Confusion on the Prophetic Periods.
WHEN the plain path of truth is left, it is no wonder that men should be ready to enter into any by-path upon which they may chance to stumble. When they turn their backs to the light, it is no wonder that they should grope their way along like blind men. When they let go the anchor, it is no wonder that they should drift in every direction on the trackless ocean. Such seems to be the position of many professed Adventists respecting the prophetic periods, especially the 2300 days. The great anchor on this period is the position established by Adventists in 1844, that the period is 2300 years in length, commenced B. C. 457, and ended in 1844. The evidence which goes to establish this, compared with that for any other position, has been admitted by one of our ablest opponents, to be like the sun compared with a rush light. But here is the great dilemma under which they labor. Adhering with what seems to us like a blind tenacity to the view that the Lord must come at the end of the 2300 days, as the Lord has not yet come, it must somehow be made to appear that the 2300 days have not yet ended. So anything that seems to afford proof in this direction, even if no more than a "rush light," is eagerly received. The latest effort to "prolong the days" that has come under our notice, is the claim put forth by W. H. Hacking, in the Millennial Harbinger of December 16, 1863, that it should read 2400 days instead of 2300 days. Concerning the commencement of this period he says: "We must therefore date the commencement of the vision as far back as B. C. 536, or else have no vision of the ram with two horns." Another little piece of numerical legerdemain is visible in his efforts to make the period, with this starting point, extend to 1866, thus: "B. C. 536 is only 535 whole years; so 1866 only makes the cardinal number 1865, added together make 2400." This speaks for itself. As to his commencement, however, we inquire, Does not the ram with two horns represent the Medo-Persian empire during its whole existence? The two horns do not represent Cyrus and Darius personally, but the two elements of the nation, Medes and Persians. Hence there is no cause for going back to the first, second or third year of the existence of that empire for the commencement of the prophetic period which covers this field of vision; and, indeed, the prophet guards us against this misapprehension, by introducing the ram in the height of his power, and pushing his conquests westward, northward and southward. But we wish to inquire more especially concerning the reading of 2400 instead of 2300 days. He offers no other authority for this than the Septuagint. That the Septuagint reads thus, we do not deny. But, to say nothing of his unfortunate attempt at quoting the Greek, in which, in a quotation of twelve words, there are no less than seven glaring errors, we are prepared to show that this reading is simply a misprint which has crept into the common edition of the Septuagint in this country. The Septuagint is a translation from the original Hebrew into Greek. Our common English version is a translation from the same Hebrew into English. One translation reads 2400, the other 2300. It will be at once seen that this difference in the translations can be authoritatively settled by simply appealing to the original from which they were both taken; and it is a fact that all the Hebrew manuscripts read 2300, not 2400. This is alone sufficient to convict the Septuagint of error here. But we have still more definite testimony. The whole question is well set forth in the following from Litch's Prophetic Exposition, vol. i, pp. 115, 116: It has been sometimes urged, as a reason why we cannot depend on the calculation of this period, that there are various readings, and it is uncertain which is the correct one. The reading of all the Hebrew manuscripts is 2300. The Septuagint, or Greek version, is 2400. The Latin of Jerome, 2200. The Hebrew copies being the eldest, and all the copies agreeing in the reading, it is but a reasonable conclusion that it is the correct reading. As for the reading of Jerome, there are few who place any confidence in it. On the reading of the Septuagint, I beg leave to introduce the following extract from "Begg's Connected View," p. 3: "It is in mercy to His people, although it will end to the condemnation of the wicked, that God has given such clear and determinate intimation of the 'things that are to come hereafter;' and any attempt to throw unnecessary doubt upon the certainty of the 'times' revealed, calls for severe reprehension. To this charge there is reason to fear the Examinator of Mr. Irving's Opinions, in the Edinburgh Christian Instructor for 1828, (p. 476,) has exposed himself, when, in order to strengthen his argument for the impossibility of determining the commencement of 'the mighty year of God's glory,' he fixes upon the misprint of one of the dates in our version of the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. 'In regard to the long period of Daniel,' there is, in reality, no reason for its being 'disputed, whether we should read, with the Hebrew, 2300, or with the Septuagint, 2400 years.' Although all our common editions of the Septuagint have this typographical error, being printed from an edition into which it had crept, yet the manuscript in the Vatican, from which that very edition was printed, has 2300, and not 2400. And of all the principal standard editions of the Septuagint, that alone from which ours are taken has this error. Let not, then, the carelessness of men be charged upon the Most High, nor the errors of copyists on the Spirit of inspiration. For a full statement on this subject, see 'The Scheme of Prophetic Arrangement of the Rev. Edward Irving and Mr. Frere critically examined by William Cunninghame, Esq., of Lainshaw." Thus, in addition to the fact that all the Hebrew manuscripts read 2300, we have the still more decisive fact that the very manuscript in the Vatican from which the common edition of the Septuagint was printed, reads 2300 instead of 2400, as printed in that edition. Hence that reading is a mere typographical error, a misprint; and on this foundation our friend would fain erect a theory. We cannot, therefore, allow him the benefit of that extra hundred years, with which he would be glad to stretch out the 2300 days. He must fall back within the original limits; and when he has puzzled his brain sufficiently in trying to make an application, we hope he will deign, before abandoning it entirely, to examine it in the light of the sanctuary, which is the true, as it is the only, key to the solution of this question.