|
8. And I heard, but I understood not: then
said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these
things?
|
8. Et ego audivi, et non intellexi: et dixi,
Domine mi, quod postremum horum?
f585
|
Now Daniel begins to ask questions in accordance with
the angel’s example. He had first heard one angel inquiring of the other;
he next summons up courage, and becomes desirous of information, and asks what
should be the end or issue? He says,
he heard without
understanding. By the word
“hearing,” he bears witness to the absence of ignorance,
slothfulness, or contempt. Many depart without any perception of a subject,
although it may be very well explained, because they were not attentive to it.
But here the Prophet asserts that he heard; implying, it would be no fault of
his diligence if he did not understand, because he was desirous of learning, and
had exerted all his powers, as we formerly intimated, and yet he confesses
he did not
understand. Daniel does not mean to
profess utter stupidity, but restricts his ignorance to the subject of this
interrogation. Of what then was Daniel ignorant? Of the final issue. He could
not attain unto the meaning of these predictions, which were so extremely
obscure, and this was needful to their full and thorough comprehension. It is
quite clear that God never utters his word without expecting fruit; as it is
said in Isaiah, I have not spoken unintelligibly, nor have I said to the seed of
Jacob, seek ye me in vain.
(<234519>Isaiah
45:19.) God was unwilling to leave his Prophet in this perplexity of hearing
without understanding, but we are aware of distinct degrees of proficiency in
the school of God. Again, sufficient revelation was notoriously conferred upon
the prophets for the discharge of their office, and yet none of them ever
perfectly understood the predictions they delivered. We know, too, what
Peter says, They ministered more for our times than for their own.
(<600112>1
Peter 1:12.) They were by no means useless to their own age, but when our age is
compared with theirs, certainly the instruction and discipline of the prophets
is more useful to us, and produces richer and riper fruit in our age than in
theirs. We are not surprised, then, at Daniel confessing
he did not
understand, so long as we restrict the
words to this single instance. It now follows: —
|
DANIEL
12:9
|
|
9. And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the
words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
|
9. Et dixit, Vade Daniel, quia clausi sunt, et
obsignati sermones ad tempus finis.
f586
|
Although Daniel was not induced by any foolish
curiosity to inquire of the angel the issue of these wonderful events, yet he
did not obtain his request. God wished some of his predictions to be partially
understood, and the rest to remain concealed until the full period of the
complete revelation should arrive. This is the reason why the angel did not
reply to Daniel. The wish in truth was pious, and, as we have previously stated,
it did not contain anything unlawful; but God, knowing what was good for him,
did not grant his request. He is dismissed by the angel,
because the words were shut up
and sealed. The angel uses this
expression in a sense different from the former one. For he ordered Daniel to
close and seal the words like precious treasures, as they would be set at naught
by many disbelievers, and by almost the whole people. Here then, he
says, the words were closed up
and sealed, as there was no fitting
occasion for revealing them. As if he had said, nothing has been predicted
either vainly or rashly, but the full blaze of light has not yet been thrown
upon the prediction: hence we must wait until the truth itself is proved by the
event, and thus the divine utterance of the angel is made manifest. This is the
summary. He then says, until the
time of the end. Some one might possibly
object; then for what purpose was this prediction delivered? For Daniel himself,
who was instructed by the angel, could not thoroughly comprehend his own
message, and the rest of the faithful, although versed in these prophetic
studies, felt themselves in a labyrinth here. The answer is at hand,
until the time of the
end; and we must also remember that
neither Daniel nor the rest of the faithful were deprived of all the advantage
of this prophecy, for God explained to them whatever was sufficient for the
necessities of their own times. I must pass over some points slightly, with the
view of finishing to-day. It follows —
|
DANIEL
12:10
|
|
10. Many shall be purified, and made white,
and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall
understand; but the wise shall understand.
|
10. Mundabuntur, et dealbabuntur, et fundentur multi,
f587 et impie se gerent impii: et non
intelligent omnes impii, et prudentes intelligent.
|
Again, the angel mentions the persecutions which were
at hand for the purpose of arming the faithful for the approaching conflicts. We
know from other sources how tender and weak our minds naturally are, for as soon
as any cause for fear arises, before it comes to blows, we fall down lifeless
through terror. As, therefore, our natural imbecility is so great, we
necessarily require many stimulants to patience, and to urge us to contend with
earnestness, and never to yield to any temptations. This is the reason why the
angel announces the necessity for such multiplied purification’s,
to cleanse
them, as wheat from chaff;
to whiten
them, as cloth by the fuller; and
to melt
them, as metal to be separated from
dross. First of all, as I have previously explained, he admonishes Daniel and
all the pious of the future state of the Church, to lead them to prepare and
gird themselves for battle, and to gather up their unconquered fortitude, since
the condition of life set before them is that of forcing their way through the
midst of troubles. This is one point. Again, the angel shews the practical
utility of this kind of life, which might otherwise seem too bitter. We
naturally refuse the cross because we feel it contrary to our disposition, while
God shews the pious that nothing can be more profitable to them than a variety
of afflictions. This is a second point. But afflictions by themselves might
possibly consume us, and hence we are cast into a furnace. Now, then, could we
expect these sufferings to promote our salvation, except God changed their
nature in some wonderful way, as their natural tendency is to effect our
destruction? But while we are
melted down, and whitened, and
cleansed, we perceive how God consults
for our welfare by pressing us with his cross and causing us to submit to
adversity. Now, thirdly, the angel shews the insufficiency of one single act of
cleansing, and our need of many more. This is the object of this numerous
heaping together of words, they
shall be cleansed, and whitened, and melted down,
or poured forth. He might have embraced the
whole idea in a single word; but, as through our whole lives God never ceases to
test us in various ways, the angel heaps together these three words to shew the
faithful their need of continual cleansing as long as they are clothed in flesh;
just as garments which are in daily use have need of continual washing. However
snowy a mantle may be, it becomes soiled immediately when used for even a single
day; requiring constant ablution to restore it to its original purity. Thus we
are brought in contact with the defilement’s of sin; and as long as we are
pilgrims in this world, we necessarily become subject to constant pollution. And
as the faithful also are infected with the contagion of numerous iniquities,
they require daily purification’s hi different ways. We ought, then,
diligently to notice these three distinct processes.
The angel afterwards adds,
The impious will act impiously,
and will never understand anything; but the prudent will be ever endued with
intelligence. Here he wishes to fortify
the pious against a stumbling block in their way, when they see the profane
despisers of God exulting in every direction, and defying God to his face. When
the faithful see the world so full of the impious, they seem to be indulging so
freely in lust as if there were no God in heaven’ time they are naturally
subject to grievous sorrow and distress. To prevent this trial from agitating
their minds, the angel announces how
the impious should conduct
themselves impiously; implying, —
there is no reason why thou, O Daniel, or the rest of the righteous, should
depend upon the example of others; Satan will cunningly set before you whatever
obstacles may draw you into the contempt of God, and the abyss of impiety,
unless you are remarkably cautious; but let not the conduct of the impious cause
either you or the rest of the pious to stumble. Howsoever they conduct
themselves, do you stand invincible. He afterwards assigns a reason for their
behavior — they understand
nothing, they are perfectly blinded. But
what is the source of this blindness? Their being given over to a reprobate
sense. If any one should see a blind man fall, and should cast himself down
after this blind man, would he be excusable? Surely his blindness was the cause
of his perishing so miserably, but why does the other person destroy himself
willingly? Whenever we see the impious rushing furiously on to their
destruction, while God is admonishing them that their blindness proceeds from
Satan, and that they are given over to a reprobate mind, are we not doubly mad
if we willingly follow them? The cause then of this impious behavior on the part
of the wicked, is added with good reason; namely, they understand nothing.
Meanwhile, the faithful are recalled to the true remedy, and the angel subjoins,
But the prudent shall
understand, meaning they shall not
permit themselves to be implicated in the errors of those whom they see entirely
devoted to their own destruction. Lastly, the angel points out to us the true
remedy which will prevent Satan from drawing us off towards impiety, and the
impious from infecting us with their evil examples, if we earnestly apply
ourselves to the pursuit of heavenly doctrine. If, therefore, we heartily desire
to be taught by God and to become his true disciples, the instruction which we
derive from him will snatch us from destruction. This is the true sense of the
passage. It afterwards follows, —
|
DANIEL
12:11-12
|
|
11. And from the time that the daily
sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate
set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety
days.
|
11. Et a tempore quo ablatum fuerit juge, nempe sacrificium,
et posita fuerit abominatio obstupefaciens,
f588 erunt dies mille ducenti et
nonaginta.
|
|
12. Blessed is he that waiteth, and
cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.
|
12. Beatus qui expectaverit, et attigerit usque ad dies mille
trecentos et triginta quinque.
|
Inconsequence of the obscurity of this passage it has
been twisted in a variety of ways. At the end of the ninth chapter I have shewn
the impossibility of its referring to the profanation of the Temple which
occurred under the tyranny of Antiochus; on this occasion the angel bears
witness to such a complete destruction of the Temple, as to leave no room for
the hope of its repair and restoration. Then the circumstances of the time
convinces us of this. For he then said, Christ shall confirm the covenant with
many for one week, and shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease.
Afterwards, the abomination that
stupifieth shall be added, and
desolation or stupor, and then death will distill, says he, upon the astonished
or stupefied one. The angel, therefore, there treats of the perpetual
devastation of the Temple. So in this passage, without doubt;, he treats of the
period after the destruction of the Temple; there could be no hope of
restoration, as the law with all its ceremonies would then arrive at its
termination. With This view Christ quotes this passage in Matthew 24, while he
admonishes his hearers diligently to attend to it. Let him who reads,
understand, says he. We have stated this prophecy to be obscure, and hence it
requires no ordinary degree of the closest attention. First of all, we must hold
this point; the time now treated by the angel begins at the last destruction of
the Temple. That devastation happened as soon as the gospel began to be
promulgated. God then deserted his Temple, because it was only founded for a
time, and was but a shadow, until the Jews so completely violated the whole
covenant that no sanctity remained in either the Temple, the nation, or the land
itself. Some restrict this to those standards which Tiberius erected on the very
highest pinnacle of the Temple, and others to the statue of Caligula, but I have
already stated my view of these opinions as too forced. I have no hesitation in
referring this language of the angel to that profanation of the Temple which
happened after the manifestation of Christ, when sacrifices ceased, and the
shadows of the law were abolished.
From the
time, therefore,
at which the sacrifice really
ceased to be offered; this refers to the
period at which Christ by his advent should abolish the shadows of the law, thus
making all offering of sacrifices to God totally valueless. From that time,
therefore. Next, from the
time at which the stupefying abomination shall have been set
up. God’s wrath followed the
profanation of the Temple. The Jews never anticipated the final cessation of
their ceremonies, and always boasted in their peculiar external worship, and
unless God had openly demonstrated it before their eyes, they would never have
renounced their sacrifices and rites as mere shadowy representations. Hence
Jerusalem and their Temple were exposed to the vengeance of the Gentiles. This,
therefore, was the setting up of this stupefying abomination; it was a clear
testimony to the wrath of God, exhorting the Jews in their confusion to boast no
longer in their Temple and its holiness.
Therefore, from that period there
shall be 1290 days. These days make up
three years and a half. I have no hesitation in supposing the angel to speak
metaphorically. As he previously put one year, or two years, and half a year,
for long duration of time, and a happy issue, so he now puts 1290 days.
And for what reason? To shew us what must happen when anxieties and troubles
oppress us. If a man should fall sick, he will not say, Here I have already been
one month, but I have a year before me — he will not say, Here I have been
three days, but now I languish wretchedly for thirty or sixty. The angel, then,
purposely puts days for years, implying — although that time may seem
immeasurably prolonged, and may frighten us by its duration, and completely
prostrate the spirits of the pious, yet it must be endured. The number of days
then is 1290, yet there is no reason why the sons of God should despair in
consequence of this number, because they ought always to return to this
principle — if those afflictions await us for a time and times, the half
time will follow afterwards.
Then he
adds, Happy is he who shall have
waited and endured until the 1335 days.
In numerical calculations I am no conjurer, and those who expound this
passage with too great subtlety, only trifle in their own speculations, and
detract from the authority of the prophecy. Some think the days should be
understood as years, and thus make the number of years 2600. The time which
elapsed from this prophecy to the advent of Christ was about 600 years. From
this advent 2000 years remain, and they think this is the assigned period until
the end of the world, as the law also flourished about 2000 years from the date
of its promulgation to its fulfillment at Christ’s advent. Hence they fix
upon this sense. But they are quite wrong in separating the 1290 days from the
1335, for they clearly refer to the same period, with a slight exception. It is
as if the angel had said, although half the time should be prorogued, yet the
faithful ought constantly to persist in the hope of deliverance. For he adds,
about two months, or a month and a half, or thereabouts. By half a time, we
said, the issue was pointed out, as Christ informs us in
<402422>Matthew
24:22. Unless those days had been shortened, no flesh would have been safe.
Reference is clearly made here to that abbreviation of the time for the
Church’s sake. But the angel now adds forty-five days, which make a month
and a half, implying — God will put off the deliverance of his Church
beyond six months, and yet we must be strong and of good courage, and persevere
in your watchfulness. God at length will not disappoint you — he will
succor you in all your woes, and gather you to his blessed rest. Hence,
the next clause of the prophecy is this, —
|
DANIEL
12:13
|
|
13. But go thou thy way till the end be:
for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the
days.
|
13. Et tu vade ad finem, et quiesces, et stabis in sorte tua ad
finem dierum.
|
Here the angel repeats what he had said before, the,
full time of perfect light had not yet arrived, because God wished to hold the
minds of his people in suspense until the manifestation of Christ. The angel,
therefore, dismisses the Prophet, and in commanding him to depart, says —
Be content with thy lot, for God wishes to put off the complete manifestation of
this prophecy to another time, which he himself knows to be the fitting one. He
afterwards adds, And then shalt
rest and shalt stand. Others translate
it, rest and
stand; but the angel does not seem to me
to command or order what he wishes to be done, but to announce future events, as
if he had said, — Thou shalt rest, meaning, thou shalt die, and then thou
shalt stand; meaning, thy death shall not be complete destruction. For God shall
cause thee to stand in thy lot with the rest of the elect;
and that, too, at the end of the
days, in thy lot; that is, after God has
sufficiently proved the patience of his people, and by long and numerous, nay,
infinite contests, has humbled his Church, and purged it, until the end shall
arrive. At that final period thou
shalt stand in thine own lot, although a
time of repose must necessarily intervene.
PRAYER.
Grant, Almighty God, since thou
proposest to us no other end than that of constant warfare during our whole
life, and subjectest us to many cares until we arrive at the goal of this
temporary race-course: Grant, I pray thee, that we may never grow fatigued. May
we ever be armed and equipped for battle, and whatever the trials by which thou
dost prove us, may we never be found deficient. May we always aspire towards
heaven with upright souls, and strive with all our endeavors to attain that
blessed rest which is laid up for us in heaven, in Jesus Christ our Lord.
— Amen.
PRAISE BE TO
GOD.
DISSERTATION
1.
THE VISION OF THE FOUR
BEASTS
<270701>Daniel
7:1-3
Our preceding volume having closed the historical
portion of Daniel’s Prophecies, our second volume is occupied with
Calvin’s comments upon those Prophetic Visions, which have ever excited
the deepest interest in the minds of thoughtful Christians. The interval of time
from the first verse of this chapter to the beginning of Daniel 10 is about
twenty-two years. The vision of This chapter is the only one written in Chaldee,
and its similarity to that of 2 may account for the same language being used in
both.
The most appropriate method of illustrating these
Lectures, is that of quoting the views of various eminent Reformers and later
divines who have ably discussed the Prophet’s language, and then comparing
them with the solutions proposed by our Lecturer.
<270704>Daniel
7:4. — The lion with eagle’s wings
is supposed to bear some likeness to the vulture-headed Nisroch, with which the
late Assyrian discoveries have rendered us familiar. Vaux, in his
“Nineveh and Persepolis,” page 32, quotes the inquiry of Beyer
in his notes to Selden’s work De Diis Syriis, as to a
connection between this far-famed Assyrian deity and the representation recorded
in this verse. Rosenmuller explains the plucking of the wings as a
deprivation of any ornament, or faculty, or innate vigor, and quotes Cicero, Ep.
ad Att., lib. 4, ep. 2, in reference to this deplumatio. The last clause,
“a man’s head was given to it,” is well explained by Jerome of
Nebuchadnezzar’s return to his kingdom after his banishment, and
his receiving the heart which he had lost. The frontispiece on the title-page of
Bonomi’s “Nineveh and its Palaces,” is a
most accurate representation of this verse. The work contains many excellent
engravings, explanatory of the symbolic language of this
Prophet.
<270705>Daniel
7:5. — The raising of the bear on one
side is interpreted by Theodoret and Jerome of the invasion of the Chaldean
empire by the Persian. The protrusions from its mouth are thought by Wintle
to be “tusks,” but Rosenmuller objects to this
supposition. Wintle’s notes are on the whole so very
judicious, that we do not hesitate again to recommend the reader to peruse them,
as in most instances they confirm the interpretations adopted in these Lectures.
Hippolytus, as quoted by Oecolampadius in loc., explains the three
“ribs” of the three people, Assyrians, Medes, and Babylonians. The
opinion of our Reformer, volume 2, page 16, is sound and
satisfactory.
<270706>Daniel
7:6. — “Four wings on its
back.” This symbolical representation occurs in the Nineveh sculptures.
See Bonomi, page 257, and elsewhere.
<270707>Daniel
7:7. — The Fourth Beast of this verse has
so usually been treated as the Roman Empire, that it simply becomes necessary to
cite the exceptions to this opinion. Rosenmuller records an attempt to
refute this interpretation by J. C. Becman, in a dissertation on the Fourth
Monarchy, published in 1671, at Frankfort-on-the-Oder, and gives a slight
sketch of his argument. Dr. Todd, in his able “Lectures on
Antichrist,” has made use of every possible argument against applying this
to the Roman Empire, and his theory has been fairly stated and ably opposed by
Birks in his “First Elements of Sacred Prophecy.” London,
1843. With reference to this fourth beast, Dr. Todd believes it to be
still future; and hence his expositions are classed with those of the Futurists.
Our readers will remember, that as an expositor of prophecy, Calvin is a
Praeterist, and that his general system of interpretation is as remote from the
year-day theory of Birks, Faber, and others, as from the futurist speculations
of Maitland, Tyso, and Todd. Notwithstanding the disagreement between these
Lectures and the writings of Birks, we strongly recommend their perusal by every
student who would become thoroughly proficient in the prophecies of Daniel. The
first step towards progress, is to surrender all our preconceived notions, and
to prepare for the possibility of their vanishing away before the force of
sanctified reason and all-pervading truth.
The Jewish commentators are specially careful to deny
the application of this fourth empire to the Romans. Rabbis Aben Ezra and
Saadiah interpret it of the Turkish sway, and extend it to times stilt
present and yet future. The Son of man they hold to be Messiah, who in their
opinion has not yet arrived. A different interpretation has been suggested by
Lacunza in La Venda del Messias en Gloria, y Magestad, translated by the
Revelation E. Irving. 2 vols. 8vo. London, 1827. Parte 2 Fenemeno 1. The opinion
that the fourth empire is Alexander and his successors, is contained in
Venema’s Dissert. ad Vaticin. Daniel emblem. 4to. Leovard,
1745.
Rabbi Sal. Jarchi understands the three ribs
of
<270705>Daniel
7:5, to be those things of Persia, Cyrus, Ahasuerus, and Darius who destroyed
the Temple. The ten kings he thinks to be the emperors of Rome from Julius
Caesar to Vespasian. The mouth speaking proud things of
<270708>Daniel
7:8, he refers to Titus, thus adopting the supposition that the fourth empire is
heathen Rome.
Maldonatus expounds the passage of heathen
Rome, and feels his wrath stirred up against those “Heretics and
Lutherans” who bring it down to Papal times, and rejoices in the
opportunity of quoting Calvin, “their
master,” against “the absurdity” of his disciples. See
Comment. in Dan., page 673. But the learned Jesuit ought to have known
that the celebrated Abbot Joachim, the founder of the Florentine order at the
close of the 12th century, interpreted this empire of the mystic Babylon and the
Papal Antichrist. He did not hesitate to apply the dates of this prophecy to the
definite period of three years and a half, from
a.d. 1256 to 1260. He was a bold forerunner of
those modern expounders, who take exactly the same view of the Papacy as
himself. See British Mag., volume 16, pages 370 and following; also pages
494 and following; and Liber de Flore Telesforus Cusentinus. Fol. 29,
a. apud Todd, page 460.
DISSERTATION
2.
THE TEN HORNS
<270707>Daniel
7:7
The controversy which has arisen between
commentator’s respecting these ten horns, refers first to the question,
were they “kings” or “kingdoms?” And next, if
“kings,” who are they? and if kingdoms, what are they?
They are usually supposed to be the kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was
divided. Vitringa in his Commentary on the Apocalypse, page 788,
enumerates them after his own method, and the variety in the reckoning of these
kingdoms is so great, that it has been used by many writers as an objection to
their being kingdoms at all. Augustine (De. civit. Del., lib. 20,
c. 23) considers the number “ten” to be indefinite, and to
include all the kings of the Roman Empire. Willet, in loc., has collected
a variety of interpretations from different writers; while Tyso gives a
table of twenty-nine distinct lists, shewing that sixty-five different kingdoms
and persons have been suggested. Elucidation of the Prophecies. 8vo, London,
1838, pages 100-114.
Rosenmuller treats them as kings. With him the
fourth empire is not Rome, but that of the Seleucidae and Lagidae. By this
assumption ten kings are easily found among those who reigned over both Egypt
and Syria between Alexander and Antiochus Epiphanes, who on this plan is the
Little Horn. He simply states his opinion without supporting it by any
arguments. It by no means requires any, as the statement itself becomes its best
refutation. This view was adopted by Bertholdt, and has been overthrown
by Hengstenberg, with his usual learning and ability. See pages 164 and
following, of the work cited in volume 1. The determination of some German
writers to make Antiochus Epiphanes the Little Horn, has induced them to divide
the four empires thus: — the Chaldean, Median, Persian, and Macedonian,
the last including the various kingdoms which sprung from it. See
Eichorn Einl., 4to, Ausg., B. 4, page 48;
also the works of Jahn, Dereser, De Wette, and Bleek, ap. Hew. pages
161-169.
Some light is thrown on this subject by Fry in his
Second Advent, volume 2, page 16, edit. 1822, London. He translates this
and other visions and prophecies of Daniel with great clearness, and the hundred
pages which he devotes to their explanation are well worthy of perusal. They
contain many judicious quotations from Sir Isaac Newton, Mede, Faber, and the
most celebrated English expounders of prophecy. As he considers the fourth beast
the Roman Empire, and extends its duration throughout the modern history of
Europe, he adopts the views of Bishop Chandler and Faber, as to the ten horns
being ten kingdoms into which that empire was divided after the irruption of the
barbarians. The northern nations parceled out the Roman Empire among themselves.
These nations invaded the empire and settled within it. Now, it appears from
history, that there were ten principal kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was
divided. These ten primary kingdoms are then enumerated according to Machiavel;
but it is beyond our province to pursue this view of the subject further; it is
enough to refer to Fry’s translations of difficult passages
of this Prophet, as clear, sound, and judicious. The Editor deems it his duty to
point out the best opinions and explanations wherever he may find them; and to
direct the reader’s attention especially to those which illustrate our
Reformer’s Commentary.
DISSERTATION
3.
THE LITTLE
HORN
<270708>Daniel
7:8
The Expositor who sympathizes most with our Lecturer
among writers of our own day, is the late Professor
Lee, of Cambridge. In his translations of the
Hebrew Scriptures he is unrivaled; no scholar of our age can approach him in the
extent of his learning or the soundness of his erudition. His expository system
of the prophecies of Daniel and St. John will meet in these days with the most
vehement condemnation, and it happily does not fall within the province
of the Editor of these Lectures to express any other opinion, than that they
throw light upon the views of our Reformer. It will be sufficient at present to
refer the reader to his valuable work, entitled “An Inquiry into the
Nature, Progress, and End of Prophecy,” Cambridge, 1849. He discusses the
subject of our second volume from page 152, to page 230, and translates the
Hebrew and Chaldee text of Daniel, adding valuable explanatory notes. Before the
student is competent to pass an opinion on the Professor’s hermeneutical
conclusions, he should be intimately familiar with his elaborate verbal
criticisms.
The fourth kingdom he holds to be the Roman, and
specifies, especially, “the Lower Roman Empire;” the ten horns are
“a series of kings, each serves constituting a universal empire for the
time being” The Little Horn is said to be “the latter rule of the
Roman power,” (p. 165.) All reference to Antiochus Epiphanes is
denied; and the argument is concluded by the following sentence, —
“By every consideration, therefore, it is evident that the Little Horn of
Daniel’s seventh and eighth chapters is identically the same, and that
this symbolized that system of Roman rule which ruined Jerusalem, and then made
war upon the sainted servants and followers of the Son of man; and in this he
prospered and practiced, until he in his turn fell, as did his predecessors, to
rise no more at all,” (p. 168.)
This vision has been ably and fully illustrated by
Professor Bush of New York, in “the Hierophant,” 1844;
and as the American Professor’s “exposition” is
exceedingly clear, and full, and instructive, a few quotations from it are
inserted here. “We propose, if possible, to ascertain the true character
of the judgment here depicted, and by a careful collation of other Scriptures to
determine its relations to the series of events connected with the second coming
of Christ and its grand cognate futurities.” “This Little
Horn,” he asserts, “is unquestionably the ecclesiastical
power of the Papacy,” and “the judgment commences a considerable
time prior to the transition of the beast from his pagan to his Christian
state.”... “This horn did not arise till after the empire
received its deadly wound by the hands of the Goths.” This divergence from
the sentiments of our Reformer compels us to avoid quoting at greater length
Professor Bush’s scheme of interpretation. It is ably planned and
carefully executed. He supposes the Little Horn to prevail against the saints
for 1260 years; adding, “nothing is more notorious than that the Roman
Empire, after subsisting not far from the space of 1260 years from its
foundation, did succumb to the sword of its Gothic invader, and about
a.d. 476 became imperially extinct, under its then
existing head.” This forms another period for the supposed termination of
the 1260 years, very different from that usually maintained by British authors.
It is said to be renewed again in the time of Charlemagne, and the testimony of
Sigonius, Hist. de Reg. Ital., Book 4, page 1.58, is quoted in proof of this.
See Hierophant, page 156.
DISSERTATION
4.
THE ANCIENT OF DAYS — THE SON
OF MAN
<270709>Daniel
7:9 and
<270713>Daniel
7:13
This expression is treated actively by
Wintle,— “He that maketh the days old,” and,
consequently, ready to expire or cease. The Deity he supposes to be meant by
this term, and refers us for an explanation of the human attributes assigned to
the Divine Being, to Dr. Sam. Clarke’s Sermons, volume 1, Discertation
5:Grotius very appositely reminds us that the ancient thrones and
since circles had wheels; and Rosenmuller treats them as
indicating the velocity with which God beholds and judges all things. Some
Jewish writers read thrones were taken away; implying’ the overthrow of
the dominions of this world, and the setting up of flint of Messiah. Both Rabbis
Levi and Saadias apply this passage to the future prosperity of
Israel alone.
OecoIampadius supposes Christ to be here
signified as the lamb slain from the beginning of the world, and therefore
“Ancient.” After quoting Chrysostom and Basil on the phrase,
“The books were opened,” he pointedly inquires, “But
what need of books? every man’s conscience will be its own open
volume.” The Christian tone of this commentator’s sentiments renders
his writings far more valuable than most of those of his own and of succeeding
ages. It treats this chapter with his usual skill and spirituality, differing
however in some points from the general tenor of these Lectures. It enumerates
the four visions of these last six chapters: the first and last of them, he
states, relate to the persecutions to arise under Antichrist the second, in
Daniel 8, to the profanation of the Temple under Antiochus; and the third, in
the ninth chapter, to its devastation under Titus. He does not take the word
“kings” for the monarch simply, but includes under the term their
counselors, warriors, and ministers of state. “A king” with hint,
refers to a monarch’s successors as well as himself. He quotes at length
from Eusebius, Evan. Dem., book 15, the well-known passage in which this vision
is recorded at full length. His illustrations of the first three beasts is
judicious, and we have previously stated (volume 1, page 427) his view of the
fourth empire as coinciding with Calvin’s. He
refutes the comments of Polychronius and Aben Ezra, who apply the fourth kingdom
to Alexander’s successors; and objects to Jerome, and Lactantius, and
Ireneus, who treat the ten kings as ten monarchies springing from heathen Rome.
The number ten is not taken literally, but mystically, for a perfect number,
that is, one made up by adding one and two, and three and four. The ten horns,
he thinks, follow the fourth beast, existing during his; own age and leading on
directly to Antichrist. He approves of Apollinarius, who interprets the 8th
verse of Antichrist, and then explains, very copiously, his sentiments as to
where he is to be found. “Very possibly,” he remarks,
“the Gregories, the Alexanders, and the Julii, did not displease God so
strikingly while occupying the Papal chair: God only is their judge. But during
this reign such innumerable enormities are committed as are worthy of the true
Antichrist, and thus rebound upon their heads.” He then runs the parallel
between Mohamed and the Papacy, and with great accuracy and spirit treats the
false prophet as the Antichrist of the east, and the Roman Pontiff as
corresponding to him throughout the west. The “eyes of a man” of
<270708>Daniel
7:8, are explained of the bland and benignant appearance of this insinuating
personage, while the blasphemies of his mouth are interpreted of the impious
boastings of Mohamed and the Pope. The manner in which both Mohamed and the
Papacy have “changed the times,” is amply discussed, and the
language of both Daniel and St. John made applicable to the modern history of
the religions of the Crescent and the Cross throughout both Asia and
Europe.
In commenting on
<270709>Daniel
7:9, he refers it to the future destination of Antichrist, and comparing’
this passage with St. John, states his view of the three and a half years, or
forty-two months, or half-week. Seven is a perfect number representing
perpetuity, and God who is perpetually angry stops half way in his course of
punishment. Oecolampadius is severe upon the Chiliasts, similar to the Futurists
of our day, who expect one personal Antichrist yet to be revealed. Although he
calls them “semi-Jews,” yet their solution of this great
problem of prophecy may after all turn out to be the right one, and Christendom
hereafter may yet vindicate their far-seeing sagacity. The remainder of the
chapter is connected with the second coming of Christ to judgment, and the final
victory of the saints when the harvest of the world shall be gathered in, and
“the righteous shall shine as the sun in the kingdom of their
Father.” The introduction of the Antichrist and the Papacy with the
Mohammedan imposture, existing as they have done for many years since the first
advent, and as it is assumed they will do till the second advent, gives the tone
to the comments of Oecolampadius very different from that of
Calvin. It becomes highly instructive to compare
and contrast them, as in this way we may derive profit from both, and correct
our own presumption, if we are tempted to esteem either as necessarily and
exclusively perfect.
<270709>Daniel
7:9. — “The thrones were cast
down” — Authorized Version. Professor Bush agrees with
Calvin, volume 2, page 32, in preferring were set, placed, or arranged,
bringing forward as his supporters, Jerome, Arias Montanus, the Syriac,
Arabic, and Genevan versions, besides Luther’s and Diodati’s.
“The saints who are subsequently said to have possessed the kingdom
formed the celestial conclave, and sat upon the encircling thrones.” He
prefers the meaning, “Permanent of days,” or,
“Enduring of days,” to the common rendering “Ancient
of days.” Cocccius favors this expression, and also Michaelis,
who assigns the primary sense of enduring and abiding to the Hebrew word. See
also
<183107>Job
31:7, and
<233318>Isaiah
33:18. The designation, enduring of days, undoubtedly carries with it a
latent contrast to the many vicissitudes, and the transient nature of the
thrones and kingdoms here shadowed forth as the antagonist dominions to that of
God everlasting. He then quotes Calvin’s
remarks on this verse as “singularly appropriate and striking.” His
garment (literally) was as the white snow. The resplendent white of his spotless
garments indicated the exquisite equity, justice, and impartiality of his
judgments, while the locks of his hair, purer than the washed wool of the
fairest fleeces, indicate nothing of the imbecility of extreme old age, but the
considerate gravity, the ripened reflection, the mature wisdom, the enlightened
experience, the venerable authority, and the calm decision, which are naturally
associated with the “hoary head.” Referring to the fairy throne and
the burning wheels, he adds, “As the entire gorgeous apparatus described
by the Prophet, has reference primarily to a period anterior to new Testament
times, when the kingdom of God had not yet obtained that fixedness which is
attributed to it in subsequent visions, therefore his throne is represented with
the accompaniment of wheels. The scene, he states, “Is a judgment which
transpires on the earth in the providence of God, and not a judgment at the end
of the world, as often understood by the readers of revelation.”...
“The scenery is to be regarded as ideal and not real. It is
the celestial shadow of a terrestrial reality. The whole scene, which is
impartially described as transpiring in heaven, does really take place in the
providence of God on earth, so these judges and co-assessors are really men, who
are made agents in executing the divine purposes relative to the overthrow of
the anti-Christian dominion represented by the Beast and the Little Horn.”
The professor, though differing from Calvin on some points, strongly
corroborates his opinions on others. The statements on pages 26 and 28 of this
volume are expanded and enforced in various passages in the Hierophant. For
instance, on page 109, “That the vision and scene does not refer to what
is usually termed ‘the last judgment’ to take place at some future
period, and simultaneously with the final resurrection and consummation of all
things, is obvious from the whole tenor of the vision. The judgment is a local
judgment, and the object of it, not the whole race of men, but a particular
despotic, persecuting, idolatrous, and blasphemous power, which the counsels of
heaven have doomed to destruction.” This is entirely in accordance with
Faber. See Calvin of Proph., volume 2, page 108.
<270713>Daniel
7:13. — The Son of
Man. He is usually admitted to be the Messiah.
Hengstenberg remarks upon our Lord’s reasons for using this
designation of himself. He aptly compares various passages in St.
Matthew’s Gospel with those of this chapter, and shews how they bear upon
the genuineness of Daniel’s prophecies.)
Oecolampadius refutes the notions of the Jews
who treat the phrase “the Son of man,” as their own nation. He
argues against Rabbi Saadias and the Chiliasts, and after fully upholding the
union of the divine with the human natures in Christ, he approves of the
instructive comments of Chrysostom and Cyril. His coming to the Ancient of Clays
is explained by St. Paul’s assert. ion, He shall deliver up the kingdom to
his Father; and thus the victory of the saints becomes that final triumph of
righteousness, which shall be visibly displayed at the second advent of the
Redeemer.
The possession of the kingdom by the saints of the
most high,
(<270722>Daniel
7:22,) was interpreted by the early Fathers, of the general spread of
Christianity after the first advent. Professor Lee, in replying to
Dr. Todd, has collected their testimony to the reign of Christ and his saints,
as spread far and wide in the very earliest period of the Gospel history. His
list of authorities will support the system of interpretation adopted by
Calvin.
See Tertullian adv. Jud., page 105. Ed.
1580.
Irenoeus. Edit. Grabe, pages 45, 46, 221,
etc.
Justin Martyr. Edit. Thirlby, pages 369, 328,
400.
Cyprian. adv. Jud, Book 2:passim, and
De Unit. Eccl., page 108. Edit. Dodwell. Euseb. Hist. Eccl.,
Book 8, and elsewhere. De, Vit. Const., Book 1, chapters 7, 8, and
his other writings.
Fabricii Lux. Sanct. Evan. contains similar
extracts from the earliest Fathers to the same purpose.
For the Professor’s own view, see his Treatise
on the Covenants, page 112 and following. He is ably supported by Professor
Bush, who correctly limits this vision to the first establishment of the
reign of Messiah, and the early preaching of the Gospel. The American Professor
throws great light on the passage, by a clear and comprehensive criticism on the
Hebrew words. His remarks on the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven,
are ingenious. He does not understand the word “clouds” in
its ordinary sense, but as denoting “a multitude of heavenly
attendants.” He quotes
<520401>1
Thessalonians 4:19, from which he concludes that the meaning is not that we
shall be caught up into the clouds, but in multitudes. The Son of man being
brought to the Ancient of days is said to set forth the investiture of the Son
of man with that vice-regal lordship, which he, in the divine economy, held over
the nations of the earth and through the perpetuity of time. “The
paramount question to be resolved, is that of the true epoch of this
ordained assumption by the Messiah of the majesty of the kingdom. He then
determines the question exactly as Calvin does, by saying, “This we think
is plainly to be placed at the Savior’s ascension.”... “It is
in this passage of Daniel that we find the germ of nearly all the announcements
of the New Testament, relative to the founding of that spiritual
monarchy.”... “Conceiving the clouds then, in the Prophet’s
vision, as being really clouds of angels, we shall be better prepared to
understand the drift of the New Testament narrative,
<440109>Acts
1:9. It was by this cloud of celestial attendants that he was brought, in the
language of Daniel, to the Ancient of days, for him to receive the seals,
as it were, of that high office which he was to fill as head of the universal
spiritual empire now to be set up.” There is, therefore, we
conceive, no greater mistake in regard to the whole rationale of this
prophecy, than to understand the judgment and the coming of the Son of man here
mentioned, as the final judgment and final coming of Christ synchronical with an
anticipated physical catastrophe of the globe.
Professor Bush quotes
Calvin on
<270712>Daniel
7:12 with approbation, and adds the Rabbinical paraphrase of Jaachiades, in
support of their joint conclusions. Vitringa, in his Dissertations on the
Emblems of this Prophet, page 504, elicits a different sense. He makes the
“life” and the “dominion” identical. Sir J.
Newton maintains that the three beasts were, in the eye of prophecy,
still living in his day, and were to be sought for where their geographical
seat existed at the time of their ascendancy. — Observ. on Daniel, page
31. Although Bishop Newton and others agree with him, there is no foundation
for this ingenious conjecture. Mede’s view is different
still, and Bush points out “a serious and probably an
insuperable objection to it;” while he glides off himself to the
“leading despotisms of the East, including perhaps those of Russia and
Turkey,” contrary to the sentiments expressed in page 26 of this volume
See pages 162, 163.
An important question has arisen among Commentators,
as to the import of the word “kings” in
<270717>Daniel
7:17. Does it refer to persons or to dynasties? Professor Bush
argues for a symbolical sense, and quotes Theodotion, who renders it
“kingdoms.” It is next asserted, that the term kingdom is not to be
applied to “a purely regal form of government,” but to
“any form of national existence in which we can recognize in
established ruling power.” Havernick remarks, that
“kings” here stands in the concrete for dynasties or
kingdoms, the representation of kingdoms for the kingdoms themselves. The word
“kingship” expresses this idea of Havernick’s better than
kingdom. Bush treats it as a denomination potiore, which he aptly
translates “a titling from the chief.”
<270718>Daniel
7:18. — The Saints of the Most High. This
phrase is said by Bush to indicate the Jews, “as forming a part at
least of the saints who are to be the possessors of the kingdom here spoken
of.” There are strong grounds for believing that the holy people
which were to be destroyed and scattered,
(<270824>Daniel
8:24, and
<271207>Daniel
12:7,) were the Jews. Daniel’s grief was occasioned, in great measure, by
a foresight of the cruel oppressions to which his own people were to be
subjected during the dominion of the Beast and Little Horn.” The plural
form of the word, which Calvin accurately
preserves and notices, is said to recall, “that holy and devoted
people who are born from above.” Bush translates sancti
altissimorum, the saints of the most High Ones.
DISSERTATION
5.
THE PROPHETIC MEANING OF “A
TIME.”
<270725>Daniel
7:25
It is important to determine accurately the meaning
of this and similar phrases. The word “time” is, as Calvin
remarks, naturally indefinite, while its use in this Prophet leads to the
conclusion that it means “years.” The passage in
<270416>Daniel
4:16, “Seven times,” is usually understood to mean seven years,
although nothing can fairly rest upon this interpretation. The phrase of this
verse is usually taken to mean half of seven times, and is used again in
<271207>Daniel
12:7. The other passages which refer to periods of time are expressed more
definitely, for instance, 2300 “evenings and mornings,”
<270814>Daniel
8:14-26; the seventy weeks or seven,
<270924>Daniel
9:24; the 1290 “days,”
<271211>Daniel
12:11, and the 1335 days,
<271212>Daniel
12:12. “The terms in the first four instances,” says Bickersteth, in
his Practical Guide to the Prophecies, edit. sixth, 1839, page 184, “are
in themselves quite ambiguous and general. There is nothing to determine,
respecting the number 2300, and the seventy weeks, whether years or days be
intended; but analogy would lead us to suppose that all were to be interpreted
on a common principle.” He goes on to say, “It appears from
<271207>Daniel
12:7, that the close of the three times and a half is closely connected with the
gathering of the Jews; and from
<380118>Zechariah
1:18-21, that the power of the four Gentile monarchies is then broken; and this
confirms the extended meaning of both. God looks at the whole course of this
world’s history as but a few days. Daniel, when he heard the period of the
times and a half announced by the angel, understood not, and on inquiry received
the answer, The words are sealed to the time of the end; and an
intimation is given, that even when unsealed, only the wise would understand.
We thus learn that the meaning couched under this expression was purposely
concealed for a time, but was afterwards to be unfolded to the wise. The
promise is not of a fresh revelation, but of an explanation of a period already
given. And there seems to have been a wise end in this veiling of the time, as
it would have been staggering to the faith, and deadening to the hopes of the
Israelites, if the whole of the interval had been openly and explicitly
declared,” page 186. This excellent man was an advocate of the
symbolizing sense of chronological expressions; thus on the “seven
times,” he says; “this seems plainly to denote the season
during which the Gentile dominion of the four monarchies should be corrupt and
worldly, as afterwards exhibited in the four beasts coming up from the
sea.” Again, “the seven times” would then answer to “the
times of the Gentiles” mentioned by our Lord. He also makes the
following statements — “The time, times, and half a time, the
forty-two months and 1260 days, are the same interval; the time, times, and
half, of Daniel and the Revelation are the same period; a prophetic day is a
natural year; the three and a half times are the half of seven times, the whole
season of Gentile power, and the same with the latter times of St. Paul. A time
denotes 360 years, and chronos is equivalent to kairos,”
(p. 365.) As these assertions are not to be found anywhere in Holy
Scripture, Calvin has manifested his wisdom, by
expounding the text as he finds it, and avoiding all conjectural statements. As
a specimen, however, of a scheme on the opposite principles to those maintained
in these Lectures, we will quote one final passage on this subject, headed
Particular Times, (p. 366.) “The time, times,
and half, and 1260 days of Revelation are the same period. The forty-two months
have a date rather later, like the two dates of the seventy years’
captivity;” (yet observe the previous extract. — Ed) “The
1290 and 1335 days of Daniel both commence with the 1260 days of Revelation,
or time, times, and a half, of both prophecies; the seven times of the Gentiles
begin with the subjection of Israel under Shamanezer; the three and a half times
begin with Justinian’s eternal code, a.d.
532-3; the forty-two months close nearly with the 1335 days; the forty-two
months begin a.d. 604, or
a.d. 607-8, with the re-union of the ten kingdoms,
or the public establishment of idolatry; the 1335 days end in
a.d. 1867-8.” The arguments in favor of this
theory, directed chiefly against the Futurists, are found in the “First
Elements of Sacred Prophecy,” from chapter. 12, page 308, to the end of
the volume. Similar discussions are contained in “The Morning
Watch,” passim, especially one on “The Sacred numbers,”
volume 5, pages 273-285, London, 1832. The reader who is curious in such
numerical calculations will find much to his taste in the volumes of this
periodical.
Brooks, in his useful compendium,
“Elements of Prophetical Interpretation,” has devoted Daniel 10 to
“Time mystically expressed.” He examines at full length the argument
of Maitland, who contends for the literal meaning of days, in “An
Inquiry into the grounds on which the prophetic period of Daniel and St. John
has been supposed to consist of 1260 years.” Brooks brings forward
the usual reasonings by which the literal meaning of the word “day”
is supposed to be overthrown, and combats Maitland with much spirit. He
settles it rather positively, that “the literal meaning of a time is a
year, and then considers the expression of this verse 25, “may signify,
mystically, if calculated by lunar time, a period of 1260 years.” Some, it
is added, “have considered that a time means mystically a century of
years.” Vitringa states this to be the view of the Waldenses, who
hoped for a speedy termination to their persecutions, and were persuaded that
the anti-christian power which opposed them could only last 350 years.
Bengelius at one time adopts, and at another rejects the year-day
explanation, and modifies it according to his pleasure in his
“Introduction to the Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” translated
by Robertson, pages 147, 212, 258. “Another important principle to be kept
in view is, the high probability that there may be a mystical fulfillment of
some of the dates and facts connected with the chronological prophecies, and a
literal fulfillment likewise.” Speculations of this kind are by no means
in the spirit of Calvin’s comments; he
carefully avoids all such expressions as “mystical days,” yet
the reader will find in this little volume many extracts from writers of repute,
illustrating the prominent features of Daniel’s
prophecies.
Professor Bush, in the Hierophant, page 180,
comments with great critical ability upon the Hebrew word signifying
“time” in this verse. He compares it with the word
ˆmz,
zemen, correctly rendered “season” in the authorized
version. The leading sense of this word, he states, “is that of a
fixed, prescribed, determinate season,” and in this respect it differs
from the more general word time, as the Greek kairos,
“season,” differs from chronos, time. As to the other
word
ˆd[
gneden is used for the most part in a wider sense, and answers more
accurately to the Hebrew
t[
Gneth, “time.” “We find mention made in the last
chapter of Daniel of two other periods, one of 1290, the other of 1335
years.” The additional numbers expressing 30 and 45 similar periods, are
called supplementary terms. At page 241 there is an able letter to Professor
Stuart of Andover, U.S., on prophet, in designations of time. This
learned writer is like Calvin, praeterits, and
consequently his writings on this subject; are an able elucidation of the
principles of these lectures. He approves of Davidson’s
statement in his “Sacred I-Hermeneutics,” that days are
days, and years years. So the writer maintains with no small skill and power of
argumentation. Professor Bush, on the other hand, replies, “the
grand principle into which the usage of employing a day for , year is to be
resolved, is that of miniature symbolization.” The argument
between the two American divines is then carried on at some length; it is only
necessary here to refer to it, on the general principle which we have adopted in
illustrating these lectures, namely, to shew that Calvin’s decision meets
with many able supporters and expounders among British, Continental, and
American writers, as well as numerous, earnest, and voluminous
opponents.
DISSERTATION
6.
THE PLACE OF THE
VISION.
<270802>Daniel
8:2
Differences have arisen as to the reality of
Daniel’s transfer to Shushan and the banks of the Ulai or Choaspes. Dr.
Blayney thinks Elam was a province of Babylon over which Daniel actually
presided; but in its more extended sense it comprised the whole country on
either side of the Eulaeus, one side being Elymais, and the other Susiana. See
Pliny, Nat. Hist., Book 6. “Susiana,” says Birks,
“close to the Tigris, was distinct from Persia Proper, and might
still be under the power of Belshazzar.”
In this eighth chapter the Hebrew language is
resumed, and used in all the following visions. This has been considered
emblematical of the subject-matter which relates mainly to the future state of
Israel, and of the kingdoms in political relation to it. The visions of this
chapter clearly refer to the Persian and Grecian empires. These are intimately
connected with those persecutions under which the Jews groaned so heavily,
through the profanation of their Temple, and the removal of their daily
sacrifice. These distresses continue for 2300 days till the sanctuary is
cleansed. The reader will find these points clearly and historically illustrated
in “the two later visions of Daniel” previously referred to,
— Daniel 1 and 2. The exposition of the Duke of Manchester is worthy of
notice. He compares and connects the visions and prophecies of Daniel 8 and 9,
and differs from the usual schemes hitherto submitted to our notice. See pages
392-397. “The vision embraces a period of time commencing from after the
conquest of India by Darius, until the last end of the indignation, for the ram
was pushing westward, northward, and southward, but not
eastward.”
DISSERTATION
7.
THE RAM AND THE
HE-GOAT.
Chapter
8:3
The clearest modern exposition with which the Editor
is acquainted is that of Birks, and it will be sufficient for our purpose
to make a few extracts from his work. “The ram is expounded by the angel
to be the kings of Media and Persia.” It is clear, then, that the word
kings is not used in a personal sense. It is plain they are the two
ruling dynasties or powers, confederate in conquest, and of which Media was
superior at first, and Persia after the sole reign of Cyrus. The ram itself, and
not the two horns, denotes the compound Median and Persian power. The ram was
seen “pushing westward, and northward, and southward.” These words
are a very clear prediction of the conquests of Cyrus, though, perhaps, they may
include the later conquests of Egypt by his son Cambyses. “The vision was
in the sixth or seventh year of Cyrus, when his career of victory had
already begun,” (p. 10.) Two objections to this explanation are then
answered; one is, that the chronology seems to require a later commencement, and
the other, that the place of the ram before the river, has been thought
to imply the previous establishment of the Persian empire. The most natural
sense of the words “before the river,” is, “with its face to
the river.” The accomplishment of this prophecy is then traced through
Herodotus, and Xenophon. The narratives of Herod. Book 1:71-95,
respecting the overthrow of Croesus, and 152-216, respecting his victories
in Upper Asia, clearly support this view of the fulfillment.
The he-goat is so clearly fulfilled in Alexander,
that, no further remark seems required. Birks has translated at length the
passages in Diodorus, and given a correct summary of the chronology of this
period. See also Alexander in Plutarch, chapter 24, Diod. Sic., lib. 17, section
46, and Quint. Curtius, lib. 4, section. 4, 19.
ALEXANDER AND HIS
SUCCESSORS
The classical passages from which correct information
is obtained respecting the kingdom of Macedon, Syria, and Egypt, as far as they
illustrate Daniel’s prophecies, are as follow: —
Quintus Curtius, fol. Col. Agripp., 1628, page
670 and following. This is the edition of Raderus under the title of Q. Curtii
Rufi de Alexandro M. historiam Mathaei Raderi S. J.
Commentarii.
Diodori Siculi, lib. 18, page 587. Wesseling,
Amst., 1746, volume 2, page 258.
Polybius, 126, cap. 10, volume 4, page 353 and
following. Schweigheuser’s edition.
Atheneous, Deipnosophist, lib. 5, cap. 5, and
lib. 10, cap. 10.
Photius, cod. 82, and cod. 92 in epit., lib.
9.
Justin, lib. 13.
Crosius, Hist., lib. 3, chapter
23.
Dexippus and Artrian in fragments preserved by
Photius.
Biblioth., cod. 82, and cod. 92.
Andrew Schott, in his edition of flee
Bibliotheca of Photius, has given a tabular view of the various divisions of
Alexander’s kingdom, classifying them according to the authority of
each of the above-mentioned authors. See fol. Gen., 1612, page
230.
Venema, in his dissertations on the
emblematical prophecies of Daniel, gives a full statement of every event, with a
separate classical authority for each. His object was to shew that
Alexander’s kingdom was divided into ten after his death, and that
the portion of this prophecy interpreted by Calvin
of the Roman empire was really fulfilled by the Greeks. Dr. Todd has quoted the
original Latin, (p. 504 and following,) from Dissertation. 5, section. 3 to 12,
pages 347 to 364. 4to. Leovard,
1745.
DISSERTATION
8.
THE WONDERFUL NUMBERER — ONE
HOLY ONE
SPEAKING TO
ANOTHER.
Chapter
8:13
A very peculiar Hebrew word is used to designate the
second Holy One. Lowth intimates its connection with the Logos. It may properly
be translated, “To the excellent one.” The original word
ynwmlp,
palmoni, is supposed to be formed of two nouns
ynwlp,
peloni, and
ynwmla,
almoni, which are found in
<080401>Ruth
4:1, and
<120608>2
Kings 6:8. Glass. gram., 4, 3, 864, as quoted in Poole’s Syn.,
calls them fictitious nouns, being used when the real name is purposely
concealed, like the oJ dei~na
of the Greeks. Hence it does not signify any angel,
but some remarkable one. Calvin’s opinion that it refers to
Messiah is held by many other interpreters, as given by Poole in loc. Wintle
adopts another view, — “the numberer of secrets,”
or, “the wonderful numberer,” from the two words
alp,
phla, “wonderful,” used by Isaiah of Messiah in the
well-known passage in chapter. 9, and
hnm,
“to number,” which has already come before us. He refers
to Glass. Philippians page 644, 4to, and translates, “And another
saint said unto that excellent one that was speaking.” Holy One is
preferable to saint in this passage. Gesenius adopts the statement of
Glasse; the quadriliteral arising from the combination of two words in common
use. See also “The Times of Daniel,” page 399, and “The
Morning Watch,” volume 5, page 276, where palmoni is translated
“the numberer of secrets.”
<270813>Daniel
8:13. — The Vision of the Daily
Sacrifice. The translation of this passage is of great
importance, Professor Lee translates as follows: —
11 By him the daily sacrifice was
to be taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was to be cast
down.
12 And an army was to be given
him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, (i.e.,
because the transgressors had now come to the full: see note, page 165,) and
it cast the truth to the ground, and it practiced and
prospered.
13 How long shall be the vision
concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give
both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
14 The answer is, unto 2300 days;
then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The wording of the Hebrew is peculiar here and highly
deserving of remark. It stands literally thus, — “Until (the)
evening (and) morning, or it may be until the evening of the morning, two
thousand and three hundred, and the sanctuary (lit. holiness) shall be
sanctified.” Evening and morning, I take here to be a mere periphrasis for
a day; and so our translators have taken it,
<010105>Genesis
1:5. The day here had in view, continues Professor Lee, “must mark
the period of Daniel’s seventieth week — the numbers given above
must be understood indefinitely, and as intended to designate a considerable
length of time.” Referring again to
<270811>Daniel
8:11, he states, this consummation could not be effected by Antiochus Epiphanes:
he only suspended the service of the Temple for about three years and a half. By
every consideration, therefore, it is evident that the Little Horn of
Daniel’s seventh and eighth chapters, is identically the same, and that
this symbolized that system of Roman rule which ruined Jerusalem, and
then made war upon the sainted servants and followers of the Son of man; and in
this he prospered and practiced, until he in his turn fell, as did his
predecessors, to rise no more at all. (P. 168.) Wintle, with his usual
judgment, translates, “until the evening (and) morning 2300.”
“I insert the word and, because the vau is repeated at
<270826>Daniel
8:26. I am inclined to think this vesperamane should induce us to
understand these days in the first instance literally, rather than of months and
years.” The great difficulty, he states, is to reconcile this period with
the tyranny of Antiochus; while he does not forget the reference to Antichrist,
of whom Antiochus was the type. See, also Sir Isaac Newton, Obs., chapter.
9:Rosenmuller has collected various explanations, especially C. B.
Bertram; Kirms, in his historical and critical commentary, page 39;
Melancthon, page 131; and Eichhorn in Apoc., t. 2, page 60.
“The Times of Daniel” also contains a translation of this
passage which is worth notice, page 400, although it is not so scholar-like as
that quoted above.
The opinion that this period refers to the rise and
duration of the Mohammedan power in the East, is ably advocated by Fry,
“Second Advent,” volume 2, page 43 and following; where
various explanations of the dates are given at
length.
DISSERETATION
9.
THE SEVENTY
WEEKS
Daniel
9:24
A great variety of opinions have been published upon
this interesting period; it would be impossible to enumerate them all, and it
will be sufficient to allude to those which illustrate Calvin’s
assertions. The titled author of “The Times of Daniel” writes as
follows, — “I endeavored to shew in the chronology that there were
two periods of seventy years, — one, the service of Babylon, the other the
desolation of Jerusalem, and that the desolation’s terminated with the
first year of Darius Nothus. I hope to establish presently that the termination
of each of these periods is a fresh epoch,” page 400. “The
decree dates from the time of Daniel’s prayer. The command came forth,
therefore, in the first year of Darius son of Ahasuerus,” page 402. He
then strongly approves of the rendering of the passage by Hengstenberg.
“Seventy weeks are cut off over thy people and over thy holy city.”
Exactly Calvin’s use of the preposition
super. And he adds, most Commentators observe that “cut
off” is used figuratively for determined. Mede is also quoted
to the same effect, works, fol. page 497. I am still able to follow Dr.
Hengstenberg in the following clause, “to restrain transgression
and to seal sin.” All senses of the verb, says he, unite in that of
restraining. To seal sin, holds forth God’s judicial hardening of persons
in sin. This passage, the Duke thinks, was fulfilled “before the passover,
in the year a.d. 67.” The terminus a quo
is said to be the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, whose date is
given in Ptolemy’s Canon An. Nabonassar 325, which, according to the
method of verifying the date here used, is b.c.
424, “which, added to the year when apostasy was no longer restrained,
a.d. 66, makes 70 weeks or 490 years.”
Original views of the “sealing” and the sixty-two weeks are
also proposed, to which we can only refer: see pages 410-422. The closing
calculation, that “we may look for the cleansing of the sanctuary
a.d. 1877,” is so adverse to the
interpretation of these Lectures, that we must be content with this passing
allusion to it.
The opinions of certaii1 celebrated writers upon this
point are here collected. Clement of Alexandria, according to the late
Bishop of Lincoln, page 383, explains it thus: “The Temple was rebuilt in
seven weeks: then, after an interval of sixty-two weeks, the Messiah
came. then, after an interval of half a week, Nero placed an abomination
in the Temple of Jerusalem: and, after another half-week, the Temple was
destroyed by Vespasian.” Theodoret closes the period three years
and a half after the suffering of Christ: “and so they begin the
last week at the baptism of Christ,” says Willet. He quotes Zonaras,
tom. 1, Annal., who commences the period at the 20th year of
Artaxerxes Longimanus, and ends the 62 weeks at the death of Hyrcanus. From this
point to Christ’s baptism they reckon seven weeks more, and then in the
midst of the last week, Messiah was slain; so there remained afterwards three
years and a half for the preaching of the Gospel. Eusebius begins the 69
weeks in the sixth year of Darius Itystaspes, and ends them in the first year of
Herod, about the death of Hyrcanus. He begins the 70th week at Christ’s
baptism, and ends the period three years and a half afterwards. Tertullian,
by beginning in the first year of Darius, counts 490 years, to the
destruction of Jerusalem.
OEcolampadius confesses this passage to be one
of the most difficult in Scripture, and can scarcely satisfy himself with any
solution. He rather unwisely introduces chronological tables of the events of
Scripture, from Adam to the time of the Herods. “With Christ,” he
says, “is the fullness of the times and the completion of the
seventy weeks.” He quotes the expressions of Jewish authorities, and
refers to the cruelty of Herod, and the anointing of Jesus as Messiah.
“They are not weeks of days, or of jubilees, or of ages,” he
asserts, but of years. They most probably begin at either the first year of
Cyrus, or the second of Darius. He calculates it both ways: the first period
closing at the death of Antiochus the brother of Alexander, and the other at the
reign of Herod. He afterwards adopts the division of this period into three
parts, and explains his method of reckoning the seven weeks. The question is
discussed with great judgment, and its perusal will amply repay the attentive
student of this remarkable prophecy.
J. D. Michaelis has elucidated this subject,
in a letter to Sir John Pringle, which the English reader will find noticed in
the Monthly Review, O. S., volume 49, page 263 and following. Dr. Blayney,
in a Dissertation, Oxford, 1775, 4to, contradicts the Professor’s
opinions: see Monthly Review, O. S., volume 52, page 487 and following. John
Uri also published at Oxford, 1788, an “Interpretation, paraphrase,
and computation of this passage.” Faber’s well-known
Dissertation, London, 1811, only needs to be mentioned to be valued; while that
of Dr. Stonard, London, 1826, is exceedingly elaborate, being a masterly
scholastic work. Dr. Wells has prefixed to his “Help to the
Understanding of Daniel,” some observations on the chronology of this
prophecy. From him we learn the different methods of Scaliger, Mede, and
Bishop Lloyd, while his own paraphrase and his solution of some of the
difficulties in the schemes of preceding writers, are worthy of attentive
perusal. Willet presents us with “The several
interpretations of Daniel’s seventy weeks dispersedly handled before,
summed together,” in his 55th question on this chapter, and continues the
subject through the ten succeeding questions. From his comments, we ascertain
the views of J. .Lucidus, lib. 7, De emendatione teenporis, Osiander,
Junius, Montanus in apparat., lib. Dan., and others. His remarks on Calvin
are worthy of notice here. “M. Calvin beginneth these years in the
first year of Cyrus, and endeth them in the sixth of Darius the son of
Hystaspes, the third king of Persia; but this cannot be; for they that
give the most years unto Cyrus and Cambyses, allow but the one 30 and the other
seven; excepting only Luther, who following Eusebius De Demon. Evan.,
giveth to each of them 20 years. Then add the six years of Darius, they will
make but 43. How, then, can the seven weeks be here fulfilled? Beside, that
Darius, in whose sixth (year), the Temple was re-edified, called Darius
of Persia, was not Darius Hystaspes the third king of Persia; but before this
Darius, three other kings are named Cyrus, Assuerus, Artashasht,
<150406>Ezra
4:6, 7.” This reference to Calvin occurs in
his 58th question, — “When the term of seven weeks, that is 49 years
began and when it ended,” page 323, Edit., 1610. One remark of
Wintle’s is most important, as its correctness vindicates
Calvin from every charge of inconsistency in his
interpretation of these prophecies. “The original word rendered weeks
throughout the prophecy, strictly signifies sevens, which word is adopted in
Purver’s translation, and may be referred either to days or years.”
Professor Jahn also adopts the same correct and simple translation, and
his satisfactory criticism is found in his Appendix to Enchir.
Hermen., Fasc. 1, page 124 and following. Vienna, 1813. The subject is
also discussed by the present Editor, in his Norristan Prize Essay for 1834,
page 81.Dathe also, in his Prophetic Majores, Edit. 3d., Halae, 1831,
translates as follows, “The seventy, yea the seventy, are drawing to a
close.” The only difference in the original is in the pointing of the
Masorets; and thus the chronology which they introduced, requires all the
ingenious apparatus of the profound astronomy of Sir Isaac Newton to reconcile
it with the historical facts. See his Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel,
part 1, chapter. 10. Archbishop Seeker has dwelt much on this point, and every
commentator on the Prophet has treated it with more or less wisdom and
discretion. Wintle is on the whole very judicious. Professor
Lee’s translation of the passage, and explanation of the
Hebrew words, is exceedingly valuable. His exegetical comments admit of some
variety of opinion as to their value. The seventy weeks, says he, were not
“to be considered chronological in any sense, but only to name an
indefinite period, the events of which, as in most similar cases, should
make all sufficiently clear,” Bk. 2, chapter 1, page 160. This
chronological period, and the dependent minor divisions, are ably treated by
Rosenmuller, who has devoted more than usual space to their illustration.
He quotes some of the best opinions of the most celebrated German writers, and
throws great light upon the historical points connected with the inquiry. See
his comments on this chapter. 9, pages 313-324.
Broughton has quoted largely from Jewish
Rabbis; he treats Daniel’s prayer as a compendium of theology, and applies
Gabriel’s answer to the baptism, miracles, and life of our
Lord.
Professor Stuart, whom we have already quoted,
has treated this subject with great precision by commenting critically on the
Hebrew words. He adopts the rendering seventy sevens, or
“seventy heptades are determined upon thy people. Heptades of what?
of days or of years? No one can doubt what the answer is. Daniel had been making
diligent search respecting the seventy years; and in such a connection,
nothing but seventy heptades of years could be reasonably supposed to be meant
by the angel.” An argument is also drawn from the double gender of the
plural of this word, which is noticed by Ewald, Gram. Heb., section. 373.
London, 1836. Many other arguments in favor of its general sense of
“sevens” are added, implying that the connection only determines
whether years or days be intended. Professor Bush brings forward the
opposite views to those of Stuart, and discusses the subject with the
utmost exactness of Hebrew criticism. Mede should also be consulted,
works, Bk. 3, chapter. 9, page 599. Hengstenberg treats the form of the
word as rarticipial and indicating a septenized period, like hebdomas in
Greek, septimana in Latin, settimana in Italian, and semaine
in French. Views in accordance with these are found in “The Morning
Watch,” volume 5, page 327. London, 1832. This article is the more worthy
of perusal, as it presents us, in an intelligible English form, the criticism of
Professor Jahn, extracted from his Appendix ad Enchiridion Hermeneutica,
Fasc. 1, page 124 and following. Edit., Vienna, 1813. The English translation of
the passage, in accordance with Jahn’s critical exposition, is worthy of
notice, particularly by those readers who wish to keep before their minds the
most valuable explanations which have ever been published by British,
Continental, and American
Divines.
DISSERTATION
10.
HIPPOLYTUS, NICOLAUS LYRANUS,
ETC.
Daniel
9:25
“Hippolytus,”
says Mosheim, “whose history is much involved in darkness, is also
esteemed among the most celebrated authors and martyrs of this age.”
(Volume 1, page 270, edit. 1823.) Although the learned Benedictines have
assisted in dispelling this darkness in their History of the Literature of
France, volume 1, page 361, yet the greatest light has been thrown upon the life
and opinions of this writer by the Chevalier Bunsen in his work,
“Hippolytus and his Age,” 4 vols., 1852. Dr. Christopher
Wordsworth has also discussed the same subject, giving an English version of
the newly discovered philosophumena, with an introductory inquiry into
the authorship of the treatise, and on the life and works of the writer. It is
out of our province to enter on the important questions raised by these
well-known writers; we must confine ourselves strictly to whatever illustrates
Daniel. He wrote commentaries on various parts of the Old and New
Testaments, and among these Bunsen enumerates one “On the Prophets,
in particular on Ezekiel and Daniel,” volume 1, page 282. A fragment of
his comment on Daniel is preserved in the edition of Fabricius, in which
the Greek text is printed from a Vatican MS., tom. 1, page 271, “named by
Theodoret and by Photius, c. 203. Jerome says Hippolytus’ historical
explanation of the seventy weeks did not tally with history and chronology.
Fabricins, 1, page 272. We have a genuine fragment of this explanation in
Fabricins, 1, page 278, on Daniel’s life and times.” The Syrian MSS.
discovered in the Lybian Desert, and explored by Cureton, contain, says Bunsen,
quotations from the Commentary on Daniel by Hippolytus. Calvin, most probably,
knew no more of his view of the seventy weeks than he found in Jerome. The
existence of his treatise on Antichrist was known to the Reformers chiefly from
ancient writers who had given a list of his works, but especially from Jerome.
From Fabricius, Appendix ad. I. 1, page 2, we learn that a forgery
was published in 1556., and that the genuine work was first edited in
1661 from two French MSS, A Latin translation was added in 1672.
“His calculations,” says Bunsen, “based upon
Daniel and the Apocalypse, are quite as absurd as those which we have been
doomed to see printed, and praised, and believed in our days. He makes out that.
Antichrist will come 500 years after Christ, from the tribe of Dan, and rebuild
the Jewish temple at Jerusalem.” This remark has caused the censure
of a writer in “The Record,” who accuses Bunsen of
making’ this bishop and martyr “the mouthpiece of his own
unbelief in the prophecies of Daniel.” “Some writers have
conceived,” says Bunsen, “that Hippolytus alludes, in his
interpretation of the ten horns of the fourth beast in Daniel, to some great
convulsions of the empire in his time; but this opinion seems to me entirely
unfounded. All I can find in these passages indicative of the time in which they
were written, (section. 28, 29,) is the existence of a very strong, iron,
military government; and this seen as to point to the time when the power of
Septimius Severus was firmly established, after fierce contests and sanguinary
battles. The rest relates to things to come, to the last age of the world, which
he thought about three centuries distant.” (Volume 1, page 274.) On page
290 we have three lists of the works of this “father,” as
noticed by Eusebius, Jerome, and Lycellus. Eusebius does not mention his work on
Daniel; both Jerome and Lycellus do; and Nicephorus adds it among others to the
Eusebian list; and on page 242 many of his works are recorded as existing among
the Escurial manuscripts. See the Catalogue des Manuscrits Grecs de la
Bibliothbque de l’Escurial, par E. Miller, 8vo, Paris, 1848. Cardinal
Main, in his “Scriptorum Veterum nova Collectio,” volume 1,
part 2, gives such figments of Hippolytus’ Daniel as were formerly
inedited, (pp. 161-222.) On page 205, ver. 13, he illustrates Daniel’s
phrase, “the old of the days,” referring it to God the
Father, the Master of all, even of Christ himself.
The interest excited by the recent publications of
Bunsen and Wordsworth, makes it desirable to state that fresh
light has been thrown upon his life and times. Cave, in his elaborate
work, is unsuccessful respecting Hippolytus. He takes up the opinion of Le
Moyne, a French ecclesiastical writer of the seventeenth century, who
conjectured that he was bishop of Portus Romanus, Aden in Arabia. The
additional supposition that he was an Arabian by birth is also a mistake. He was
bishop of the “portus,” a harbor of the city of Rome,
during the time of the Emperor Alexander Severus, at the beginning of the third
century. He suffered martyrdom during the persecution of Maximus the Thracian,
about a.d. 236. The Chevalier’s narrative of
the manner in which a lost book of his has been recovered is worthy of notice.
“A French scholar and statesman of high merit, M. Villemain, sent a
Greek to Mount Athos to look out for new treasures in the domain of Greek
literature. The fruits of this mission were deposited, in 1842, in the great
national library, already possessed of so many treasures. Among them was a MS.
of no great antiquity, written in the fourteenth century, not on parchment, but
on cotton paper, and it was registered as a book ‘on all heresies,’
without any indication of its author or age ... . It fell to the lot of a
distinguished Greek scholar and writer on literature, a functionary of that
great institution, M. Emmanuel Miller, to bring forward the hidden treasure. In
1850 he offered it to the University Press at Oxford, as a work of undoubted
authenticity, and as a lost treatise of Origen, ‘Against all
Heresies.’” It was published in 1851, and Bunsen, on reading
it, pronounced it not to be the work of Origen, but of Hippolytus; and in
letters to Archdeacon Hare, he has thrown great light upon the subject, and
enabled us to per, use some fragments of his comments on Daniel and the
Antichrist, which Calvin could only have known through Eusebius and
Jerome.
It is worthy of notice that Sir Isaac Newton,
in his “Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel,” etc., quotes
Hippolytus thus, — “If divers of the ancients, as Irenaeus, Julius
Africanus, Hippolytus the martyr, and Apollinaris bishop of Laodicea, applied
the half week to the times of Antichrist, why may not we, by the same liberty of
interpretation, apply the seven weeks to the time when Antichrist shall be
destroyed by the brightness of Christ’s coming.”
Nicolaus de Lyra received his name from the place of
his birth, Lire, a small town in Normandy. He flourished at the beginning of the
fourteenth century: he was one of the Society of the Friars Minors at Verneuil,
although he is supposed to have been born a Jew. his oostills were
repeatedly printed at the close of the fifteenth and the early part of the
sixteenth centuries, and were familiar to the biblical students of
Calvin’s day. He was a good Hebrew scholar, and has enriched his comments
with the best specimens of Rabbinical learning. He is a good interpreter of the
literal sense; but his views were attacked by Paulus Burgensis, Paul
bishop of Burgos, who was a converted Jew, and defended by Mattathias Doring.
His works, with those of his opponent and champion, were published at Duaci,
a.d. 1617; also at Antwerp,
a.d. 1634, in 6 vols. folio. See also Hart. Horne,
volume 2, part 2, chapter 5. In the Morning Watch, volume 1, page 147, he is
considered as a forerunner of the Reformation. Luther is there said to have
written of him thus: “Ego Lyram ideo arno, et inter optimos pono, quod
ubique diligenter refiner et persequitur historian.”
“Burgensis.”
A notice of Paul of Burgos is found in Allport’s edition of
Bishop Davenant on Justification, volume 2, page 86,
note.
The Africanus here mentioned was Julius Africanus of
Nicopolis, (Emmaus,) a friend of Origen’s, and rather his senior in years.
He is a very early writer on chronology, about a.d.
232; and his epistle concerning the history of Susannah, together with
Origen’s reply, is in Wetstein’s edition, annexed to
the dialogue against the Marcionites. Mosheim calls him “a man of the most
profound erudition, but the greatest part of whose learned labors are unhappily
lost.” Cent. 3, part 2; see also Gieseler’s Eccl. Hist.,
volume 1, page 145, American translation. The treatise to which Calvin probably
refers is the fragment on the genealogy of Christ preserved by Eusebius, Hist.
Eccl., lib. 1, chapter. 7, especially as Eusebius himself had just quoted this
chapter of Daniel
(<270924>Daniel
9:24) at the close of his sixth chapter. Other writings of his are quoted
by Eusebius, lib. 6, chapter. 31, entitled “Concerning
Africanus.”
Apollinaris, bishop of Hierapolis, flourished in the
second century. He is included by Gieseler among the writers against the
Montanists, and is united with Melito of Sardis by Eusebius, as writers of great
repute. See Euseb. Eccl. Hist., lib. 4, chapter. 26, 27. In the latter chapter
he gives a list of his works. See also lib, 5, chapter. 16, 19. Another of the
fourth century is mentioned by Mosheim as Bishop of Laodicea. An account of this
writer is found in the English edition of Bailey’s
Dictionary.
DISSERTATION
11.
ABOMINATION OF
DESOLATION
<270927>Daniel
9:27
Various questions have arisen respecting the correct
interpretation of this phrase. The prophecy has been supposed to be accomplished
first under Antiochus Epiphanes, and again by the Roman armies under Titus.
Hengstenberg’s remarks were chiefly in reply to
Bertholdt, Com. 2, page 584, and in explanation of our Savior’s
comments, as recorded by St. Matthew. He thinks “it was then
regarded by the Jews as relating to a still future occurrence — the yet
impending conquest and destruction of Jerusalem.”
“A sufficient proof of this is afforded by the
passage, Josephus Arch. 10:1 l, 7, ‘Daniel predicted also the Roman
supremacy, and that our country should be desolated by them.’” The
passage De Bell. Jud. 4:6, 3, is also quoted with this conclusion,
“How general the reference of the prophecy then was to a future
destruction of the city, appears from the express observation of Josephus, that
even the zealots had no doubt of the correctness of this interpretation. The
same interpretation is found also in the Babylonian and Jerusalem
Gemarah.” (P. 215.) This reference to “thee
zealots” is explained in a note to Bishop Kidder’s
Demonstration of the Messias, pt. 2, page 11. They were slain standing on
the battlements of the temple, and their carcasses and blood were scattered and
sprinkled about the sanctuary before its final destruction. This is supposed to
be a fulfillment of the prediction. Professor Lee states, “It
is to be understood rather of the Roman armies, with their heathen ensigns,
stationed over against the Temple, than of anything else.” (Book 2,
chapter. 2, page 202.) He translates thus, “For the overspreading
of abominations he shall make it (i.e., Jerusalem) desolate; even until
the consummation (i.e., the complete end) and (until) that determined
shall be poured upon the desolate, rather desolator;” meaning, “the
people of the prince who should come as a desolator and destroy the city and the
sanctuary.” (Book 2, chapter. 1, page 142.) “Let it be
remembered,” says he, “all is here indefinite. No mathematical
measure of time or portion of time is therefore to be thought of. The occurrence
of their several events will supply the only measures of time now to be had
recourse to.”
The early Reformers, Oecolampadius, Bullinger,
and Osiander, treated the word “overspreading” in its literal sense
of “wing,” and applied it to the wings or pinnacles of the
Temple; the first of these three takes it for “the very altar and holy
place where the winged cherubim were.” Augustine in his Epis. 80,
ad Hesychium, interprets it of the legions and wings of the Roman armies
which compassed and defiled the Temple. Irenoeus, lib. 5, ad. haer.,
explains it of Antichrist., whom he imagined should sit in the Temple at
Jerusalem, and be worshipped as Messiah. Rosenmuller illustrates the use
of the word wing from
<230808>Isaiah
8:8, and 18:1, and also from Cicero, Offic. lib. 2, chapter 13. C. B.
Michaelis objects to the usual sense of the “abomination of
desolation’s,” while Gesenius and Winer refer the wing
to the pinnacle of the Temple. Rosenmuller prefers the active sense of
“the desolater,” according to the marginal reading of our authorized
version, and applies the passage to Antiochus Epiphanes, quoting 1 Maccabees
1:11, 63, as fulfilling the prediction. Dr. Wells approves of this
translation, but he interprets the desolater to mean “the Gentile people
inhabiting the (once) countries of the Roman Empire.” (Paraphrase, page
101.)
DISSERTATION
12.
THE VISION ON THE BANKS OF THE
HIDDEKEL
<271001>Daniel
10:1
This vision is referred to by Bertholdt and
Griesinger in an attempt to shew its contradiction to
<270121>Daniel
1:21, but their cavils have been ably answered by Hengstenberg, pages 54,
55. The error in the Alexandrine translation of this verse is discussed on page
239. With regard to the fasting of
<271002>Daniel
10:2, Staudlin assumes that Daniel abstracted himself as far as possible
from sensible objects, in order to obtain very high revelations, and that the
reason why only Daniel saw the appearance lies in the fact, that only he had
been fasting a long season and doing penance, and had thereby sharpened and
sanctified his vision; see N. Beitr., page 279, ap. Heng.,
page 120. The celestial appearance of
<271005>Daniel
10:5 and 6 is said to be “identical with the angel of the Lord, and
thus also with Michael. Daniel finds himself on the banks of the Tigris, and
sees hovering over its waters a human form clothed in linen, with a golden
girdle about his loins.” Hengstenberg objects to the opinion that
this is a representation of Gabriel. He is so terrified by the voice of the
apparition that he fails into a deep swoon, and for a long time cannot recover,
whereas with Gabriel, on his former single appearance, Daniel 11, he converses
quite fiercely and without restraint. The angel of the Lord is present in calm
silent majesty, and works with an unseen power. The man clothed in linen cannot
be, as Staudlin assumes, absolutely identified with the Most High God,
but is as distinct from him as the angel of the Lord from the Lord himself. For
he swears not; by himself, but, with his right hand lifted up to heaven, by the
eternal God. The supposition of a distinction between the man clothed in linen
and Gabriel has the analogy of
<270816>Daniel
8:16 in its favor. The names Gabriel and Michael are peculiar to Daniel, and
occur only in such visions as from their dramatic character demand the most
exact description possible of the persons concerned and the bringing of them out
into stronger relief. This opinion is discussed more at length on pages
136-188.
Rosenmuller objects to consider this vision as
either an ecstasy or dream. He quotes Theodoret and Jerome on the phrase,
“desirable food,” and explains the period of the Prophet’s
fasting according to the view of C. B. Michaelis. The attire of
<271005>Daniel
10:5 is that of the high priest, although it is by no means certain that this
representation portrayed “the prince of the army of Jehovah.” The
likeness to chrysolite is said to be not with respect to color, but clearness
and brilliancy. Bochart and Calmer suppose Uphaz and Ophir to be the same place;
see Wintle’s note, which is full of information. In illustration of the
“voice,”
<271006>Daniel
10:6, Rosenmuller quotes Iliad 11:1. 148 and following, and enters fully into
the Jewish theory of various orders of angels, in the first of which were
Michael and Raphael. On this very interesting subject he has selected with great
judgment. the opinions of various ancient interpreters, especially Theodoret and
Jerome, as well as those of Luther, Geier, Gesenius, and Winer. “The hand
that touched him,” observes Wintle, “was probably one of the
attendant angels. The form of the superior spirit was scarcely visible by
Daniel, and therefore it seems likely to have been one of an inferior order,
whose hand he could discover as reached out unto him.
(<271018>Daniel
10:18.) The Son of God is seldom introduced to human notice without a retinue of
angels.”
<271013>Daniel
10:13. The prince of the kingdom of Persia is
supposed by some writers to be either Cyrus or Cambyses opposing the building of
the Temple; and by others to refer to those guardian angels which the Orientals
believed to protect different countries. Wintle adopts Theodotion’s
translation of the last clause of this verse, as the sense then becomes very
clear; but Rosennmuller prefers the Syriac version, “I was delayed
there,” in preference to “I left him there.”
DISSERTATION
13.
MICHAEL THE
PRINCE
<271013>Daniel
10:13
The appearance of angels, as recorded in these
prophecies, has always given rise to much inquiry and conjecture. Henstenberg
contends for the identity of Michael and the angel of the Lord, as
recognized by the elder Jews, perhaps on the testimony of tradition. He
contends against the assertion of Bertholdt, that the Jews derived
their distinction between superior and inferior angels from the Persians, after
the end of the Babylonish captivity, (2, 528.) Gesenius recognizes
angel-princes, “as the earthly monarch is surrounded by his nobles, so
here is Jehovah by princes of heaven.” Traces of a gradation of
rank among the angels are also found in
<183323>Job
33:23, according to the explanation suggested by Winer. “We
go further,” adds Hengstenberg, “we can shew that
those angels of higher rank who play a particular part in our book, are the very
same that meet us in just the same character in the oldest books. We have
already pointed out in the Christoloqie, that the doctrine of the angel
or revealer of God, runs through the whole of the Old Testament, who in a
twofold respect, first as the highest of all angels, then as connected
with the hidden God by a oneness of essence, appears as his revealer. He then
argues for the identity of Michael with the angel of Jehovah, the leader of the
Israelites, the prince of the army of Jehovah, according to
<023234>Exodus
32:34, and
<060513>Joshua
5:13, and
<380105>Zechariah
1:5. In some passages in the Talmud, Michael as the angel of Jehovah is
associated with the Shekinah. See on this interesting point
Baumgarten-Crusius Bibl. Theol., pages 282, 287. Jerome on
Zechariah 1; and Danz in Meuschen, Illustrations of the New Testament
from the Talmud, pages 718, 733.
DISSERTATION
14.
HISTORICAL PROOFS. THREE KINGS OF
PERSIA.
<271102>Daniel
11:2
“The speaker in
this last vision is the Son of God himself. There are two things which in my
judgment may be clearly proved; that the princes of Persia and Javan, as also
Michael and Gabriel, are created angels; and that the speaker in this last
vision is the angel of the covenant, the Son of God... The phrase, ‘to
strengthen him,’ is also very significant. The word is mahoz, the
same which occurs in the plural mahuzzim, at the close of the prophecy.
Here it plainly denotes a tutelary or guardian power, exercised on behalf of
Darius by the Son of God. At the close of the vision it must bear a similar
meaning. The Mahuzzim are those tutelary powers, whether saints, angels, or
demons, who are objects of great horror to the willful king.” —
Birks, page 33. Herodotus is still a safe guide in the interpretation
of this prediction. His narrative of Cambyses and Darius Hystaspes, amply
illustrates and confirms it. The canon of Ptolemy agrees in the same account,
only Smerdis is omitted, as usual, because his reign was less than a year. In
the reign of Darius, the third successor of Cyrus, the rebuilding of the temple
was renewed, under the exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah. “The fourth
king,” who is far richer than all, and stirs up all against the realm of
Greece, plainly answers to Xerxes, the son and successor of Darius. Those three
reigns reach forward through fifty years of the world’s history,
a.d. 534-485.
<271102>Daniel
11:2. The fourth king was Xerxes. The four last
books of Herodotus, and the eleventh of Diodorus, are entirely occupied with his
invasion of Greece. The Greek play of AEschylus, called the Persae,
written within eight years to celebrate the triumph of the Greeks, is useful in
conveying a vivid impression of this predicted invasion. Willet may be
consulted, as he enters very fully into all the historical details, and gives
his authorities in abundance; but his arrangement is very cumbrous; and his want
of critical skill often renders his judgment valueless. He has raw materials in
abundance, but seldom produces it “ready made to hand.” See
Quest. 6, for various opinions on the identity of this fourth king, page 398,
Edit. 1610.
<271103>Daniel
11:3-5. “The mighty king who shall stand
up,” clearly refers to Alexander. The exposition of
Calvin is substantially correct throughout this
chapter; it will be sufficient to add a few dates and
references.
Diodorus, lib. 18, chapter. 43, narrates the
career of Ptolemy the son of Lagus, who received Egypt as his share, and
successfully repelled the attacks of Perdiccas. Lib. 19, chapter. 79,
continues the exploits of Ptolemy. Justin, lib. 13, chapter. 6, and
16, chapter. 2, confirms the statement of Diodorus.
<271105>Daniel
11:5. “One of his princes shall be
great.” This refers to Seleucus Nicator, the founder of the kingdom of
Syria. His strength is related by Appian, de Bel. Syr. sect. 164, who
says he could stop a bull in his career by laying hold of him by the
horn. The Arabs called the era of the Seleucidae Dilcarnain, two-horned.
— See Prideaux, Connex., part 1, b. 8; Justin 19, chapter. 12, and 55, 56,
58, 62, 90, 91, 100; Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, chapter. 8; Grey on Hist.
of the Seleucidae, 8:35
<271106>Daniel
11:6-9. We have here the marriage of
Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, with Antiochus Theus, the
grandson of the great Seleucus. Birks has drawn up an elaborate list of
each king of Syria and Egypt, from a.d. 323
to 164; and states the following monarchs as referred to in the corresponding
verses of this chapter; viz.,
5.
Ptolemy Soter, and Seleucus Nicator.
7,
8. Ptolemy Philadelphus, and Antiochus
Theus.
9.
Ptolemy Euergetes, and Scleucus Callinicus.
10.
Seleucus Corarams, and Antiochus
Magnus.
11,
12. Ptolemy Philopator.
14,
17. Ptolemy Epiphanes.
20.
Seleucus Philopator.
21.
Antiochus Epiphanes.
25.
Ptolemy Philomotor.
He has also treated the details of the history so
plainly, that we may satisfy ourselves by simply referring to chapters 6 to 11,
pages 73-171. Wintle’s notes are also very explanatory; both
these authors supply all the Historical Proofs
which the reader of Calvin’s Daniel can
require.
The annexed authorities will explain some of the
historical allusions of the text.
Villius, page 298, was Publius Villius, the Roman
ambassador to the court of Antiochus, who there held a conference with
Hannibal.
P. Popilius Leanas, page 317. The narrative is
founded on Valerius Maximus, 6, chapter. 5; Livy, 45, chapter. 12; Paterculus,
1, chapter. 10. Calvin probably adopted this
anecdote from Jerome. See Fry, volume 2, page 55.
Valerius Soranus, page 349 — a Latin poet of
the period of Julius Caesar.
Alexander, king of Syria, page 358. The events of his
career are detailed by Josephus, Ant., 13, chapter. 9.
Physcon, page 359. See Josephus as before, and
Athenaeus, 2, chapter. 23.
Carrae, page 364. For the death of Crassus there, see
Lucan 1. verse. 10.5, and Pliny, lib. 5. c.
14.
DISSERTATION
15.
THE WILFUL
KING
<271136>Daniel
11:36
The subject here commenced is of the deepest
interest, and needs peculiar caution in its treatment. The words in which it is
conveyed are obscure in themselves, and, consequently, all the early
translations of them are imperfect. Calvin has
thrown great light upon the original phraseology, but still reference may be
profitably made to some modern translators. The sixteenth chapter of the
“Two Later Visions of Daniel,” is occupied with this discussion;
various views are clearly and fairly stated; some conjectures are refuted, and
some conclusions enforced which differ very materially from
Calvin’s. The translation of obscure passages
adopted in this work are excellent, as well as those given by Elliott in
his notes to pages 1327 and following, of volume 3 of his Horae Apocalypticae.
Professor Lee’s translations are exceedingly full and
explanatory, while his hermeneutical views agree more with
Calvin’s than either Elliott’s or
Birks’. See his Inquiry into the Nature, Progress, and end of Prophecy,
Book. 2, chapter 2, page 189 and following. Wintle’s notes
are much to the point. And Bishop Newton traces the analogy between this king
and Antichrist in his Dissertation., volume 3, chapter. 26. The annexed comments
from Birks, page 271 and following, will explain some grammatical
difficulties.
<271137>Daniel
11:37. — “He shall not regard the
elohim of his fathers.” The clause is ambiguous, as the word
“elohim” may receive two opposite constructions. Bishop Newton and
others think it to mean, the one true God; but Mede, with many able writers,
render it correct]y, the gods of his fathers, implying the false deities of the
heathens. Arguments are then given in support of this view, and objections
forcibly answered. “Neither shall he regard the desire of
women.” The meaning of this phrase is shortly discussed. The received
view, that it refers to the Messiah, is set aside, and it is taken the enlarged
sense of despising and trampling upon these humanizing affections of which women
are the object. Elliott, after a good Hebrew criticism, applies it to the
Messiah, fortifying his opinion by Faber on the Prophecies, pages
380-385, volume 1, edit. 5; so Lee in his preface, page 126, to Euseb.
Theophania — “This occurring as it does in a context speaking of
deities, was probably intended to designate the Messiah.”
<271138>Daniel
11:38. — “But in his estate with
Eloah he will honor Mahuzzim.” We now enter upon the second part of this
description, which exhibits the new worship set up by the Willful King. Here
several questions of some difficulty will arise. I will first offer what appears
to me the most natural translation, and consider afterwards the chief points in
dispute one by one.
“But in his estate with Eloah, he will
honor Mahuzzim; even with an eloah whom his fathers knew not, he will honor them
with gold, and with silver, and with precious stones, and with pleasant things.
And he will offer to the strongholds of Mahuzzim, with a foreign eloah whom he
will acknowledge; he will increase their glory, and will cause them to rule over
many, and will divide the land for gain.” The meaning of the word
Mahuzzim, fortresses or strongholds, is next described, and in conclusion, it is
decided, that Mahuzzim “must here denote guardian deities or tutelary
persons, who receive worship as protectors and guardians, defenses and
fortresses, from their votaries.” Professor Lee’s
translation is as follows,— “But in his estate he shall honor
the god of forces; and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold,
and silver, and with precious stones, and with pleasant things.”
“Nero was the first of this series.” “Domitian was the first
emperor who generally persecuted, and who, during his lifetime, assumed the
title of the Lord God, and insisted upon being worshipped as a deity.”
This is the Professor’s interpretation, page 192. The translations of
Mede, Bishop Newton, and Dr. Gill, vary slightly from each
other, but none of them are so correct as that given above. The original
word, translated “offer,” has very wide and various meanings. In
<021025>Exodus
10:25, it is rendered “sacrifice” to the Lord our God, and is very
frequently used in this sense. The words, “a foreign god whom he will
acknowledge,” are probably an explanation of the previous phrase, “a
god whom his fathers knew not;” implying that the worship of this divinity
was borrowed by the Willful King from some other nation, and was unknown to his
fathers.
“Such, in conclusion,” says Birks,
“are the results which flow from a careful inquiry into the natural
meaning of this passage. The Willful King here described is one which might be
expected to rise after the renewed persecution of the faithful, when imperial
help had been given them, and to continue perhaps for ages, until the
restoration of Israel. His title as the king, and the time appointed him
in the words of the angel, prove him to be the same with the Little Horn,
speaking great words against the most High. He will reject every form of heathen
worship, commended to him by the long practice of his fathers, utter proud
speeches of surprising arrogance, and of real blasphemy against the God
of heaven, trample under his feet the strongest instincts of domestic love, and
thus magnify himself against God and man. He will, however, adopt a foreign
eloah derived from the Jews for his own; but will turn the very worship he pays
to the Son of God into the key-stone to a wide and spreading system of idolatry,
in which he will pay reverence to a multitude of guardian powers, and cause them
to receive homage and worship from his people.” The comments of this able
writer on
<271136>Daniel
11:36-39 are so contrary to the views of Calvin,
that it is only necessary here to state their variance with those of our
Reformer. Some explanations are worthy of notice, as, for instance, the
following— “These words apply accurately to the local persecutions
of believers under the Arian emperors, and the fierce and savage cruelties of
the Vandals against the confessors of the faith. When, however, the time of the
end, or the predicted three times and a half should begin, these persecutions
would gradually become more systematic and severe. So that the prophecy at once
proceeds to describe the king, who would prosper in the time of the end, and by
whom the fires would be kindled afresh with more than Pagan cruelty, against the
followers of God.”
Elliott in his Horae Apocalypticae, volume 3,
page 1294, has devoted a section to the elucidation of this chapter. His
comments upon the Hebrew words of the original text are valuable, displaying
great judgment, and throwing much light upon the Prophet’s meaning. His
chronological list of the kings of Syria and Egypt is correct, and very clearly
explains the history of this prophetic period. This prophecy, he states,
naturally divides itself into two parts: first, that from
<271101>Daniel
11:1-31, sketching the times of the Persians and Greeks; secondly, that from
<271132>Daniel
11:32 to the end of Daniel 12, sketching the sequel. His comments upon the whole
of Daniel 11 to verse 35, are illustrative of Calvin’s views in these
Lectures; but this writer interprets verse 36 and following, in accordance with
the expositions of Mede and the two Newtons. These are so fundamentally at
variance with Calvin’s writings, that it
would be out of place to dwell upon them here. Elliott’s
notes on the Hebrew words throughout the latter portion of this chapter are
most excellent, and may be trusted as scholarlike, sound, and
judicious.
Chapter 6 of the “First Elements of
Sacred Prophecy” is occupied by a refutation of Dr. Todd’s theory.
The details of the fulfillment of each verse are plainly and accurately stated,
and the objections of the Fourth Donnellan Lecture are shewn to be futile. This
work is chiefly devoted to the refutation of the Futurist theories, which are
directly opposite to that of Calvin. See
particularly pages 135-149.
Fry in his Second Advent, chapter. 5,
sect. 21, has collected the views of various English Commentators, but they all
vary exceedingly from those of Calvin.
DISSERTATION
15.
THE POLLUTION OF THE
SANCTUARY
<271136>Daniel
11:36, etc.
The various occasions on which the sanctuary was
polluted by heathen foes are as follows: —
1.
By Antiochus Epiphanes, when he set up the image of Jupiter Olympius on the
divine altar. The daily sacrifice was then taken away, and Acra fortified so as
to overlook the Temple.
2.
The Romans polluted it under Pompey the Great, as recorded by Josephus,
Antiq., 14, § 4, 2, 6. It was transitory and quickly repaired,
although this was the first step towards the complete loss of
liberty.
3.
The next profanation occurred under Crassus, who carried off the gold and the
treasures which Pompey had left. Eleazer the priest, who had the custody of the
vail of the Temple, gave him a beam of solid gold as a ransom for the whole, and
yet he afterwards carried away all the wealth of the sacred edifice. (Antiq.,
14, 7, 1.)
4.
When Herod obtained the kingdom, a.c. 38, the
Romans under Sosius took the city by storm; the Jews took refuge within the
Temple, but were unmercifully massacred by their cruel foes. (Antiq., 14,
16, 3.) So again a slaughter took place in the Temple by Archelaus on the first
passover after Herod’s death, while the cruelties of Sabinus form a
similar instance. (Wars, 2:3, 2.)
5.
When Titus pitched his camp on the Mount of Olives, and the Romans brought their
ensigns within the Temple, and offered sacrifices to them. (Wars, 6:6,
1.)
6.
During the reign of Hadrian, after the revolt of Barchochebas, a temple was
built and consecrated to Jupiter Capitolinus on the very site of the
sanctuary.
DISSERTATION
17.
THE CONQUEST OF THE GLORIOUS
LAND
<271141>Daniel
11:41
The sober views of our Reformer form a striking
contrast to the speculations of some modern writers. Birks, for instance,
considers the spread of the Turkish power as accomplishing this verse. He quotes
Rycault’s History of the Ottoman Kings, and considers the
conquest of Thessalonica and the subjugation of Greece by Amurath II.,
a.d. 1432, as the intended fulfillment. In 1514,
Selim the third Turkish Emperor overthrew the Sultan of Egypt, and obtained
possession of Aleppo. After other victories, he turned aside to visit
Jerusalem.
The next verse is also supposed to predict his
conquests; and the facts detailed by Rycault, volume 1, pages 246-248,
respecting the conquest of Judea, Arabia, and Egypt, at the commencement of the
sixteenth century of the Christian era., are asserted to fulfill
<271141>Daniel
11:41 to 43. The last verse of this chapter is also supposed to be accomplished
by the historical events recorded by Rycault, volume 1, pages 249-251. A
similar opinion is given by the author of “The Revelation of St.
John Considered,” Append. 1, page 467. Elltott’s
sentiments are similar to these, but less precise, and not very clearly
expressed. Mede and Bishop Newton think the closing verses of this
chapter remain yet unfulfilled. Professor Lee treats this as accomplished
by Constantine and Licinius; see pages 19.5-197, and gives as his authority
Hist. Univers., volume 15, pages 582-584.
Before the reader has arrived at this “point
of observation,” he will probably have decided whether the Praeterist
or the Futurist interpretations of these verses is the more acceptable to his
own mind, and will value these references according to the conclusions to which
he has already arrived.
DISSERTATION
18.
THE SEALING OF THE
BOOK
<271204>Daniel
12:4
It will not be necessary here to add more than a
quotation from Hengstenberg, who answers objections with his usual
success, — “The command to the Prophets to shut up and seal the
prophecies relates only to a symbolical action, to be understood of something
internal; and after the removal of the mere drapery, the imperatives are to be
resolved into futures, thus — these prophecies will be closed and sealed
till the time of the end, in nearly the same manner as Zechariah
(<381115>Zechariah
11:15) is commanded in a vision to take the instruments of a foolish shepherd,
to intimate that some day ungodly rulers will ruin the people ... . But the
external acceptation of the words is still more strongly opposed by
chapter. 12:9. There the angel answers Daniel’s request for more precise
disclosures respecting the prophecy, by saying that he cannot furnish him with
them because it is closed and sealed up till the last time.” The
objections here answered are those of Bertholdt, Comm., page 795; De
Wette; Bleek, pages 186, 207; and Sack, Apol., page 285.
Alexander, W. L., (Edinburgh,) in his Congregational Lectures,
seventh series, 1841, has a short but explanatory criticism on the meaning of
“to seal” and “to shut up;” see
Lecture 7, page 372.
DISSERTATION
18.
THE EXPRESSIONS RELATIVE TO
TIME
<271211>Daniel
12:11
The variety of opinion as to the expressions of
Time in this chapter renders it difficult to
illustrate our author with sufficient brevity. The wisdom of the early reformers
is conspicuous. OEcolampadius agrees with Calvin in treating these
periods of days, as implying long and indefinite times —
“multiplicatione dierum longum tempus antichristianae impietatis
agnoseas” — by the multiplication of the days you will perceive the
lengthened period of the anti-christian impiety. Junius and Polanus,
as quoted by Willet, consider the days to be literal ones, and the
accomplishment to have taken place during Maccabean times. He also gives the
views of Hippolytus and Nicolaus de Lyra, to whom
Calvin has previously referred. Melancthon
adds together the 1290 and the 1335 days, making seven years and three
months, beginning b.c. 145, and ending
b.c. 151, when Nicanor was overcome. Bullinger
understands them of the times of Antiochus, and Osiander of the
duration of Antichrist, but thinks this prophecy does not properly, “but
by way of analogue, concern the latter times.” The opinions of those
modern interpreters who adopt the principles of Mede will be found in the
works already quoted. He reckons the years from the time of Antiochus,
b.c. 167, which brings us down to the 12th century,
when the Waldenses and Albigenses protested against the tyranny of the Papacy;
and between the forty-five years, 1123 and 1168
a.d. a great secession occurred from the dominion
of the Pope, by which he thinks the prophecy to have been fulfilled. Bishop
Newton, Dissertation. 26, page 387, writes as follows, — “It
is, I conceive, to these great events, the fall of Antichrist, the
re-establishment of the Jews, and the beginning of the glorious millennium, that
the three different dates in Daniel of the 1260 years, 1290 years, and 1335
years, are to be referred.” Here the word “years” is
used as if it occurred in the scriptural text.
Professor Lee considers that the events which
occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus fulfilled the prediction of
verse. 1. “The children of thy people,” found written in the
book, are said not to be the Jews at large, but the holy remnant who embraced
Jesus as Messiah, and escaped to carry the tidings of salvation to the ends of
the earth. The many who slept in the dust of the earth were to awake
“in a first resurrection with Christ,”
<450603>Romans
6:3-6, and “some to shame and everlasting contempt, i.e.,
awakened to hear through the preaching of the gospel, the judgments
denounced against unbelief, and to feel this in a general overthrow.” The
resurrection is here interpreted of our regeneration and union with the Savior
through the Spirit, and the precise period of its accomplishment is confined to
the early spread of the gospel among mankind.
The “time, times, and a half” of
<271207>Daniel
12:7, “must, of necessity, signify the time that should elapse from the
fall of Jerusalem, to the end of Daniel’s seventieth week; for, according
to the prediction enouncing this, the Temple and the City were to fall in the
midst of this week,” page 199. In direct contrast to this extract,
Elliott’s reference of this chapter to times yet future
occurs in volume 2, page 1343. Assuming the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days to be
years, the former period is said to close at the French Revolution in 1790
a.d., the second at the Greek Revolution in 1820
a.d.; and as they are “unhesitatingly”
pronounced to be all three “measured from one and the same commencing
epoch,” the last date must terminate a.d.
1865. Frere terminates the 1290 days in a.d.
1822, and the 1335 in a.d. 1847. See his Letter
dated September 9, 1848, to the Editor of the Quarterly Journal of Prophecy,
October 1848. Wintle refers this verse to the struggle with
anti-christian powers, when Michael should stand up “to defend the cause
of the Jews, and to destroy the enemies of true religion.” Note in
loc.
The Duke of Manchester has devoted an Appendix
to the discussion of these expressions. He justly observes; if they “are
to be taken literally, then the important events of the latter part of this
prophecy will be within the compass of a man’s life, and will relate to
the actions of an individual. If, on the other hand, the 1290 and 1335 are
years, they will extend far beyond the life of any individual, and must
therefore be applied, not to a person, but to a system. Thus the whole character
of the prophecy will be different.” “The prophecy of Daniel 10-12 is
not symbolical, nor even figurative, but is literal. The expression translated
days in Daniel 8 is different from the term rendered days in Daniel 12. The
character of the prophecy, Daniel 10-12, is rather what we may call
biographical, for it details the actions of individuals. I see no more warrant
for saying the willful king denotes a system, than for saying the vile person,
or , the raiser of taxes, or a dozen other kings, mentioned in the prophecy,
denote systems. The genius of the prophecy, therefore, seems to require that
the measure of time connected with the actions of the willful king, should be
suitable to the reign of an individual king, and not elongated into times
suitable to the continuance of a system from generation to generation.
‘Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the 1335 days,’ seems to
imply that some individuals would endure for the whole 1335 days.” Thus
far the noble author’s remarks are completely in the spirit of
Calvin, but a few sentences afterwards, he supposes
the “abomination of desolation” to belong to the last days of the
world, thus giving countenance to the Futurist expositions. The curious reader
may consult a Review in “The Morning Watch,” volume 5, page 161, of
Faber’s Second Calendar of Prophecy, in which many ingenious
speculations are brought forward illustrative of Daniel’s expressions
relative to Time. The various numbers of this work contain a multiplicity of
laborious investigations of this subject, chiefly based upon the year-day
theory.
DISSERTATION
20.
MODERN DISCOVERY THROWING ITS
LIGHT
ON DANIEL’S
PROPHECIES.
<271213>Daniel
12:13
We now conclude these our Dissertations by a further
allusion to the subject which occupied our attention in the
Preface. — the marble commentary on the
inspired text presented by the Nineveh monuments. Three thousand years have
passed over the Assyrian mounds, and at length, while we are closing our volume,
the grave is giving up its dead at the call of the intellect of modern Europe.
The crusted earth, beneath which Nineveh has been so long inhumed, has now
revealed the monumental history of its grandeur, the imperishable witness of its
incomparable renown. We must leave the interesting narrative of the discovery of
these unrivaled treasures, and the description of these singular sculptures; our
attention must be directed solely to the inscriptions, by the reading of which
alone these monuments become available for our purpose. Had we been unable to
read them, “all the excavations must have been to no purpose, and the
sculptured monuments would have been worthless as the dust from which they have
been torn.” Well may we ask, in the language of an able review of
Layard’s second series of monuments of Nineveh, May 16, 1853,
“By what splendid accidents, then, has it happened that illumination has
been thrown into the heaps, and that art, inferred for 3000 years, becomes, when
brought to light, in an instant as familiar to us all as though it were but the
dainty work of yesterday? How comes it that these arrow-headed, or, as they are,
more generally styled, cuneiform characters, which bear no analogy whatever to
modern writing of any kind, and which have been lost to the world since the
Macedonian conquest, are read by our countrymen with a facility that commands
astonishment, and a correctness that admits of no dispute? The history is very
plain, but certainly as remarkable as it is simple. Fifty years ago the key that
has finally opened the treasure-house was picked up, unawares, by Professor
Grotefend of Gottingen. In the year 1802 this scholar took it into his head to
decipher some inscriptions which were, and still are to be found on the walls of
Persepolis, in Persia. These inscriptions, written in three different languages,
are all in the cuneiform (or wedge-like) character, and were addressed, as it
now appears, to the three distinct races acknowledging, in the time of Darius,
the Persian sway — viz., to the Persians proper, to the Scythians, and to
the Assyrians. It is worthy of remark that although the cuneiform character is
extinct, the practice of addressing these races in the language peculiar to each
still prevails on the spot. The modern governor of Bagdad, when he issues his
edicts, must, like the great Persian king, note down his behest’s in three
distinct forms of language, or the Persian, the Turk, and the Arab who submit to
his rule will find it difficult to possess themselves of his wishes. When
Grotefend first saw the three kinds of inscription, he concluded the first to be
Persian, and proceeded to his task with this conviction. He had not studied the
writing long before he discerned that all the words of all the inscriptions were
separated from each other by a wedge, placed diagonally at the beginning or end
of each word. With this slight knowledge for his guide, he went on a little
further. He next observed that in the Persian inscription one word occurred
three or four times over, with a slight terminal difference. This word he
concluded to be a title. Further investigation and comparison of words induced
him to guess that the inscription recorded a genealogy. The assumption was a
happy one. But to whom did the titles belong? With no clue whatever to help him,
how should he decide? By an examination of all the authorities, ancient and
modern, he satisfied himself at least of the dynasty that had founded
Persepolis, and then he tried all the names of the dynasty in succession, in the
hope that some would fit. He was not disappointed. The names were Hystaspes,
Darius, and Xerxes. Although the actual pronunciation of these names had to be
discovered, yet by the aid of the Zend (the language of the ancient Persians)
and of the Greek, the true method of spelling was so nearly arrived at that no
doubt of the accuracy of the guess could reasonably be entertained. The
achievement had been worth the pains, for twelve characters of the Persian
cuneiform inscription were now well secured. Twenty-eight characters remained to
be deciphered before the inscriptions could be mastered. Grotefend here
rested.
“The next step was taken by M. Bournouf,
a scholar intimately acquainted with the Zend language. In 1836 he added
considerably to the Persian cuneiform alphabet by reading twenty-four names on
one of the inscriptions at Persepolis; but a more rapid stride was made
subsequently by Professor Lassen of Bonn, who, between the years 1836 and 1844,
to use the words of Mr. Fergusson, the learned and ingenious restorer of the
palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis, ‘all but completed the task of
alphabetical discovery.’
“While progress was thus making in Europe,
Colonel Rawlinson, stationed at Kermanshah, in Persia, and ignorant of what had
already been done in the west, was arriving at similar results by a process of
his own. He, too, had begun to read the Persian cuneiform character on two
inscriptions at Hamarian, the ancient Ecbatana. This was in 1835. In 1837 he had
been able to decipher the most extensive Persian cuneiform inscription in the
world. On the high road from Babylonia to the east stands the celebrated rock of
Behistun. It is almost perpendicular, and rises abruptly to the height of 1700
feet. A portion of the rock, about 300 feet from the plain, and still very
perfect, is sculptured, and contains inscriptions in the three languages already
spoken of. The sculpture represents King Darius and the vanquished chiefs before
him — the inscriptions detail the victories obtained over the latter by
the Persian monarch. This monument, at least 2350 years old, deciphered for the
first time by Colonel Rawlinson, gave to that distinguished Orientalist more
than eighty proper names to deal with. It enabled him to form an alphabet.
Between the Colonel and Professor Lassen no communication whatever had taken
place, yet when their alphabets were compared they were found to differ only in
one single character. The proof of the value of their discoveries was
perfect.
“Thus far the Persian cuneiform
character! To decipher it was to take the first essential step towards reading
the cuneiform inscriptions on the walls at Nineveh. But for the Persepolis
walls, the Behistun rock, and Colonel Rawlinson, it would have been a physical
impossibility to decipher one line of the AssyriaI1 remains. In the Persian text
only forty distinct characters had to be arrived at; and when once they were
ascertained, the light afforded by the Zend, the Greek, and other aids, rendered
translation not only possible, but certain to the patient and laborious student.
The Assyrian alphabet, on the other hand, has no fewer than 150 letters; many of
the characters are ideographs or hieroglyphics, representing a thing by a
non-phonetic sign, and no collateral aids whatever exist to help the student to
their interpretation. The reader will at once apprehend, however, that the
moment the Persian cuneiform character on the Behistun rock was overcome, it
must have been a comparatively easy task for the conqueror to break the mystery
of the Assyrian cuneiform inscription, which, following the Persian writing on
the rock, only repeated the same short history. Darius, who carved the monument
in order to impress his victories upon his Assyrian subjects, was compelled to
place before their eye the cuneiform character which they alone could
comprehend. The Assyrian characters on the rock are the same as those on the
bas-reliefs in the Assyrian palaces. Rawlinson, who first read the Persian
inscriptions at Behistun, and then by their aid made out the adjacent Assyrian
inscriptions, has handed over to Layard the first-fruits of his fortunate and
splendid discovery, and enabled him for himself to ascertain and fix the value
of the treasures he has so unexpectedly rescued from annihilation. As yet, as
may readily be imagined, the knowledge of the Assyrian writing is not perfect;
but the discovery has already survived its infancy. All other year or two of
scholastic investigation, another practical visit to the ancient mounds, and the
decipherment will be complete! Fortunate Englishmen! Enviable day-laborers in
the noblest vocation that can engage the immortal faculties of man! What glory
shall surpass that of the enterprising, painstaking, and heroic men who shall
have restored to us, after the lapse of thousands of years, the history and
actual stony presence of the world-renowned Nineveh, and enabled us to read with
our own eyes, as if it were our mother tongue, the language suspended on the
lips of men for ages, though written to record events in which the prophets of
Almighty God took a living interest!”
The following narrative of discoveries which have
been made since our Preface was written, will most appropriately close our
attempt to illustrate in every possible way these valuable Lectures: —
“When Mr. Layard returned to the scene of operations in 1848, he lost no
time in proceeding with his excavations. During his absence a small number of
men had been employed at Kouyunjik by Mr. Rassam, the English vice-consul, who,
as the agent of the British Museum, had carried on the works suspended by Mr.
Layard, though rather with the view of preventing interference on the part of
others than of prosecuting excavations to any great extent. Mr. Rassam’s
labors, limited as they were, had not been fruitless. He had dug his way to new
chambers, and had exposed additional sculptures. The latter were of great
interest, and portrayed more completely than any yet discovered the history of
an Assyrian conquest, from the going out of the monarch to battle to his
triumphal return after a complete victory. The opinion formerly entertained by
Mr. Layard with respect to this palace was now confirmed. He was convinced that
the ruins at Kouyunjik constituted one great building, built by one and the same
king. He was still further satisfied that Kouyunjik and Khorsabad were
contemporary structures, and that the north-west palace at Nimroud had a much
higher antiquity than either.”
That portion of the subject which applies most to our
purpose is the result obtained from the inscriptions with which the sculptures
are accompanied. In the language of the review already quoted — “The
king of Assyria himself is represented superintending the building of the mounds
upon which the palace with its bulls is to be built. This king, as the cuneiform
inscription shews, is Sennacherib; and the sculptures, as Rawlinson and the
initiated are permitted to read, celebrate the building at Nineveh of the great
palace and its adjacent temples — the work of this great king. The
inscriptions on the bulls at Kouyunjik record most minutely the manner in which
the edifice was built, its general plan, and the various materials employed in
decorating the halls, chambers, and roofs. Some of the inscriptions have a
thrilling interest. They indicate that the Jews, taken in captivity by the
Assyrian king, were compelled to assist in the erection of the palaces of their
conquerors, and that wood for the building was brought from Mount Lebanon,
precisely as Solomon had conveyed its cedars for the choice woodwork of the
temple of the Lord. There is an awful strangeness in thus being brought face to
face, as it were, with the solemn mysteries of the Bible and with our own
earliest sacred recollections.
“During the month of December (1848) the
treasure-seekers were rewarded with a rare harvest. A facade of the south-east
side of the palace at Kouyunjik, forming apparently the chief entrance to the
building, was discovered. It was 180 feet long, and presented no fewer than ten
colossal bulls, with six human figures of gigantic proportions. The bulls were
more or less injured; some of them were even shattered to pieces, but
fortunately the lower parts of all remained untouched, and consequently the
inscriptions were preserved. Two of these inscriptions contained the annals of
six years of the reign of Sennacherib, ‘besides numerous particulars
connected with the religion of the Assyrians, their gods, their temples, and the
erection of their palaces.’ There can be no reasonable doubt of the
accuracy of the translation made of these writings, and now given in Mr.
Layard’s volume.
f589
The very differences and variations that occur when the cuneiform character is
submitted to more than one translator attest to the correctness of the general
interpretation. Colonel Rawlinson has translated into English the particular
inscriptions of which we speak; and Dr. Hincks, an equally competent scholar,
has done the same — both independently of each other; and there is no
material discrepancy in their views. The inscription informs us that in the
first year of his reign Sennacherib defeated Berodach-Baladan, king of
Car-Duniyas, a city and country frequently mentioned in the Assyrian
inscriptions. It is not for the first time that the reader hears of this king,
for he will remember how, When Hezekiah was sick, ‘at that time
Berodach-Baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a
present unto Hezekiah,’ who boastfully shewed to the messengers
all the treasures of his house. The Assyrian monument and holy writ thus begin
to reflect light upon each other. But this is only a gleam of the
illumination that follows. In the third year of his reign, according to the
inscriptions, Sennacherib overran with his armies the whole of Syria.
‘Hezekiah,’ so runs the cuneiform writing, ‘king of Judah, who
had not submitted to my authority, forty-six of his principal cities, and
fortresses and villages depending upon them of which I took no account, I
captured, and carried away their spoil. I shut up himself within Jerusalem, his
capital city.’ The next passage, says Mr. Layard, is somewhat defaced, but
enough remains to shew that he took from Hezekiah the treasure he had collected
in Jerusalem — thirty talents of gold and eight hundred talents of
silver, besides his sons, his daughters, and his slaves. The reader has not
waited for us to remind him that in the 2nd Book of Kings it is written how
‘in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did Sennacherib, king of
Assyria, come up against all the fenced cities of Judah and took them ... And
the king of Assyria appointed unto Hezekiah, king of Judah, three hundred
talents of silver and Thirty Talents of Gold.
And Hezekiah gave him all the silver that was found in the house of the Lord,
and in the treasures of the king’s house.’ It is
something to have won from the earth such testimony on behalf of inspired
Scripture. It is also something to have obtained from holy writ such evidence in
favor of the monumental records of long-buried Nineveh.
1Discoveries
in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon. Being the result of a Second
Expedition, undertaken for the Trustees of the British Museum. By Austin H.
Layard, M.P. London: Murray, 1853.Layard’s Monuments of,
Nineveh. Second Series. London: Murray, 1853.
“At a later period a chamber was
discovered in which the sculptures were in better preservation than any before
found at Kouyunjik. The slabs were almost entire, and the inscription was
complete. The bas-reliefs represented the siege and capture, by the Assyrians,
of a city of great extent and importance. ‘In no other sculptures were so
many armed warriors seen drawn up in array before a besieged city.’ The
sculptures occupied thirteen slabs, and told the whole narrative of the attack,
the conquest, and the destruction of the enemy. The captives, as they appear in
the bas-reliefs, have been stripped of their ornaments and fine raiment, are
barefooted and half-clothed. But it is impossible to mistake the race to which
they belong. They are Jews; for the stamp is on the countenance as it is
impressed upon the features of their descendants at this very hour. The Assyrian
sculptor has noted the characteristic lines and drawn them with surprising
truth. To what city they belong we likewise know, for, above the figure of the
king, who commands in person, it is declared, that ‘Sennacherib, the
mighty king, king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the throne of judgment
before the city of Lachish, gives permission for its slaughter.’ That it
was slaughtered we have good reason to believe, for is it not written in the
Bible that Sennacherib had quitted Lachish, having vanquished it, before his
generals returned with the tribute extorted from Hezekiah?
“If evidence were still wanting to prove the
identity of the king who built Kouyunjik with the Sennacherib of the Old
Testament, it would be sufficient to call attention to one other most remarkable
discovery that has been made in these mysterious mounds. In a passage in the
south-west corner of the Kouyunjik palace, Mr. Layard stumbled upon a large
number of pieces of fine clay, bearing the impressions of seals, which there can
be no doubt had been affixed, like modern official seals of wax, to documents
written on leather or parchment. The writings themselves have, of course,
decayed, but, curiously enough, the holes for the string by which the seal was
fastened are still visible; and in some instances the ashes of the string itself
may be seen, together with the unmistakable marks of the finger and thumb. Four
of these seals are purely Egyptian. Two of them are impressions of a royal
signet. ‘It is,’ says Mr. Layard, ‘one well known to
Egyptian scholars, as that of the second Sabaco, the AEthiopian of the
twenty-fifth dynasty. On the same piece of clay is impressed an Assyrian seal,
with a, device representing a priest ministering before the king, probably a
royal signet.’ We entreat the reader’s attention to what follows.
Sabaco reigned in Egypt at the end of the seventh century before Christ, the
very time at which Sennacherib ascended the throne. ‘He is probably the So
mentioned in the
<121704>2
Kings 17:4 as having received ambassadors from Hoshea, king of Israel, who, by
entering into a league with the Egyptians, called down the vengeance of
Shalmaneser, whose tributary he was, which led to the first great captivity of
the people of Samaria. Shalmaneser we know to have been an immediate predecessor
of Sennacherib, and Tirhakah, the Egyptian king, who was defeated by the
Assyrians near Lachish, was the immediate successor of Sabaco II. It would seem,
that a peace having been concluded between the Egyptians and one of the Assyrian
monarchs, probably Sennacherib, the royal signets of the two kings, thus found
together, were attached to the treaty, which was deposited among the archives of
the kingdom.’ The document itself has perished, but the proof of the
alliance between the two kings remains, and is actually reproduced from the
archive-chamber of the old Assyrian king. The illustration of Scripture-history
is complete, and the testimony in favor of the correct interpretation of the
cuneiform character perfect.”
Long as this extract is, it gives but a slight
specimen of the surprising amount of scriptural illustration derived from this
new and unexpected source. We add a last and final one: — “Ten years
have scarcely elapsed since the first discovery of ruins on the site of Nineveh
was made, and already there lies before us an amount of information, having
regard to the history of the old Assyrian people, of which we had previously not
the most distant conception. When Mr. Layard published, in 1849, the account of
his first Assyrian researches, the monuments recovered were comparatively
scanty, and the inscriptions impressed upon them could not be deciphered. Now, a
completed history can be traced in the sculptured remains, and the inscriptions
may be followed with the same facility as the Greek or any other character. That
they may be read with immense profit and instruction is evident from the
startling facts which they have hitherto revealed. Some of these facts we
venture briefly to place before the reader. We have previously hinted that the
earliest king of whose reign we have any detailed account is the builder of the
north-west palace at Nimrod, the most ancient edifice yet beheld in Assyria. His
records, however, furnish the names of five, if not seven, of his predecessors,
some of whom it is believed founded palaces, afterwards erected by their
successors. The son of this king, it is certain, built the center palace of
Nimroud, and raised the obelisk, now in the British Museum, upon which the
principal events of his reign are inscribed. Upon that obelisk are names
corresponding to names that are found in the Old Testament. The fortunate
coincidence furnishes at once the means of fixing specific dates, and enables
Mr. Layard to place the accession of the Assyrian monarch who built the oldest
Nimroud palace at the latter part of the tenth century before Christ. The
builder of the palace of Khorsabad is proved to have been the Sargon mentioned
by Isaiah. The ruins of his palace supply the most complete details of his
reign; and from the reign of Sargon a complete list has been obtained of all the
kings down to the fall of the empire. The son of Sargon was Sennacherib, who
ascended the throne in the year 703 b.c. We know
from the Bible that Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon, and we now
ascertain from the monuments that one of the palaces at Nimroud was the work of
his reign. The son of Esarhaddon built; the south-east palace on the mound of
Nimroud; and, although no part of his history has been as yet recovered, there
is good reason for concluding him to have been the Sardanapalus who, conquered
(b.c. 606) by the Medes and Babylonians
under Cyaxares, made one funeral pile of his palace, his wealth, and his
wives.
“While it is certain that there is no mention
of Nineveh before the 12th century b.c. Mr. Layard
is still of opinion that the city and empire existed long before that period.
Egyptian remains found at Karnak refer to a country called Assyria, and the
enterprising explorer is not without hope that further investigation will supply
him with still more ancient records than any he now possesses. The monuments of
Nineveh, as far as they go, corroborate all extant history in describing the
monarch as a thorough Eastern despot, ‘unchecked by popular opinion, and
having complete power over the lives and property of his subjects; rather adored
as a god than feared as a man, and yet himself claiming that authority and
general obedience in virtue of his reverence for the national deities and
the national religion.’ The dominion of the king, according to the
inscriptions, extended to the central provinces of Asia Minor and Armenia
northward; to the western provinces of Persia eastward; to the west as far as
Lydia and Syria; and to the south to Babylonia and the northern part of Arabia.
‘The empire appears to have been at all times a kind of confederation
formed by many tributary States, whose kings were so far independent that
they were only bound to furnish troops to the supreme lord in time of war, and
to pay them yearly a certain tribute.’ The Jewish tribes, it is now
proved, held their dependent position upon the Assyrian king from a very early
period; and it is curious to observe that, wherever an expedition against the
kings of Israel is mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions, it is invariably
stated to have been undertaken on the ground that they had not paid their
customary tribute.
“At every step sacred history is illustrated,
illuminated, and explained by the speaking stones of Nineveh; and in this regard
alone the Assyrian discoveries have a significance beyond any revelation that
has been made in modern times. Even the architecture of the sacred people may be
rendered visible to the eye by comparing it with that of the Assyrian
structures; and certainly not the least instructive result of all Mr.
Layard’s labors is the ingenious analogy drawn by Mr. Fergusson in his
‘Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored,’ between
the temple of Solomon and the palace of the Assyrian
king.”
A CONNECTED TRANSLATION
OF
THE PROPHECIES
OF DANIEL
ACCORDING TO THE VIEWS OF
CALVIN’S COMMENTARIES.
CHAPTER
1
1 In
the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon arrived at Jerusalem and besieged it.
2 And
God delivered Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, and part of the vessels of
the house of God; and he carried them into the land of Shinar, into the house of
his god; and he placed the vessels in the treasure-house of his
god.
3
Then the king commanded Aspenaz, the chief of the eunuchs, to bring some of the
children of Israel, and of the royal seed, and of the nobles,
4 Youths
in whom there was no blemish, but of beautiful aspect, skilled in all prudence,
and understanding knowledge, and capable of expressing their thoughts, and in
whom was rigor, that they might stand in the king’s palace and be taught
the literature and language of the Chaldees.
5 And
the king appointed them a daily allotment of the royal food, and of the wine of
his own drinking; thus nourishing them for three years, that at the end they
should stand before the king.
6 Now,
among these youths there were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah,
Misael, and Azariah.
7 The
chief of the eunuchs gave them each names: he called Daniel, Belteshazzar;
Hananiah, Shadrach; and Misael, Meshach; and Azariah, Abednego.
8 And
Daniel determined in his heart not to pollute himself with the portion of the
king’s food and drink: and he requested the chief of the eunuchs that he
might not thus defile himself.
9 Now,
God had placed Daniel in favor and pity before the chief of the
eunuchs.
10 And
the chief of the eunuchs said to Daniel, — I am afraid of my lord the
king, he has appointed your food and drink, for he will observe your faces
emaciated when compared with the youths your equals, thus ye will endanger my
head with the king.
11 Then
said Daniel to Meltzar, whom the chief of the eunuchs had set over Daniel,
Hananiah, Misael, and Azariah, —
12 Try
thy servants for ten days: let nothing but pulse be given us to eat and water to
drink.
13 Then
let our countenances be inspected before thy face, and the countenances of the
youths who eat a portion of the royal diet, and deal with thy servants,
according to what thou shalt behold.
14 So
he listened to their advice, and proved them for ten days.
15 And
at the end of the ten days their countenances appeared plump, and they were
fatter than all the other youths who had partaken of the royal
diet.
16 Then
Meltzar removed both their portion of food and of wine, and gave them
pulse.
17 Thus
God gave to these four youths knowledge, and science in all literature, and
wisdom; and Daniel received the power of understanding all visions and
dreams.
18 At
the end of the period at which the king commanded them to be brought before him,
the chief of the eunuchs introduced them to Nebuchadnezzar.
19 Then
the king addressed them: and among them all none was like Daniel, Hananiah,
Misael, and Azariah, as they stood before the king.
20 And
in every expression of wisdom and intelligence, in which they were examined by
the king, he found them ten times superior to all the soothsayers and
astrologers throughout his whole realm.
21 And
Daniel continued until the first year of king Cyrus.
CHAPTER
2
1 Now,
in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed
dreams: and his spirit was troubled, and his sleep became
interrupted.
2 Then
the king commanded them to call together the astrologers and soothsayers, the
sorcerers and the Chaldeans, to declare to the king his dreams. So they came and
stood before the king.
3 And
the king said to them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit is troubled for
understanding the dream,
4 And
the Chaldeans said to the king in Syriac: O king, live for ever! Tell thy
servants the dream, and we will declare the interpretation.
5 The
king answered and said to the Chaldeans, — The matter is gone from me: if
ye will not make known unto me both the dream and its interpretation, ye shall
be cut in pieces and your bones shall become a dunghill:
6 But
if ye will show the dream and its interpretation, ye shall receive from me large
rewards, and gifts, and much honor; therefore declare to me the dream and its
interpretation.
7 They
answered a second time and said: Let the king narrate the dream to his servants,
and we will declare its interpretation.
8 The
king answered and said: In truth I perceive that ye would gain time, because ye
know that the dream has fallen out of your mind,
9 Besides,
if ye will not declare to me the dream, there is but one sentence for you: as ye
have prepared a lying and corrupt discourse to relate before me, until the time
be changed, wherefore narrate the dream to me, and I shall know your ability to
declare its interpretation.
10 The
Chaldeans replied before the king, saying: There is not a man upon earth who can
explain the king’s matter; besides, no king, or prince, or prefect ever
made such a request to any magician, or astrologer, or
Chaldean:
11 And
the subject of the king’s inquiry is precious, and none can explain it
before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with
flesh.
12 On
this account the king was filled with anger and fury, and ordered the
destruction of all the wise men of Babylon.
13 Then
the edict went forth, and the wise men were slain, and they sought Daniel and
his companions for the purpose of slaying them.
14 Then
Daniel inquired concerning the counsel, and the edict of Arioch the captain of
the royal guards, who had gone forth to slay the wise men of
Babylon.
15 He
announced and said to Arioch, the king’s captain: Wherefore is the decree
so urgent from the king’s presence? Then Arioch explained the matter to
Daniel.
16 Then
Daniel entered and asked the king to give him time, and he would bring the
interpretation to the king.
17 Then
Daniel went home, and opened the subject to Hananiah, and Misael, and Azariah,
his companions:
18 That
they might implore mercy from the God of heaven concerning this secret, and that
Daniel and his companions should not perish with the rest of the wise men of
Babylon.
19 Then
the secret was revealed to Daniel in a vision by night: then Daniel blessed the
God of heaven.
20 Daniel
answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever! Wisdom and
might are his:
21 It
is he who changeth times and seasons: He appoints and removes kings: He gives
wisdom to the wise, And knowledge to those who are skilled in
science.
22 He
reveals hidden and secret things, He knows what lies hid in darkness, And light
dwells with him.
23 O
God of my fathers, I confess to thee and praise thee: For thou hast given me
wisdom and strength: Thou hast now revealed to me what we desired of thee: Thou
hast made known to us the king’s request.
24 Therefore
Daniel went unto Arioch, whom the king had ordered to slay the wise men of
Babylon; he went and said thus unto him: Destroy not the wise men of Babylon:
Introduce me to the king, and I will show him the
interpretation.
25 Then
Arioch hastily introduced Daniel to the king, and said thus to him: I have found
a man among the sons of the captivity of Judah, who will make known the
interpretation to the king.
26 The
king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to
tell me the dream which I saw, as well as its interpretation?
27 Daniel
answered the king by saying: The wise men and the magi, the astrologers and
sorcerers, cannot declare to the king what he demands;
28 But
there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets: He has declared to King
Nebuchadnezzar the events of the latter days: This is thy dream, this is the
vision of thy head upon thy couch.
29 Thy
thoughts, O king, came up to thee upon thy bed, as to what shall be hereafter:
He who reveals secrets has explained the future to thee.
30 And
as to me, this secret was not revealed to me through my superiority in wisdom
over other living men, but that I should explain the interpretation to the king,
and that thou shouldst know the thoughts of thy heart.
31 Thou,
O king, wast looking, and beheld a great image! This great image and its
excellent splendor stood before thee, And its form was
terrible.
32 The
head of this image was of pure gold: Its breast and its arms were of silver: Its
belly and thighs of brass.
33 Its
legs of iron: Its feet partly of iron and partly of clay:
34 Thou
wast looking until a stone was cut out without human hand, It struck the image
on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them.
35 Then
the iron and the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, were broken in
pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer thrashing-floor; and
the wind carried them away, and no place was found for them: and the stone which
struck the image became a great mountains and filled the whole
earth.
36 This
is the dream; and we will declare its interpretation before the
king.
37 Thou,
O king, art a king of kings: For the God of heaven has given to thee a kingdom
of power, and strength, and glory.
38 And
wherever the dwelling—place of the children of men, of the beasts of the
field, and of the fowls of heaven exists, He hath given it into thine handy and
hath made thee ruler over all, Thou art this head of gold.
39 And
after this shall arise another kingdom inferior to them, And another of brass
— a third kingdom shall succeed, And it shall bear sway over all the
earth.
40 Then
a fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: For as iron breaks all things in
pieces and reduces them to atoms, And as iron bruises all these things, So shall
this empire bruise and brake to pieces.
41 And
whereas thou didst behold the feet and the toes, partly of potter’s clay
and partly of iron: The kingdom shall be divided: the strength of iron shall be
in it: Because thou sawest iron mingled with the moistened
clay.
42 And
as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay; So that kingdom
shall be partly strong and partly fragile:
43 And
whereas thou didst behold iron mixed with testaceous clay, So they shall mingle
themselves with the seed of men: But they shall not adhere to one another, as
iron will not mingle with clay.
44 And
in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set a kingdom, which shall
never be destroyed: And this kingdom shall not be left to any other people, But
it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, And it shall stand for
ever.
45 Besides
this thou didst behold the stone cut out of the mountain without hands, which
broke the iron, brass, clay, silver, and gold. The great God has made known the
coming events of futurity: The dream is true, and the interpretation of it is
correct.
46 Then
King Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and worshipped Daniel; and commanded men
to offer to him a sacrifice and a sweet-smelling fragrance.
47 The
king answered unto Daniel, and said, Truly your God is a God of gods, and a Lord
of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since thou hast been able to reveal this
secret.
48 Then
the king exalted Daniel, and gave him many valuable presents, and appointed him
ruler of the whole province of Babylon, and chief of the elders over all the
wise men of Babylon.
49 Then
Daniel made a request of the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego
over the administration of the province of Babylon: but Daniel was at the
king’s gate.
CHAPTER
3
1 Nebuchadnezzar
the king made a golden image; its height was sixty cubits, its breadth six
cubits. He erected it on the plain of Dura, in the province of
Babylon.
2 Then
King: Nebuchadnezzar sent to gather together the princes, the satraps, and the
magistrates, the judges, the treasurers, the counselors, the presidents, and all
the governors of the provinces, to come to the dedication of the image which
King Nebuchadnezzar had erected.
3 Then
the princes, the senators, and the magistrates, the judges, the treasurers, the
counselors, the presidents, and all the governors of the provinces collected
together at the dedication of the image which King Nebuchadnezzar had erected.
And when they stood before the image which Nebuchadnezzar had
erected,
4 A
herald proclaimed in the midst of the multitude, O people, nations, and
languages, to you it is spoken:
5 Whenever
ye shall hear the sound of the trumpet, harp, pipe, psaltery, sackbut, dulcimer,
and all kinds of music, ye must fall down and worship the golden image which
King Nebuchadnezzar has erected.
6 And
whosoever shall not bend the knee and adore, shall be instantly cast into the
midst of a furnace of burning fire.
7 Therefore
at the very same hour, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, harp,
pipe, psaltery, sackbut, dulcimer, and all musical instruments, all people,
languages, and nations, fell down adoring the golden image which King
Nebuchadnezzar had erected.
8 Wherefore
the Chaldeans immediately approached and vociferously accused the
Jews.
9 They
spoke, and said to King Nebuchadnezzar, O king, live for ever.
10 Thou,
O king, hast issued an edict, that as soon as every man shall hear the sound of
the trumpet, harp, pipe, psaltery, sackbut, dulcimer, and all musical
instruments, he shall fall down and adore the golden image.
11 And
he who shall not fall down and adore, shall be east into the midst of a furnace
of burning fire.
12 There
are certain Jews whom thou hast set over the administration of the province of
Babylon, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: these men have not paid attention to
thee, O king: they do not worship thy gods, and they do not adore the image
which thou hast erected.
13 Then
Nebuchadnezzar, with rage and fury, commanded Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to
be brought before him: then those men (the Chaldeans) brought them up before the
king.
14 Nebuchadnezzar
spoke, and said to them, Is it true, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that ye
do not worship my gods, nor yet adore the image which I have
erected?
15 Now,
are ye prepared, as soon as ye shall hear the sound of the trumpet, harp, pipe,
psaltery, sackbut, dulcimer, and all musical instruments, to fall down and adore
the image which I have made? For if ye will not adore it, ye shall be east the
stone hour into the midst of a furnace of burning fire: and who is that God who
shall deliver you from my hand?
16 Shadrach,
Meshaeh, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, we are not anxious about
our reply to thee concerning this matter.
17 Behold!
our God whom we worship is powerful. He can free us from the furnace of burning
fire, and he will deliver us out of thy hand, O king.
18 But
if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not worship thy gods, and we
will not adore the golden image which thou hast erected.
19 Then
Nebuchadnezzar was filled with fury, and the figure of his face was changed
towards Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: he spoke and commanded the furnace to
be heated seven times more than it was usual to heat it.
20 And
he commanded the very strongest of his attendants to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, and to east them into the furnace of burning fire.
21 Then
those men were bound in their mantles, and turbans, and garments, and were east
into the furnace of burning fire.
22 Because
the king’s order was urgent, and he had commanded the furnace to be made
so exceedingly hot, the extremity of the flame slew the men who had taken up
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.
23 And
those three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound in the midst
of the furnace of burning fire.
24 Then
Nebuchadnezzar the king was terrified, and rose in haste, and spoke, and said to
his counselors, Did we not cast these men bound into the furnace? They answered
and said to the king, True, O king!
25 He
answered and said, But I see four men loose, walking in the fire, and they have
no hurt: and the aspect of the fourth is like the Son of a God.
26 Then
Nebuchadnezzar approached the door of the furnace of burning fire; he spoke and
said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, servants of the most High God, come forth
and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego came out of the midst of
the fire.
27 Then
the satraps, generals, prefects, and counselors of the king assembled to behold
those men, over whose body the fire had no power, and a hair of their head was
not burnt, neither were their garments changed, nor had the smell of fire passed
over them.
28 Nebuchadnezzar
spoke and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has
sent his angel and preserved his servants, who have trusted in him and changed
the king’s edict, and delivered up their bodies, that they might neither
worship nor adorn any god except their own God.
29 Hence
I issue a decree, that any nation, people, and tongue, which shall utter a
perverse speech against the God of these men, namely, Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and his house shall be reduced to a dungheap:
because there is no other God who can deliver after this
method.
30 Then
the king rendered Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego prosperous in the province of
Babylon.
CHAPTER
4
1 Nebuchadnezzar
the king unto all people, nations, and tongues, which dwell on the whole earth,
peace be multiplied unto you!
2 It
pleases me to narrate the signs and wonders which the High God has wrought
towards me.
3 How
great are his signs! how mighty his wonders! His kingdom everlasting — his
dominion from age to age.
4 I
Nebuchadnezzar was at rest in my house, and flourishing in my
palace:
5 I
saw a dream which terrified me: and the thoughts upon my bed, and the visions of
my head disturbed me.
6 And
I issued a decree for bringing all the wise men of Babylon before me, who should
explain the interpretation of my dream to me.
7 Then
the magicians, astrologers, Chaldeans, and soothsayers entered, and I told my
dream before them, and they did not furnish me with its
interpretation.
8 At
length Daniel was brought before me, whose name is Belteshazzar, according to
the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods, and I told my
dream before him.
9 O
Belteshazzar, prince of the magi, because I know the spirit of the holy gods is
in thee, and no secret overcomes thee, explain the visions of the dream which I
saw and its interpretation.
10 These
were the visions of my head upon my bed: I saw, and behold! a tree in the midst
of the land, and its height was great.
11 The
tree grew and became strong, and its height reached to heaven, and its aspect to
the extremity of the earth.
12 Its
leaves were beautiful, and its fruit plentiful, and food for all was in it: the
beast of the field took shelter under it, and the fowls of heaven dwelt in its
branches, and all flesh was nourished by it.
13 I
was gazing in the visions of my head upon my bed, and behold, a watcher and an
holy one came down from heaven.
14 He
cried with a loud voice, and said thus, Hew down the tree, and tear off its
leaves, pluck off its boughs, and scatter its fruits: Let the beast flee away
from its shadow, and the birds from its branches.
15 But
leave the stump of its roots in the earth, and with a band of iron and brass, in
the herb of the field; and let it be wet with the rain of heaven, and let its
portion be with the beast in the herb of the field.
16 Let
his heart be changed from a human heart, and let the heart of a beast be given
to him: and let seven times pass over him.
17 The
edict is in the decree of the watchers, and the demand in the word of the holy
ones, That living men may know the Most High to be ruler in the kingdom of men,
He will give it to whom he will, And will raise up the humble man as its
ruler:
18 I
King Nebuchadnezzar saw this dream: and do thou Belteshazzar declare the
interpretation, since all the wise men of my kingdom cannot unfold it to me: but
thou canst do it, because the spirit of the holy gods is in
thee.
19 Then
Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, became stupified for almost one hour, and
his thoughts disturbed him. The king answered and said, Belteshazzar, let not
the dream and its interpretation distress thee. Belteshazzar answered and said,
O my lord, may the dream be for thine enemies, and its interpretation for thy
foes.
20 The
tree which thou sawest so great and strong, whose magnitude reached to heaven,
and its aspect over the whole earth;
21 Whose
foliage was beautiful, and whose fruit was copious, In which was food for all,
and under which dwelt the beasts of the field, and on whose branches rested the
birds of heaven,
22 Is
thyself, O king; Thou hast become great and strong; Thy magnitude has been
multiplied, and extended to the heavens; Thy power to the ends of the
earth.
23 When
the king saw a watcher and a holy one descend from heaven, who said, Hew down
the tree and destroy it; leave only the stump of its roots in the earth; and let
it be with a band of iron and brass in the herb of the field, and let it be
washed with the dew of heaven, and let its portion be with the beast of the
field, until seven times pass over it.
24 This
is the interpretation, O king: this is the decree of the most High, which
concerns the lord my king.
25 They
shall drive thee from men, and thy habitation shall be with the beasts of the
field; they shall feed thee with grass like oxen, and shall moisten thee with
the dew of heaven; and seven times shall pass over thee, until thou shalt
acknowledge the most High as the ruler over the kingdom of men, who will give it
to whomsoever he will.
26 And
when they spoke of leaving the stump of the tree’s roots: thy kingdom
shall stand for thee, from which thou shalt acknowledge that there is dominion
in the heavens.
27 Wherefore,
O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee; break away thy sins by
righteousness, and thy iniquities by pity to the poor. Behold, there shall be a
prolongation to thy peace, (a medicine for thine errors.)
28 All
this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar.
29 After
twelve months he was walking in the palace of his kingdom at
Babylon.
30 The
king spoke, and said, Is not this great Babylon which I have built for the royal
seat of the kingdom, in the mightiness of my valor, and in the splendor of my
excellency?
31 While
the speech was in the mouth of the king, a voice descended from heaven, They say
unto thee, O King Nebuchadnezzar, thy kingdom has departed from
thee.
32 They
shall expel thee from among men, and thy habitation shall be with the beasts of
the field; they shall make thee eat grass like oxen, and seven times shall pass
over thee, until thou shalt acknowledge a lofty ruler in the kingdom of men, and
who shall give it to whomsoever he pleases.
33 In
that hour was the word completed upon Nebuchadnezzar; and he was cast out from
men, and eat grass like oxen, and was moistened by the dew of heaven, until his
nails became like claws, and his hair like the wings of eagles.
34 And
at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar raised my eyes to heaven, and my
intellect returned to me, and I blessed him on high, and praised and glorified
him living for ever, because his power is eternal, and his kingdom of perpetual
duration.
35 And
all the dwellers on the earth are considered as nothing; and he does according
to his pleasure in the army of the heavens, and among the dwellers upon earth;
there is none who can hinder his hand, or say unto him, Why dost thou act
thus?
36 At
the determined time my intellect returned to me, and I returned to the
excellency of my kingdom; my honor and my dignity was restored to me, and my
counselors and elders consulted me again; and I was established in my kingdom,
and more ample dignity was added to me.
37 Now
I Nebuchadnezzar praise, and extol, and glorify the king of heaven, because all
his works are truth, and his ways are judgment: and those who walk in pride he
is able to humble.
CHAPTER
5
1 Belshazzar
the king made a great banquet for a thousand of his nobles, and drank wine
before the thousand.
2 Belshazzar
having tasted the wine, commanded (men) to bring the vessels of gold and silver
which Nebuchadnezzar his father had brought from the Temple at Jerusalem, that
the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines, might drink from
them.
3 Then
they brought the golden vessels which had been taken from the house of God at
Jerusalem, and the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines, drank from
them.
4 They
drank wine, and praised the gods of gold and silver, of brass and iron, of wood
and stone.
5 In
the same hour the fingers of a man’s hand came forth, and wrote in the
neighborhood of the candlestick on the surface of the wall of the king’s
palace; and the king saw the palm of the hand as it was
writing.
6 Then
the king’s countenance changed, and his thoughts affrighted him, and the
joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote against each
other.
7 The
king cried mightily that the magi, the Chaldeans, and the astrologers, should be
brought in; and the king spoke and said to the wise men of Babylon, Whosoever
shall read this writing, and declare its interpretation to me, shall be clothed
in purple, with a chain of gold about his neck, and shall rank third in the
kingdom.
8 Then
entered all the king’s wise men, and were unable to read the writing, and
to explain to the king its interpretation.
9 Then
king Belshazzar was much frightened, and his countenance was changed, and his
princes became anxious.
10 The
queen, in consequence of the words of the king and his nobles, entered into the
banqueting-house, and spoke and said: O king! live for ever — Let not thy
thoughts frighten thee, nor let thy countenance be changed.
11 There
is a man in thy kingdom in whom exists the spirit of the holy gods, and in the
days of thy father, intelligence, and knowledge, and wisdom, like that of the
gods, were found in him; and King Nebuchadnezzar, thy father — the king, I
say, thy father — made him chief of the magi, astrologers, Chaldeans, and
soothsayers.
12 Because
an enlarged mind, and a discerning understanding, the interpretation of dreams,
the revelation of secrets, and the solution of difficulties were found in him,
namely, Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar; now let Daniel be called, and
he will show the interpretation.
13 Then
Daniel was introduced before the king. The king spoke and said to Daniel: Art
thou that Daniel of the sons of the captivity of Judah, whom my father led away
from Judah?
14 I
have heard of thee, that the spirit of the gods is in thee; and intelligence,
knowledge, and superior wisdom have been found in thee.
15 And
now the wise men and magicians have been brought before me for the purpose of
reading this writing, and of unfolding its interpretation to me; and they cannot
declare the interpretation of the matter.
16 And
I heard of thee, that thou canst solve difficulties and unravel secrets; now, if
thou canst read this writing, and explain its interpretation to me, thou shalt
be clothed in purple with a chain of gold round thy neck, and shalt hold the
third rank in the kingdom.
17 Then
answered Daniel and said before the king: Let thy gifts be for thyself, and give
thy rewards to another. Yet I will read the writing to the king, and reveal its
interpretation to him.
18 O
king, the High God gave to King Nebuchadnezzar, thy father, an empire, and
magnificence, and loftiness, and splendor.
19 And
on account of the magnificence which God conferred upon him, all people,
nations, and tongues trembled, and were frightened at the sight of him; whom he
wished to slay, was slain, (vol. 1 p. 332, note,) and whom he wished, he raised
up, and whom he wished, he cast down.
20 But
when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit hardened to pride, he was cast down
from the throne of his kingdom, and they deprived him of his
glory.
21 And
he was driven away from the children of men, and his heart was placed among the
beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses. They fed him with grass like
oxen, and his body was moistened with the dew of heaven, until he acknowledged
the rule of the most high God in the kingdom of men, and his appointing over it
whom he wills.
22 And
thou, O Belshazzar his son, hast not humbled thine heart, although thou knowest
all this.
23 And
thou hast raised thyself against the God of heaven when they brought the vessels
of his house before thee, and thy nobles, thy wives and concubines, drank wine
from them; and thou hast praised the gods of silver and gold, of brass and iron,
of wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor understand; and thou hast
not honored God, in whose hand is thy breath, and in whose power are all
things.
24 At
that time a portion of a hand was sent from God’s presence, and this
writing was marked down.
25 And
this is the writing which was engraven. MENE, MENE, it has been numbered. TEKEL,
it has been weighed. UPHARSIN, and they are dividing.
26 This
is the interpretation of the sentence, — MENE, God has numbered and
finished thy kingdom.
27 TEKEL,
weigh, or it has been weighed — thou hast been weighed in a balance, and
hast been found wanting.
28 PERES
for Upharsin, thy kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and
Persians.
29 Then
Belshazzar commanded, and they clothed Daniel in purple, and a chain of gold was
placed around his neck, and they cried out before him that he was the third
ruler in the kingdom.
30 In
that night Belshazzar the king of the Chaldeans was slain.
31 And
Darius the Mede received the kingdom, when he was sixty-two years
old.
CHAPTER
6
1 It
pleased Darius, and he set over the kingdom one hundred and twenty presidents of
the provinces, who should be over the whole kingdom.
2 And
over them were three satraps, of whom Daniel was one, that the presidents of the
provinces should render an account to them, and the king should suffer no
loss.
3 Then
Daniel himself was superior to the satraps and presidents of the provinces,
because a nobler spirit was in him; and the king was thinking of elevating him
over the whole kingdom.
4 Then
the satraps and presidents of the provinces sought to find an occasion against
Daniel in his administration of the kingdom, and they could find neither
occasion nor fault, because he was trustworthy, and neither fault nor crime was
found in him.
5 Then
those men said, we shall not find in this Daniel any occasion, unless we find it
against him as to the law of his God.
6 Then
the satraps and presidents of the provinces came in a body to the king, and
spoke thus to him, King Darius, live for ever!
7 All
the presidents of the kingdom, the senators and governors of provinces, the
counselors and the generals, have consulted together to establish a royal
statute, and to confirm the edict, that whoever should ask a petition from any
god or man for thirty days, except of thee, O king, shall be cast into the
lions’ den.
8 Now,
O king, establish the edict, and sign the writing which is immutable, according
to the law of the Medes and Persians, which does not pass away.
9 Wherefore
King Darius signed the writing and the decree.
10 But
when Daniel knew the writing to have been signed, he entered into his house, and
his windows being open in his chamber towards Jerusalem, three times every day
he bent upon his knees and prayed, and confessed before his God, as he was
accustomed to do.
11 Then
these men assembled, and found Daniel uttering prayers and supplications before
his God.
12 Then
they approached, and said before the king concerning the edict: Hast thou not
signed an diet, that if any man shall ask anything from any god or man even for
thirty days, except of thee, O king, he should be cast into the lions’
den? The king answered and said, — The saying is true, according to the
law of the Medes and Persians, which passes not away.
13 Then
they spoke, and said before the king: Daniel, who is of the children of the
captivity of Judah, has not given his mind to thee, O king, nor to the edict
which thou hast signed, but prays according to his custom three times a
day.
14 Then
the king, on hearing those words, was much grieved within himself, and applied
his heart to deliver Daniel, and was anxious to snatch him away even to the
setting of the sun.
15 Then
those men assembled around the king and said, — Know, O king, this is the
law of the Medes and Persians; No edict or statute which the king has
established can be changed.
16 Then
the king commanded, and they brought Daniel, and east him into the
lions’ den. The king answered, and said to Daniel: Thy God, whom thou
servest continually, will surely deliver thee.
17 And
a stone was brought, and laid upon the mouth of the cave; and the king sealed it
with his own ring, and with the ring of his nobles, lest the decree concerning
Daniel should be changed.
18 Then
the king went to his palace, and passed the night fasting, and musical
instruments were not brought before him, and sleep departed from
him.
19 Then
the king rose in the morning, as soon as it was light, and came in haste to the
lions’ den.
20 And
when he approached the den, he cried with a sorrowful voice to Daniel, and the
king spoke and said to Daniel, Daniel! servant of the living God: Could thy God,
whom thou servest continually, preserve thee from the lions?
21 Then
Daniel said unto the king, O king, live for ever!
22 My
God sent his angel, and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not hurt me,
since integrity before him was found in me, and also before thee, O king, I have
committed nothing wrong.
23 Then
the king was highly delighted within himself, and commanded Daniel to be brought
out of the den; and Daniel was brought out of the den, and no injury was found
upon him, because he trusted in his God.
24 And
the king commanded, and they brought those men who had invented the accusation
against Daniel, and they were cast into the den, themselves, their
children, and their wives, and before they arrived at the pavement of the den,
the lions obtained the mastery of them, and broke in pieces all their
bones.
25 Then
King Darius wrote to all people, nations, and languages, which dwell in all the
earth: Peace be multiplied unto you!
26 I
have issued a decree throughout the whole of the dominions of my kingdom, that
they may fear and be afraid at the presence of the God of Daniel, because he is
the living God, and endureth for ever; and his kingdom shall not be overthrown,
and his dominion shall be for ever.
27 In
delivering and rescuing, and uttering signs and wonders in heaven and earth; for
he delivered Daniel from the power of the lions.
28 So
Daniel himself lived prosperously in the reigns of Darius, and of Cyrus the
Persian.
CHAPTER
7
1 In
the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream, and visions of
his head upon his bed. He wrote the dream at the time, and related the sum of
the words.
2 Daniel
spoke and explained; I saw in my vision by night, and behold! four winds of
heaven contending in a great sea.
3 And
four large beasts came forth from the sea, differing among
themselves.
4 The
first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings; I kept looking till the
wings were plucked, and it was raised from the ground, and stood on its feet
like a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.
5 And
behold a second beast following, like a bear, and it was raised on one side, and
three tusks were in its mouth between its teeth; and thus they said to it,
Arise, devour much flesh.
6 After
this I looked, and behold another beast like a leopard, and the wings of a bird
were on its back; the beast had four heads, and dominion was granted to
it.
7 I
looked again after this in the visions of the night, and behold! a fourth beast,
formidable and terrible, and exceedingly strong; it had large iron teeth,
devouring and crushing, and trampling the remnants under its feet; it was
different from all the former beasts, and had ten horns.
8 I
was attentive to the horns, and behold another small horn grew up among the
others; and three of the former horns were torn away from its face; and behold!
eyes like human eyes were in that horn, and a mouth speaking
boastfully.
9 I
continued looking till thrones were placed, and the Ancient of days was seated.
His raiment was white as snow, and the hair of his head was like clean wool; his
throne was sparks of fire, and its wheels burning flame.
10 A
river of fire flowed forth, and went out from his presence; a thousand thousand
waited upon him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; judgment
was fixed, and books were opened.
11 Then
I continued looking on account of the utterance of boasting words which the horn
uttered; I continued gazing till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed,
and given up to the burning of fire.
12 And
they had taken away their dominion from the rest of the beasts, and long life
was given to them even for a time and a time.
13 I
saw in visions of the night, and behold in the clouds of heaven, as it were, the
Son of man came, and advanced even to the Ancient of days, and they brought him
near before him.
14 And
power was given unto him, and glory, and a kingdom, and all people, nations, and
languages, shall serve him; his dominion is an eternal dominion which shall
never be taken away, and his kingdom shall never be abolished.
15 As
to me, Daniel, my breath was stopped within my bodyand the visions of my head
frightened me.
16 I
approached one of those who were present, and inquired of him the truth
concerning all these things, and he informed me, and opened up for me the
explanation of these events.
17 These
four great beasts which thou sawest, are four kingdoms which shall arise out of
the earth:
18 And
they shall possess the kingdom of the saints of the most High, and these shall
obtain the dominion even for an age, and for ages of ages.
19 Then
I desired the truth concerning the fourth beast, which was different from all
the others, and very terrible, whose teeth were of iron, and his claws of brass,
devouring, and crushing, and trampling the remnants under its
feet.
20 Also
concerning the ten horns which were on its head, and of the last which rose up
when the three former ones had fallen, namely, the horn which had eyes, and a
mouth speaking grandly, whose aspect was more mighty than its
fellows.
21 I
continued gazing, and this horn made war with the holy ones, and prevailed
against them.
22 Then
came the Ancient of days, and judgment was given to the saints of the lofty
ones, and the time arrived, and the saints received the
kingdom.
23 Thus
he stated, The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be
different from all the former kingdoms, and shall devour the Whole earth, and
shall crush it, and break it completely in pieces.
24 Also
the ten horns from that kingdom are ten kings which shall arise, and another
shall arise after them, which shall be distinguished from the former ones, and
shall afflict the three kings.
25 And
he shall speak words towards the region of the Highest, and he shall crush the
saints of the lofty ones, and shall presume to alter times and the law; and it
shall be delivered into his hand for a time, and times, and the division of a
time.
26 And
judgment shall be established, and they shall take away his power, to disperse
and destroy it even unto the end.
27 Then
the kingdom and the power, and the magnitude of their sway under the whole
heaven, shall be given to the people of the holy lofty ones, which kingdom is
everlasting, and all powers shall serve it and become obedient to
it.
28 Therefore
an end of the matter. As to me Daniel, my thoughts troubled me much; And my
countenance was changed upon me, And I laid up the matter in my
heart.
CHAPTER
8
1 In
the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar, a vision appeared unto me
Daniel, in addition to the vision previously offered to me.
2 I
saw in a vision, and while I was seeing, I happened to be in Susan the capital,
which is in the province of Elam. I saw in a vision, and behold I was near the
river Ulai.
3 Then
I raised my eyes and looked, and behold, A single ram stood before the river; it
had two horns: The horns were lofty, and one was higher than the other, And this
lofty one grew up last.
4 I
saw the ram butting westward, and northward, and southward; No beasts could
stand before him: No one could snatch anything from his hand: Thus he did
according to his pleasure, and magnified himself.
5 And
I was attentive, and behold! A he-goat came from the west over the face of the
whole earth, And yet he never touched the ground: The goat, too, had a
remarkable horn between its eyes.
6 Then
he approached the ram possessing the two horns, which I had seen standing on the
river’s bank, And he ran at him with the fury of his
bravery.
7 Then
I saw him approach the ram, and exasperate himself against him, He smote the
ram, and broke both his horns; The ram had no power to stand before his face:
For he threw the ram upon the ground and trampled upon him, And no one could
deliver the ram from his power.
8 Then
the he-goat magnified himself amazingly; And when he was in his strength, his
mighty horn was broken; The four conspicuous ones arose in its place towards the
four winds of heaven.
9 And
from one of these came forth a single small horn, And magnified himself
surprisingly towards the south, and the east, and the desirable
land.
10 Then
it magnified itself towards the heavenly army, And it cast down upon the earth
some of that army and of the stars, and trampled upon them.
11 Besides
this, it magnified itself against the prince of the army, and the continual
sacrifice was removed from him, and the place of his sanctuary was
profaned.
12 And
time was given to the continual sacrifice, in consequence of wickedness, and it
shall cast forth truth upon the ground, and shall succeed, and fare
prosperously.
13 Then
I heard a holy one speaking, And the speaking holy one said to the wonderful
one, How long will the vision of the perpetual sacrifice, and the desolating
wickedness be permitted to last? How long will the sanctuary and the army be
trampled down?
14 And
he said to me, Unto evenings and mornings 2300: Then the sanctuary shall be
re-cleansed.
15 know
it happened while I Daniel was gazing on the vision, and was seeking
intelligence, Behold! there stood before me as it were the appearance of a
man.
16 Then
I heard a man’s voice in Ulai, which cried, and said, Gabriel, teach this
man the vision.
17 Then
he approached my standing-place; And at his arrival I was frightened and fell
upon my face, Then he said to me, Understand, O son of man; Because the vision
is for a definite time.
18 Moreover,
while he was talking to me, I swooned away with my face to the ground; then he
touched me, and restored me to my place as before.
19 Then
he said, Behold! I will inform thee of what shall happen at the close of the
indignation: For the end of the period is determined.
20 The
ram which thou sawest with two horns, represents the kings of the Medes and
Persians.
21 The
he-goat is the king of Greece, (Jayan,) and the great horn between his eyes is
the first king.
22 But
this was broken, and as four horns stood forth in its stead, so four kingdoms
shall arise out of the nation, yet not to be compared with him in
strength.
23 And
at the end of their kingdom, when these wicked ones have departed, a king shall
exist, fierce of countenance, and skilled in enigmas.
24 And
his fortitude shall be strengthened, but not by his own strength: He shall
overthrow wonderfully, and prosper, and succeed, and destroy the mighty, and the
people of the holy ones.
25 And
according to his intelligence his craft shall prosper in his hand, and he shall
magnify himself in his heart, and in peace he shall destroy multitudes. Even
against the prince of princes shall he stand up, and shall be broken without
hand.
26 The
vision of the morning and evening which has been pronounced is truth. Do thou
therefore seal up the vision, because it extends to many days.
27 Then
I Daniel suffered deep sorrow and languor for some days: Yet I rose and did the
king’s business; I was struck with astonishment at the vision, yet no one
perceived it.
CHAPTER
9
1 In
the first year of Darius, son of Ahasuerus, of Median descent, who was appointed
king over the kingdom of the Chaldees.
2 In
the first year of this reign, I Daniel diligently considered in books the number
of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had come to Jeremiah the
Prophet, to complete the seventy years appointed for the desolation of
Jerusalem.
3 Then
I raised my face towards the Lord God, to inquire by prayer and supplication,
with fasting, sackcloth, and ashes.
4 And
I prayed to Jehovah my God, and confessed, and said, O Lord God, great and
terrible, keeping the covenant and mercy towards those who love thee and keep
thy commandments;
5 We
have sinned and acted perversely: We have conducted ourselves wickedly, and have
rebelled: We have transgressed thy precepts and thy judgments:
6 We
have not listened to thy servants the prophets, who have spoken in thy name to
our kings, our princes, cur fathers, and all the people of the
land.
7 With
thee, O Lord, is righteousness, but with us confusion of face, As at this day:
to all Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to all Israel, far and
near, whither thou hast driven them, on account of their transgression by which
they have transgressed against thee.
8 O
Lord, to us belongs confusion of face, To our kings, our princes, our fathers,
because we have sinned against thee.
9 To
the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, Although we have been
rebellious against him.
10 We
have not listened to the voice of Jehovah our God, that we should walk in his
laws, which he has set before our face by the hands of his servants the
prophets.
11 Even
all Israel have transgressed thy law, and have declined to listen to thy voice,
Therefore the curse is poured down upon us: And the oath which is written in the
law of Moses, the servant of God, Because we have sinned against
him.
12 And
he has established his word which he had spoken against us, and against our
rulers who governed us, by bringing upon us a great calamity: For under the
whole heaven nothing has occurred like that which has happened to
Jerusalem.
13 As
it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: Yet we have
not deprecated the wrath of Jehovah our God, to turn away from our iniquities,
and to become attentive to thy truth.
14 And
Jehovah has watched over the evil, and sent it forth upon us: Because Jehovah
our God is just in all the works which he performs, And yet we have not listened
to his voice.
15 And
now, O Lord our God, who didst lead thy people out of the land of Egypt with a
strong hand, and hast made thyself a name as the fact itself has proved, we have
sinned, we have done wickedly.
16 O
Lord, according to all thy righteous dealings, let thine anger be turned away, I
pray thee: Let thine indignation cease from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy
mountain; For through our sins, and through the iniquities of our fathers,
Jerusalem and thy people have become a reproach to all our
neighbors.
17 Hearken
now, O our God, to the prayers of thy servant, and to his supplications: Make
thy face to shine on the desolated sanctuary, for the Lord’s
sake.
18 Incline,
O my God, thine ear, and hear: open thine eyes and behold our distresses, and
the desolation of the city called by thy name: Because we do not pour out our
supplications before thy face on account of our own righteousness, but by reason
of thy many mercies.
19 O
Lord, hear; O Lord, be propitious; O Lord, attend and perform; Delay not for
thine own sake, O my God, since thy name is invoked in behalf of thy city and
thy people.
20 And
while I was yet speaking, and praying, and confessing my sins, and those of my
people Israel, and while I was speaking my petition before Jehovah my God, on
behalf of the mountain of the sanctuary of my God;
21 Even,
while I was yet uttering my prayer, The man Gabriel, whom I had before seen in a
vision, flying swiftly, Touched me about the time of the evening
sacrifice.
22 Then
he taught me, and spoke to me, and said, O Daniel, I have now come forth, to
afford thee needful information.
23 At
the beginning of thy prayers the word went forth, which I am come to declare,
because thou art greatly beloved: Attend therefore to the word, and understand
the vision.
24 Seventy
weeks have been determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to close up
wickedness, and seal up sin, and expiate iniquity, and bring in eternal
righteousness, and seal up the vision and the prophecy, and anoint the holy of
holies.
25 Take
notice therefore and understand, From the going forth of the word concerning the
return of the people, And the rebuilding of Jerusalem to Messiah the Leader,
Seventy weeks, and sixty-two weeks; then the people shall be brought back, And
the street and the wall shall be rebuilt, and that too amidst the perplexities
(or “in the narrow limit”) of the times.
26 Then
after the sixty—two weeks, Christ shall be cut off, and become nothing:
The people of the coming leader shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: Its
end shall be with an inundation: And at the close of the war a completion of
desolation’s.
27 And
he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; And for half a week he
shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease; And upon the spreading of
abominations he shall be astonished, And at the close, he shall pour the full
accomplishment upon the desolator.
CHAPTER
10
1 In
the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia, a revelation was made to Daniel, called
Belteshazzar; and the word was most true and the times most extended; and he
understood the word, and fully comprehended the vision.
2 In
those days I Daniel gave myself up to mourning for three weeks of
days.
3 I
did not eat any delicate food; neither flesh nor wine entered my mouth: Nor did
I anoint myself at all, till three weeks of days were
fulfilled.
4 On
the twenty-fourth day of the first month, I was upon the banks of the great
river Hiddekel;
5 Then
I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold! a man clothed in linen vesture, His
loins were girt with the gold of Uphaz:
6 His
body was like the chrysolite, His face like the appearance of lightning, and his
eyes like lamps of fire, His arms and his feet were as bright as polished brass,
And the voice of his words like the sound of a tumult.
7 I
Daniel alone saw the vision: For the men who were with me saw no vision; Yea,
rather, great terror fell upon them, and they fled into hiding
places.
8 Then
I Daniel was left alone, And I saw this great vision: Then there remained no
strength within me: My comeliness was turned to corruption, and I did not retain
my strength.
9 Yet
I heard the voice of his words; And when I heard the voice of his words, I fell
down in a swoon with my face towards the ground.
10 And
behold! a hand touched me, and raised me upon my knees, and upon the palms of my
hands.
11 Then
he said to me, O Daniel! a man of desires, Understand the words which I address
to thee, And stand upright, because I am now sent unto thee. When he had spoken
this word unto me, I stood up trembling.
12 Then
he said unto me, Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day on which thou didst
apply thy heart to understanding, and to afflicting thyself before the face of
thy God, thy words were heard. And I am come through thy words.
13 The
prince of the kingdom of the Persians resisted me for twenty-one days; And, lo,
Michael, one of the chief leaders, came to my assistance; And I was left among
the kings of the Persians.
14 Now
I am come to disclose to thee what shall occur to thy people at the close of the
days; for still the vision is for days.
15 While
he was speaking to me according to these words, I placed my face upon the
ground, and became dumb.
16 When,
lo! one bearing the form of the sons of men touched my lips; And I opened my
mouth and spoke, and said to the person standing before me, O lord, my sorrows
are turned upon me in vision, and I cannot retain my strength.
17 And
how could the servant of this my lord speak with this my lord? Henceforth no
strength remained in me and no breath was left in me.
18 Then
a second time, he who bore a human appearance, touched me, and strengthened me,
and said,
19 Fear
not, O man of desires, peace be to thee, Take courage and be strong. And while
he was addressing me, I became strong, Then I said, Let my Lord speak, because
thou hast strengthened me.
20 He
said next, Surely thou knowest why I am come to thee, I am now going to return
to contend with the prince of Persia; And when I am gone, behold, the prince of
Javan (Greece) will come.
21 But
I will declare unto thee what is deeply graven in the scripture of truth: For
there is not one who will stand by me in these affairs, Except Michael your
prince.
CHAPTER
11
1 In
the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood both to strengthen and to succor him:
and now I will declare to thee the truth.
2 Behold,
three kings shall yet stand up in Persia, and a fourth shall be enriched with
great riches above them all: and when he is grown strong through his wealth, he
shall stir up the whole against the kingdom of Jayan (Greece.)
3 Then
a mighty king shall stand up, and shall rule with extended dominion, and shall
do according to his will.
4 And
when he shall be established, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be
dispersed towards the four winds of heaven, yet not to his posterity, nor yet
according to the dominion which he exercised; for his kingdom shall be
extirpated, and shall be for others, who are not of his
posterity.
5 A
king of the south shall then become strong, being one of his princes, and he
shall be strengthened against him, and shall become supreme, and his dominion
shall be extensive.
6 At
the end of the years, they shall become allies, and the daughter of the king of
the south shall, come to the king of the north for the purpose of making peace:
Yet his arm shall not retain its strength; neither shall he stand, nor his seed,
but she shall be delivered up with her attendants, and her mother, and whoever
supported her at that time.
7 Yet
there shall stand up a shoot from her root in its own rank: it shall come with
an army, and shall reach the fortifications of the king of the north, and shall
act among the people, and shall prevail.
8 Their
gods also with their molten images, with their precious vessels of silver and
gold, shall they carry into captivity to Egypt, and he shall stand for more
years than the king of the north.
9 And
the king of the north shall come into the kingdom, and shall return to his own
land.
10 But
his sons shall be provoked, and shall assemble a multitude of mighty forces; and
shall advance rapidly, and overflow, and pass through: he shall return and shall
be stirred up even to his own fortress.
11 Then
the king of the south shall be exasperated, and shall go forth to make war
against the king of the north: he shall set in motion a large multitude, and
that multitude shall be delivered into his hand.
12 Then
that multitude shall be taken away, and his heart shall be elated: He shall east
down tens of thousands, and yet he shall not become strong.
13 For
the king of the north shall return, and shall collect a greater multitude than
before And at the end of the times of the years, he shall come swiftly with a
great army, and with much wealth.
14 And
at those times many shall stand up against the king of the south (Egypt), and
sons, robbers of thy people, shall exalt themselves to establish the vision, but
yet they shall fail.
15 For
the king of the north shall come, and shall east up a rampart, and shall take
the city of fortifications, and the arms of the south shall not stand, nor yet
the people of his levies, for there shall be no strength for
standing.
16 Also
when coming he shall do unto him according to his will, and none shall stand
before his face, and he shall stand in the desirable land which shall be
consumed in his hand.
17 And
he shall set his face to come with the power of his whole kingdom to make
alliances with him; he shall accomplish this: he shall give the daughter of
women to him to corrupt her, but she shall not stand by him, nor be under his
power.
18 Then
he shall turn his face towards the islands, and shall take many: and a prince
shall set at rest his reproach against him: hence he shall not turn his reproach
upon himself.
19 And
he shall turn his face towards the fortifications of his own land, and shall
stumbles and fall, and never be found.
20 Next
there shall stand up in his place one who shall send forth an exactor, or raiser
of tribute, in honor of his kingdom, but within a few days he shall perish, yet
not either in anger or in battle.
21 Then
a contemptible person shall succeed him, on whom they shall not confer the honor
of royalty, but he shall come stealthily, and shall seize the kingdom by
flatteries.
22 His
auxiliaries shall be overwhelmed by a deluge before his sight: they shall be
utterly broken, as well as the leader of the covenant.
23 After
conjunction with him shall he practice deceit, and shall ascend, and prevail
with a small band.
24 He
shall advance in peace into the richest portion of the province, and shall do
what neither his father nor his father’s father had done: he shall
distribute among them spoils, and booty, and wealth, and he shall think many
thoughts respecting fortified cities, and that for a time.
25 And
he shall stir up his strength and his breast against the king of the south, with
a great army; and the king of the south shall be roused up to battle with a
large and very powerful army: and he shall not stand, because they shall agitate
perfidious counsels against him.
26 Those
who partake of his table shall ruin him, and his army shall be overwhelmed, and
many shall fall wounded.
27 The
heart of both these kings shall be inclined to evil; at the same table shall
they speak deceitfully: yet it shall not prosper, because the end is yet for a
defined period.
28 Then
shall he return to his own land with great wealth; and his heart shall be
towards the covenant of holiness, and he shall accomplish his purpose, and
return to his own land.
29 After
a time he shall return, and shall come to the south; But this expedition small
not succeed as the former one.
30 For
ships of Chittim shall advance against him, and he shall be humbled, and return,
and shall be indignant against the holy covenant, and shall do his work, and
return and apply his mind to the deserters of the holy
covenant.
31 And
arms shall stand up from him; and they shall profane the sanctuary of Ms
strength, and abolish the continual sacrifice, and set up the abomination which
shall make desolate.
32 Now
those who act impiously against the covenant will he seduce with flatteries, but
the people who know their God shall be strengthened and will practice
it.
33 And
the wise among the people shall teach many, yet they shall fall by the sword,
and by the flame, by exile, and by rapine, for many days.
34 Yet
in their fall they shall be assisted with moderate help, and many shall join
themselves to them through flatteries.
35 Also
some of those who have understanding shall fall, to prove, and purge, and whiten
them even for a definite time, since it is still for an appointed
time.
36 And
the king shall act according to his will, and shall raise himself, and magnify
himself above every deity, and against the God of gods shall he speak wonderful
things; He shall prosper also unto the consummation of the anger, Since the
decision has been made.
37 He
shall not attend to either the God of his fathers, nor to the desire of women:
He shall not attend to any deity, for he shall magnify himself above them
all.
38 And
the God of fortresses shall he honor in his own place; And a god whom his
fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and precious stones, and
with desirable things.
39 Then
he shall attack the fortifications of strength with the strange god whom he has
acknowledged: He shall multiply the glory, and cause them to reign over many;
for he shall divide the land for a price.
40 After
a fixed time, the king of the south shall attack him; Then the king of the north
shall rush at him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many
ships; and he shall enter his lands, and shall overflow and pass
through.
41 He
shall also arrive at the land of desire, (Judea;) Many regions shall fall, but
these shall escape out of his hand, Edom, Moab, and the heads of the children of
Ammon.
42 Then
he shall extend his hand over the lands, and the land of Egypt shall not
escape.
43 He
shall have dominion over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the
desirable things of Egypt, and Libya and Ethiopia in his
progress.
44 But
rumors shall disturb him from the east and from the north; he shall go forth
with great anger to destroy many, and to devote them to utter
destruction.
45 And
he shall fix the tabernacle of his palace between the seas, near the mountain of
the desire of holiness; Then he shall come to his end, and no one shall help
him.
CHAPTER
12
1 Moreover,
at that time shall Michael the mighty prince stand up, standing for the sons of
thy people; And there shall be a time of affliction, such as was not from the
existence of nations until that period. Yet at this period thy people shall
escape, every one who shall be found written in the book.
2 And
many of those who sleep, and have been reduced to earth and dust, shall awake;
some to perpetual life, and others to shame and continued
abomination.
3 Then
the wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; And those who have
turned many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.
4 And
thou, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal up the book, till the time appointed.
Many shall investigate, and knowledge shall be increased.
5 Then
I Daniel was gazing, and behold two others standing, One on this side, and the
other on that of the river’s bank.
6 And
one of them said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the
river, “How long will it be to the end of these
wonders?”
7 Then
I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river; He
raised his right hand and his left towards the heavens, and swore by him who
liveth for ever, That it should be for the appointed time, times, and half a
time; And at the completion of the dispersion of the holy people, All these
things shall be accomplished.
8 Then
I heard, but I did not understand; and I said, O my Lord, what shall be the end
of these events?
9 Then
he said, Depart, Daniel, because the words are closed and sealed up to the time
appointed.
10 Many
shall be purified, and made white, and tried; Yet the impious shall act
impiously: And the impious will not understand, but the prudent will
understand.
11 From
the time of taking away the continual sacrifice, to the setting up of the
desolating abomination, shall be 1290 days.
12 Blessed
is he who shall have waited, and shall have arrived at the 1335
days.
13 And
do thou go until the end, and rest; And thou shalt stand in thy lot at the end
of the days.
END OF
CONNECTED TRANSLATION OF DANIEL
AN ANALYSIS OF
THE CONTENTS
OF THE BOOK
OF DANIEL.
There Are Two Main Divisions,
—
1. THE
HISTORICAL PORTION. —
2. THE
PROPHETICAL PORTION.
Each Occupies Six
Chapters.
1. THE
HISTORICAL PORTION.
CHAPTER 1 TO 4
Sect. 1.
The captivity of King Jehoiakim about B.C. 607
— the treatment of Daniel and his three companions — their
superiority as they stood before the king. (Chap. 1)
2.
King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream — forgotten — submitted to the
magicians — their failure and destruction — Daniel’s proposal
and success — the secret revealed to him and communicated to the king
— the image described and explained — the four kingdoms — the
elevation of Daniel and his companions to high honor, about B.C. 603. (Chap.
2)
3.
The golden image on the Plains of Dura — the accusation against
Daniel’s three companions — their reply to the king — their
condemnation to the burning fiery furnace — their preservation — the
king’s astonishment — his proclamation and promotion of the three
confessors over the province of Babylon, about B.C. 580. (Chap.
3)
4.
Nebuchadnezzar’s confession of the power of the Most High — his
dream respecting the Tree, the Watcher, and the Holy One — Daniel’s
interpretation — its accomplishment — the king driven from among men
— his madness, and his restoration to reason and re-establishment in his
kingdom, about B.C. 570-563. (Chap. 4)
5.
The impious feast of Belshazzar — the handwriting — the
magicians’ ignorance — Daniel’s interpretation — its
fulfillment — Belshazzar slain — Darius the conqueror, about B.C.
538. (Chap. 5)
6.
One hundred and twenty princes set over the kingdom — three presidents
— the unalterable decree — Daniel’s habit of prayer continued
— his accusation and condemnation to the lions’ den — his
miraculous deliverance — the king’s rejoicing and decree — the
Prophet’s prosperity till the reign of Cyrus, about B.C. 537. (Chap.
6)
2. PROPHETICAL
PORTION.
CHAPTER 7 TO
12
Sect. 1.
Daniel’s own dream — the four
beasts — the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man — the explanation of
this dream — the fourth beast being the Roman Empire, and the ten horns
the Roman Senate — the kingdom given to the Son of Man — fulfilled,
according to CALVIN, at the first advent of Christ and the early propagation of
the Gospel, — about B.C. 555. (Chap. 7)
2.
Daniel’s vision at Shushan — the ram and the he-goat — the
little horn — the cleansing of the sanctuary — the appearance of
Gabriel — the explanation of the vision — the king of fierce
countenance said to be the power of heathen Rome — the Prince of princes
— the truth of the vision of the evening and morning —
Daniel’s fainting and astonishment, — about B.C. 553. (Chap.
8)
3.
The Prophet, after studying the writings of Jeremiah, anticipates the close of
the captivity — he prays and confesses his sins at full length in the
first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus — while he is praying the angel
Gabriel is sent to instruct him — he is informed of the celebrated period
of the seventy weeks — of the coming of Messiah the prince and of the
overspreading of desolation’s, which events are historically explained in
the course of these Lectures, — about B.C. 538. (Chap. 9)
4.
A vision by the river Hiddekel in the third year of King Cyrus — during
the Prophet’s terror an angel addresses him, touches him, and inspires him
with confidence, and then returns to contend with the prince of Persia, together
with another angel called Michael your prince. This vision being introductory to
the following prophecy “noted in the Scripture of truth,” —
about B.C. 534. (Chap. 10)
5.
The prophecy of the Scriptures of truth detailed at full length by the angel
— the three kings of Persia — the fourth Xerxes — the mighty
king Alexander and the division of his empire into four parts — two
monarchies specially dwelt upon rathe kings of the north being the Seleucidae,
and those of the south the Ptolemidae or Lagidae — their various wars,
intermarriages, treaties, and successes — fully elucidated by historical
testimony throughout these Lectures — the willful king (ver. 16)
interpreted of Antiochus the Great — the vile person (ver. 21) being
Antiochus Epiphanes — the willful king (ver. 36) being the heathen Roman
Empire — the remainder of the prophecy being ingeniously accommodated to
the well—known character of the Roman conquests in the East, — about
B.C. 534. (Chap 11)
6.
Michael the prince stands up for the people — the certainty of a future
resurrection proclaimed — two angels appear on the banks of the river
— the Prophet inquires concerning the timing of these events — the
time, times, and a half — the closing and sealing of the words till the
time of the end — the abomination of desolation set up — the 1290
days — the 1335 days — the angel’s command to stand in thy lot
at the end of the days — these periods said to be completed at the first
advent of Christ and the early history of the Gospel dispensation, including the
destruction of Jerusalem and the persecutions of the Church under the heathen
Emperors of Rome, — about B.C. 534. (Chap. 12)
A NOTICE OF SOME
ANCIENT
CODEXES AND
VERSIONS.
Those of the Septuagint are of most importance. Dr.
WELLS has compared the Alexandrian and Roman MSS., and arranged in parallel
columns their various readings, adding also the Hebrew original. We have
remarked in the Preface, p. 49, that early in the second century
Theodotion’s version was substituted for that of the Septuagint.
Rosenmuller has remarked its variations from the original Hebrew and
Chaldee text, particularly in chaps. 3, 4, 5, and 6. He cites various examples,
and refers us to. Eichhorn and Bertholdt for details. Jerome
followed Origen, who used a mark to denote any difference between his copy
of the Alexandrian version and the Hebrew text. Hengstenberg, p. 234
and following, English Translation, has answered some objections of the
Neologians concerning this point. Daniel juxta LXX. was first edited at
Rome by the Society for Propagating the Faith, in the year A.D. 1772, fol., from
a codex discovered in the Chisian Library. It is accompanied with a Latin
version, with the Septuagint chronology, with the Greek and Latin of Hippolytus,
and with the Greek and Latin of Theodotion’s version. It was reprinted at
Gottingen, A.D. 1774, and again at Trajectum ad Rhen., A.D. 1775, by Ch.
Segaar, (Utrecht.) See Masch’s Bibl. Sac., part 2. vol. 2. pp.
320-322. Various other collations of these two codexes have been made. Dr.
HOLMES, formerly Dean of Winchester, published in A.D. 1805,
the
Book of Daniel according to the texts of Theodotion
and the Septuagint. For this edition 311 MSS. were collated, and their
variations marked. The Sixtine or Roman edition of 1587 has been adopted, while
the Complutensian and Aldine variations, as well as those of Dr. Grabe, have all
been noticed.
VERSIONS.
There are three chief versions made from the
Septuagint text: viz., the Syriac, the old Latin or Italic, and the Arabic. They
are useful in determining the original Greek phrases used by the Alexandrine
translators. the Vulgate Latin forms a fourth and later version, and their
differences and agreements have been carefully noticed by Dr. Wells. The
Syriac version was edited, translated into Latin, and illustrated by a preface
and critical notes by Cajetanus Buggatus, Mediolani, (Milan,) A.D. 1788,
with the following title, — Daniel secundum editionem LXX. interpretum
ex Tetraplis desumptam. Ex codice Syro-Estranghelo Bibliothecae Ambrosianae
Syriace. Wintle in his notes makes good use of the variations of these
versions as well as Rosenmuller in his elaborate expositions of the text.
We are informed by Jerome that Theodotion’s Greek version of Daniel
was universally used in the Greek and Eastern Churches.
Another Greek version of Daniel occurs in an edition
of a codex in the Library of St. Mark’s at Venice, first published and
illustrated with notes by Jo. Bapt. Caspare D’Ansse de Villoison.
Argentorati, A.D. 1784.
A codex rescriptus, containing fragments of Daniel in
a Latin version made before the time of Jerome, was discovered in the University
Library at Wurtzburg by Dr. Feder. The fragments were published by Dr. Munter,
Hafniae, A.D. 1821, 8VO. The codex is supposed to be as old as the sixth or
seventh century.
A LIST OF THE MOST ANCIENT AND
MODERN BRITISH AND FOREIGN EXPOSITIONS OF DANIEL,
With Concise Epitomes Of The
Contents Of The Most Important.
1 JEWISH
COMMENTATORS.
DR. KENNICOTT first edited a Hebrew interpretation of
the Chaldee chapters of Daniel and Ezra from an ancient codex. It was translated
and re-edited by J. L. SHULZE. Hal., 1782.
BUXTORF edited a Hebrew Commentary on Daniel by Rabbi
Saadiah Hag-gaon, who lived in Egypt and died about the middle of the
tenth century. Basil., A.D. 1618.
R. SOLOMON JARCHI’S Commentary on Daniel is
exceedingly full and clear in its verbal explanations. The edition of J. F.
BREITHAUPT, Gotham, 1713, is very convenient, and full of most valuable
Hebrew criticisms.
R. ISAAC ABARBANEL, who is frequently refuted by
CALVIN in the preceding Lectures, has been mentioned in our Ezekiel, vol. 2 p.
403. He entities his comments on Daniel, “The Fountains of
Salvation.” They were first published at Naples, A.D. 1497: again in A.D.
1551, without the name of any place, and again at Amsterdam, A.D.
1647.
R. JOSEPH TEITZAK, who lived in the fifteenth
century, wrote a Commentary on Daniel, published at Venice, A.D.
1608.
R. JOSEPH the son of David the son of JOSEPH JACHIA,
commonly called JACCHIADES, who died A.D. 1539, wrote a
Paraphrase on Daniel, in much repute:
published at Amsterdam, A.D. 1633.
R. MOSES ALSCHECH, who lived at the close of the
sixteenth century, called his Commentary on this Prophet, “The Rose of
Sharon:” published at Zaphetae, A.D. 1568, and at Venice, A.D.
1592.
R. SAMUEL, son of R. JUDAH VALERIUS, entitled his
comment on this Prophet, “The Vision of the Time Appointed.” Venice,
A.D. 1586.
2 EARLY
FATHERS.
The Greek Commentary on this Prophet by HIPPOLYTUS,
Bishop of the harbor of Rome, has been already mentioned. It was first edited at
Paris, A.D. 1672, in a general collection of the Greek Fathers, and afterwards
Jo. Alb. Fabricius published the whole of his works at Hamburgh, A.D.
1716 and 1718. His explanations of chaps, 7:to 12:are edited from the Chisian
codex according to the Septuagint translation, which, as we have formerly
stated, was first published at Rome, A.D. 1772.
EPHREM SYRUS wrote his Commentary on this Prophet
about A.D. 370. It was published at Rome, A.D. 1740, by Peter Benedict,
both in Syriac and Latin. See vol. 2 p. 203 and following.
JEROME’S valuable exposition of this Prophet is
found in vol. 5 of his works, p. 2. Edit. Vallarsii. Venice, A.D.
1768.
THEODORET’S valuable comments on Daniel are
found in vol. 2 pt. 2 p. 1053, of the edition of his works by J. L. Schulze.
Hal. Saxon., A.D. 1 768.
3 EARLY
REFORMERS.
MARTINI LUTHERI Auslegung des Propheten Daniels,
consists of three parts, published at different times at Wittemberg, from
A.D. 1530 to 1546. See Jo. G. Walch’s preface to Luther’s
Works, vol. 6 p. 13, and p. 1422 and following.
JO. OECOLAMPADII Commentariorum in Danielem, Libri
Duo. Basileae, A.D. 1530, 1543, and 1562: also, Geneva, A.D. 1553, 1567,
and 1578. A very valuable exposition, and more in accordance with modern
views of Antichrist and the spiritual nature of our Lord’s kingdom, than
the Lectures of CALVIN.
PHILIPPI MELANCTHONIS Commentarius in Danielem
Prophetam. Wittemberg, A.D. 1543: published also in his works, and
translated into German by Justus Jonas. P. 2 p. 416. A.D.
1546.
4 AUTHORS QUOTED BY
POOLE
IN HIS SYNOPSOSIS ON
DANIEL.
AS POOLE merely gives the name of his authors without
any hint as to the titles and dates of their works, the following information
will be of use. It is confined exclusively to Daniel
VICTORINI STRIGELII, Danielis Prophetae Concio.
Lipsiae, A.D. 1565, 1571, 1572. 8vo.
BENEDICTI PERERII, Com. in Danielem. Romae,
A.D. 1586: also Lugduni, A.D. 1588, 1591, 1602: et Antverpiae,
1594
FRANCISCI Juan, Expositio Prophetae Danielis.
Heidelberg, A.D. 1593: Geuevae, 1594.
AMANDI POLANI A POLENSDORF in Danielem Prophetam
Commentarius. Basil., A.D. 1593, 4to, et 1606, 8vo.
JOANNES MALDONATI, Commentarii in prophetas
quatuor Jeremiam, Ezekiel, Baruch, et Danielem. Moguntiae, A.D.
1611.
The translation is good; the comments short and
explanatory of the Hebrew words; and it is to be expected that a Jesuit would
occasionally direct his shafts against
“Calvinianis.”
HUGONE BROUGHTONO, Commentarius in Danielem primum
Anglice scriptus. First published in English in London, A.D. 1596 and
1597. Jo. Boreel translated it into Latin at Basil, A.D. 1599. Small
4to.
The Latin translation is materially influenced by
Rabbinical comments on the Hebrew and Chaldee text. The work is very valuable as
a repository of historical information in the words of the original Greek
historians.
HEXAPLA IN DANIELEM BY ANDREW WILLET. Cambridge, A.D.
1610.
A very valuable collection of the opinions of others,
and a good study for those who are interested in the variety of speculations
which have been invented concerning the prophecies of this book. The difficult
questions “handled” are 536, and the knotty controversies undertaken
are 134. In addition to most of the standard writers quoted by Poole, Pintus
is introduced, whose work is entitled, Hectoris Pinti, Commentarii in
Danielem, Lamentationes, Jeremiae, et Nahum. Conimbrae, A.D. 1582. Venetiis,
A.D. 15S3. Colon., A.D. 1587. Antverpiae, A.D. 1595.
POOLE also quotes the translations of this Prophet
made by Pagninus, Montanus, and Malvenda, who are Roman Catholics; and
Munster, Junius and Tremellius, and Castalio, who are
Protestants. Their various merits are given by H. Horne, vol. 2. part 2. pp. 62,
64, who states the authorities from which he derives his own
information.
5 FOREIGN
INTERPRETERS.
THE best of these are German. Their variety is great;
a few only can be noticed here; others will be found in abundance in
Rosenmuller’s Elenchus Interpretum.
MARTINI GEIERI, Praelectiones Academicae in
Danielem. Lipsiae, A.D. 1667, 1684, 1697, 1702: and repeated in vol. it. of
his works. Amsterdam, A.D. 1695, folio. “One of the most valuable,”
writes H. Horne, “of all Geier’s expository
works.”
PRODROMUS DANIELICUS auctore JO. GER. KERKHERDERE.
Lovanii, A.D. 1711. 12mo.
A small yet learned volume by the historian to his
Catholic Majesty Charles III., containing many criticisms and attempts to
reconcile historical difficulties. In many points very illustrative of
CALVIN’S sentiments.
HERMAN VENEMA, Dissertationes ad vaticinia
Danielis emblematica, cap. 2, 7, et 8. Leovardiae, A.D. 1745: another vol.
contains his exposition of cap. 11:4; 12:3. Leovardiae, A.D. 1752.
4to.
CH. B. MICHAELIS, Annotationes
philologico-exegeticae in Danielem. Hal., A.D. 1720.
J. D. MICHAELIS, Epistolae de LXX. Hebdomadibus
Danielis. London, A.D. 1773.
H. HAVERNICK’S New Commentary on the Book of
Daniel. The original title is, Neue critische untersuchungen uber das buch
Daniel. Von Heinrich Havernick. Hamburgh, A.D. 1838. This small volume of the
excellent Professor at Rostock is much esteemed.
EMST. WILM. HENGSTENBERG. Die Authentic des Daniel
und die integritat des Sachariah. Berlin, A.D. 1831.
This work is now accessible to the English reader
through the translation of the Revelation B. P. Pratten. Edinburgh, Clark, A.D.
1848.
Its contents are as follow: —
THE GENUINENESS OF
DANIEL.
Chap.
1 — History of attacks on the Book of
Daniel.
Chap.
2 — Reply to
objections.
Sect.
1 Alleged Greek Words
—
2
Impure Hebrew
—
3
Silence of Jesus Sirach
—
4
Position in the Canon
—
5
Depreciatory statements of the Jews
—
6
The O. T. referred to as a complete Whole
—
7
Aimless profusion of miracles
—
8
Historical errors
—
9
Irreconcilable contradictions
—
10
Improbable and suspicious accounts
—
11
Later ideas and usages
—
12
Unusual indefiniteness of the prophecies
—
13
This definiteness ceases with Antiochus Epiphanes
—
14
Other objections —
1. The passage,
Daniel 12;
2. Correspondence in ideas and
expressions with much later Books;
3.
Marks of Jewish national pride;
4.
Absence of all higher moral tendency;
5.
Passages which speak in praise of Daniel.
Chap.
3 — Arguments for the
Genuineness.
Sect.
1 Testimony of the author himself
—
2
Reception into the Canon, and general acknowledgment of Canonicity
—
3
Testimony of Christ and the Apostles
—
4
Traces of the Book in pre-Maceabean times —
1 The passage of Josephus, Arch.
11:8;
2. 1 Macc. 2, 59,
60;
3. The LXX. of
<053208>Deuteronomy
32:8, and Isaiah 30
4; Badness of the
Alex. version of Daniel, which was nearly contemporary with the alleged original
composition —
5
Character of the language;
1. Use of Hebrew and
Aramaean;
2. Correspondence of its
Aramaean, with that of Ezra, and deviation from that of the Targums
—
6
Exact knowledge of history —
7
Familiar acquaintance with the institutions, manners, and customs of the times
of Daniel —
8
Other arguments;
1. The entire peculiarity of prophetic style,
and the mode of representation adopted in the
Book;
2. Several things at variance with
the spirit of the Maccabean times;
3.
Exact agreement of the historical part and the
prophecies;
4. Immediate conjunction of
the death of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Messianic times.
As the Professor refers to many Neologian works for
the purpose of refuting their wild extravagancies, the titles of the four
following ones are given in full. See their characters delineated in our
Preface.
Daniel aus dem Hebraisch-Aramaischen neu ubersetzt
und erklart, mit einer vollstandigen Einleitung, und einigen historischen und
exegetischen Excursen. Von LEONHARD BERTHOLDT, erste und zweyte Halfte.
Erlangen, 1806, 1808, in octon.
G. F. GRIESINGER’S Neue Ansicht der Aufsatze im
Buche Daniel. Stuttg. u. Tubing., 1815, in octon.
Ueber Verfasser und Zweck des Buchs Daniel. Revision
der in neuerer Zeit daruber gefuhrten Untersuchungen. Von FRIEDR. BLEEK. In der
Theologischen Zeitschrift herausgeg. von Schleiermacher, de Wette, u. Lucke, p.
3. Berlin, 1822, in octon.
HER. GOD. KIRMSS Commentatio historico-critica,
exhibens descriptionem et censuram recentium de Danielis libro opinionum. Jenae,
1828, in quat.
A list of other interpretations better known on the
Continent than in either Great Britain or America, will be found in
ROSENMULLER’S “elenchus interpretum.” His own elaborate
Scholia in DANIELEM, Lipsiae, 1832, have proved very serviceable for the
illustration of these Lectures.
The title of the following French work is worthy of
mention. Daniel le prophete dans une suite de Lecons pour une Ecole du Dimanche.
4 vols. Partridge and Oakey, publishers to the Evangelical
Alliance.
6 AMERICAN
WORKS.
A Critical and Historical Interpretation of the
Prophecies of Daniel. By N. S. Folsom. Boston, 12mo, 1842.
A work on the system of Professor Stuart; displaying
considerable historical research, and more explanatory of CALVIN’S views
than some modern British works.
The Prophecies of Daniel, Nos. I. and II. By GEORGE
BUSH, Professor of Hebrew in New York City University. New York,
1844.
The Hebrew and Chaldee originals with several of the
ancient versions. The comments are strictly exegetical. Most valuable to the
critical reader of this Prophet. See a Sketch of its contents in the American
Biblical Repository. October, 1844.
7 BRITISH
COMMENTATORS.
ROBERTI ROLLOCI Commentarius in Librum Danielis
Prophetae. Edinburgi, 1591, 4to.
The Book of Daniel, explained after the following
method, etc. By Dr. EDWARD WELLS. Oxford, 1716.
The Septuagint version is printed in parallel columns
with the English version, and useful annotations added.
Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel and the
Apocalypse of St. John. By Sir ISAAC NEWTON. London, 1733, 4to.
The Astronomical fame of the author has bestowed
great celebrity upon the calculations of this work.
An Essay towards the Interpretation of the Prophecies
of Daniel, with occasional remarks upon some of the most celebrated
Commentators on them. By RICHARD AMNER. London, 1776, 8vo.
The opinion of Grotius and Le Clerc is followed here,
making the times of Antiochus Epiphanes the termination of the events predicted.
See British Critic, O. S., vol. 13 p. 290 and following.
Daniel, an Improved Version attempted, with a
Preliminary Dissertation and Notes, Critical, Historical, and Explanatory. By
THOMAS WINTLE, B.D. London, 1807, 4to, 1838, 8vo.
The best English version with which the Editor is
acquainted. The notes are sufficiently copious and very scholar-like; many
references to it have already been made in illustrating these
Lectures.
A Dissertation by way of Inquiry into the true import
and application of the Vision related,
<270920>Daniel
9:20 to the end, usually called Daniel’s Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, etc.
By BENJAMIN BLAYNEY, B.D. Oxford, 1775, 4to.
A Dissertation on Daniel’s Prophecy of the
Seventy Weeks. By GEORGE STANLEY FABER, B.D. London, 1811, 8vo
A Dissertation on the Seventy Weeks of Daniel the
Prophet. By the Rev. JOHN STONARD, D.D. London, 1826, 8vo.
Daniel’s Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks. By a
Layman. London, 1836, 12mo. A Dissertation concerning the Chronological Numbers
recorded in the Prophecies of Daniel. By the Revelation PHILIP ALLWOOD, B.D.
London, 1833, 8vo.
The Times of Daniel, Chronological and Prophetical.
By GEORGE DUKE OF MANCHESTER. London, 1845, 8vo.
A very elaborate and original work, in which the
chronology is re-arranged on a basis varying from that commonly
received.
The Four Prophetic Empires and the Kingdom of
Messiah, being an exposition of the first two visions of Daniel. By the
REVELATION T. R. BIRKS, M.A. London, 1845.
The Two Later Visions of Daniel: historically
explained. By the Revelation T. R. BIRKS, M.A. London, 1846.
A very clear and useful historical compendium. The
first sixteen chapters are a practical comment on these Lectures. Frequent
extracts have already been made.
An Inquiry into the Nature, Progress, and End of
Prophecy. By SAMUEL LEE, D.D. London, 1849.
The Events and Times of the Visions of Daniel and St.
John, etc. By SAMUEL LEE, D.D. London, 1851.
These works of this lamented scholar are quite in the
spirit of CALVIN’S interpretations. The adherents to CALVIN’S views
of these prophecies will find much profit from their perusal.
Prophetic Studies, or Lectures on Daniel. By JOHN
CUMMING, D.D. Sixth thousand. London, 1852.
Remarks on the Prophetic Visions of the Book of
Daniel, etc. By S. P. TREGELLES, LL.D. 1853.
The works of other authors are enumerated by H.
Horne, vol. 2 pt. 11, p. 290, etc., and by Ed Bickersteth in his
“Practical Guide to the Prophecies,” p. 401. London,
1839.
Providence, Prophecy, and Popery, as exhibited in the
first seven chapters of Daniel. By the Rev. WILLIAM WHITE, minister of the
Original Secession Church, Haddington. 12mo, 1848.
Studies on the Book of Daniel: a Course of Lectures
by J. N. DARBY. Translated from the French, and revised by the Author, 12mo,
1848.
Lectures on the Prophet Daniel, considered in a
Series of Lessons for a Sunday School. By the Rev. L. GAUSSEN of Geneva. 8vo,
1848.
Lectures, Expository and Practical, on the Book of
the Prophet Daniel. By the Rev. CHARLES POPHAM MILES. 2 vols 12
mo.
Index of
Subjects
Index of
Names
Index of
Citations
Index of Latin Words
and Phrases
List of Scripture
References
FOOTNOTES
ft388
Some translate “rising out of.” —
Calvin.
ft389
The phrase in the Latin text is a proverb: nodum quaerere in scyrpo. The
French is correct in its interpretation: chercher de la difficulte ou il
n’y en a point. Both Ennius and Terence use the proverb.
— Ed
ft390
That is, differing among themselves. — Calvin
ft391
The first beast like a lion. — Calvin
ft392
That is, the second beast followed the first —
Calvin
ft393
That is, “Thus it was said to it;” for this word is taken
indefinitely. — Calvin
ft394That
is, a vision was offered to me. — Calvin
ft395
The Latin text in the Geneva edition of 1617 has “populi”
where it ought to be “pupilli.” That of 1569 is correct in
reading “pupilli” — Ed.
ft396
That is, which can strike terror. — Calvin
ft397
That is, was attentive. — Calvin
ft398
Or removed; for the word
wymr,
remiv, is expounded by interpreters in two senses; verbally,” until
they took away thrones or erected them aloft.” — Calvin. “The
word may be rendered ‘were pitched,’ or set down, for the reception
of Deity and his assessors the saints.” —
Wintle.
ft399
Some, the light or splendor. — Calvin.
ft400
That is, millions. — Calvin.
Ft401
That is, myriad’s of myriad’s, or a hundred million. —
Calvin.
Ft402
That is, I was gazing upon that vision still: it signifies the attention of the
mind, and that not after a human method, but as if he had been caught up aloft
in a prophetic spirit. Thus he says his senses were fixed upon that vision
— “on account of the voice,” therefore, or “through the
voice.” — Calvin.
ft403
For
µ[,
gnem, is taken in this passage in Chaldee, like
b,
be. This usage is customary: hence “in the clouds.” —
Calvin.
Ft404
Verbally, “made him approach.” — Calvin. The Latin text
of 1561 has “eum” at the end of the verse, and the French
translation implies it. See the Dissertations at the end of this volume. —
Ed.
Ft405
The Latin translation of Irenaeus is “proeludium.” The French
here has “une approche et entree.” and then adds, “He
uses a word which we cannot translate into French.” It means a preface or
introduction. — Ed.
ft406
Tertullian’s words are, “Tunc praeluxit Filius Dei humanitate
sua.” — Ed.
ft407
Or, shall not be abolished. — Calvin.
ft408
Or vanished, or my spirit was wanting to me, Daniel. —
Calvin.
Ft409
Or “sheath,” properly; but here this noun is transferred
metaphorically to the body. — Calvin. Aben-Ezra calls the body
“the sheath” of the mind. — Ed.
ft410
The Latin here refers to the Hebrew construction. The French translation has
expressed Calvin’s meaning without keeping close to the words. Les
saincts des souverains is the French reading of the Hebrew regimen. See
Dissertations at the end of this volume. — Ed.
Ft411
This word
abxyl,
litzba, is usually explained to mean “for the truth,” that is. I
desired to know. — Calvin. The Vulgate has
“diligentius discere.” Wintle, “accurate
information.”
Ft412
That is, “beyond the other beasts.” —
Calvin.
ft413
The expression seems concise, but because he had formerly added what had been
omitted, for the purpose of connecting the history, he repeats again, “the
angel said so,” namely, “as to that portion of the vision, thus
spake the angel.” — Calvin.
ft414
Some translate it in the passive, “lest any change be made.” —
Calvin.
ft415
Some translate, “shall rub to pieces,” but the sense is the same.
— Calvin.
ft416
Or, after those horns. — Calvin.
ft417
King, or the horn itself, shall be different. —
Calvin.
ft418
Which is denoted by the horn. — Calvin.
ft419
Others translate, “shall consume, afflict.” —
Calvin.
ft420
That is, he shall think with himself to change. —
Calvin.
ft421
That is, to dissipate and blot out. — Calvin.
ft422
Calvin’s expression is here proverbial; the French translates ils
n’en approachent ne pres ne loin; the Latin being, neque
coelum neque terram attingunt. — Ed.
ft423
Or, as yet there is an end of the discourse. —
Calvin.
ft424
Or, as far as I, Daniel, am concerned. — Calvin.
ft425
Or, I have laid it up to be kept. — Calvin.
ft426
That is, in addition to the vision which was offered me before. —
Calvin.
ft427
hrybh,
hebirah , which some translate citadel, or palace, or royal residence.
— Calvin.
ft428
That is, on the river’s bank. — Calvin.
ft429
Or, before his face. — Calvin.
ft430
There was none to snatch it from his hand. —
Calvin.
Ft431
That is, I attended or was attentive. — Calvin.
ft432
From the west. — Calvin.
ft433
It did not touch the ground. — Calvin.
ft434
Which was possessed of two horns, or verbally, “master of
horns.”-Calvin.
ft435
Before the river. — Calvin.)
ft436
That is, when the he-goat approached the ram, and excited himself, or became
savage against him. — Calvin.
ft437
Threw him prostrate.-Calvin.)he had collected fresh forces, and engaged a second
time, he despaired of his kingdom, was betrayed by his followers, and cruelly
slain. Thus the he-goat struck the ram, and broke his two horns; for
Alexander acquired the Median as well as the Persian empire.
Ft438
This noun is connected with
ˆwzj
chezeven, “vision,” and is translated in our version variously.
In
<232818>Isaiah
28:18, it is rendered by “agreement,” and in
<270805>Daniel
8:5, by “notable,” and in the margin correctly by “of
sight.” Calvin’s Latin “illustre,” is very suitable.
— Ed.
ft439
Or, desire; some translate it in the genitive, and understand “desirable
land;” for Judea was often called the desirable land, because God of his
own free will chose to be worshipped there; but we may receive it simply for
glory.” — Calvin.
ft440
That is, proceeded even to the prince of the army. —
Calvin.
ft441
Namely, the sacrifice. — Calvin.
ft442
Or, dissipated. — Calvin.
ft443
Some translate “army” but I approve of the other sense, and shall
give the reason by and bye. — Calvin.
ft444
Or, on “account of wickedness,” verbally, “time shall be
given” - the future tense. — Calvin.
ft445
That is, shall have execution prepared, as we commonly say. —
Calvin.
ft446
Some translate, How long will the vision be permitted? but it ought rather to be
treated by the rules of grammar — “How long will be allowed for the
vision of the perpetual sacrifice and the devastating wickedness?” —
Calvin.
ft447
That is, for treading down. This word may be repeated. —
Calvin.
ft448
That is, until evening and morning. Calvin. — Wintle’s notes
on these verses are very explanatory, and agree on the whole with Calvin’s
comments. See DISSERTATION on this verse. — Ed.
ft449
Calvin means to imply that the Jews used these words to express the idea of the
Latin phrase, “omne ignotum pro magnifico.” —
Ed.
ft450
That is, between the two banks of the river. —
Calvin.
ft451
Or, at the end of the vision. — Calvin.
ft452
Some translate, “approached me,” an interpretation which is
tolerable. — Calvin.
ft453
Verbally, “upon my standing,” as in old French, “en mon
estre.” — Calvin.
ft454
Or I will open to thee, or verbally, make thee to know. —
Calvin.
ft455
That is, the horn was broken. — Calvin.
ft456
Verbally, “in faces.” — Calvin.
ft457
The English reader may consult Michelet’s Life of Luther.
Hazlitt’s Ed., 1846.
ft458
Or, according to his fortitude; we shall treat this phrase also. —
Calvin
ft459
That is, “in wonderful ways” “wonderfully;” the noun
being used in the place of the adverb. — Calvin.
ft460
The edit. Gen., 1617 read Merces incorrectly: that of Vincent, 1571, and
the French of Perrin, 1569, are correct, as in the text. —
Ed
ft461
That is, for a time. — Calvin.
ft462
That is, after I rose up. — Calvin.
ft463
That is, I discharged my duty to which the king had appointed me. —
Calvin.
ft464
That is, there is no one who could understand. —
Calvin.
ft465
Verbally, was crowned, ie, was king. —
Calvin.
ft466
He repeats the words, the first year. — Calvin.
ft467
Some translate the word
ytnyb
binthni, I was attentive, I diligently considered, but this is of little
consequence as to the sense. — Calvin.
ft468
Some take “prayers and supplications” for the accusative sense.
— Calvin.
ft469
A turn of expression rather unexpected. The Latin text is quasi suggestus; and
both the French editions translate comme une chaire pour prescher. —
Ed.
ft470
The same word in Hiphil signifies to celebrate God’s praises, but it is
here taken for confessing a fault. — Calvin.
ft471
Or, we have revolted from thy precepts and thy judgments. —
Calvin.
ft472
Verbally, of faces. — Calvin.
ft473
That is, to all the Jews. — Calvin.
ft474
Or, on account of transgressions. — Calvin.
ft475
hls,
selech, signifies “to pardon.” It is translated
“propitiations,” but there is no doubt about the sense. —
Calvin
ft476
Or, because they are rebellious; for the particle
yk,
ki, is properly causal; but it appears from many passages of Scripture to
be taken adversatively, which seems to suit this passage better. —
Calvin.
ft477
Verbally, receded or declined. — Calvin.
ft478
The copula here has a inferential force. — Calvin.
ft479
Or, distilled; for
qtn,
nethak, has both meanings. — Calvin.
ft480
Some translate, “execration.” —
Calvin.
ft481
That is, against our judges and rulers who governed us; for the Hebrews use
“to judge,” as signifying “to govern.” —
Calvin.
ft482
That is, as it happened. — Calvin.
ft483
Made it come. — .Calvin.
Ft484
That is, as the event itself pointed out. —
Calvin.
ft485
Or, in our sins and iniquities. — Calvin.
ft486
Verbally, “all.” — Calvin.
ft487
That is, those who are in our circuit. — Calvin.
ft488
That is, make thy face to shine. — Calvin.
ft489
Or, devastation. — Calvin.
ft490
The words super eam, “upon it,” are redundant. —
Calvin.
ft491
Or, on account of thy compassion’s. —
Calvin.
ft492
That is, while I was yet speaking. — Calvin.
ft493
Or, made to fall; the same word as before. —
Calvin.
ft494
That is, on account of, or for the sake of, the mountain. —
Calvin.
ft495
See Wintle’s clear and comprehensive note in loc. —
Ed
ft496
That is, that I may teach thee what is necessary to be known. —
Calvin. See DISSERTATIONS at the end of the volume. —
Ed.
ft497
That is, thou art a man to be desired. — Calvin.
ft498
Verbally, upon the city of thy holiness. — Calvin.
ft499
The word
µtj,
chethem, “to seal,” is repeated twice. —
Calvin.
ft500
Or, holiness of holiness, alluding to the Temple. —
Calvin.
Ft501
See DISSERTATIONS at the end of this volume. — Ed.
ft502
Or, know and understand. — Calvin.
ft503
Or, concerning the bringing back of the people. —
Calvin.
ft504
Or, the people shall return. — Calvin.
ft505
A plain, from the word to spread. — Calvin.
ft506
See this verse quoted in Euseb., Hist. Ecc., lib. 1:chapter 6: and the
DISSERTATIONS at the end of this volume, for an account of these writers.
— Ed.
ft507
See his Chronology at full length in his comment on this verse, lib.2. Edit.
fol. 1567. The Editor ventures to recommend the readers of Calvin’s
Daniel, to peruse the judicious comments of CEcolampadins. They are worthy of
more attention than they have received in England. See our DISSERTATIONS
throughout. — Ed.
ft508
Shall confirm. — Calvin.
ft509
Shall make to cease. — Calvin.
ft510
Or, expansion, verbally, wing. — Calvin.
ft511
Or, shall stupefy, for some take it transitively. —
Calvin.
ft512
That is, the word itself was most true. — Calvin.
ft513
That is, although the time of its fulfillment should be long. —
Calvin.
ft514
“Delicate;” verbally, “of desires.”
–Calvin.
ft515
The demonstrative pronoun is here used for the sake of explanation. —
Calvin
ft516
Some translate, burning brass. — Calvin
ft517
Some take
ˆwmj,
chemon, for noise or tumult — Calvin
ft518
The word
lba,
abel, “but” is put adversatively; it is not a simple
affirmation. — Calvin
ft519
Verbally, to hide themselves. — Calvin
ft520
Or, no vigor was left in me. — Calvin
ft521
Verbally, and comeliness. — Calvin
ft522
That is, to vanishing away. — Calvin
ft523
That is, I fell on my face as if asleep. — Calvin.
ft524
Touched upon me; but the
b,
beth, is superfluous. — Calvin.
ft525
That is, one of the chief leaders. — Calvin.
ft526
Or, to strengthen me. — Calvin
ft527
That is, was left. — Calvin
ft528
To make thee understand. — Calvin
ft529
That is, what shall happen to thy people. — Calvin
ft530
That is, some one wearing the form of the sons of man. —
Calvin
ft531
That is, who stood opposite me, or at a distance from me. —
Calvin
ft532
There is in the original the pleonasm of the words, “and I,” of
which the Latin language does not admit. — Calvin
ft533
That is, he who bore a human appearance. — Calvin
ft534
That is, to desire, as we said before. — Calvin.
ft535
Some translate, “Act like a man and be strong.” Both words are the
same in the original. — Calvin. See the
Dissertations on this chapter. —
Ed.
ft536
That is, I stood by to strengthen and assist him. —
Calvin.
ft537
Or, he shall be rich with great opulence. — Calvin
ft538
Or, with his riches, that is, when he shall prevail. —
Calvin
ft539
That is, as he wishes, or according to his lust. —
Calvin
ft540
There are various minor errors in the edition 1617, which are correct in the
edition of 1571. For example, on folio 94, verse 3, violavit
occurs for volavit; and on folio 95, verse 3, non begins the
sentence instead of nam. — Ed.
Ft541 The relative
article is in the feminine gender. — Calvin.
Ft542 Some
translate, “in its degree;” but I see no reason for it. —
Calvin.
Ft543
la al, is
here used in the sense of Òwith;Ó yet some translate it literally,
to his army; but the former exposition is preferable. —
Calvin.
ft544
That is, among the fortifications, or among the people.
The number is changed, and it can only be referred to the people. —
Calvin.
Ft545
That is, with desirable vessels, as I formerly stated on this
word.-Calvin,
ft546
Or, they shall lead captive into Egypt their gods, together with their images
and their desirable vessels of silver and gold. —
Calvin.
ft547
The edition of 1617 has modestia incorrectly for molestia. The
error is corrected in subsequent editions. The reader of the original must be
prepared for many verbal inaccuracies in this edition. —
Ed.
Ft548
Calvin quoting from memory has not stated the numbers
accurately. See Polyb., lib. 5, p. 421, edit. Casaubon. Paris; also the
Dissertations at the end of this volume. — Ed.
Ft549
That is, he will collect a greater army than before.
— Calvin.
Ft550
That is, at the close, at a fixed time, at the end.
— Calvin.
Ft551
Or, “many,” for there are two words in the
original, “great and many.” — Calvin.
Ft552
That is, he shall build up a mound by casting up stones,
and wood, and earth. — Calvin.
Ft553
That is, he shall turn himself. —
Calvin.
Ft554
Some translate, “the upright,” pl., (recti)
“with him.” The copula may be superfluous, as we often
find it in the Scriptures. We must read it in one context, — he shall make
alliances with him, as we saw before. — Calvin.
Ft555
That is, she shall not obey his will, nor stand by him. —
Calvin.
Ft556
Some translate this word as if in opposition with the last, — “the
honor or glory of the realm.” — Calvin.
Ft557
That is, they shall not commit to him. — Calvin.
Ft558
That is, they shall not confer the glory of the
kingdom. — Calvin.
Ft559
Or, he shall disperse their property. —
Calvin.
Ft560That
is, they shall agitate against him perfidious counsels. —
Calvin.
Ft561
That is, the issue should be different, for the latter expedition should not
succeed as the former one did. — Calvin.
Ft562
Or, he shall grieve, which sense I rather prefer. —
Calvin.
Ft563
That is, he shall apply his mind. — Calvin.
Ft564
We have treated this word before. —
Calvin
Ft565
That is, he shall pervert them more and more by
flatteries. — Calvin.
Ft566
That is, all the people who acknowledge. —
Calvin.
Ft567
When they shall fall. —
Calvin.
Ft568
These two words spring from the same root; as “they shall be
fortified,” comes from “fortitude,” so “they shall be
assisted,” from “assistance.” —
Calvin.
Ft569
Or, to be tried; the word properly signifies to pour out.
— Calvin.
Ft570
That is, to purify them. — Calvin.
Ft571
Or, to purge them again. —
Calvin.
Ft572
The edit. of 1617 has nunc instead of non, which is the correct
reading. — Ed.
Ft573
The Latin is “ille dicebat,” the French has
“un quidam disoit,” — a curious
mixture which implies uncertainty. Can it be Crassus? —
Ed.
Ft574
See the DISSERTATIONS at the end of this
volume.
Ft575
The French edition altogether omits this reference to the Concilia
— Ed.
Ft576
That is, with all precious things. —
Calvin.
Ft577
The word “Mahuzzin” has occasioned a great
variety of translations. See Wintle in loco, and the
Dissertation on this passage at the end of this
volume.
Ft578
That is, “shall not escape,” or
“snatch itself away.” — Calvin.
Ft579
That is, over all precious things. — Calvin.
Ft580
Probably “reports” or
“statements” which should be heard. —
Calvin.
Ft581
Of the heavens, meaning the firmament. — Calvin.
Ft582
That is, those who justified many. —
Calvin.
Ft583
That is, one on one side, and the other on the opposite.
— Calvin.
ft584
That is, stood above the bank. — Calvin.
ft585
That is, what shall be the end of these things? —
Calvin.
ft586
That is, the prefixed time, as we have formerly explained
it. — Calvin.
Ft587
Or, “shall be melted by fire;” the word
means originally “to pour out,” but is here taken transitively for
to purify. — Calvin.
Ft588
We have translated it so before; some translate, “of
desolation.” The word signifies “to be desolate,” but the
other sense suits better here. — Calvin.
ft589
Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon. Being the result of a
Second Expedition, undertaken for the trustees of the British Museum. By Austin
H. Layard, M.P. London: Murray, 1853.
Layard’s Monuments of Nineveh.
Second Series. London: Murray, 185