3808 DANIEL’S PROPHECY VINDICATED. [EXERC. XIV.
of them the computation is to take its date and beginning. And yet, as, notwithstanding this difficulty, never any man doubted but that the years mentioned contained the time of Abraham and his pos- terity’s being in Egypt, so no more, notwithstanding the difficulties and difference pleaded about the computation of these weeks of Daniel, did ever any doubt but that the time limited in them was that allotted unto the Judaical church and state until the coming of the Messiah. The like difference there is amongst learned men about the beginning and ending of the seventy years in Jeremiah allotted unto the Babylonish captivity; and that because the people were carried captive at three different times by the Babylonians.
There is therefore, indeed, no weight in this exception, which is taken merely from the weakness and imbecility of the minds of men not able to make a perfect judgment concerning some particu- lars in this divine account; which, as we shall afterwards manifest, is of no great importance as to the principal, yea only, end of the prediction itself, whether we can do so or no, But yet that this difficulty is not so “ inextricable” as is pretended, but as capable of a fair solution as any computation of time so far past and gone, we shall, I hope, sufficiently evidence in the account that shall be sub- joined unto our exposition and vindication of the prophecy itself.
4, From this general consideration the learned author proceeds to give five particular reasons te prove his opinion, which we shall examine in their order; and the first is as followeth:— '
“ Because,” saith he, “in no place of the New Testament is this pro- phecy used against the Jews to prove the Messiah already come.”
Ans. Might this reason be allowed as cogent, it would disarm - the Christian church of the principal testimonies which in the Old Testament it hath always rested in to prove that the Messiah is long since come, and that Jesus of Nazareth is he; for as any of that nature are sparingly recorded in the writings of the gospel, so of the most evident and illustrious unto that purpose there is no mention at all therein. And it is most evident, that, as well in dealing with the Jews as in his instruction of his own disciples, the Lord Jesus made use of innumerable other testimonies than what are recorded in the books of the New Testament. So also did his apostles and other primitive teachers of the gospel. Hence are they said to prove Jesus to be the Christ out of Moses and the prophets, and he to have instructed his disciples out of Moses and all the prophets in the things concerning himself; and yet the particular places whereby the one and other were performed are not recorded,
Besides, this reason laboureth under another unhappiness, which is, that it is grounded upon a mistake; for indeed this prophecy is expressly made use of in the New Testament to denote the time by us allotted unto it, and that by our Lord Jesus Christ himself. For,
SECT. 4-6.] DANIEL’S PROPHECY VINDICATED. 3809
*
Matt. xxiv. 15, 16, speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem, which, according unto this prediction, was immediately to succeed upon his coming and suffering, he says unto his disciples, “ When ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand,) then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains.” That which here is called BdAvywa rijs épnudoews, or réiv Epnudoewy,—as the words of the evangelist are inserted into the version of the LXX. in this place,—is, D1M1D DAP 23 oy , “the desolator” (or “ waster”) “over a wing of abominations;” that is, as Luke interpreteth the words, “an army compassing Jerusalem. unto the desolation thereof,” chap. xxi. 20. Wherefore, our Saviour expressly applying this prophecy of Daniel to the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the consequent of his passion, plainly declares that in his suffering, and the de- solation that ensued on the Jews, this whole prediction and limi- tation of time is fulfilled, and ought not to be sought after in any other season of the church. And this is abundantly sufficient, not only to render the foregoing reason utterly useless, but also to super- sede all the following considerations and arguments, as those which contend directly against the interpretation of this prophecy given us by the Lord Christ himself. But yet, having made this entrance, we shall examine also. the ensuing reasons in their order,
5. It is added, therefore, secondly, “ If the restoration of the city, verse 25, is of the material Jerusalem after Nebuchadnezzar’s cap- tivity, it must begin in the first year of Cyrus, from which time seventy weeks of years will fully expire long before the birth of Christ.”
Ans. There are sundry learned men who despair not to make good the computation from. the first of Cyrus, whose arguments it will not be so easy to overthrow as to make their failure in chrono- logy to be the foundation of so great an inference as that here pro- posed, namely, that the coming of the Messiah is not intended in this prophecy. But we shall afterwards prove that there is not only no necessity that the decree mentioned for the restoration of Jerusalem, verse 25, should be thought to be that made in the first year of Oyrus, [but] that indeed it is impossible that any such deeree should be intended, seeing no such was made by him, but only one about the re-edifying of the temple, which here [there] is no respect unto. Another decree, therefore, express to what the angel here affirmeth, we shall discover, from whence unto the suffer- ings of Christ the seventy weeks are an exact measure of time,