Page images
PDF
EPUB

DANIEL'S LAST VISION AND PROPHECY.

CONTENTS. The passage of Daniel's Last Prophecy, which is
the subject of illustration, begins with the 31st Verse of the xi.
Chapter, and extends to the end of the Book of Daniel.-Bishop
Newton's Account of the various opinions that have been held re-
garding it.-Brief statement of his Interpretation of it. That
Interpretation deserts the historical order of events;-Is inconsistent
with the view in which the passage is presented, by our Saviour's
express quotation of the prophet Daniel ;-And with some terms in
the passage itself.-Brief statement of the Interpretation of the pas-
sage now to be offered.—Translation of the passage and Criticism
vindicating the changes made in it from the common translation.

B

these several monarchs. So accurately do these events correspond with the predictions in this part of Daniel, that the infidel, Porphyry, could not evade the force of the argument, thence arising, for the Divine Inspiration of the prophecy, otherwise than by asserting that the prophecy was written after the events.

But, while commentators thus agree in their interpretations so far down in the prophecy, they differ greatly from each other respecting all that follows the thirtieth verse referred to. We shall well express their several agreements and differences in the language that Bishop Newton employs, when he has brought his own interpretations down to the point where the differences begin. "Thus far," says he, "the meaning and the completion of the prophecy is sufficiently clear and evident; there is more obscurity and difficulty in the part that remains to be considered. Thus far commentators are in the main agreed, and few or none have deviated much out of the common road: but hereafter they pursue so many different paths, that it is not always easy to know whom it is best and safest to follow. Some, as Porphyry among the ancients, and Grotius among the moderns, contend that the whole was literally accomplished in Antiochus Epiphanes. Others, as Jerome, and most of the Christian Fathers, consider Antiochus as a type of Antichrist; as, in the seventy-second Psalm, Solomon is exhibited as a type of Christ, and many things are said of the one, which are only applicable to the other. Some, again, understand what remains, partly of the tyranny of Antiochus, and partly of the great apostacy of the latter days, or the days of the Roman empire. Others, again, apply it wholly to

the invasion and tyranny of the Romans, the subsequent corruptions in the church, and alterations in the empire. There is no writer or commentator, whom we would choose to follow implicitly in all things; but in this we may agree with one, in that with another, and in some instances, perhaps, differ from all.”

This accomplished interpreter then proceeds to examine the interpretations, which, before his time, had been put on this part of Daniel, and endeavours to establish his own; which, in brief terms, is, that from the thirty-first to the thirty-fifth verse of the eleventh chapter, both inclusive, the prophecy refers to the power of the Romans, the destruction of Jerusalem by that people, and the extension, persecution, and corruptions of Christianity; that, from the thirty-sixth verse to the end of the chapter, it refers to the papal superstitions, and the wars of the Saracens and Turks; and that the beginning, at least, of the twelfth chapter refers to the general resurrection.

The interpretation of Bishop Newton has been very generally received as the right one, by succeeding writers, although some have differed from him; as for instance, the Rev. Edward Cooper, who, in a treatise on the subject of some prophecies, dedicated to the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, has referred the prophecy, at the thirty-sixth verse of the eleventh chapter of Daniel, to Napoleon Bonaparte.t

Bishop Newton's "Dissertations on the Prophecies" ;-Dissert.

XVII.

+ The Crisis. By the Rev. Edward Cooper. Lond. 1825.

« PreviousContinue »