6. He adds, thirdly, “The first division of the seventy weeks is seven weeks of years, verse 25, the end whereof is. expressly cha- racterized by the setting up of a Messiah governor; which cannot be verified in the setting up of the first governor of the Jews after the
310 DANIEL’S PROPHECY VINDICATED. [EXERC. XIV.
*
captivity, much less of Christ; for Zerubbabel was set up in the beginning, and Christ long after the end of all. No other governor can be meant after the first, because the setting up of one pointeth at the first. Therefore, if the seven weeks end not in the setting up of Zerubbabel or Christ, as they cannot, then they cannot be verified in the material state of Jerusalem after the captivity of Babylon.” .
Ans. This exception fixeth on one of the greatest difficulties in the text, which yet is not such as to bear the weight of the i- ference that is here made from it; for the argument from the division of the time in the text is of this importance: ‘ Because it is said, that “from the going forth of the decree to build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall in troublous times;” therefore, if the seven weeks end not in the setting up of Zerubbabel or Christ, they cannot be verified in the material state of Jerusalem after the captivity.’ Now I see not the force of this argument; for the words may have another interpretation, and the separating of the seven weeks from the sixty-two, as all of them from the seventy before mentioned, excluding one out of the distri- bution, may be to another end than to denote either the setting up of Zerubbabel, which assuredly they did not, or the coming of Christ, which they extend not unto. In brief, they do not precisely assert that at the end of the seven weeks Messiah the Prince should be; for although they are distinguished from the other for some certain purpose not expressed, as to the determination of the time of the coming of the Messiah they are to be joined with the sixty-two weeks, as is expressly affirmed in the following words. Now, not to prevent myself, [anticipate,] in what is more largely afterwards to be insisted on, in the exposition of the several passages of this prophecy, after a full consideration of what sundry learned men have offered for the solving of this difficulty, I shall here briefly propose my apprehensions concerning it; which, I hope, the candid and judicious reader will find to answer the conduct of the context and design o the place.
7. First, I fix it here as unquestionable, that the whole space of seventy weeks doth precisely contain the time between the going forth of the decree and the unction of the most Holy, with his passion that ensued, some few years of the last week remaining not reckoned on, to keep the computation entire by weeks of years. This is so expressly affirmed, verse 24, that the interpretation of all that ensues is to be regulated thereby. And this as we shall after- wards prove, so here we take it for granted, as the hypothesis on which the present difficulty is to be solved. There is, then, a distri- bution of these seventy weeks into seven, sixty-two, and one, upon
SECT. 7, 8.] DANIEL’S PROPHECY VINDICATED. 311
es
the account of some remarkable events happening at the expira- tion of these several distinct parcels of the whole season. Verse 25, we have two portions of this time expressed, namely, seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks; and two events attending them,—Messiah the Prince, and the building of the street and wall: “ 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.” The two events here mentioned did ensue the two distinct parcels of time limited, but not in the order which the words at first view seem to represent, as is evident from the context: for as the Messiah did not come at the expiration of the seven weeks, so the sixty-two weeks were not expired before the building of the city; nor is that mentioned as the event designed by the whole space of sixty-nine weeks, but as that which should fall out in some interval of it; for the prophecy issues not in the re- storation, but desolation of the city.
The angel, therefore, expresseth the distinct divisions of time, and the principal distinct events of them, but not the order of their accomplishment ; for the natural order of these things is, that in seven weeks the building of the city, wall, and street, should be finished, and in sixty-two weeks after the Messiah should be cut off. And this is evident from the text; for as the building of the city can no way be said to be after the sixty-two weeks, but in and after the seven, which was the season wherein the decree was exe- cuted, so the cutting off the Messiah is expressly said in the next verse to be after those sixty-two weeks, which succeeded unto the seven weeks wherein the restoration of the city was finished. And to suppose the Messiah in verse 25 not to be the same with the Messiah, verse 26, and the most Holy, verse 24, is to confound the whole order of the words, and to leave no certain sense in them. For the single remaining week, the use of it shall be afterwards declared. This distinction, therefore, of the several portions of the whole time limited doth rather confirm our application of this pro- phecy than any way impeach the truth or evidence of it.