The third marked use of this word again occurs in Egypt. The king tells the Israelites to offer to their god the sacrifices which they desired, without going
to the desert for that purpose. To this Moses ob- jects that they should have to sacrifice to the Lord uthe abomination (FiaSjift) of the Egyptians," who would thereby be highly exasperated against them (Exod. viii, 2G). A reference back to the first ex- planation shows that this "abomination" was the cow, the only animal which all the Egyptians agreed in holding sacred ; whereas, in the great sacrifice which the Hebrews proposed to hold, not only would heifers be offered, but the people would feast upon their flesh (see J. C. Dietric, Antiquiiates, p. 136). See Apis.
A fourth expression of marked import is the abom- ination of desolation (DpiJX! "jT!lp£J, Dan. xi, 31 ; Sept. f3£t\vypa rjQaviffpiivov, or ti'Z'CJ V!|pd , Dan. xii, 11 ; Sept. to (5Bt\vyua r//c kptipuictcnc, literally, filthiness of the desolation, or, rather, desolating Jilthi- ness), which, without doubt, means the idol or idola- trous apparatus which the desolater of Jerusalem should establish in the holy place (see Hitzig, in loc). This appears to have been (in its first application) a prediction of the pollution of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, who caused an idolatrous altar to be built on the altar of burnt offerings, whereon unclean things were offered to Jupiter Olympius, to whom the tem- ple itself was dedicated (see Hoffman, in loc). Jo- sephirs distinctly refers to this as the accomplishment of Daniel's prophecy ; as does the author of the first book of Maccabees, in declaring that " they set up the abomination of desolation (rb jiSiXvypa r//£ ip7jpdj- o-hoc) upon the altar" (1 Mace, i, 59; vi, 7; 2 Mace, vi, 2-5 ; Joseph. Ant. xii, 5, 4 ; xii, 7, G). The phrase is quoted by Jesus in the same form (Matt, xxiv, 15), and is applied by him to what was to take place at the advance of the Romans against Jerusalem. They who saw "the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place" were enjoined to " flee to the mountains." This may with probability be referred to the ad- vance of the Roman army against the city with their image-crowned standards, to which idolatrous honors were paid, and which the Jews regarded as idols. 'The unexpected retreat and discomfiture of the Roman forces afforded such as were mindful of our Saviour's prophecy an opportunity of obeying the injunction which it contained. That the Jews themselves re- garded the Roman standards as abominations is shown by the fact that, in deference to their known aversion, the Roman soldiers quartered in Jerusalem forbore to
Ancient Roman Standard?.
ABOMINATION
26
ABOMINATION
introduce their standards into the city; and on one occasion, when Pilate gave orders that they should be carried in by night, so much stir was made in the matter by the principal inhabitants that, for the sake of peace, the governor was eventually induced to give up the point (Joseph. Ant. xviii, 3, 1). Those, how- ever, who suppose that "the holy place" of the text must be the temple itself, may find the accomplish- ment of the prediction in the fact that, when the city had been taken by the Romans and the holy house destroyed, the soldiers brought their standards in due form to the temple, set them up over the eastern gate, and offered sacrifice to them (Joseph. War, vi, 6, 1) ; for (as Havercamp notes from Tertullian, Apul. c. xvi, 1G2) "almost the entire religion of the Roman camp consisted in worshipping the ensigns, swearing by the ensigns, and in preferring the ensigns before all the other gods." Nor was this the last appearance of " the abomination of desolation in the holy place ;" for not onty did Hadrian, with studied insult to the Jews, set up the figure of a boar over the Bethlehem gate of the city (MUsl Capitolina) which rose upon the site and ruins of Jerusalem (Euseb. Chn,n. 1. i, p. 45, ed. 1G58), but he erected a temple to Jupiter upon the site of the Jewish temple (Dion Cass, lxix, ■12), and caused an image of himself to be set up in the part which answered to the most holy place (Nicephorus Callist. iii, 24). This was a consum- mation of all the abominations which the iniquities of the Jews brought upon their holy place (see Auberlen, Dan' el and the Revelation, p. 161 sq.). — Kitto, s. v. See Jerusalem.
In Dan. ix, 27, the phrase is somewhat different and peculiar: dB\37a C1^™'^ T33 bv"\, which (as point- ed in the text) must be rendered, And upon the wing of filthinesses that desolates, or {there shall be) a desola- ter; but the Sept. has t-l to ispov ficeXvypa twv iprjpdjo-ewv (v. r. rijc tpi]/.tw(re<x)c) tcTai, Vulg. et erit in 1< mplo abominntio desolationis ; a sense that is fol- lowed by Christ in his allusion (Matt, xxiv, 15), and which may be attained by a slight change of pointing (7*3 in the "absolute"), and so rendering, "And upon the wing (of the sacred edifice there shall be) jilthinesses, even a desolater." Eosenmuller (Scholia in Vet. Test, in loc.) understands the "wing" (~32) to signify the hostile army or battalion detached for that purpose (a sense corresponding to the Latin aid), at the head of which the proud Gentile general should enter the city. Stuart, on the other hand (Commen- tary on Daniel, in loc), likewise interpreting the whole passage as denoting exclusively the pollution of the temple caused by Antiochus, translates the verse in question thus, " And over the winged-fowl of abomi- nations shall be a waster," and applies the " wing" (?23, i. q. "fowl," in our version "overspreading") to a "statue of Jupiter Olympius erected in the temple ; and this statue, as is well known, usually stood over an eagle at its feet with wide-spread wings." Both these interpretations, however, appear too fanciful. It U preferable to render T32, with Gesenius (Thesaur. lleb. p. 698), Furst (/A//. Handw. s. v.), and the mar- ginal translation, a battlement, i. c. of the temple, like irrepvyiov, in Matt. iv. 5; both words meaning literal- ly a wing, and applied in each case to a corner or sum- mit of the wall inclosing the temple. Neither can we so easily dispose of our Saviour's reference to this prophecy, since he speaks of it as about to be fulfilled in tli.- destruction of Jerusalem. It appears to tally completely with that event in all its particulars, and to have had at most but a primary and typical fulfil- ment in the case of Antiochus (q. v.). (For the dates involved in this coincidence, see the Meth. Q/:ar. Re- view, July, 1850, p. 494 sq.) See Seventy Weeks. The distinction attempted by some (Alford and Ols- hausen, in loc.) between the events referred to in