CHAPTER X.
FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHECY
"THE secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but
those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children."
(Deuteronomy 29:29) And among the "things which are revealed" fulfilled
prophecy has a foremost place. In presence of the events in which it has been
accomplished, its meaning lies upon the surface. Let the facts of the Passion be
admitted, and their relation to the twenty-second Psalm is indisputable. There
are profound depths of spiritual significance in the Psalmist's words, because
of the nature of the facts which have fulfilled them; but the testimony which
the prophecy affords is addressed to all, and he who runs may read it. Is it
possible then, it may be asked, that the true interpretation of this prophecy of
the Seventy Weeks involves so much inquiry and discussion?
Such an objection is perfectly legitimate; but the answer to it will be found in
distinguishing between the difficulties which appear in the prophecy itself, and
those which depend entirely on the controversy to which it has given rise. The
writings of Daniel have been more the object of hostile criticism than any other
portion of the Scripture, and the closing verses of the ninth chapter have
always been a principal point of attack. And necessarily so, for if that single
passage can be proved to be a prophecy, it establishes the character of the book
as a Divine revelation. Daniel's visions admittedly describe historical events
between the days of Nebuchadnezzar and of Antiochus Epiphanes; therefore
skepticism assumes that the writer lived in Maccabean times. But this
assumption, put forward without even a decent pretense of proof, is utterly
refuted by pointing to a portion of the prophecy fulfilled at a later date; and
accordingly it is of vital moment to the skeptic to discredit the prediction of
the Seventy Weeks.
The prophecy has suffered nothing from the attacks of its assailants, but much
at the hands of its friends. No elaborate argument would be necessary to
elucidate its meaning, were it not for the difficulties raised by Christian
expositors. If everything that Christian writers have written on the subject
could be wiped out and forgotten, the fulfillment of the vision, so far as it
has been in fact fulfilled, would be clear upon the open page of history. Out of
deference to these writers, and also in the hope of removing prejudices which
are fatal to the right understanding of the subject, these difficulties have
here been discussed. It now remains only to recapitulate the conclusions which
have been recorded in the preceding pages.
The scepter of earthly power which was entrusted to the house of David, was
transferred to the Gentiles in the person of Nebuchadnezzar, to remain in
Gentile hands "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."
The blessings promised to Judah and Jerusalem were postponed till after a period
described as "seventy weeks"; and at the close of the sixty-ninth week of this
era the Messiah should be "cut off."
These seventy weeks represent seventy times seven prophetic years of 360 days,
to be reckoned from the issuing of an edict for the rebuilding of the city —
"the street and rampart," of Jerusalem.
The edict in question was the decree issued by Artaxerxes Longitmanus in the
twentieth year of his reign, authorizing Nehemiah to rebuild the fortifications
of Jerusalem.
The date of Artaxerxes's reign can be definitely ascertained — not from
elaborate disquisitions by biblical commentators and prophetic writers, but by
the united voice of secular historians and chronologers.
The statement of St. Luke is explicit and unequivocal, that our Lord's public
ministry began in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar. It is equally clear
that it began shortly before the Passover, The date of it can thus be fixed as
between August A.D. 28 and April A.D. 29. The Passover of the crucifixion
therefore was in A.D. 32, when Christ was betrayed on the night of the Paschal
Supper, and put to death on the day of the Paschal Feast.
If then the foregoing conclusions be well founded. we should expect to find that
the period intervening between the edict of Artaxerxes and the Passion was 483
prophetic years. And accuracy as absolute as the nature of the case permits is
no more than men are here entitled to demand. There can be no loose reckoning in
a Divine chronology; and if God has; deigned to mark on human calendars the
fulfillment of His purposes as foretold in prophecy, the strictest: scrutiny
shall fail to detect miscalculation or mistake.
The Persian edict which restored the autonomy of Judah was issued in the Jewish
month of Nisan. It may in fact have been dated the 1st of Nisan, but: no
other day being named, the prophetic period must be reckoned, according to a
practice common with the Jews, from the Jewish New Year's Day.
[1]
The seventy weeks are therefore to be computed from the 1st of Nisan B.C.
445. [2]
Now the great characteristic of the Jewish sacred year has remained
unchanged ever since the memorable night when the equinoctial moon beamed down
upon the huts of Israel in Egypt, bloodstained by the Paschal sacrifice; and
there is neither doubt nor difficulty in fixing within narrow limits the Julian
date of the 1st of Nisan in any year whatever. In B.C.. 445 the new moon by
which the Passover was regulated was on the 13th of March at 7h. 9m. A. M.
[3]
And accordingly the 1st Nisan may be assigned to the 14th March.
But the language of the prophecy is clear: "From the going forth of the
commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince
shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks." An era therefore of
sixty-nine "weeks," or 483 prophetic years reckoned from the 14th March, B.C.
445, should close with some event to satisfy the words, "unto the Messiah the
Prince."
The date of the nativity could not possibly have been the termination of the
period, for then the sixty-nine weeks must have ended thirty-three years before
Messiah's death.
If the beginning of His public ministry be fixed upon, difficulties of another
kind present themselves. When the Lord began to preach, the kingdom was not
presented as a fact accomplished in His advent, but as a hope the realization of
which, though at the very door, was still to be fulfilled. He took up the
Baptist's testimony, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." His ministry was
a preparation for the kingdom, leading up to the time when in fulfillment of the
prophetic Scriptures He should publicly declare Himself as the Son of David, the
King of Israel, and claim the homage of the nation. It was the nation's guilt
that the cross and not the throne was the climax of His life on earth.
No student of the Gospel narrative can fail to see that the Lord's last visit to
Jerusalem was not only in fact, but in the purpose of it, the crisis of His
ministry, the goal towards which it had been directed. After the first tokens
had been given that the nation would reject His Messianic claims, He had shunned
all public recognition of them. But now the twofold testimony of His words and
His works had been fully rendered, and His entry into the Holy City was to
proclaim His Messiahship and to receive His doom. Again and again His apostles
even had been charged that they should not make Him known. But now He accepted
the acclamations of "the whole multitude of the disciples," and silenced the
remonstrance of the Pharisees with the indignant rebuke, "I tell you if these
should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out." (Luke 19:39, 40)
The full significance of the words which follow in the Gospel of St. Luke is
concealed by a slight interpolation in the text. As the shouts broke forth from
His disciples, "Hosanna to the Son of David! blessed is the king of Israel that
cometh in the name of the Lord!" He looked off toward the Holy City and
exclaimed, "If thou also hadst known, even on this day, the things
which belong to thy peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes!"
[4]
The time of Jerusalem's visitation had come, and she knew it not. Long
ere then the nation had rejected Him, but this was the predestined day when
their choice must be irrevocable, — the day so distinctly signalized in
Scripture as the fulfillment of Zechariah's prophecy,
"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! behold
thy King cometh unto thee!" (Zechariah 9:9) Of all the days of the
ministry of Christ on earth, no other will satisfy so well the angel's words,
unto Messiah the Prince."
And the date of it can be ascertained. In accordance with the Jewish custom, the
Lord went up to Jerusalem upon the 8th Nisan, "six days before the Passover."
[5]
But as the 14th, on which the Paschal Supper was eaten, fell that year
upon a Thursday, the 8th was the preceding Friday. He must have spent the
Sabbath, therefore, at Bethany; and on the evening of the 9th, after the Sabbath
had ended, the Supper took place in Martha's house. Upon the following day, the
10th Nisan, He entered Jerusalem as recorded in the Gospels.
[6]
The Julian date of that 10th Nisan was Sunday the 6th April, A.D. 32.
What then was the length of the period intervening between the issuing of the
decree to rebuild Jerusalem and the public advent of "Messiah the Prince," —
between the 14th March, B.C. 445, and the 6th April, A.D. 32? THE INTERVAL
CONTAINED EXACTLY AND TO THE VERY DAY 173, 880 DAYS, OR SEVEN TIMES SIXTY-NINE
PROPHETIC YEARS OF 360 DAYS, the first sixty-nine weeks of Gabriel's prophecy.
[7]
Much there is in Holy Writ which unbelief may value and revere, while
utterly refusing to accept it as Divine; but prophecy admits of no half-faith.
The prediction of the "seventy weeks" was either a gross and impious imposture,
or else it was in the fullest and strictest sense God-breathed.
[8]
It may be that in days to come, when Judah's great home-bringing shall
restore to Jerusalem the rightful owners of its soil, the Jews themselves shall
yet rake up from deep beneath its ruins the records of the great king's decree
and of the Nazarene's rejection, and they for whom the prophecy was given will
thus be confronted with proofs of its fulfillment. Meanwhile what judgment shall
be passed on it by fair and thoughtful men? To believe that the facts and
figures here detailed amount to nothing more than happy coincidences involves a
greater exercise of faith than that of the Christian who accepts the book of
Daniel as Divine. There is a point beyond which unbelief is impossible, and the
mind in refusing truth must needs take refuge in a misbelief which is sheer
credulity.