The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 46

(7) And ye did not hearken unto me. (8) Syria Rnd Palostino, the IRst vcree we hnve Therefore thus Paith the Lord, beoanse ye quoted mther implies t.hRt they had. The have not believed my ""ords, (9) behold, I Rrgument is this : The prophets fore-told. nm sending. and I wi II take' a race (1ra.-p10.v) this dcsol9.tion of Judo.h whioh had just from the north, nnd I will bring thC'm oocurred, Rnd now Joreminh foretells ilmt agatnet this land, nnd ngainet the inhabit- seventy years from this dnto would ho tho nnt• thereof, and against nil the nations overthrow of IltLbylon. As tho former hiLd round nbout it, and I will make them proved truo, so they might be confident deeolnte. nnd l will give them for an this new prophecy woulcl prove truo nlso. astoniehmont (11, vnnishing away, a'f>a.- There remRins now Jer. xlvi. 2. 'fhoro v1<rµh), Rnd an hiSBing, Rnd for perpetual is nothing in the Septungint corresponding reproach. (HJ) And l will destroy from to Jer. xlvi. 1. The opening verso of the them voice or joy, nnd voioe of gladness, twenty-sixth chapter, which corresponds to ,·oicc of bridegroom, nod voice of bride, the forty-sixth of the Massoretio, rcnlly ho- eceut of myrrh, and light of lamp. (11) longs to the end of the previous chnpter. And all U.te land shn.11 be for ostouishment The prophecy hero hegins Rhruptly, ns (a,i>avi<rµlw); and they ehall be slavce Rmong that in the forty-eighth chapter, "Rgo.inst, the nal.ions seventy ~·ears. (12) And when Egypt," and the date at the end of the the Be,•uuty years are fulfilled, I will judge Yerse does not npply to the hnttle, but to that nation, and set them for nn evcrlasling the time when the prophecy wns given. u.stnni~hmenl (a<f>a.v,..-µbv). (13) And l will It is not necessarily a prophecy in the hring upon that land all the words which sense of foretelling what was yet to take I spake concerning it, all the things written pbce. Jeremiah was against the Egyptian. in this hook." alliance, Rnd this shout of exultation over The reader will observe that the clause the overthrow of Pho.raoh-Necho, who had declaring the eynchronism between the slain Josiah, the darling of the prophets, til'llt year of Nebuchadnezzar and the fourl.h was recorded to prevent any further coquet- of JchoiR1.-im, is not given. Had the ting with Egypt. We would observe, too, clause in question been in any way one that the clause ooutaining the dnte might tllat supported the o.nthenticity of Daniel, be omitted without spoiling the sense of we are sure such a diligent student as Pro- the passage, and as 11.ll critics know this i1 fcBSor Ilemn would not have failed to a canon applied to such passages in Amos obser,·c the fact tho.t it wa.s not in the and Hose!!. a.s imply a recognition that 8eptuo.gint, and declo.re tho.t it made it of worship in the Israelitish high places was doubtful o.uthenticity. He, no doubt, re- not cunsidered true worship, we will not calls that this is the argument by which press this canon, but we will rather investi- the last clause of I Sam. ii. 22 is ruled out gate the ohrooology from other authorities. of coun, when any one wonld bring it for- First let ns look o.t the prophecy of ward to prove the existence of the taber- Jeremiah, that seventy years after the Cap- nacle during the youth of Samuel and the tivity the Lord would judge Babylon (Jer. pontillcate of Eli. We will not impeach xxv. 12). The capture of Jerusalem took his honesty, nor say that he fails to notify place, according to M. Oppert (' Solomon et h ii, readers of the fact of the non-occurrence ses Success.,' p. 98), in the year B.o. 587. of the clo.use in the Septuagint "to con- The same authority (Zeit8chrift fur .A.8- ceal its untrustworthiness." If there were syriologie, Mai, 1693) places the capture of not a suspicion that the omission of the l:labylon B.c. 539, that is to say, forty-eight words witl,in square brackets is due to years after. This differ,;,noe between seventy homoiolcl,uto11, which somewhat invalidates years and forty-eigbt years is too great to the testimony of the Frederico-Augustan be put down merely to the use of round Codex, we might be inclined to maintain numbers, and it certainly would hRve been that uot even WIL8 the yea.r of Jehoiakim liable to be modified had there not been an i;iven in this p1ophecy. The reader will earlier date from which to start. Professor further observe that in the whole section Bevan tiLkes the captivity of Jehoiachin, there is not a word of Babyloninns, or Chal- placed by Oppert at B.C. 598, and by himself clcans, or N ebuchaduezzar. Moreover, the at n.o. 599, as the stnrtiug-point, without passage purports to give a summary of the assigning any reason. According to the messages of all the prophets that for twenty- one date it was only sixty, e.ocording to three years had heen warning Judah and the other only fifty-nine, not seventy yoo.ra J erll8alcm. That being the ca.se, it is not ·after, that Babyloo. was taken. The differ- wonderful that there is no reference to the ence is still too great. If wo take the o.ppearanee of the Babylonians and Nebu- date given by Daniel to be correct, that ci,li<lnezzar the pre,':ious year. Bo far from Nebucho.dnezzar came to Jerusalem one th" publication of this summary implying year before his accession-the third yeBr LL.iL th~ l.Sabylou.ie.n.s had oot yet Rppcarcd io. of Jehoiakim-and then received the sub- on. r. 1-21.] 'l'frn BOOK OF DANIEL. 5