THE 70 WEEKS AND 2300 DAYS (CONCLUDED.)
SYNOPSIS OF THE PRESENT TRUTH, No. 11.
THE 70 WEEKS AND 2300 DAYS (CONCLUDED.)
We have now examined the four grants that were made by the kings of Persia in favor of the Jews, which are the only events to which we can look for the decree to restore and to build Jerusalem. We have seen that the first, second, and fourth do not contain the essential features necessary to constitute that decree; but that the third, the decree to Ezra, harmonizes with the conditions of the prophecy in every particular: 1. It contained all the elements necessary to constitute such a decree, and when carried out, resulted in the thorough restoration of the Jewish state. It answered to the prophecy fully in this respect. 2. From the commencement of the work by Ezra, to the last act of reformation by Nehemiah were just forty-nine years, which is the exact period allowed in the prophecy to this work. 3. As this decree went forth B. C. 457, the sixty-nine weeks or 483 years which were to extend to the Messiah the Prince, reckoned from the commencement of the work in the Autumn of that year, bring us to the Autumn of A. D. 27, when our Lord was baptized by John in Jordan and went forth preaching "the time is fulfilled." Mark i. Three and a half years from this, to the midst of the seventieth week, bring us to the Spring of A. D. 31, where it has been demonstrated that the crucifixion took place. Three and a half years more, the last half of the week, terminate the 70 weeks or 490 years in the Autumn of A. D. 34. Here then we stand at the end of this great period which Gabriel in his explanation of the 2300 days, told Daniel was cut off upon Jerusalem and the Jews. There is this one grand fact yet to be noticed: If the first 490 years terminated in the Autumn of A. D. 34, the whole period ends in the Autumn of A. D. 1844. For 490 taken from 2300, leave 1810; and 1810 added to A. D. 34, where the 490 terminate, make 1844. Previous to 1843 the light concerning the going forth of the decree in B. C. 457, had been clearly set forth. The end of the 2300 days was therefore confidently expected in 1843; for 457 years before Christ, and 1843 after, make just 2300 years. But the fact was overlooked that it takes 457 full years and 1843 full years to make 2300; and that, consequently, if the period had commenced with the very first day of 457, B. C., it would not end till the very last day of 1843, and that therefore, if a portion of the year B. C. 457 had elapsed before the 2300 days commenced, they would cover, before they terminated, a corresponding portion of the year 1844. And when it was taken into consideration that the midst of the seventieth week was marked by the crucifixion, which was in the first Jewish month in the Spring of 31, and that the 70 weeks would therefore end in the seventh month, Autumn of 34, it was at once seen that the days began, not with the starting of Ezra from Babylon in the Spring, but with the commencement of the work at Jerusalem, which it is not probable could be earlier than the seventh month, Autumn, of 457, and commencing at that point they must extend to a corresponding point in the year following 1843, and consequently end in the seventh month, Hebrew reckoning, in the Autumn of 1844. Such was the chronological argument upon which the preaching of the Advent doctrine of 1844 was based. It was good then; it is good now. Notwithstanding all the efforts that have been made to remove the dates, Honesty is at last compelled to let them stand as they were then placed. There are no Sampsons in the land who can pluck away these pillars of the temple of truth. With the great fact before us that the 2300 days would end in the Autumn of 1844, we reasoned as follows: 1. The Sanctuary, according to the prophecy, is then to be cleansed. 2. The earth, or the land of Palestine, is the Sanctuary. 3. Its cleansing is to be by fire at the revelation of the Lord Jesus. 4. In the "example and shadow of heavenly things," the high priest on the tenth day of the seventh month, entered the holiest of the earthly sanctuary, to make an atonement and came forth to bless the people. We therefore confidently expected that our great High Priest would descend from heaven in flaming fire and bring deliverance to his people, on the tenth day of the seventh month of that year in which the 2300 days should end. We need not mention how painful was the disappointment, or how the hopes of God's expectant people were as effectually crucified as were those of the early disciples when they beheld their Master bleeding upon the cross. There had been a mistake somewhere: where or how was it? was the mystery to be solved? Not a few made a precipitous retreat into the world again; and some flew off in the line of a tangent into the most extravagant fancies. But independent of these, three general divisions have arisen from the body of believers as it then existed, each claiming to give a reason why we did not at that time realize our hope. 1. The reason offered by the first class is that the seventy weeks are no part of the 2300 days; that the two periods have different starting points; and that the former affords no key to the explanation of the latter. It requires but a glance to see that this view sets aside entirely the important period of the 2300 days; for if the seventy weeks do not mark its commencement, we challenge the world to tell us where it does commence, or of what possible use it can be on the Sacred Page. So much then of revelation, yet remains unrevealed. 2. The second class have attempted to re-adjust the 2300 days by tearing up the original dates, astronomy and history to the contrary notwithstanding, and so arranging them as to make the point for the cleansing of Palestine or the burning of the earth fall in the future, as it is quite evident that neither of these events have taken place in the past. 3. The third class take the position that the conceptions at first entertained concerning the Sanctuary and its cleansing were incorrect. The Advent Herald has from time to time since 1844 been putting forth unanswerable vindications of the original dates. But the position hereby became extremely embarrassing; for to admit that the days had ended, and that the earth was not burned, would, according to its own premises, involve the word of God in a positive failure. In order therefore that the days may be indefinitely extended to the future, it has denied the connection between them and the seventy weeks, by which alone we have any clue to their commencement, and thus set them adrift. We learn this from a series of questions addressed by a correspondent to the Editor of the Herald, and his answers as follows: "Question. In your 'Chronology' the cross is placed in A. D. 31. What are the principal objections which bear against its being placed in A. D. 39? "Answer. 1. The absence of any evidence placing it there. 2. The contradiction of the wonderful astronomical, chronological and historical coincidences which show beyond the shadow of controversy that the 7th of Artaxerxes was in B. C. 457-8 that the birth of Christ was B. C. 4-5, that the thirtieth year of Christ was 483 years from the 7th of Artaxerxes, that the crucifixion was in A. D. 31, and that that was the point of time in the last week when the sacrifice and oblation should cease. "Ques. If the 70 weeks of Dan. ix do not commence in the 20th of Artaxerxes, how can the 2300 days begin at the same time with them, and yet terminate in the future? "Ques. Must we not henceforth consider that they have different starting points? "Ans. Yes."—Advent Herald, May 22d, 1852. We must now call the reader's attention to that portion of the "original Advent faith," which once formed a part of a standing notice in the Advent papers, under the head of "Points of difference between Us and our Opponents." It is as follows: "We claim that the ninth of Daniel is an appendix to the eighth, and that the seventy weeks and the 2300 days or years commence together. Our opponents deny this."—Signs of the Times, 1843. The Herald itself has now denied this, and thus abandoned its original position, and gone over to the ground of its opponents. Again: "The grand principle involved in the interpretation of the 2300 days of Dan. viii, 14, is, that the 70 weeks of Dan. ix, 24, are the first 490 days of the 2300 of the eighth chapter."—Advent Shield, p. 49. Art., Rise and Progress of Adventism. "If the connection between the 70 weeks of Dan. ix, and the 2300 days of Dan. viii, does not exist, the whole system is shaken to its foundation; if it does exist as we suppose, the system must stand."—Harmony of Prophetic Chronology, p. 38. From these extracts it will be seen how serious a departure from the "original Advent faith," is this denial of the Herald's, and of how grave a character. It is taking the position of the opponents of the Advent faith; it is ignoring the "grand principle involved in the interpretation of the 2300 days;" it is yielding a point by which "the whole system is shaken to its foundation." Thus has the Herald turned traitor to its first principles, and ignominiously abandoned the Gibraltar of the prophetic periods to the hands of the enemy. And yet, "We are the Adventists," is the presumptuous claim which it still puts forth. And what are the reasons for all this? Simply these: "We have no new light respecting the connection between the 70 weeks and the 2300 days. The only argument against their connection is the passing of the time. Why that has passed is a mystery to us, which we wait to have revealed."—Ad. Herald, Sept. 7th, 1850. Conclusive testimony to show the connection of the 70 weeks and 2300 days has in its place been offered; and we submit to the judgment of the reader if the reasons above alleged are sufficient to disprove it, or to justify so glaring a departure from just rules of interpretation. Even the seeming objection against their connection has been since 1844 thoroughly removed, as will in due time be noticed. Another class have attempted to re-adjust the reckoning of the days by assigning a later date for the seventy weeks. They took the commission of Nehemiah, in the twentieth of Artaxerxes, as the starting point, and gave it such a date as to make the whole period terminate in 1854. This was the basis of the recent excitement on time that has existed in some parts of the land. The merits of Nehemiah's commission have been already examined. We have seen that it will neither answer the import of the prophecy, nor harmonize with a single date. But 1854 has passed; and even allowing the 20th of Artaxerxes its proper date, B. C. 444, the 2300 days reckoned therefrom could only extend to 1857, which is also passed. That theory therefore has fallen; and those who have rested upon it have been doomed to failure and disappointment which they might have avoided. And now that the utmost limit has passed to which the days can possibly be extenuated, we may hope that some will be willing to view the matter in its true light and admit that the mistake must lay, not in the original reckoning of the time, but in the event to occur at the end of the days. We have seen the desperate position adopted by the Herald on account of the passing of the time in 1844; we must call attention also to the position assumed by the Herald's Crisis, so far as we have been able to ascertain it, since the passing of the latter time. We had supposed that the majority of its supporters might as a last resort adopt the conclusion of the Herald, that the periods were not connected. How many of them privately entertain this view we cannot say; but we have not seen it publicly advocated: a prudent silence having for the most part85been maintained concerning the prophetic periods. The last that has come under our notice on the subject is an article from I. C. Wellcome, in the Crisis of Oct. 28, 1857, in which he says: "That those periods are intended to enlighten our minds and direct our faith in regard to the end of the gospel age, I fully believe. But not that we should so locate their commencement and terminus by historic events as to form a basis for full faith, such as we are required to have in the statements of the gospel. Gospel truths are clear and certain requiring our implicit confidence. But human calculations and historic applications, as connected with prophetic times (though important and useful when used modestly and carefully) may not demand such confidence." He then proceeds to throw out some suggestions in regard to the prophetic periods in the form of questions, as follows: "First. Is the definite year of Christ's advent clearly revealed in the Scriptures alone? "Second. Can all intelligent Christians understand the principle of prophetic reckoning and arguments by which to determine confidently and certainly at what point of time the periods end? "Third. Can all Christians accurately compute sacred chronology and definitely determine the age of the world? "Fourth. Are all Christians in circumstances which will permit them to gain access to historical and chronological works, and have capacity and time to study them and gain all the light which may be obtained by able and energetic students? "Fifth. Are children, young converts, and believers of small capacity required by the gospel to put full confidence in the declarations of more able men on prophetic times and historic research." The import of these questions none can fail to perceive. It is to throw an uncertainty over prophetic reckoning; to foster the idea that the periods cannot be understood; and hence to discourage their study, and take the edge from those great truths that are built upon them. It is akin to that popular idea, that much of the word of God is beyond our comprehension and cannot be understood; or, in other words, that revelation is not revelation; which is infidelity. Of what use is a prophetic period with both ends in the fog? For what were they given, if there is no definiteness to be attached to them? No; all Scripture is profitable; and those prophecies and periods of years which leads us down to scenes connected with the end, are within the easy comprehension of all "able and energetic students," of whom there are not a few, and they can bring them within the comprehension of every child. So it is with the 2300 days. With the data which the Bible gives, and the plain records of history, which are entitled to universal confidence, there need be no hesitation in the application. It is easy, natural, clear, harmonious and definite. There stands that great period in the past like a monument of truth; and no efforts have been able to shake its foundations or to overthrow its structure. Beware then of those who would endeavor to obscure or remove the ancient landmarks. It is a fearful thing to err from truth. If the light in you become darkness how great is that darkness. It is not strange, after all the wild work that has been made by those who have compassed themselves with sparks of their own kindling, that some should have but little confidence in anything. But truth is not responsible for all this, and it is none the less clear, and the prophetic periods are none the less definite and certain on this account. The idea that if the termination of the prophetic periods is known, the time of the second advent is also known, is a conclusion drawn without warrant; for there is no prophetic period that reaches to the coming of the Saviour as will be hereafter proved. But yet they do bring us to events which it is not safe to lose sight of. Perhaps some are ready to remind us here that we have not yet explained what did take place in 1844, nor accounted for the passing of the time. The patience of such we must request a little further, as, previous to that, there are other prophetic periods which we wish to notice and apply.