(Dan. ix. 25.); sixty-two weeks, or four hundred and thirty-four years more, bring us to the public manifestation of the Messiah, at the beginning of John the Baptist's preaching; and one prophetic week or seven years, added to this, will bring us to the time of our Saviour's passion, or the thirty-third year of the Christian æra, - in all four hundred and ninety years, according to the prophecy. The latter part of the prediction (27.) relates to the subversion of the Jewish temple and polity, and the second coming of the Messiah.1

SECT. 4. contains Daniel's fourth and last prophetic vision, in the third year of the reign of Cyrus, in which he is informed of various particulars concerning the Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires, and the kingdom of the Messiah. (x.-xii.)

An introductory narrative states the occasion of the vision, viz. Daniel's fasting and supplication (probably on account of the obstruction of the building of the temple)2 and describes the glorious person who appeared to the prophet. (Dan. x. 1-21. xi. 1.) The prediction then describes the fate of the Persian empire (xi. 2.), whose fourth king, Xerxes, was attacked, and his empire destroyed, by Alexander (3.); the partition of his vast dominions into four kingdoms (4.); and the wars between the kingdoms of Egypt (which lay to the north of Judæa) and of Syria (which lay to the south of the Holy Land) are then foretold, together with the conquest of Macedon by the Romans. (5-36.) The prophecy then declares the tyranny of the papal Antichrist, which was to spring up under the Roman empire (36 -39.), and the invasion of the Saracens (from the south) and of the Turks (from the north) in the time of the end, or latter days of the Roman monarchy (40-45.) This prophetic vision concludes with foretelling the general resurrection (xii. 1—4.), and with announcing the time when all these great events were to have their final consummation, when the Jews were to be restored, Antichrist destroyed, the fulness of the Gentiles brought in, and the millennium, or reign of saints, was to begin. (5—13.) But the exact period, until PROVIDENCE shall open more of the seals,3 cannot be fully ascertained.

Upon the whole, we may observe with Bishop Newton,1 what an amazing prophecy is this, comprehending so many various events, and extending through so many successive ages, from the first establishment of the Persian empire, upwards of 530 years before Christ, to the general resurrection! What a proof of a Divine Providence, and of a Divine Revelation! for who could thus declare the things that shall be with their times and seasons, but He only who hath

1 Of this illustrious prophecy, which Sir Isaac Newton has justly pronounced to be the foundation of the Christian religion, Dr. Hales has given some chronological computations, slightly differing from the above. See his Analysis, vol ii. p. 559. et seq.

2 See Ezra iv. 4, 5.

3 The reader who is desirous of studying what has been written on this subject, is referred to the writings of Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, Mr. Faber, Mr. Frere, and Dr. Hales, who have collected a great variety of important information on the fulfilment of Daniel's prophecies.

4 Dissertations on Prophecy, vol. i. pp. 413, 414.

them in his power: whose dominion is over all, and whose kingdom endureth from generation to generation!

III. Of all the old prophets Daniel is the most distinct in the order of time, and easiest to be understood; and on this account, Sir Isaac Newton observes,1 in those events which concern the last times, he must be the interpreter of the rest. All his predictions relate to each other, as if they were several parts of one general prophecy. The first is the easiest to be understood, and every succeeding prophecy adds something to the former. Though his style is not so lofty and figurative as that of the other prophets, it is more suitable to his subject, being clear and concise; his narratives and descriptions are simple and natural; and, in short, he writes more like an historian than a prophet.

Of the genuineness and authenticity of the book of Daniel we have every possible evidence, both external and internal.

1. With regard to the external evidence, we have not only the general testimony of the whole Jewish church and nation, which have constantly received this book as canonical; but we have the particular testimony of Josephus, who (we have seen) commends Daniel as the greatest of prophets; of the Jewish Targums and Talmuds, which frequently quote and appeal to his authority; of JESUS CHRIST himself, who has cited his words, and has styled him "Daniel the prophet" (compare Dan. ix. 26, 27. with Matt. xxiv. 15. and Mark xiii. 14.); and likewise of the apostle Paul, who has frequently quoted or alluded to him (compare Dan. iii. 23-25. and vii. 22. with Heb. xi. 33, 34. and Dan. xi. 36. with 2 Thess. ii. 4.), as also of St. John, whose Revelation derives great light from being compared with the predictions of Daniel. To these testimonies we may add that of Ezekiel, a contemporary writer, who greatly extols his exemplary piety and singular wisdom (Ezek. xiv. 14. 20. xxviii. 3.), and also the testimony of antient profane historians, who relate many of the same transactions.2

2. The internal evidence is not less convincing: for the language, style, and manner of writing, are all perfectly agreeable to that age, and prove that it was written about the time of the Babylonish captivity. Part of the book, viz. from the fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the seventh chapter, was originally written in the Chaldee language, because that portion treats of the Chaldæan or Babylonish affairs: the rest of the book is pure Hebrew. But the most satisfactory evidence is the exact accomplishment of Daniel's prophecies, as well those which have been already fulfilled as those which are now fulfilling in the world. So clear and explicit indeed are his predictions concerning the advent of the Messiah, and other important events, of times far remote from those in which he lived, that Porphyry, a learned adversary of the Christian faith in the

1 On Daniel, p. 15.

? The most important of these testimonies are collected by the writers refer vl to in the preceding page.

3 Porphyry seems to have been the first who impugned the genuineness, d 25

VOL. IV.

third century, finding that Daniel's predictions concerning the several empires were so universally acknowledged to be fulfilled, that he could not disprove the fact of their accomplishment, — alleged against them that they must have been written after the events, to which they refer, had actually occurred. To him they appeared to be a narration of events that had already taken place, rather than a prediction of things future; such was the striking coincidence between the facts when accomplished, and the prophecies which foretold them. And he further affirmed that they were not composed by Daniel, whose name they bore, but by some person who lived in Judæa about the time of Antiochus Epiphanes; because all the prophecies to that time contained true history, but all beyond that period were manifestly false. But this method of opposing the prophecies, as Jerome has rightly observed, affords the strongest testimony to their truth for they were fulfilled with such exactness, that, to infidels, the prophet seemed not to have foretold things future, but to have related things past. With respect to the particular prophecy (Dan. xi.) relating to the kings of Syria and Egypt, which Porphyry affirmed was written after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, we may remark that the book of Daniel was translated into the Greek language one hundred years before he lived; and that very translation was in the hands of the Egyptians, who did not cherish any great kindness towards the Jews and their religion and those prophecies which foretold the successes of Alexander (Dan. viii. 5. xi. 3.) were shown to him by the Jews, in consequence of which he conferred upon them several privileges.

IV. In the Vulgate Latin edition of the Bible, as well as in Theodotion's Greek version, which was adopted by all the Greek churches in the East in lieu of the incorrect Septuagint translation above alluded to, there is added in the third chapter of Daniel, between the twenty-third and twenty-fourth verses, the song of the three children, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were cast into the fiery furnace; and, at the end of the book, the history of Susanna and the story of Bel and the Dragon are inserted as the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters. But these additions were never received into the canon of Holy Writ by the Jewish church; neither are they extant in the Hebrew or Chaldee languages, nor is there any evidence that they ever were so extant. The occurrence of Hebraisms in them proves nothing more than that they were written by a Hebrew in the Greek tongue, into which he transferred the idioms of his own language: and that they were thus originally written in Greek by some Hellenistic Jew, without having any higher source whence they could be derived, is evident from this circum

authority of Daniel's writings, in the twelfth of his fifteen books against the Christians. Dr. Lardner has collected such of his objections as are extant, together with Jerome's answers to them. Jewish and Heathen Testimonies, chap. xxxvii. (Works, vol. viii. pp. 185-204. 8vo.; or vol. iv. pp. 214-225. 4to.) Methodius, Eusebius, and Apollinarius, also wrote answers to Porphyry, which have long since perished.

1 Præf. ad Danielem, et Proœm. ad Comment. in Daniel.

stance, that, in the history of Susanna, Daniel, in his replies to the elders, alludes to the Greek names of the trees, under which, they said, the adultery charged upon Susanna was committed, which allusions cannot hold good in any other language. The church of Rome, however, allows these spurious additions to be of the same authority with the rest of the book of Daniel; and, by a decree of the fourth session of the council of Trent, has given them an equal place in the canonical Scriptures. But they were never recognised as part of the sacred volume by the antient fathers of the Christian church. Julius Africanus, Eusebius, and Apollinarius rejected these pieces, not only as being uncanonical, but also as fabulous: and Jerome, who has been followed by Erasmus and other modern writers, has given the history of Bel and the Dragon no better title than that of The Fables of Bel and the Dragon." And others, who have admitted them for instruction of manners, have nevertheless rejected them from the canonical Scriptures; in which conduct they have been followed by the Protestant churches, who exclude them from the canonical, and assign them to the apocryphal writings.2

SECTION V.

ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET OBADIAH.

I. Author and date.—II. Synopsis of its contents.

BEFORE CHRIST, 588-583.

I. THE time when this prophet flourished is wholly uncertain. Jerome, with the Jews, is of opinion that he was the same person who was governor of Ahab's house, and who hid and fed one hundred prophets whom Jezebel would have destroyed. Some other critics think that he was the Obadiah, whom Josiah constituted overseer of the works of the temple, mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxiv. 12. Dupin refers him to the time of Ahaz, in whose reign the Edomites, in conjunction with the Israelites, made war against the tribe of Judah; because his prophecy is almost wholly directed against the Edomites or Idumæans. Grotius, Huet, Dr. Lightfoot, and other

1 In the examination of the elders, when one of them said he saw the crime committed, vno oxivov, under a mastich-tree, Daniel is represented as answering, in allusion to σχίνον, « The angel of God hath received sentence of God, ΣΧΙΣΑΙ σε poor, to cut thee in two." And when the other elder said that it was uno pov, under a holm-tree, Daniel is made to answer, in allusion to the word "The angel of the Lord waiteth with the sword, ПIPIZAI os pecov, to cut thee in two." Jerome ut supra.

πρινον,

2 Dr. Prideaux's Connection, part i. book iii. sub anno 534. vol. i. pp. 164, 165. edit. 1720. Calmet's Dictionary, voce Daniel, and his Préface sur Daniel, Comm Litt. tom. vi. pp. 609-612. The fullest vindication of the genuineness and canonical authority of the prophecies of Daniel is to be found in Bishop Chandler's "Vindication of the Defence of Christianity, from the Prophecies of the Old Testament," and in Dr. Samuel Chandler's "Vindication of the Antiquity and Au thority of Daniel's Prophecies," both published at London in 1728, in 8vo.

commentators, however, make him to be contemporary with Hosea, Joel, and Amos, agreeably to the rule of the Jewish writers, viz. that, where the time of the prophet is not expressed, his predictions are to be placed in the same chronological order as the prophecy immediately preceding. Archbishop Newcome, with great probability, supposes that Obadiah prophesied between the taking of Jerusalem (which happened in the year 587 before Christ) and the destruction of Idumæa by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place a very few years after. Consequently he was partly contemporary with Jeremiah one of whose predictions includes the greater part of Obadiah's book. (Compare Obad. 1-9. with Jer. xlix. 14, 15, 16. 7. 9, 10.) His writings, which consist of only one chapter, are composed with much beauty, and unfold a very interesting scene of prophecy.

II. The prophecy of Obadiah consists of two parts; viz. PART I. is minatory, and denounces the destruction of Edom for their pride and carnal security (1-9.), and for their cruel insults and enmity to the Jews, after the capture of their city. (10-16.) This prediction, according to Archbishop Usher, was fulfilled, about five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, by the Babylonians subduing and expelling them from Arabia Petræa, of which they never afterwards recovered possession.

PART II. is consolatory, and foretels the restoration of the Jews (17.), their victory over their enemies, and their flourishing state in consequence. (18-21.)

Archbishop Newcome considers this prophecy as fulfilled by the conquests of the Maccabees over the Edomites. (See 1 Macc. v. 3-5. 65. &c.) There is no doubt that it was in part accomplished by the return from the Babylonian captivity; and by the victories of the Maccabean princes; but the prediction in the last verse will not receive its complete fulfilment until that time when "the kingdoms of the world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ." (Rev. xi. 15.)

SECTION VI.

ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL.

I. Author and date. -II. Canonical authority of the prophecies Ezekiel.III. Their scope.-IV. Analysis of them.-V. Observations on the style of Ezekiel.

BEFORE CHRIST, 595-536.

I. EZEKIEL, whose name imports the strength of God, was the son of Buzi, of the sacerdotal race, and one of the captives carried by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon, with Jehoiachin king of Judah: it does not appear that he had prophesied before he came into Mesopotamia. The principal scene of his predictions was some place