Imágenes de páginas

sider the common translation much more correct than the Septuagint, or the Arabic and Vulgate versions. The original words are yan01110) which must mean “ the vision of the daily sacrifice;" à construction which the very words demand, for the Septuagint, &c. could not be correct, unless there was a 1 placed before 7987, the English of which would then be, How long shall be the vision and the daily sacrifice, &c. But the tautology evident in the Septuagint, Arabic, and Vulgate versions of this passage is a proof that they do not contain the sense of the Hebrew text; for the daily sacrifice, and the casting down of the sanctuary, certainly formed part of Daniel's vision; and, consequently, in the first clause, “ How long shall the vision last?” must be contained all that can be implied in the latter part of the interrogation. In the Hebrew what is translated 2300 days is literally 2300 evenings and mornings ; * but as the evening and morning is “ in Hebrew the notation of time for a day,” I think 2300 + days must be meant,

ער ערב בקר אלפים So I would translate the Hebrew words *

[ocr errors]

mira wbwr: which is literally two thousand and three hundred evening-morning, the Hebrew numeral words being joined with nouns in the singular number. These words are also in the singular number in the 26th verse, where it is said by the angel, that “ the vision of the evening and the morning, which was told, is true.”

+ Several copies of the Septuagint read 2400 days (í lepas Stoxinsai nai tempaxácia.;) but this reading is evidently spuriousg

. which signify as many years,* according to the mode of interpretation already adopted in the explanation of the 1260 days of the Woman's residence in the wilderness, and of the forty-two months of the Beast's continuance. From this it follows that the vision of the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot, must continue 2300 years. If this be a correct view of the prophecy, it is, hence, evident that the commencement of the 2300 days cannot be só early as the time of the vision, as more than these years have already elapsed since the third year of the reign of Belshazzar. There is also considerable evidence in the supposition that the 2300 years did not commence before the time of Alexander the Great; for in the account of the ram with two horns there is nothing


as several of the best and oldest manuscripts of the Septuagint have τριακόσιαι instead of τετρακόσιαι. One of the manuscripts alluded to is the Codex Alexandrinus, supposed to have been written so early as the fourth or fifth century. In the Complutensian Polyglott printed at Alcala in 1517, and in the Antwerp Polyglott printed in 1570, it is tpaxácian. Theodoret, who flourished in the fourth century, read so in his copy of the Septuagint. The various reading of 2200 days, which Jerome says ex. isted in some manuscripts in his time, merits no attention as only two of these manuscripts have come down to us. There is no various reading of this passage in the Hebrew text, which appears to me decisive in favour of the common reading.

* See Bishop Newton's Dissertation on the Prophecies in loc.

spoken respecting the daily sacrifice, or the trans; gression of desolation : but in the vision of the hegoat all these things are mentioned; it would, therefore, appear that the commencement of the 2300 days cannot be before Alexander's reign: and as the first sight Daniel had of the he-goat was in its coming from the west to attack the ram with two, horns, it is not improbable that the year in which Alexander invaded Persia was the commencement.. This was about B. C, 334;* and consequently the 2300 years will end some time in the last half of the twentieth century. That the commencement of the 2300 years is to be. dated in the time of Alexander may be gathered from the circumstance that Daniel saw the little horn springing up out of one of the four horns of the goat; from which it appears that the length of the vision of the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot, will comprise at least the time allotted to both the Greek and Othman empires. But as the prophecy is not yet fully accomplished, it would not be safe nor prudent to speak positively concerning the exact time of its entire fulfilment; I, therefore, conclude with Bishop Newton, that “when these years shall be expired, then their end will clearly shew whence their be is to be dated.”

* This is one of the three epochs which Bishop Newton sup: posed might be the commencement of the days mentioned above, See his Dissert. in loc.

The angel concludes his interpretation of the vision of the ram and he-goat with saying, “ And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision, for it shall be for many days.” “ The shutting up of the vision,” as Bishop Newton very properly observes, “implies that it should not be understood of some time; and we cannot say that it was suffi. ciently understood so long as Antiochus Epiphanes was taken for the little horn. The vision being for many days must necessarily infer a longer term than the calamity under Antiochus of three years and a half, or even than the whole time from the first beginning of the vision in Cyrus to the cleans. ing of the sanctuary under Antiochus, which was not above 371 years. Such a vision could not well be called long to Daniel, who had seen so much longer before ; * and especially as the time assigned for it is two thousand and three hundred days; which, since they cannot by any account be natural days, † must needs be prophetic days, or two

* See Dan. vii.

+ Bishop Newton has very ably refuted the general opinion that the 2300 days refer to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes as follows: 6 These two thousand and three hundred days can by no computation be accommodated to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, even though the days be taken for natural days. Two thousand and three hundred days are six years and somewhat more than a quarter: but the profanation of the altar under Antiochus lasted but three years complete, according to the author of the first book of the Maccabees; i. 59. compared with iv. 52. and the desolation of the temple, and the taking away of

thousand and three hundred years. Such a vision may properly enough be said to be FOR MANY DAYS.".'

the daily sacrifice by Apollonius, continued but three years and a half, according to Josephus. Mr. Mede proposeth a method to reconcile the difference, and saith that the time is not to be reckoned from the height of the calamity, when the daily sacrifice should be taken away, (from thence it is but three years, but from the beginning of the transgression, which occasioned this desolation, and is described 1 Macc. i. 11, &c.' But Antiochus began to reign, according to the author of the first book of the Maccabees, i. 10. in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks, or æra of the Seleucidæ ; and in those days was the beginning of the transgression, which is described 1 Macc. i. 11, &c. that is ten or eleven years before the cleansing of the sanctuary, which was performed in the 148th year according to the same author, iv. 52. Or if we compute the time from Antiochus's first going up against Jerusalem, and spoiling the city and temple, these things were done, according to the same author, iv. 20. in the 143d year; so that this reckoning would fall short of the time assigned, as the other exceeds it.”?

« AnteriorContinuar »