Continued from Chapter 2 The Knights Templar Paves Way For Protestant Reformation.

PAGAN ROME

Rome, from its earliest history, has always been the implacable enemy of God’s truth, from its decree to crucify Jesus Christ, to sending early Christians to their deaths in the coliseum arena of ravenous lions. It was that same ‘Sun’ worship system of religion, that had been originally concocted in Babylon. Anciently, it had come to Rome in fragments and was known historically as Pagan Rome. But later, as the Imperial Roman Empire collapsed and Papal Rome took its place, Babylonian Sun Worship manifested itself in an almost pure and radical form. And even though today it has lost the power to have one executed for not conforming to its doctrines, it is still the same, and is called the ‘Roman’ Catholic (universal) Church.

The religion of the Romans was always emphatically a state religion, and every Roman god had something to do, some useful office to perform with distinct rituals and sacrifices related to national life. The calendar was an official almanac of religion, which paralleled the seasonal changes of the year distributing their appropriate ceremonies. Each stage of the year, the progress of agricultural development, the family meal, all contributed to the ongoing pulsation and energetic cycle of ceremonies. About one day in four was set apart for the worship of particular gods, celebrated by their feasts, games, sacrifices, and ceremonies. Religion had ceremonies for every event in life, from birth, to infancy, puberty, marriage, to death, and a place in every vocation and in every public work. So strongly had these ceremonies and calendar dates become a part of the lives of the people that its influence is even felt in modern society today.

Another area of the Roman religion that was most important for the constant surveillance of the well-being of the land and its people, was a group of men called Augurs and Haruspices, whose technical expertise was to ‘divine’ the future. Augurs were a religious college of diviners, and their function was to determine, reveal, and interpret the will of the gods toward men, and was practiced in accordance with superstitious occurrences and observations of certain signs or omens. These included thunder and lightning, the flight and cries of particular birds, feeding of the sacred chickens, the actions of certain serpents, or accidents, such as spilling salt or the stumbling of a horse. It is interesting to note that in ancient Rome there was a territory called Ager Vaticanus from which site arose the Vatican of today. The word Vatican is a two part word, “vatic”, meaning to divine, and “can” or canny, an attribute of the serpent. In other words, Vatican means the divining serpent. Haruspices, had distinctly another ‘science’ to foretell the future. After certain animals had been sacrificed, their entrails and liver were examined to discover the will of the gods. Nothing in regards to state action was ever undertaken without the advice of these diviners.

Jupiter was the supreme deity of the Romans, with the god of Mars and Saturn following. But as Rome ever enlarged her empire, deities of conquered nations were added to her pantheon. For example, there was Mithra, the Persian Sun god, Isis and Osiris, divinities of Egyptian Sun worship, Venus, the Semitic goddess of love and beauty, and Janus, the Asia Minor god of doors and hinges, called the opener and shutter, who along with the goddess Cybele, each having a spiritual ‘key’, are just a few that became a panorama of pagan gods and goddess devoutly and rigidly worshipped in Rome.

In the minds of worshippers, the ‘heavenly’ or spiritual was always represented or acted out by an ‘earthly’. As the Sun in the heavens was the great object of worship, so ‘fire’ was worshipped as its earthly representative. In Egypt, one of the commonest symbols of the sun or Sun god, was a disc with a serpent around it. The original reason of that identification was, as the sun was the great enlightener of the physical world, so the serpent was held to have been the great enlightener of the ‘spiritual’ by giving mankind the “knowledge of good and evil”. In Pagan Rome, this fire-worship and serpent-worship both occupied a pre-eminent place in Roman esteem. The ‘fire of Vesta’, the virgin goddess of the blazing hearth, was regarded as one of the grand safeguards of the empire by whose duty it was kept with the most jealous care by the Vestal virgins — small girls chosen and having to serve chastely for thirty years. The serpent, being universally acknowledged as a symbol of fire-worship, so the “Great Fiery Serpent” or ‘Red Dragon’ then became, next to the Eagle, the principal Imperial standard of the Roman legions as an emblem of that system of fire-worship on which the safety of the empire was believed so vitally to hinge.

The worship of the Sun, the Great Fire-god, who was intimately identified with the Serpent, was actually the central object of worship from which every other god and ritual revolved. As the sun made its daily appearance and disappearance in the heavens, creating daylight and darkness, and as the earth made its annual trip around the sun producing summer-time and winter’s death, a time to plant and a time to harvest, it was obvious that all life depended on the sun, for its light and warmth, for its very existence. Plainly then man’s anticipations of good and anxieties of bad, his parade of lesser gods, and his calendar that kept him informed, were all subject to the moods of the Sun.

But the Sun had also a human representative. Over this massive and complex system, where every minute detail of worship was controlled and regulated, there presided the Sovereign Pontiff or Pontifex Maximus, who was worshipped as the Great King of the Sun, or the Sun-god incarnate. Under him, was the hierarchy of his college of Pontiffs or Cardinals. Like a fine tuned and well oiled machine, these priests kept this religious system running smoothly. However, it was only when Julius Caesar, who had been previously elected Pontifex Maximus, and then became as Emperor, the supreme civil ruler of the Romans, as he combined in himself, both as head of the Roman state and head of the Roman religion, that all powers and functions of the ‘true legitimate Babylonian Pontiff’ were supremely vested in him.’ It was from this god-king mentality, who had demanded worship from his subjects, and to whom Christians had refused to bow, that caused them to be brutally put to death. With all the religion that saturated the Roman soul, it failed utterly to soften the severity of their character, or weaken their passion for war and bloody sports. Their hard and rigid wills were rarely moved by the cries of agony or the shrieks of the dying.

The Word of God, when properly understood, is a most incredible gift. Who can fathom such a Sovereign God having the awesome ability to foresee the future, and then with unselfish love, reveal it to His people so that they may not walk in darkness, but rather light. Scripture had predicted centuries before the event, that Rome as a world empire would collapse, and out of her ruins and fragments, arise a religio-political power that would labor to bind up her broken pieces. The ruling society, benefiting from Rome’s successes in conquest, had become extremely rich and prosperous, giving way to excessive licentiousness and debauchery. Over half of the Roman population were slaves, and it was from the miseries of these wretched peoples, that the aristocrats relished their fondest pleasures and recreation. The moral decay and depravity of the Roman mind and government is vividly illustrated in its lawfulness of the gory gladiator contests that excited hundreds of thousands in its amphitheaters. This organization of murder, which became such a popular past time and sport, and yet being the most monstrous and disgusting outrage upon human dignity, only serves to demonstrate again, Rome the “Beast”. And Rome, not over night, but as her moral cancer worked incessantly through the centuries, from within and without, finally crumbled. The Roman Empire staggers, sprawls, is thrust off the stage, and as if by magic, ‘reappears’ — it is the Church of Rome which plays the part of the magician and keeps this corpse alive.

CATHOLIC ROME — OCCULT SEAT OF SUN WORSHIP

Anyone with eyes to see, and who is not blinded by ‘religion’, certainly must recognize Papal Rome as the disguised off-spring of Pagan Rome, or Paganism ‘baptized’ with the name Christianity. In light of Scriptural teaching, sincere men like John Wycliffe, Savonarola, Martin Luther, and thousands of others, were willing to give their lives for God’s truth, and most did. The Church of Rome makes pure mockery of everything that is sacred, pure, and the truth. Claiming to be Christian, it has in clinging tenaciously to its possession of the title ‘Pontifex Maximus’ who sits at the Vatican, and its preoccupation with the revival of Roman ascendancy on earth as the Kingdom of Heaven, has become just a continuation of Roman Paganism, with even greater atrocities, using the faith and needs of simple men to forward its schemes. Let’s review just a few of the core items carried over from Paganism to the Church of Rome, that Protestants fearlessly gave their lives to oppose.

‘Syncretism’ is a word meaning the mingling into one religious system, elements that have been drawn from different other religious systems. As a smokescreen, this is exactly what the Church of Rome has done in calling herself Christian. Most will ask, is it really that important? What difference does it honestly make? The reader must be reminded, that God calls this ‘mixing’ of false religion with His truth as something He hates, an abomination. (Deuteronomy 12:28-32 & 18:9-12) It is startling to learn of God’s stern denunciation and warnings against this ‘mixing’, but even more amazing, is the attitude of those who claim to be teachers of God’s Word, who shrug these poisons off as perfectly harmless.

THE MASS

True Christianity teaches that when the Messiah, Jesus Christ, had come and fulfilled His mission in giving Himself as the “final sacrifice” to ransom the world from sin, that by His death, but much more important, by His resurrection, which certified His sinless life; this supernatural event proved that Christ’s ministry was fully approved by God the Father. Thus the whole Hebrew system of priests and sacrifices, which God had originally given to them to be a ‘type’ and figure of the coming Messiah’s death, was to be abolished at his death. But the underlying and basic teaching of the Church of Rome, is its hierarchy of supreme pontiff or pope, its various orders of priests and nuns, and the endless sacrificial ceremony of Christ, called the Mass. God says the priests and sacrificial system ended at the death of Christ. Rome says no, and sets them up. Through the Mass, and the capture of superstitious minds, and only in the name of religion, Catholics are taught to believe that a wafer and wine is turned into the ‘literal’ body and blood of Christ. But carrying this absurdity a bit further, it is then required for the believers to participate in an act of cannibalism after the wafer has been turned to flesh, to eat that flesh, so to speak, as the flesh of the ‘victim of sacrifice’, whose flesh it is believed to be Christ’s. Remove these two Romish ‘false’ doctrines, the priesthood and the sacrificial Mass, and there is no Roman Church. But that is only the beginning.

THE SUN WHEEL

The Vatican, and its supreme pontiff of the Sun, titled Pontifex Maximus, has been previously mentioned. To see another “Sun” symbol of the Occult at the Vatican, one only needs an aerial view of Saint Peter’s court yard, and in the pavement you will notice what is known as a ‘double cross’, or the largest “Sun Wheel” in the world. Anciently, it was taught that the Supreme Sun god drives a chariot drawn by four steeds that traversed each day in the spaces of the firmament and sank at dusk, extinguishing its fires in the ocean. The nation of Israel was caught up in this Sun worship, and during a period of ‘reform’, it is recorded how they put down those “that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven, and took away the houses that the kings of Judah had given to the sun, and burned the chariots of the sun with fire”. (2 Kings 23:5 & 11)

Chariots, and especially the ‘wheels’ of the chariots, were representative of the Sun. The wheel and its spokes actually became a cross within a circle, which is one of the most ancient symbols of the Sun. The circle and the cross within the circle represents the four extreme points of the sun in relation to the earth in its yearly travel around the sun. Those four points are: the ‘two solstices’ occurring at 21 June, making the longest day during the year and 21 December, making the shortest day of the year — and the ‘two equinoxes’, occurring in the spring, 21 March, and autumn, 21 September, making night and day of equal length all over the earth. Hitler’s regime was deep into the Occult, and his Swastika is nothing more than a Sun symbol of a cross, with the segments of the circle broken and with right angles made at the ends of the cross. The Hindu religion, a thousand years before Christ, had the swastika symbol of the Sun.

THE PHALLIC OBELISK AND DOME

From your aerial vantage point over the Vatican courtyard, you will also see rising from the center or hub of this Sun Wheel, in its erect position, a symbol of the Occult and Sun worship that is highly regarded for its sacred importance. This particular Sun symbol was literally uprooted from Egypt and transplanted in Rome, as others were taken to the cities of London, Paris, Constantinople, and Central Park, New York. Its numerous ‘look alikes’ are popularly used as monuments and memorials for great men, or actually any man that wants to be remembered. A casual walk through any graveyard will vividly show you this. But just what is the significance of this Sun symbol, this stone monument or ‘obelisk’ as it is called, especially in certain places where it stands erect before a Dome?

First, it must be noted that even though the obelisk has been publicly displayed in the most obvious and conspicuous places to be seen, yet in any dictionary or regular encyclopedia, the subject ‘obelisk’ and its full meaning is just never explained. Only in specialized books and literature do you find its true symbolic significance and what it meant to those who worshiped the Sun. In other words, the obelisk symbol has been purposely displayed for public awareness, but at the same time, its real meaning has been kept from us, or at the least, kept out of those reference books where most would normally look.

However, the Encyclopedia Americana, 1964 edition, showing how the obelisk was related to Sun worship, explains it like this — “a monument representing the sun in ancient Egyptian religion. The Egyptians were sun worshippers, regarding the great luminary as the creator of the universe, the maker of all gods above and below, and even the author of himself…The two most striking characteristic monuments which represented him on earth were the obelisk and the pyramid…The obelisk is the technical figure of one ray or pencil of light emanating from the sun.” The word o-’bel’-isk actually means the ‘shaft of Bel’; Bel being another way of writing Baal, the Babylonian and Egyptian Sun god, that all nations followed after.

It is an interesting fact about the chief temples of Egypt and Babylonia, that they were “oriented” — that is to say, that the temples were built so that the shrine and entrance always faced in the same direction. On one morning in the year, and one morning alone, in a temple oriented to the rising place of the sun at Mid-Summer Day, the sun’s first rays would smite down through the gloom of the temple and down the long alley of the temple pillars to brilliantly illuminate the altar. Thus it was believed that by that pencil of light or “shaft” of the Sun’s presence upon the altar, it became impregnated. This solemn event gave assurance of fertility in the land and another fruitful year.

But as further evidence that gives proof that Roman Catholicism is nothing more than disguised Sun Worship, that actually arose from the ruins of Roman paganism, consider the fact that the Vatican of today and St. Peter’s Basilica is literally built right over the very grounds of the ancient Vatican Circus. It was here, that they held their chariot races to the “Sun”. And as then, so today, St. Peter’s is oriented toward the east. That is, “so that at the vernal equinox the great doors can be thrown open at sunrise and the sunrays passing through the nave will illuminate the high altar.”

By pagan tradition, an altar symbolized the female body, which in turn symbolized ‘Mother’ Earth. It does not take any great imagination to understand the symbolism of an obelisk standing before a Dome — which represents a pregnant woman’s belly. Ask yourself with deep soul searching, what does any of this have to do with “true” Christianity??

Today’s world wide participation in observing calendar dates that have come down to us from ancient Babylonian Sun worship, tells only too well the influence this system has had upon mankind. Most people today observe these dates as Christian holy days and festivities, when in reality, the dates themselves have nothing whatever to do with Christianity. Christmas and Easter both are good examples of how these Sun dates have been twisted and perverted to be recognized as something that is Christian. Yet, any good encyclopedia will quickly inform you of their true origin.

BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION

The date, 25th December, because the days began to lengthen after the death of the winter solstice, was believed by the pagans to be the ‘birth’ date of Sol, their Sun god. But to better understand the origins of this heathenistic custom that we know today as Christmas, we should go all the way back to the city and nation of Babylon. Babel, which later became Babylon, was originally founded by a man named Nimrod, “the mighty hunter”. (Genesis 10: 8-10) Babylon was the seat of the first great apostasy against God after the flood. It was here that the “Babylonian Cult” was instituted by Nimrod and his queen, Semiramis. Semiramis was also Nimrod’s mother and his wife in an incestuous relationship. From this Babylonian Cult is derived all types and forms of false worship, carried over today into the various pagan religions, including also the Christ-Mass and Easter.

Nimrod lived approximately two hundred and fifty years after the flood. It was during those days of Nimrod, Semiramis, and his father Cush, when they gained a following and a deep hold over the then whole human race; for at that time there was only one language and all were one homogenous people. The Bible tells us that Nimrod gained the title “Mighty Hunter” and “The Apostate” because of his innovative building of walled cities to free men from the ravages of wild beasts, which were then multiplying against mankind, and because of his leading men away from the idea of a God who was capable of interceding with wrath into the affairs of men. History records that he led people astray to such an extent that they drifted from the faith of their fathers in the true God.

Ancient history teaches, that it was the Babylonians who first became involved in the worship of the heavens, and developed a system of numerology, the horoscope, astrology, and the zodiac, claiming the highest wisdom and ability to ‘divine’ the future. It was characterized by the word “mystery” because their practices were hidden from non-members. Once admitted into the Babylonian mystery religion, men were no longer Babylonians, Assyrians, or Egyptians, but became members of a mystical brotherhood over which ruled the Pontifex Maximus, or high priest, whose word was final in all matters within the lives of the brotherhood — regardless of the country in which they lived, becoming a supranational organization.

This Babylonian system, from its very inception right till today, has been a blueprint and planned method to effectively circumvent the truth of God. From Babylon it spread to the ends of the earth and to where, Scripture records, Abraham was chosen of God to flee those idolatrous nations, and thus preserve His truth through a called out people. This explains how so many different nations of the world, whether Egypt, India, Aztec, Maya, Inca, or Sioux Indian, all worshiped the Sun in some manner, and are found to have common religious traditions interwoven into their cultures. Egypt, almost surpassed Babylon in its worship with pyramid and obelisk monuments dedicated to the Sun. Joseph, when sold into Egypt by his brothers, (Genesis 41:45) later married the daughter of the priest of ‘On’, or the priest of the Sun.

Babylon continued to be the seat of worldwide ‘mystery religion’ activity until it was conquered by the Medes and Persians and the Babylonian priesthood (or Chaldeans) were forced to move to Pergamos, which then became their headquarters. Over the years this cult gained such power to where the Roman Caesars absorbed the bulk of the principles and structure of the Babylonian religion into their own pagan religion. Julius Caesar was made Pontifex Maximus of the Etruscan Order in 74 B.C. Thereafter, Rome’s religion became that of Babylon.

As believers in this Sun worship system, calendar dates were set up to celebrate the winter solstice, (24-25th December, the shortest day of the year) and the summer solstice, (24th June, the longest day of the year). Easter was the pagan festival that occurred at the spring equinox, when all nature was in ‘resurrection’ after the death of winter. Any student of the Scriptures well knows the word Easter, in its ‘original’ meaning, is not a Christian expression, but comes from the goddess of spring Astart or Ishtar, which is just another name for the Queen of Heaven, Semiramis, who celebrated that festival with the sun rising in the ‘east’ — even as the word “East-er” implies. (Ezekiel 8:16) When Nimrod’s life was abruptly ended, it was Semiramis who called for a period of mourning, who instructed her subjects that Nimrod had returned to the Sun, declaring that his deified name was now Tammuz. Looking towards the east, the rising place of the Sun, was the natural place to look for the return of their savior.

Rituals and festivals, which harmonized with the Sun worship calendar dates, were also applied to the death and resurrection of Tammuz. Forty days of ‘sacred’ Lenten abstinence were given to weeping for his death, now claimed to be the Sun god incarnated. The forty days also seemed to be an indispensable preliminary to sharpen their zeal for the degrading activities or unbridled lust in the Easter or Bacchus festivities that were to follow. As the death of Winter became representative of the death of Nimrod, so the resurrection of Spring became also representative of Nimrod’s resurrection, but with his new deified name Tammuz, and were celebrated both by alternately weeping and then rejoicing. (Ezekiel 8:14) Even today, Bacchus, which means “The Lamented One”, lives on as the ‘patron saint’ of such disgusting public homosexual orgies as are evident during the New Orleans Mardi Gras. But even more obvious, it lives on in the annual Lenten rituals of the Roman Catholic Church.

When you take a good look at the doctrines and rituals practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, then try in a search of the Scriptures to support them, shockingly, you will find they are just not there. The truth is, with heart-felt sadness, that the pope grows rich in the measure that the poor are duped. The doctrine of purgatory is a striking example of such an abuse; and has no justification, whether in Scripture or in logic. Its real basis is Rome’s wanton greed. For there is not one word spoken of it in all Holy Scripture, and also if the Pope with all his pardons may for money deliver one soul from torment, he may deliver as well without money; and if he may deliver one, he may deliver a thousand, he may deliver them all, and so destroy purgatory. And so then he is a cruel and unmerciful tyrant, without a trace of compassion, if he keeps them there in prison, writhing in pain, till men will give him money. Doesn’t this make reasonable sense, dear Catholic reader?

During the reformation in the sixteenth century, when Martin Luther was redirecting the world’s attention (and conscience) to God’s Holy Word, these falsehoods and corruptions were identified and repudiated as having no part in the worship of the Lord Jesus Christ — as taught in the Scriptures. Doctrines such as purgatory, and paid for Masses to get loved ones out of purgatory, an existing burning hell, worship of the cross, images, relics, and of Mary, and Sunday as a holy day, can’t be found in Scripture. The celibacy of the priesthood, confessing sins to a priest, kissing the pope’s feet, rosary prayer beads, holy water, sale of indulgences, adoration of the wafer, or host, and the list goes on and on, of abominable human inventions to burden and enslave superstitious minds. To keep the people in total darkness, the Bible was labeled a forbidden book and placed in the index of forbidden books by the Council of Toledo in 1229 AD. By contrast, our Lord and the apostles commanded that the Scriptures should be read by all. (John 5:39, 2 Timothy 2:15 & 3:15-17)

Continued in Chapter 4 Martin Luther — A Man Used of God.

All chapters of The Grand Design Exposed

Note: Some of this is new information for me. The author John Daniel paints the Knights Templar in a positive light. That’s what it looks like to me. But seeing who their enemies were, it makes me think that all the negative stuff I heard about the Knights Templar may have been propaganda from the Catholic Church! Any comments about this are appreciated.

A CALL FOR HELP

Most all have read or heard about the Roman Catholic religious wars during the Middle Ages to free Jerusalem, called the “Crusades”. In the Catholic religion, ‘indulgences’, or special favors in the forgiveness of sins are given by the pope to those who make pilgrimages to holy shrines. Jerusalem had the very holiest of shrines. However, Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in 1071 AD, depriving Roman Catholic pilgrims from entering into the city. The whole Catholic world became alarmed.

To recover Jerusalem, an urgent appeal was presented by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont, arousing an enthusiastic response of Catholics to arms. It became the first of a series of eight religious wars from 1096 to 1291 AD, nearly 200 years, mostly ending in defeat and horrible disasters. Pope after pope through the years, made their appeals urging and rallying crusade after senseless crusade. One in particular is repugnant in history, where mere children were allowed to answer the call. Many became sick and died along the way or were sold into slavery before ever reaching their destination. To the popes, who are supposed to be the representatives or vicars of Christ, winning back Jerusalem at any cost, was all that mattered. Yet the humble Jesus of Nazareth said, (John 18:36) “My Kingdom is not of this world, if my Kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight”.

The crusaders precariously delivered Jerusalem from the Muslims, and even though they occupied the area, the severe hostilities and frequent skirmishes from surrounding neighbors was a constant reminder of how insecure the victory really was. The crusaders had fulfilled their vows, and were now ready and anxious to return home. What was needed for their replacement, was a provision establishing a permanent defensive military force against the enemy and also a means to ensure protection and safety for traveling pilgrims. These needs brought about the creation of a very unique institution — the ‘military monk’ order of knighthood.

Two orders of knights were established. One, the Knights of Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, later to become the Knights of Malta, who took care of the sick and the physical needs of the pilgrims. The other, were the Knights of Templar, who became the military arm for defense and protective escorts for pilgrims traveling to and from the city. The Knights Templar history is one of extreme importance and becomes one of the most fascinating stories ever to be researched. As the first order of men becoming military monks, they became the role model for every succeeding military order afterwards. The meteorite like career in their rise to power, wealth, and fame, was as legendary and sensational as the tragic and grisly manner they were brought to their end — or at least their ‘visible’ end. Mystery, intrigues, and cover up surround their demise, and it is in this atmosphere that presents a great paradox today, especially when considering the parties involved during the founding of the United States of America.

It would be very hard to find a greater contrast, when comparing the principles on which the Roman Catholic Church is ruled, along side those which the American Republic was founded. Catholicism is controlled through the rule of ‘one’, who has been invested with infallible, absolute, and ruthless dictatorial powers compelling all to fully submit, with all democratic processes banished and condemned. On the other hand, the American Republic extended to its people the ‘right’ as individuals to think, to express themselves unobstructed, to be ruled by a government whose laws were for the people and by the people, that they might live and move and worship freely, in peace and unmolested.

John Carroll was a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest. George Washington was a Protestant Freemason. They indeed, according to the principles they each represented, were supposed to be opposed to one another. Instead, they worked in perfect harmony together in laying out Washington D.C., the city and seat of our nation’s government, and in conjunction with and at the very same time, founded the first Jesuit college in the states, known today as Georgetown University. As we progress further in our study, it will be shown the hidden connection between the Roman Catholic Knights Templar and Freemasonry, and how the Jesuits infiltrated Freemasonry, then by creating a secret society within a secret society, founded their “Order” of the Illuminati.

TEMPLARS FOUNDED

In the year 1118, a few years after the first crusade conquest of Jerusalem, the Knights Templar were founded. Their name was taken from the ancient Temple of Solomon, the site of their first headquarters. They continued as an order until the year 1307, nearly 200 years, and were dissolved a few years after the permanent loss of Jerusalem. Their immediate popularity after becoming an order has been contributed to the two great passions of the Middle Ages; religious fervor and martial prowess. Their expansion in wealth, power, and land possessions was phenomenal. Gifts of every kind were showered upon them. One such example in 1131, the king of Aragon bequeathed to them a third of his domains. At the peak of their prosperity, it is said that they held over 9000 manors all over Europe, plus mills, markets, and trade monopolies. These were all income producing properties. In addition, they controlled a considerable fleet of fighting and merchant ships and maintained an international banking operation.

The popes took them under their immediate protection, exempting them from all taxes including paying tithes. They were above all laws and answered to no one but the pope. By virtue of their possessions, manpower, diplomatic skills, and martial expertise, the Temple Knights wielded enormous political and military influence. But it was no less influential financially, handling much, if not most, of the available capital in western Europe. Kings deposited their royal treasuries with the Templars and became quite often deeply in debt to them, and at a high rate of interest. It is impossible to calculate the profound and lasting influence the Knights Templar had on every level of society. With such a vast amount of power and influence, especially in high places, it would not be rational to believe that with the termination of the Order, all traces of its influence also just stopped and abruptly vanished along with them.

Nearly everyone has some notion about the Inquisition; at the very least, that it was a Catholic Church ordained and perpetuated hunt for, and destruction of dissenters, apostates, heretics, Jews, witches, warlocks, alchemist, and anyone else out of ecclesiastical favor. That it operated a long time ago, say from the Middle Ages to the French Revolution, and that it achieved its ends by means so terrible and ferocious that history had recorded nothing comparable until the Holocaust of 1939- 45. It was a time when no one was ever safe from the bloodlust of the Church. Prosecution and destruction for a banned thought or feeling, or merely for being suspected of one, was an ever present peril for all. It was during this time period and this mind set that the Knights Templar were founded, when they flourished, and when they came to their sudden end.

In 1291 Roman Catholics forced from the Holy Land was complete, never to be restored. The Knights Templar retreated to the island of Cypress as a temporary place of residence. Here they dreamed and planned for another crusade. But Europe no longer rallied to the cry for a holy war. The fervor was gone. So much wealth had been spent and so many lives lost in vain, that it became a dead issue. In effect, the Templars had lost their purpose to exist. What was worse, they had made many enemies because of their arrogance and haughty ways. They were also in constant conflict with the Hospitallers. Some even suggested, including the pope, for practical purposes, the two orders of knights should be combined. And with this in mind, Pope Clement V summoned Jacques de Molay, the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, to appear before him.

The king of France, Philip IV, the most powerful monarch on the Continent at the time, also looked favorably on the merger proposals, but with a totally different point of view. He had proposed to Pope Clement V, that the kings of France be named the hereditary grand masters of the combined orders and that he himself be appointed as supreme commander, to be known as “War King”. The only one who seemed to like his idea was Philip himself. So as an alternative to gain access to the Templars wealth, Philip developed a plan to bring the Templar order down.

TEMPLARS BETRAYED

By 1306, the Templars had become the focus of particular attention for Philip IV of France. Philip was enormously ambitious. He had grandiose designs for his country, and gave little thought about crushing whoever or whatever stood in his way. He had already engineered the kidnapping and murder of one pope, Boniface VIII, and is widely believed to have orchestrated the death, probably by poison, of another, Benedict XI, who followed. By 1305, he had installed his own puppet on the papal throne, Clement V. In 1309, Philip hijacked the Papacy itself, uprooting it from Rome and relocating it on French soil, at Avignon, where it remained, dividing the Catholic Church for the next sixty eight years. With the Papacy thus in his pocket, Philip had the latitude he needed to move against the Templars, and with staggering swiftness and efficient precision, he did.

With sealed orders, kept absolutely secret and not to be opened until the given time, in one stroke, every Knight Templar found in France, including Grand Master Jacques de Molay, were arrested, placed in chains, and cast in prison. Trumped up charges of the most sinister kinds of heresy were brought to bear and broadcasted effectively throughout the realm. Immediately the Inquisitors went to their hideous work, torturing their victims, extorting those confessions they wanted to hear. The shrieks renting the air of those tortured, terrified those who knew they were next. Within a few days after the tortures began, thirty-six Templars died as a result. Some had their feet burned totally off and, understandably, a number are reported to have gone mad from the pain. One Templar was helped to a council of inquiry later, carrying with him the blacken bones that had dropped out of his feet as they were burned off. He had been permitted by his torturers to keep the bones as sickening souvenirs.‘

Pope Clement V refused to believe the accusations Philip was bringing against the Templars. But with some bullying, relentless pressure, and intimidation, the weak pope finally caved in, reluctantly cooperating with the king. It was true, the Templars had made some enemies, but it was also true and very obvious, that the other nations in Europe did not believe the charges either. Most nations acquitted them outright, saying they were innocent. Some allowed them to go into other orders or change into secular clothes, shave their beard, and melt into the crowd. In Portugal, they found refuge by just changing their name to Knights of Christ. Christopher Columbus was a Templar Knight of Christ.) England and Ireland dragged their feet. Scotland ignored the pope’s excommunication altogether, and became a haven for the fugitives.

In France the terror went on. Torture, excommunications, and for “relapsed heretics”, they were burned alive in public wholesale executions. Four and one half years after the first arrests, Pope Clement V, on March 1312, declared the Knights Templar disbanded, yet ‘without’ proclaiming them either guilty or innocent. All Templar property, except in Spain and Portugal, was to be transferred to the Hospitallers. Two years after that, March 1314, the Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, was roasted alive over a slow fire. The Order that began in such glory, now ended in public disgrace.

The decree from the pope was infallible. Any Templar not brought to justice was a fugitive from law, and subject to arrest. Yet everyone knew the whole affair was disturbingly wrong. It became a Church scandal that needed to be hushed, covered up. But certainly the cover up ‘business’ was nothing new to Rome. The Church’s suppression of its repulsive involvement, especially when it advertises it can do no wrong, was to save face. The running Templars silence, was to keep from being caught.

What seems to us today as a minor, generally obscure fragment of medieval history, is just the point that should be made here; it has been purposely made obscure. How many today have even heard of the Knights Templar? But you can be assured of this, when it was all happening, it was the most dominant issue of its time, dramatically surpassing events in far away Scotland, galvanizing opinions and reactions across the Catholic world, sending tremors throughout all Western culture. The Templar, it must be remembered, was, with the sole exception of the Papacy itself, the most important, most powerful, most prestigious, most apparently unshakable institution of its age. It was regarded as one of the central pillars of Western Catholicism. For most of its contemporaries, it seemed as immutable, as durable, as permanent as the Church herself. That such an edifice should be so suddenly demolished, rocked the very foundation upon which rested the assumptions and beliefs of that time. Indeed, for an example of the indelible impression this tragedy made upon minds, is found in the superstition which holds Friday the 13th to be a day of misfortune; most today having not the vaguest idea of its origin, will find that it grew from the very date when King Philip made his initial arrests, Friday, 13 October 1307.

So here all of a sudden, a very large and prestigious group of men of Europe, the rejected military monk, found himself in a weird and totally new condition. The pope had rejected him, so he had no choice but to reject the pope. Before, during his entire life in the Templar order, his link with God had been through his Grand Master, who was responsible only to the pope, who claimed to be God’s sole viceroy on earth. Now his religious order had been dissolved, his Grand Master had been burned at the stake, and Christ’s vicar had cast him aside. He still believed in God, but his chain of intercession with God had been ripped away. Now for the first time in his life, no one stood between God and himself. His prayers of solicitation and thanksgiving, his acts of adoration, his hopes of salvation could no longer be through the pope, and were now on a purely personal basis, not by choice, but brutally thrust upon him. To the medieval mind, there could have been no other harrowing and traumatic experience imaginable.

It was from this most brutal and overwhelming experience, that the ‘seeds’ of Protestantism were violently sown; left to germinate fully sixty years and more before John Wycliffe and the Lollards came on the scene. Those seeds were free to germinate and propagate because they were nurtured in complete secrecy, and they gave strength to others who were also religiously persecuted and disillusioned.

FRIENDLY HELP

The nations of England, Ireland, and Scotland, were separated from the Continent, and so it helped to breed their own independent ideas. One example, they never allowed machines of the Inquisition permanently on their soil. That doesn’t mean they were not staunch Catholics, or they were much less brutal in the way those who came under the law were treated. They just had their own way of thinking about certain things, and that included Rome. This independent thought became fertile ground for friends and families in their efforts to hide, feed, and to give any needed assistance to keep the running Templars safe from being caught. They became vital contacts, providing what any fugitive is desperate for; safe lodging, food, some news, and a chance to let his panic subside. These basic provisions allowed the Templars some needed time to think clearly and rationally, to organize an underground network of contacts, and a secret system for survival.

To show the determination of the English people in their resistance to Rome’s decree, a royal dragnet assisted by other religious orders, had turned up just two fugitives in England and one in Scotland. In addition, a number of them escaped who had been earlier imprisoned, which undoubtedly had required help from inside or outside, or both. Then too, because the king was slow to act, the arrests in England had come three months after the arrests in France, providing good time to make preparations. Bruce, the newly elected king of Scotland during this same time period was struggling for Scotland’s independence from England, had desecrated a church by shedding blood in it found himself also excommunicated by the pope. And yet, significantly enough, this made no impression on the Scottish clergy, giving Bruce their full support, and allowing a perfect haven for the fugitive Templars.

In any case, there was some kind of mutual assistance organization, to the extent that it stayed alive functioning for three generations, seventy years. There had been a common goal, a common fear, and a common enemy to require the usefulness and need of a mutual protection society to motivate such longevity. In 1381, the “Peasant Uprising” gave ample proof of a ‘secret society’ that was in place and working, giving both leadership and organization to the uprising, as they vented their specific hatreds and grievances.

As we review historical events and circumstances during those turbulent times, we see the most deplorable conditions which could only have possibly produced the groans of a population thoroughly oppressed. The rigorous suppression, the complete disregard for human life, the vicious and incredible practices of butchery that were constantly before a person’s eye to keep everyone in line from generation to generation, all in the name of religion, where king and pope vied for the position as to who was the ‘top’ agent of God — this was that marvelous apparatus which was loved by Rome, known as the feudal system. To get a better perspective or the ‘pulse’ of the times, from when the Templars were first arrested in 1307, and for two hundred years after, we shall briefly, in chronological order, list just a few events that historians felt worthy to record.

The history of man, and certainly the nations of medieval times were constantly at war, causing a steady drain on manpower and finances. England and France, 1337-1453, fought their historic Hundred Years’ war. The people were taxed, taxed, and taxed again to replenish depleted treasuries. In 1340, the plague Black Death swept through Europe and Asia, annihilating whole communities and killing nearly half of the European population. Because of the ruthless oppression of the people, priests of the lower clergy who were intimately involved with the pains and emotions of their parishioners, began to petition and preach against Rome for reform. Around 1360, priests like John Ball, John Wrawe, and John Wycliffe, with other local priests openly condemned the corruptions of Rome and demanded freedom for all men. Clerics, being then the only literate class, wrote and sent letters to other parish priests, intending them to be read aloud for others to hear. By 1380, John Wycliffe had translated the Bible into the English language and was sending it to other preaching priests throughout England. His followers were known as Lollards. John Wycliffe himself was spoken of as the “Morning Star of the Reformation”. The Peasant Uprising was in the year of 1381. In 1450 the printing press was invented and the John Gutenburg Bible was printed. Columbus discovered the New World in 1492. Henry VIII reigned 1509-1547 and made himself head of the English Church instead of the pope. In Germany, Martin Luther, another humble Catholic parish priest, nailed his famous Ninety-Five Theses, in 1517, to the church door, giving new vitality to an already growing and uncontained sentiment of the people.

To go back again to the Peasant Uprising in 1381, there are some important factors involved that can not be dismissed if we’re to believe it was just a spontaneous eruption. It’s true, conditions were at a boiling point, but there are too many evidences showing that the uprising had been well planned in advance to be a coincidence. First, there were over 100 thousand rebels who took part in the rampage coming from great distances of fifty miles or more and from every direction, but strangely enough, the movement began simultaneously, as by a predetermined given time. Also, some 1500 were wearing a special identifiable hooded uniform, so that they could be readily recognized. Prison gates were left open, draw bridges left down, certainly the work of inside help. Too many inconsistencies to examine them all here in this brief description. However, with all the head choppings that took place, and all the destruction of property, there was marked evidence that the Knights Hospitallers and their properties which had been given to them by the pope, but belonging originally to the Templars, were a very special target. Considering in that day and time, when communication and transportation was by foot or horseback, (and only the noble class had horses) there seems to have been some real quality time, leadership, and organization put into the planning, to have successfully pulled the uprising off.

BROTHERHOOD OF FUGITIVES

Historical and archaeological findings have produced substantial evidence to show the Knights Templar had fully established themselves in a secret underground society through the years, known to the peasants as the “Great Society”. It was the influence of that society working with the lower parish priests, that made the clandestine peasant uprising possible. To be a Templar, you could not be of peasant descent, you had to be free born and of the noble class. Yet it was the peasants who always suffered most miserably and it was to their great masses that the seeds of protest and reform, with the urging of the Templars, had the greatest appeal. The uprising was crushed, but the seeds that gave hope of a better way lived on through the centuries. And whether history records it or not, for an honest researcher, the proof is overwhelming that it was the fugitive Knights Templar who gave birth to the effective protesting of Rome.

To break the bands of Roman tyranny, it took an experience literally so catastrophic within the Catholic realm, setting in motion ripples of protests, waves ever increasing through the centuries, developing into the full tidal wave of the Protestant Reformation, the French Revolution, and the pope taken prisoner in 1798 by the French Army, thus ending the temporal power of the Roman Catholic Church. It is this ‘loss’ of temporal power, which Scripture describes as the “Beast” receiving a “wound unto death”, that rattled the very foundation of the Roman system. And to recover that loss, Rome focused its energies into an ultra important top priority secret strategy, encompassing deep and long range plans — confidently working, patiently waiting for the “Grand Design” to bear its fruit.

How can any mortal man put into descriptive words, a picture that adequately reveals the intensity of those times? The seeds of protest were born, and they lived, and would not die. Through relentless torture, starvation, genocide massacres, burning at the stake, against every conceivable fury of Rome, they could not be extinguished. History estimates that over one hundred million people lost their lives during that time of Roman tyranny. Is it any wonder that God graphically describes this onslaught of Rome as her being “drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus”, and calls her the “Beast”? As viciously as Rome fought to hold on to its power, the Word of God had declared that it would receive a “Deadly Wound,” and it did. What the clandestine movement the Knights Templar began, God raised up fearless preachers of His ‘Word of Truth’ to complete.

To try to trace the movements of the fugitive Templars historically is a monumental job, because in reality they left no recorded history. Only by searching for telltale clues, do we recognize their influence and presence. As a group of men fleeing for their lives and the torture they knew was in store for them if they got caught, secrecy and the oaths of those brought into that secrecy was of paramount importance. Every imaginable cover was used to guarantee that safety. However, the legacy of those courageous men live on today through the records of their ‘Old Charges’; prescribed rules which once governed their conduct as a brotherhood of fugitives.

After the Protestant Reformation had completed its work in lifting humanity to its rightful God given position, and the pressure for secrecy diminished, allegorical rituals came into play to preserve and remind the Templars of their earlier times. And when four London lodges finally decided to go public on 24 June 1717, they emerged not with the name Knights Templar, but instead, Freemasonry; a name that reminded them of their rage to be free, to end all serfdom and villeinage, to be a ‘free man born of a free mother’. In understanding the tragic history of the Templars, then observing the rituals of Freemasonry, especially their central ritual involving the construction of King Solomon’s temple, makes sense. For remember, the original headquarters and residence of the grand master were at the ‘round temple’ in Jerusalem, from which they took their name. And it was during the time of building their order, that their leader was struck down and murdered, leaving allegorically speaking, the construction of their ‘Temple’, or order, unfinished. Freemasonry is the direct descendant of the Knights Templar.

With the invention of the printing press, the Scriptures became available to the people. Like a candle illuminating the blackest night, God’s truth began to shine in men’s hearts. A book that was forbidden and unlawful from the very beginning, the message it contained and the hope it sparked, was valued by far much greater, than the terrible risks of having it in possession. After two hundred years since the arrests of the Templars, God using their devastating experience, brought unspeakable glory to His name and truth. Valiant men transformed by that ‘Truth’ held God’s banner high. Martin Luther, like it was said of the apostle Paul, was turning Europe upside down. The frenzied hatred and seething revenge that Rome held for these men is fully realized in the order given by the Council of Constance, thirty-five years after the death of John Wycliffe, that his remains be dug up and burned for heresy. This desecration was not the act of some isolated fanatic, it was the official act of the Church. Rome’s appetite for power and control over others is insatiable. For one to question or disrupt that power, is an anathema.

Martin Luther’s unwavering testimony sent shock waves through the Roman Catholic hierarchy. How dare this lowly monk tamper with the dogmas of Rome? Fearing for his very life, but calm and steadfast in mind, he stood in German court and struck down, one by one, the corrupt doctrines of Roman Catholicism, as compared with Bible truth. So fully did he convince the German princes, that they became his protector from Rome’s fury to burn him. His faith and practical teachings of Bible truth were words that exploded in the minds of his listeners. A movement before only spoken in darken hushed tones of whispers, now suddenly burst forth as the noontide sun. The “Protestant Reformation”, to the glory of Almighty God!

Chapter 3 Rome — Implacable Enemy of God’s Truth — Reason for Reformers’ Cries

All chapters of The Grand Design Exposed

Introduction from the webmaster:

I got this text from a PDF file with reference numbers after parts of the text, but there were no corresponding references at the end of the text! I therefore did not include the reference numbers.

The author, John Daniel, wrote this book in 1999. Because some of it may be dated information, please keep in mind this Scripture:

The enemies of Jesus Christ and His people, and mankind’s enemies in general, are spiritual beings, servants of their master Satan in the spirit world, and therefore they are not hindered by bodily age, poor health and death. When their agent on earth dies, they continue to work their agenda through another agent, and adjust their plans accordingly. It’s the general design of their plans we should be cognizant of.

PLANET IN PAIN

Without question, the world today is in quite a predicament. Certainly, never before in the history of our planet, has it ever been so greatly stressed upon mankind’s consciousness the overwhelming ills that are facing our world. The urging of these continued reports seem to leave us in no doubt, that if we as a world, do not get our act together, it may be too late. The fact is, they tell us, that our world is facing a crisis hour, approaching its final destiny. We must act ‘universally’ now, if we are to avert a world-wide catastrophe. So they say.

We hear disturbing reports about our world environment. They tell us the ozone layer is rapidly being destroyed, causing global warming. The ‘use it and throw it away’ life style of the West is creating massive amounts of solid wastes at an incredible rate, of which much is non-biodegradable materials, setting off the ‘separate and recycle it’ craze. Hazardous chemicals are being dumped into the delicate ecosystem by industries. Oil spills are polluting the oceans and waterways. Acid rain is destroying forests. The much needed oxygen-producing rain forests of South America are being annihilated. We are incessantly being bombarded by these and many other complex environmental issues that tend to haunt and restrict us. We are told, there must be a ‘now or never’ very bold world leadership, if Mother Earth is to be spared a rendezvous with death.

Another problem facing the whole world is the accelerating pace of global financial breakdown. It is a world economic crisis looming on the horizon that threatens the very stability of the society of man. Russia’s financial and banking sector is utterly bankrupt, leading nationalist calls for re-regulation of that economy. The Japanese banking system, with $1.5 trillion in non-performing loans, is teetering on the edge. Japan’s ninth largest bank, the Long Term Credit Bank, with $190 billion in assets, has been insolvent for half a year. The world’s stock exchanges are plummeting. Asia and South America’s banks are tottering. American banking giants such as Bank of America, Citicorp, and Bankers Trust have reported July-August 1998 losses of $220 million, $300 million, and $340 million, respectively, in bad investments, mostly in Russia. And then, ready to explode with the slightest accident, is the world’s $130 trillion derivatives market. They tell us that the 1990’s will decide the economic future of the world.

It has been made quite clear to us that, in order to secure peace and economic security for the whole world, there must be a well-directed international trading system. The New Age economic plan is pretty well outlined in Alice A. Bailey’s book, “The Externalisation of the Hierarchy”, published by Lucis Trust. It points out that there will be a “complete economic reorientation” by which ‘humanity is relieved of all economic anxiety’. (p.574) “When the ‘adjuster of finances’ appears, national currencies will have been largely superseded, not only by a system of barter, but by a universal monetary exchange”. (pp.580-581)

The 27 April 1998 issue of Time magazine, ran a cover feature article titled, “The Future of Money — What the Big Mergers Mean — Are Banks Really Necessary — Will Microsoft Control it All?” The article emphasized that the electronic or “Omnicard” and a cashless society is fast approaching us where cash transactions will be prohibited. Plastic debit cards must then be used to pay bills so that funds can be instantly and efficiently removed from your bank account to theirs. All will be compelled to join the system or lose the privilege to buy or sell. However, this is but a small price to pay, when considering the uniformity and convenience you receive in return. So they say.

But over and above all the other financial ills facing our distressed world, is one that seems to lurk in the background worse than the bubonic plague of the 1300’s. It’s the Y2K, year 2000 computer meltdown or computer “Millennium Bug”. Whether real or a hoax, we are being psyched out into believing that there could be utter chaos — world-wide! The potential result: a global power failure that would bring industry to a stop; transportation will stop; government Social Security checks stop; and a possible bank run that could bankrupt banks all over the world. However, what if it turns out to be just some hysteria fraud? What would those who are manipulating us really have to gain? For one thing, someone would make a pile of money to fix the so called problem. But more important, there is no doubt of the impressionable effects it would have on the general public. Something similar to the villagers and the shepherd boy who thought it amusing to falsely cry wolf. So that when a true crisis actually does arrive, everyone will turn a deaf-ear thinking it to be another joke, and not wanting to be fooled again will refuse to respond. But there really is nothing to worry about — so they tell us.

Political unrest and constant fear of war is another very real problem that is kept before us to keep the world in a state of distress and unbalance. We do not have to be reminded of the ongoing Middle East crisis. First Iran, then Iraq, working to achieve military superiority with their intercontinental ballistic missiles, with either nuclear or chemical warheads, that threaten world peace. Nations hungry to acquire the power of mass death think nothing of stealing and cheating and lying to achieve their ambitions. Nor do nations with nuclear capabilities have any scruples of clandestinely selling nuclear technologies to nations who want it. So just when the world was beginning to think it was safe from the “Nukes”, India’s joy for her five underground nuclear explosions, May 1998, sent shudders throughout the world. When the age of nuclear terror seemed over, the specter is back.

So which country will show off its atomic prowess next? And no one even wants to think about what would happen should a nuclear device fall into the hands of some terrorist. The world is asking — is the nuclear arms race back on again? Will we ever devise effective ways to control the nuclear beast? Even as these words are being typed, December 1998, Iraq is being bullied and again bombed with innocent people being murdered on the pretense of world peace. But of course, for the sake of world peace and harmony among nations, we are told, the world urgently needs an international peace or ‘police’ keeping force.

We certainly can’t overlook the world-wide drug scene that is ravaging the very heart and soul of our society, either. What family today has not been affected in some personal manner by this diabolical scourge? Drugs could not be a more ingenious and efficient means inflicted on society to self destruct; to create brainless zombies, that takes away an individual’s mind to think and the ambition to be a success; other than a life of crime and shiftlessness. Drugs have turned cities today into literal battle zones, with their gang wars, violent robberies, looting, muggings, rapes, shootings and killings that rock the streets. Drug users become immediate victims and prey as they expose and submit themselves to the lowest of moral values. Their drug environment then becomes a breeding ground stimulating free sex that results in abortions as birth control, homosexuality and aids, with lives and families destroyed and children abused that grow up very much confused. As an invention from hell, drugs fulfills its intended purpose splendidly.

As jails are filled to overflowing, we are told that an all out war on drugs has to be declared. The enforcement of these “tougher laws” requires additional tiers of expensive government. Of the $7,900,000,000 dollars (that’s $7.9 Billion) that former President George Bush allotted to the war on drugs during his Administration, the bulk of the money went to swell the budget of 58 federal agencies and 74 congressional committees already engaged in the “war on drugs”. And yet, drugs seem to be as prevalent today as when before the war was declared. Is it possible that the United States of America, the greatest military superpower the world has ever known; that has the ability and technology to send men to the moon and outer space, and to launch spy satellites that surveils every corner of the globe — can not win the “war on drugs”, and has to admit defeat? That conclusion seems a little doubtful.

Perhaps a quick peek behind the scenes to reveal one tiny area may give us just a little different viewpoint. For example, it is well established that George Bush was quite actively involved in drug trafficking, not only from Central and South America, but from the Golden Triangle of Northern Burma as well. As a duplicity and read his lips, he could quite willingly promote the international drug trade that brought him incredible personal ‘financial’ profit, and at the same time, also declare a “war on drugs” for personal ‘political’ profit. But keep in mind, there is something much much larger, lurking in the shadows, than just personal profit that is motivating the drug traffic. But to shed a ray of light on the position of the U.S. government and its leaders, there was a very revealing story, of all places, in the U.S. News and World Report, dated March 26, 1990 on page 16. Read it carefully:

What the U.S. News and World Report is stating is that General Khun Sa will stop his shipments amounting to 40% of the heroin supply if the U.S. will send his nation financial aid, and from other sources, he wants another agriculture crop that he can grow that the US. will buy from him so that his economy will function without drug money. What the story does ‘not’ say is that the 1,200 metric tons of refined heroin per year, worth on the street an amount equal to 10% of America’s Gross National Product, is being shipped from Thailand on U.S. Air Force cargo planes! Also, what the story did ‘not’ say is that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built a two lane road back into the North Burma mountains so that these shipments could be brought out on trucks instead of the backs of mules. No wonder the Bush Administration “has not responded”.

So could it be that the ‘no-win’ war on drugs serves a greater and a more secret interest? Under the pretext of rescuing people from the incalculable perils of rampaging mobs seeking a desperate fix, or the looting of their homes and ravaging their women, people willingly give up a little freedom and liberty for what they believe will be peace and safety. That is why we are told we need more police, more judges, more jails, more prisons, more and longer punishments. The power elite and government leaders at the top are immune to punishment. And they set up their off shore banks to launder drug dollars in the billions. It is these same people that tell us now that we need tougher gun laws, that our society must be more stringently regulated in order to curb the drug related epidemic of crime and lawlessness. Perhaps a national police state, to restore and maintain law and order. We are told.

Without a doubt, we are kept well informed today by those who want us to be keenly aware of our world’s condition. But has it ever occurred to you that someone may be hoodwinking us; that we might be victims, being set up and conditioned to accept “change”, — change in the social structure of the world at large and change in your own lifestyle? Whether you want to believe or accept it or not, this idea of change is part of a world wide revolution that is now in progress; that you will soon come to recognize fully as the, not so benevolent, “New World Order”.

Think about this, citizens of the world, if you will even dare to think contrary to what you have been programmed to believe. But are we all so gullible, so naive, so blind, as to not see through the clever maneuvers the power brokers behind the scenes are manipulating us into? Are we to seriously believe, that unless mankind acts right now, this very decade, that the world situation is so hair raisingly critical, that life on our planet is going to cease to exist? Of course we’ve been well informed of the nuclear weapons that can overkill our race ten times over, if the powers-that-be so desire. But what about the so called climate crisis, the economic and Y2K crisis, that the intellectual computer designers could not seem to foresee the chaos they were creating only thirty years away, a food crisis when grain is rotting in the silos, drugs, with its no-win war policy, that is spawning an ever expanding circle of moral degenerates, where moral decline reaches even the highest levels of government, as our nation is victimized and divided by the President Clinton scandal? Do you begin to see maybe a little suspicious trend here?

NEW WORLD ORDER

All of these numerous crises seem to be rushing in at us all at once to flood and overwhelm us with a feeling of great despair. But in reality, even if these crises were valid, which one of them could you convict the general public of actually being guilty of causing or creating? Or which of us, for that matter, as a mere citizen, could correct, even if we wanted to? But if you listen closely, it’s the super-wealthy elite power brokers of the world that is screaming at us poor working class citizens telling us that the world is in a shambles. And with not too much discernment, it is ‘they’, not us, that have actually caused and created the world problems. So the question is asked — and you may not even have to stretch your imagination too much for the answer — could it be possible that there is a behind-the- scenes movement, a plot and a plan; yes, even call it a conspiracy, that is well networked and orchestrated, that is preparing the inhabitants of the world to sense a ‘need’ to change — from the decayed and unworkable ‘old order’, to their glorious “New World Order”?

As the world is being bombarded and barraged ruthlessly with its myriad of problems, Big Brother always seems to come up with the right solution and a law, that takes away another one of our freedoms; herding us a little bit tighter into their corral of regulations. There is no doubt, the world would not even be interested in any new system of ‘Global Government’, unless it could be fully persuaded that it really needs one. Remember, the perfect slave is one that is convinced he is a happy one. And certainly for the purpose of convincing us, it serves quite well if a “climate of panic” is trumpeted to hasten their New World Order goal to a climax. There is no better example of this than the two world wars, when after each war, “progress” was made by establishing a supranational organization for the alleged purpose of promoting world peace. First the League of Nations, then the United Nations; each organization bringing us closer to the realization of a one-world government. Surely the United Nations today, is the closest thing to world government that humanity has ever known.

The ‘New World Order’ is really not something new. And even though the term New World Order was unheard of twenty years ago (in 1999), it is actually a catch-phrase that expresses a goal that a certain religious-political world power has been working toward for centuries. They have also termed their master plan to bring the whole world under the heading of one centralized rule — that is, politically, economically, and religiously — “The Grand Design”. This plot, and even the term New World Order, has been kept a tight secret, known only to a select few. Only now, after the stage has been fully set and they can see the globalist golden dream shimmering tantalizingly within their reach, have those who have been scheming begun to talk publicly of their humanitarian goal. And for those who could recognize the signs, it was no coincidence that ever since former President George Bush’s Desert Storm Middle East war campaign, we have begun to hear the vague term, New World Order; first by George Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev, and then by others. But even now, we are not told just what the New World Order precisely means.

In order to keep us all dociled and pacified as each crisis looms to devour us, and an outcry of public alarm is heard, new laws are then legislated to ward off and regulate the manufactured monster — for the peace and safety and well being of our concerned society. In other words, Big Brother in his benevolent love for us, saves us from the very menace he has intentionally created against us, so that we will all cry out for his “protection”; resulting in tighter laws to regulate and enslave us. Isn’t this quite the same as the ‘Protection Money’ demanded by the Mafia against the tyranny they themselves inflict? And then with all the hype and hoopla, it is advertised and promoted by the media that there is in progress a great movement for a “change”. We are led to believe, that this sudden movement is now coming from a spontaneous reaction of concerned grass root citizens of the world, appearing to come from the bottom up, as something the people of the world “want”, not the top down. So coming in the name of democracy, non-threatening, and not as a system being forced upon us, the inhabitants of ‘Mother Earth’ rush to embrace a program that gives hope for world peace and unity — unaware of the hidden agenda that is in store for them.

For those readers being introduced into this bold message for the first time, to impress upon you the enormity and seriousness of the issues at stake into which the world is about to be plunged, and so you may know for a surety that you are being ‘set up’, it is vital to share with you in one area alone, pertinent information that should convince any skeptic who has any doubt as to where the globalist ideas are coming from. This information seems to be so classified that not a word has been passed on to us by the media, and no book to our knowledge, except one, has been written about it. It has to do with a series of meetings starting in the 1940’s and culminating in 1959 by the founding of the organization called, the World Constitution and Parliament Association (WCPA).

Since the WCPA was founded, ongoing meetings have been carried on throughout the world, the latest in Lisbon, Portugal, from 29 April to May 1991. The organization’s purpose was to forge a world constitution which it produced and adopted in 1977. The resulting document came to be known as the “Constitution for the Federation of Earth”. Further meetings have been instrumental in forming a World Cabinet to serve until twenty-five countries have ratified the world constitution, making it then eligible to usher in a full-blown world government. Quietly prepared and waiting to be implemented, is the document that will soon efficiently serve its masters in their rule over us. Should you desire further information, including ample evidence of reproductions of the original WCPA documents, the reader is encouraged to purchase the eye-opening book, “En Route to Global Occupation”, by Gary H. Kah.

There are other secret and semi-secret organizations such as the International Bankers, the Council on Foreign Relations, The Bilderberger Group, Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission, the New Age Movement, the Illuminati, and Freemasonry, who are all deeply involved in global politics, and who actively promote the uniting of the people of our planet under a New World Order. However, (and understand this well, because it is extremely important) these all are but mere “front” organizations, behind which the true source of power hides and uses to distribute and channel its designs. And as in any conspiracy, secrecy and shifting attention and blame away from itself is paramount to its success. But “this” conspiracy is above all conspiracies, and makes all others pale in significance. No stakes could be higher, no prize could be greater. To rule the entire world, and to control every human being in it, begins to touch upon a realm that is beyond the scope of man’s grasp. For whether man wants to acknowledge it or not, there is a Sovereign God who is watching and promises to intervene.

CHRIST — OUR ONLY HOPE

It is therefore with a very solemn dedication that the words of this book is sent on its mission. Without prejudice or offense toward any persons, but only in love to uncover, reveal, and share the truth about “the system” and other organizations who have confederated themselves together for the oppression of their brothers and sisters; citizens less powerful than they are. But in order to escape the risks of deception, and being side- tracked into believing a falsehood through the most powerful and convincing source of influence conveyed by the media which “this” conspiracy has at its disposal, we raise up that Book given to mankind for our guide and final word for truth, the Holy Scriptures of the Sovereign and Almighty God. Being forewarned, you are then admonished to draw near to our Saviour Jesus Christ, for only through Him is our victory over this conspiracy possible.

To a world that is racked with insurmountable problems, there is great personal solace and comfort to know, and with complete confidence, that there is a loving God that not only cares, but intends to intervene and make things right. But the heartbreaking side of this story is that our sophisticated society today is completely oblivious of this God; including those remarkable unbroken promises that He has given in His Word, the Scriptures. Amazing promises, when known, that become such a soothing balm when facing our world’s ills. And by a God that proves He does not lie and we can trust; by giving us His elaborate promises centuries beforehand, and then are precisely kept. Only the true and loving God of creation has that ability to do this.

It is revealed in Scripture that man, from the very beginning, is bent on rejecting God’s love and authority and prefers his own systems of rulership and worship. And it has brought untold misery, death, and problems upon the earth. It is a struggle that is as old as man himself, and God in Scripture has ‘promised’ that this struggle for world domination and world kingdoms with its false religion would continue until He intervenes in man’s affairs and sets up His own Kingdom of love and rightness.

It is for this purpose that the pages that you are about to embark on wants to make known; that the God who actually created and shows His love for us, certainly is not responsible for man’s woes. But it is man himself, in his rebellion against God, that have brought on these woes and with staggering consequences. Yet in spite of man’s obstinacy, God in His love, so that mankind would not be fearfully groping in the dark, has revealed specifically in Scripture those rebellious world empires that would arise to usurp and show contempt for God’s authority and support a world false religion. It is the purpose of this book to boldly pull back the veil of misinformation and deception of these world systems and that collaborating false religion, that the reader may see and understand today’s current events, and prove in his own mind what is truth.

To begin, anyone that has studied world history, even casually, knows that the last four world empires that rose and fell in succession until our very own day were Babylon, Medo- Persia, Greece, and Rome. And it is Rome, the last of these world empires, that today, the whole Western civilization looks to for its roots. But God revealed to the prophet Daniel, in chapters 2 and 7 of his book, that these four world empires would emerge centuries before they appeared, even describing some of their basic characteristics. God, in Daniel chapter 7, used symbols of animals to represent these political world powers. But Rome, the last world power, is described in Scripture to be diverse or different from all the others. In fact, it was so different and so terrible that even though God used beastly animals of nature to represent the first three empires, there was no animal in nature to even compare it with the fourth. Daniel called it the fourth “Beast”. The prophet John in the book of Revelation, chapter 13:1-10, was shown this same power and also called it the “Beast”. It is a political and religious world power. It received worship. It is ROME!

It is wrong to be kidding and deceiving ourselves. The Beast described in Scripture is not some oversized computer sitting in Brussels, Belgium, as some suggest. It sits on seven hills in Italy. The history of Rome, even though it has been greatly suppressed, is filled with shocking horror stories. Its methods of execution and torture go far beyond our human imagination. These were not isolated cases, but instead, cruelty and brutality were the socially accepted norm among the ruling class, and became the amusement and recreation for the general populace. The early Christians had read in Scripture, (Daniel 7:7, 11 & 12) the “fourth beast dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, and it had great iron teeth, it devoured and break in pieces and stamped the residue with the feet of it”, and so they knew what was in store for them under Rome’s rule. They also knew from Scripture that Rome was to undergo certain phases or physical changes in her long reign, but was to continue to exist right up until God set up His own Kingdom; destroying Rome in the burning flame at our Lord’s second coming. The people of God, whether Jewish, early Christians, or true Christians today, know exactly what to expect from Rome — the “Beast”.

God promised and foretold in Scripture that Rome was to undergo three separate phases. The first is what we know as historically, Pagan Rome. As a world empire, Rome was to collapse and then divide into small national fragments. But in an attempt to bind these national fragments together, for over a thousand years, the supreme pontiff or Pontifex Maximus of the Babylonian Mystery Religion began a reign of terror in Europe unparalleled in human history. This was Rome’s second phase, when Europe was ruled by the Roman Universal Church and is known historically as Papal Rome. But Papal Rome was to lose its power too, and did. Seeking to regain that lost power, the world today is racing pellmell toward Rome’s third and last stage of determined world domination.

It must be clearly understood, that the Church of Rome, even though she is not openly dominating the world just yet, is by far the most powerful, wealthiest, and influential organization upon the face of the earth. During Rome’s second phase called, Papal Rome, the Roman Catholic Church of those medieval times held the population of the Western world in an iron grip of tyranny from which there was no escape. Her method of compelling others to conform was by stark terror and torture. She set up her ecclesiastical tribunals called the “Inquisition”, and justified them by saying it was all in the name of God. Then she went about her inhuman acts of torture to purge the world of what she considered nonconformists and branded them as heretics.

It is so very hard today to imagine how anyone could watch and inflict systematic tortures designed to bring to its victims the most severest and agonizing pain, to the very point of death, yet denying death, and then start the process all over again — even on an animal, much less another human being. How can we today grasp the living conditions of the common serf and peasant under the feudal system, where kings and the higher clergymen lived in pomp, luxuries, and extravagances of every kind, while the peasant and lower parish priests, who associated and sympathized with them, scratched out their grim existence without hope of redress or relief from their oppressions, except only by death. Rome, even today, does not deny this barbaric time of her history. She just does not want to advertise it and prefers to keep it quiet till she can employ it once again.

These atrocities are so repugnant to the character of the true God, which is love, that no wonder the Church of Rome forbids God’s Word, the Scriptures, to be read. Rome hates to have her crimes exposed. She goes to great lengths to censor and establish elaborate cover-ups. And she can because of her powerful influence. But the God of love looks down upon His stricken people and buoys their sinking spirits by giving them hope and confidence in His Word, that it will not always be this way. God exposes these world political systems and its Babylonian religion so that His people may see and compare with His own character, proving how far the depraved mind can go when it is controlled by Satan.

The central theme running throughout all the Scriptures, from cover to cover, is that One Person, Jesus Christ, who as a Gift from God to humanity, adamantly declares that He will triumph over the oppressors and pick up the downtrodden. But for those who have never been told this wonderful good news, they must be led to God’s Word so that they may partake and be refreshed. They must understand God’s promises. And because Rome has affected the whole world, we must have a basic knowledge of what Rome was like yesterday, if we are to understand what Rome’s ambitions are today. If we are to clearly understand Biblical terms like “the Beast and his Image”, and appreciate Scriptural language that states, “she was ‘drunken’ with the blood of the saints”, we must know the ‘ferociousness’ of Rome’s past, to see why the God of Scripture would describe Rome as “the Beast”.

This book’s purpose in unveiling Rome’s dark past, must bring to light certain specific areas of the Church of Rome’s history that she has purposely and effectively covered up. It must emphasize strongly that the Church of Rome at one time was the most powerful and brutal political-religious institution upon planet earth. That it also lost that temporal power to crush and destroy those who did not agree with her. This book will show how that ‘loss’ becomes directly connected and associated with movements and organizations, (some that many people have never heard of) such as the Knights Templar, Protestantism (Note: The author surely doesn’t mean genuine Protestantism which is nothing less than Bible based Christianity!), the Inquisition, Freemasonry, the Jesuits, the Illuminati, and even how Rome was very much involved in the founding of the United States of America. But most important, it will show how in Rome’s fanatical obsession to regain that loss, she has launched a “Grand Design” upon an unsuspecting world to bring it once again under her control. We must explore Rome’s hidden obscured past, so that the correct view of today’s end time current events and their relationship with the “Beast and his Image” and the New World Order can be known.

THE LORD’S COMMISSION

The sovereign God has given to man in the Scriptures a clear description of the two powers that are to play the key role in the events just prior to the second coming of our Lord. The cowardly ministers of God today, have refused to call out the names of these powers because it would stir up the wrath of that very powerful and influential Universal (meaning Catholic) Church, and it involves that world Superpower Nation that the Church of Rome intends to use to enforce its doctrines.

Consider the early Christians who lived during those times of the Pagan Roman Empire, and understood perfectly through Scripture the atrocities that Rome was to commit in its opposition to the truths of God. Were they not also under tremendous social and mental pressures in their decisions to either bow to Caesar or be torn by lions at the coliseum? Woe to those who claim to be representatives of God’s Word, and fail to make known the truth because of fear of controversy.

Feed my sheep! is the commission given by our Lord. Our world is on the brink of disaster. The storm is coming, swiftly moving and relentless in its fury, as it sweeps all away in its path. Will we be guilty of not sounding the warning before it is too late? The sheep are hungry for truth. Too long they’ve been denied vital nourishment because of clever deceptions. This presentation will surely ruffle many feathers, as it searches out those unexplored areas that will lay bare the deceptions and expose the truth which Rome has for so long diligently kept hidden to accomplish her “Grand Design”.

The word “Protestant” means in a religious sense, to protest Rome — her atrocities, her abuses, and her unScriptural doctrines. However, the protester of Rome fell into two main categories. The one group that everyone knows of, are those who protest from a firm Scriptural viewpoint. The second group, were those who had a ‘personal’ vendetta or grudge against Rome without any Scriptural consideration. It is this group especially that we want to intensely identify, who no one has the vaguest idea about, that are a complete historical mystery, and yet, were to quietly and drastically change the course of the whole world. But the fact remained, to protest Rome, whether king or peasant, meant swift and exact punishment. The profound question is: how could anyone shake themselves from the tyrannies of Rome? The answer lies in the history of this mysterious second group.

Secular history teaches that a vigorous movement to reform Rome began right after the invention of the printing press, in 1450, which made the Bible available to the downtrodden common people, and they began reading for themselves the truth of Rome’s errors; as compared with Scripture. While this is certainly true, what history fails to show, is that another event had occurred over a hundred years before, that had rocked all of Europe like nothing before or since. An event so traumatic, that it shook the Roman institution to its very foundation, and set in motion seeds of such bitterness, hatred, and anger, that were so deeply planted and nourished in every level of society, that it prepared minds and moods for centuries afterward.

It began abruptly on the date known as the day of misfortune, — but no one today seems to know quite the reason why — Friday the 13th, October 1307, that the most vicious arrest, suppression, and termination of that group of warrior knights, called the Knights of Templar, took place. You must bear in mind, that these were not just ordinary men, but were of the most noble aristocratic elite ruling class of Europe. As Knights, they were unswervingly Catholic, and became nearly as powerful, wealthy, and affluent an organization as the Papacy itself. The Roman Church treacherously crushed them as an Order of Knights, but because of their unique position in world affairs, it certainly could not snuff out their political influence or smother their brewing resentment. It was this group of powerful, wealthy, and bitter men that were capable to form an underground movement against Rome that finally erupted into the Protestant Revolution. It was not possible, anymore than it is today, for the poor, defenseless, haggard common peasants to go up against the establishment without being brutally crushed. It is this vague area of history that Rome wants to be kept completely unknown; that will be exciting for us to venture into and explore.

Continued in Chapter 2 The Knights Templar Paves Way For Protestant Reformation.

All chapters of The Grand Design Exposed

Continued from Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part IV..

We must not close our brief outline of the last, or Christian, section of the Divine programme without any allusion to its most considerable document—the Book of Revelation, the saintly John’s contribution towards the end of the first century. This last book of the Bible consists almost entirely of an apocalypse of the future; that is, of what was future in the days when Domitian was reigning in Rome (emphasis mine), and John suffering under his cruel tyranny in the lonely island of Patmos.

As in the Old Testament we have first historic books, then didactic and poetic writings, and then the volume of prophecy, containing all the extant works of sixteen different authors, so in the New we have first the four Gospels and the Book of Acts, which are historic, then the Epistles, which are didactic, devotional, and hortatory, and lastly a book of prophecy. It is true that, as we have seen, predictions of the first importance, fundamental and far-reaching in character, are scattered through both Gospels and Epistles. But the Apocalypse alone is wholly prophetic, and it thus occupies in the New Testament the place of the major and minor prophets of the Old. It finishes the book with a foreview of the then commencing, but now closing, age, including multitudes of definite particulars, and glancing on more briefly into ages yet to come.

It would, therefore, be a conspicuous omission to leave the Book of Revelation entirely out of account in this last section of our programme. It is a principal part of it; and as it traces beforehand the outline of the main secular and ecclesiastical events which were to occur in the sphere of the Roman earth, and as the outline has been most accurately realized in history, it would seem as if this section would serve our evidential argument even better than the previous ones.

And indeed it would do so were we at liberty here to make use of it; but two reasons forbid our doing this. In the first place, the Apocalypse is, we may say, not written in our Bibles in English, but in ancient Eastern hieroglyphics. It needs therefore translation before its statements can be adduced in evidence. Those statements are nevertheless just as precise, and the predictions they embody are consequently just as capable of verification, as if they had been made in plain non-symbolic language. The key by which they are to be translated is found in Scripture itself, and the work presents no real difficulty. But it takes time. Exposition of the book must precede any evidential argument based on its prophetic statements, and for this a whole volume, rather the closing pages of one, is requisite. And, secondly, the nature of some of its principal predictions is such as to have caused the book to become a very battlefield of controversy. The Church of Rome is in it so definitely indicated and branded as apostate, that its advocates have been driven to the use of every possible expedient to avoid the application of the predictions to Rome papal, and to refer them either to Rome pagan—that is, to the past—or else to some power still future, some antichrist yet to come. This misapplication of the central prediction dislocates the rest of the visions, and introduces confusion into a prophecy conspicuous for its order. Hence a determination of the application as well as of the meaning of the predictions would be needful before any use of their fulfilment, as evidence of inspiration, could be attempted.

It is true that in our last section we have employed its predictions of the apostasy as confirmatory of the plain prophecies of the Apostle Paul. But an angelic interpretation of this special point settles its application for all candid minds. The majority of the visions are not thus interpreted or applied; and hence before we could demonstrate the fulfilment of the prophecies of Patmos as a whole, the meaning of each and all of its symbols would have to be determined, and their true application proved by solid arguments.

For this purpose it is evident that a separate book is required, and such a one we hope, if the Lord permit, to publish ere long, as a sequel to the present volume.

It is already partially prepared, and will be completed as soon as leisure can be secured from more practical engagements. If any of our readers wish to expedite its appearance, they can do so materially by sending financial help to our large Missionary Institute, formed to assist in the evangelization of the world during the brief remainder of this dispensation.¹

¹ See prospectus of East London Institute for Home and Foreign Missions.

This work is an extensive and important one, and requires a large income to sustain its efficiency. To secure this demands, naturally, a very considerable share of our time and attention, so that help sent to it makes it the easier for us to use the press for the diffusion of Divine truth. We would urge Christian readers who feel the deep importance of this, in these days of doubt and unbelief, to act with all the liberality they can towards our missionary enterprise.¹

¹ In the meantime we may refer to books already in existence which give, with great fulness, the historic exposition of the Apocalypse, and among these the first is, unquestionably, the learned and elaborate work of the late Rev. E. B. Elliot, in four volumes, or his briefer book, “The Last Prophecy.”

While, therefore, we can make no attempt to demonstrate in this place the fulfilment of the Apocalyptic predictions of the Apostle John, we may state in a few words the nature of the evidence they afford.

The Book of Revelation is an essential and integral part of Scripture, and occupies a place in the volume of prophecy which, if we had it not, would present a blank without any previous parallel. Every event of importance to the people of God and to the history of redemption had, under the old Jewish dispensation, been predicted before it occurred, as, for instance, the birth of Isaac, and of Jacob and Esau, the exaltation of Joseph in Egypt, the descent of the Israelites into Egypt, and their exodus from it; the forty years in the wilderness, the entrance to the land, the subjugation of the Canaanites, the building of the temple, the separation of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, the Assyrian capture of the ten tribes, and its date, the Babylonish captivity, and its date, the succession of the Persian kings, the reign of Alexander the Great, and the wars of the dynasties of Syria and Egypt, the birth, ministry, and death of Messiah, and the judgments and desolations of Jerusalem and Judea. All these events were foretold before they came to pass, as well as many others. Now the prophecies of our Lord and of the apostles as regards the Christian age did not foretell historic events in which the Church would be interested, and by which she would be vitally affected, they did not foretell her fortunes in the world so much as the deep, underlying principles of her existence, the moral character of her surroundings, and the development both of spiritual life in the true Church and gross corruption in the apostate Church, Events of an outward political character were not predicted either in the Gospels or Epistles in connection with Christian history. The fall of Jerusalem affected, of course, the early Christians, but it was essentially an event of Jewish history—its last episode.

Was it not to be expected that, before the volume of inspiration was closed, a programme of the eighteen Christian centuries of a more outward, definite, event-predicting kind would be given? The saints of this age would need such a one even more than the Jews of the preceding age. The wide diffusion of the Church through all lands, the great changes it was to undergo, the strange and subtle temptations it was to experience, the disguised enemies it was to encounter, the cessation of inspired guides and teachers, with John himself, the long ages to elapse before Christ’s return,—all would lead us to expect—judging by analogy— that the outline of the events to take place in the world in which she was destined to move, would be placed in the hands of the Church before the canon of Scripture closed. We should not expect much reference to merely political events as such, however great the world might deem them, but only to those which directly influenced the redeeming work of God in the earth,—in other words, Church history.

The age was to be a long one, faith and hope would be sorely tried, experience would show that the promises of Christ’s speedy return were to be understood on the scale of “a thousand years—as one day”; and without some orderly serial prophecy to guide the expectation and sustain the faith of the Church, there would be a danger that both might, in the course, and especially towards the close, of the age, fail. Such predictions had been given in the Jewish age; would they be withheld in the more enlightened Christian dispensation? Every analogy would lead us to expect the reverse.

Yet, on the other hand, Christ had made it perfectly plain that He wished every generation of His people to live in constant watchfulness for His return. To reveal plainly from the first either the events or the chronology of the Christian age would entirely have prevented this, and rendered watchfulness impossible, save for the last generation. How was the apparent difficulty to be met? How was a revelation of the future, sufficiently clear to answer all desirable purposes, to be made without being so explicit as prematurely to unfold the facts and foreseen length of this age? The problem was solved by Divine wisdom in this wonderful Apocalypse. It presents a consecutive and continuous outline of the occurrences which would take place in the outward history of the Church from John’s day to the second advent, and beyond; but it presents it in symbolic language, in a form which would veil the true meaning for a time, but would allow it to become progressively clear in the later stages of the dispensation.

In its chronological statements of periods prior to the second advent, this book employs, in harmony with its general plan, the year-day system of representing the orbital or annual, by the axial or diurnal, revolution of the earth—a day stands for a year. This has been proved, however, only by the lapse of time, and could not have been certainly anticipated at first. As a matter of fact, the writings of the Fathers and of the early Church show us that while the outline of the great eternal future to follow the second advent was clearly understood in early times, yet that the prophecies of this present evil age of Satanic power were scarcely comprehended at all. Light as to their meaning dawned on the Church very gradually as the centuries passed away; and not until the apostasy was fully developed was even a partial comprehension of their meaning at all widespread.

With the Reformation came a great illumination as to the scale of the chronology and the scope of the prophecy, and ever since it has been increasingly understood and applied, until a recognition of its relation to, and absolute harmony with, other and earlier prophecies is common now among students of Scripture.

This harmony is evident, and lies so on the surface, as well as in the depths of the book, that it may be noted even by cursory readers. The Apocalypse is not isolated from the rest of the prophetic scriptures. It is intimately related to the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament, and agrees perfectly with the other prophetic teachings of our Lord and His apostles in the New. As to its relation to the former— the Book of Daniel—its subject is the same, and its symbols are the same.

At the time when John lived, the three earlier empires of Daniel had passed away; but the fourth, or Roman, was in the zenith of its power, and was destined to continue in existence for nearly two thousand years. Daniel had briefly outlined its character and career under the striking symbol of the ten-horned wild beast. John enlarges the Daniel foreview, employing the same symbols. Three times over in the pages of the Apocalypse this terrible ten-horned wild beast is portrayed (chs. xii., xiii, xvii.). Moreover, the most notable feature of this wild beast as represented in Daniel,— its blasphemous, persecuting “little horn,” whose action draws down the advent of the Ancient of Days in judgment,— reappears in the Apocalypse with fuller detail and in more vivid colouring. Its rise, place, power, pride, tyranny, blasphemy, are the same; its duration as assigned in Daniel and the Apocalypse is the same, and the time and manner of its destruction are the same. This identity is indeed the principal key to the Apocalypse.

Secondly, the parables of our Lord are in similar agreement with the Apocalypse. In the parables the king is seen to go into a far country to receive the investiture of his kingdom, and to return for its exercise; in the Apocalypse he is seen in the heavens, and his second advent in manifested glory is symbolized and foretold. In the parables we have the marriage of the king’s son; in the Apocalypse “the marriage of the Lamb.” In the parables the virgins are awakened by the midnight cry, “Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye forth to meet him”; in the Apocalypse the advent is represented together with its accompanying events. In the parables the conduct of the faithful and faithless servants is described, and the reward of their respective works; in the Apocalypse we see the two classes and the issues of their acts. The Lord comes, and His reward is with Him, and He gives every man according to his works. The lesson of the parables as to the kingdom which is the everlasting recompense of faithful service is repeated in the Apocalypse, with a fulness of detail and splendour of imagery peculiarly its own.

The same harmony is traceable between the prophetic teachings of the apostles of our Lord and those of this final New Testament prophecy. The oft-repeated warnings and predictions occurring in the Epistles of Paul with reference to the great apostasy which was to take place in the Church of Christ—predictions echoed more or less clearly and emphatically by all the apostles—are confirmed by the wonderful Apocalyptic symbolization of that apostasy, especially that part of it which portrays its connection with Rome, and the persecution of Christ’s faithful witnesses by the apostate Church. So Jude’s prophecy of the advent of Christ in judgment on the ungodly (quoted from Enoch, “the seventh from Adam”) is in harmony with the detailed vision of that advent and of that judgment in the Apocalypse; and so also Peter’s prophecy of the new heavens and the new earth. The Book of Revelation enlarges this last into the exquisite imagery of its twenty-first and twenty-second chapters, adding a multitude of details, of definite features, entirely omitted in Peter’s earlier prediction of the ultimate issue of Divine Providence and of the eternal state of mankind.

The object of this final prophecy of Scripture was not, however, mainly to reveal more of the advent and post-advent events than had been previously revealed, but to unfold those of the interval which was to precede the advent. The closing section of the book, from chapter xix. onwards, relates, it is true, to what is still future; but the previous prophetic portion of Revelation, comprising twelve or thirteen chapters, is fulfilled, and not unfulfilled, prophecy. It was announced to John as a revelation of “things that must shortly come to pass”; and of some of them it was said “the time is at hand,” Accordingly, it has a series of consecutive visions—as we can only state, without attempting to prove, at this time—of the glory and prosperity of the empire of Rome under the Antonines in the second century, of its military and fiscal troubles in the third century, and of the terrible famines and pestilences which followed; of the prolonged pagan persecutions of the early Church, and of the noble army of martyrs under them; of their triumph and patience, and of the great revolution, unparalleled in the Roman earth, when paganism was proscribed and the empire became Christian. It traces then the rapid development of the professing Church, and marks the contrast between it and the true Church, and subsequently it follows out the fortunes of the Roman empire, in which the young Church had to develop. It presents, under the symbols of the four first trumpets, the series of tremendous judgments under which the empire went to pieces in the Gothic, Hunnish, and Vandal invasions of the fourth and fifth centuries; the rise and career of the great Mohammedan power in the Eastern empire,—first, under its Saracenic, and then under its Turkish form; and the coincident rise among the Gothic kingdoms of the West of a revived power of Rome, of a rule ecclesiastic in nature, blasphemous, corrupting, idolatrous, and persecuting in character, connected with the apostate Church of which it is the head.

It recounts by anticipation the existence, during the tyranny of this revived Roman power, of witnesses for Christ, who would, throughout its career, protest against its assumptions, and suffer even unto death from its wild-beast-like cruelty; of the sudden resurrection of these slain witnesses at the era of the Reformation, and of the rise of powerful Protestant nations soon after that revival of primitive Christianity. Then it goes on to portray the outpouring of judgments of a consuming character on the papal power itself, as was fulfilled in the French revolution and in all the subsequent anti-papal revolutions of this century; also the similar preparatory consumption and decay of the Turkish, or Ottoman, power, even to the verge of extinction; and, lastly, a great final revolution in Europe, ending in the fall of Babylon, or Rome papal, and of Rome itself. At this point the fulfilled glides into the unfulfilled, and it is a point to which history has almost brought us. The next events predicted are the second advent of Christ and the marriage of the Lamb.

Thus the special office of the Book of Revelation in the Divine programme of the world’s history, is to unfold to the people of God in this dispensation the outline of the history of the Church in the world, from the beginning of the second century to the end of the age—the period of Israel’s rejection and dispersion—the eighteen Christian centuries. It also describes the great crisis at which this age melts into the next following, or millennial age, much more in detail than any previous prophecy, presenting in their order its successive incidents; and it adds some particulars of the later crisis at its close, through which that age passes into the eternal state or new heavens and new earth. From this last portion must be learned, rather than from any earlier and less orderly prophecy, the sequence and succession of the closing episodes of the story of human redemption. By its position as the last part of the last section of the programme it has the authority of a final statement from Christ of what His Church is to look for, and it closes with the words: “Behold, I come quickly; and My reward is with Me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” “Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!”

To sum up our argument from the New Testament section of the Divine programme:—

A fresh outburst of light from heaven took place in the first century of our era. An entirely new view of the then approaching and commencing future was given to the people of God on earth. The essential facts on which that new future depended were not only foretold, but in the course of that century accomplished. The amount of fresh light imparted at this time may be estimated by contrasting the hopes and expectations of Mary and Elisabeth, Simeon and Anna, Zacharias and John the Baptist, at the beginning of the century, with those of Paul the aged, and of the saintly Apostle John, at its close. Israel and her fortunes filled the view of the former; “every creature under heaven ”—“all the world”—‘all nations and kindreds, and peoples and tongues”—that of the latter. A human, yet superhuman, Messiah to be born, and to deliver the Jews, was the expectation of the first group; a crucified, risen, and ascended Saviour of the world, to come again in power and great glory—of the second. The foretold and fulfilled fact, of Israel’s rejection of Christ, had made the great change, and the Christian programme revealed the amazing difference between the results which had been expected and those which would actually ensue. It sketched clearly, though in outline only, the fortunes of the Jewish nation, of the Roman world, of the true Church, of the false Church, and of the papal dynasty which would rule it. It gave consequently a most comprehensive and, at the same time, a most definite foreview of the main historic features of the dispensation then beginning and now drawing to a close.

This anticipative outline was entirely new and original in most of its features, though it harmonized with that of Daniel in others. It could not have been sketched from analogy or from memory, for it resembled nothing in the past. It was drawn by Jewish pens, and yet it was diametrically opposed to Jewish anticipations. It could not be imaginative, for it was full of definite, yet most unlikely, predictions, embracing a vast variety of historical episodes affecting millions of mankind for many ages, and history has actually fulfilled them all.

The facts now inscribed in order on the records of the past were noted, and that in the same order, in this programme of the future. The great difference between the two is that the former gives in detail what has been; the latter, only in outline and principle, what would be. As a great philosopher goes behind phenomena in quest of law, and sums up countless facts in one great formula or statement of underlying principle, so the revealing spirit, passing by the multitudinous and often confusing details of history, includes volumes in a verse and ages in an expression, seizing for prediction only the fundamental feature which associates innumerable earthly events.

Thus our Lord, for instance, traced clearly on the chart of the then opening age which He drew two great broadly divergent streams of events as resulting from His own death and resurrection. He no more paused to specify particulars than a geographer would to mark the trees and bushes on the banks of the great river whose course he indicates by a certain line. The traveller who descends the river estimates the geographer’s knowledge of it by the correspondence of its general direction from its source to the ocean, not by the unavoidable absence of detail. It would be ten thousand chances to one, as all experience proves, that the true windings of the stream could have been rightly indicated by a stranger to the country. So the omission of minor particulars in no wise invalidates the evidence of inspiration afforded by predictions which are clearly correct when compared with the general course of events extending over ages.

What were the two streams laid down thus on the chart of the eighteen Christian centuries by Christ at their very outset?

The first was the turbid and troubled torrent of Jewish history. Its source was pointed out—their rejection of Him self; its course was defined—Titus, Vespasian, Hadrian— myriads of slaughtered and captive Jews—the state of Jerusalem and Judea, the Saracenic conquests, the Ottoman occupation of Palestine, the dispersion of Israel in all lands and their long-continued and great tribulation, “until” a yet future day—all these events are foretold, though summed up in a few sentences.

The other great stream was outlined as plainly in the parables and predictions of Christ. It includes all that is meant by the propagation of the gospel and growth of the early Church, the world-wide diffusion of Christianity, the age of martyrs, the conversion of the Roman empire and of the Gothic nations to Christianity, and the character and course of Christendom.

Were either of these great streams of events visible in Christ’s day or from His point of view? As well ask are the Tigris and Euphrates visible from London streets to-day! How then came they to be thus clearly predicted? Have not the streams themselves flowed steadily and persistently for ages? What long catalogues of events go to form the waters of the Jewish stream! And as to the other—the Christendom stream — why, Eusebius and Sozomen, Bede and Baronius, Gibbon and Ranke, Mosheim and Milner, Hallam and D’Aubigné, Carlyle and Froude, and a hundred other historians unite their rivulets to make but a small contribution to the flood of its mighty waters! We stand ourselves this day on the banks of the ever-widening and deepening stream. It is flowing precisely in the direction in which the Prophet of Galilee said long since it would flow, and every sign portends that it will merge into the ocean at the time indicated in His last Revelation. How came He to select these two all-important streams of events, and to anticipate so clearly and correctly the general course of each?

Again, how came He through His apostles to indicate the future careers and true characters of two great dissimilar organizations which should be developed in the midst of Christendom from germs already in existence—a true Church, one in life and one in spirit with Himself, and a false Church, energised by Satan and seated at Rome? Out of all the countless organizations men have formed since the first century, two and only two fixed the prophetic eye and claimed anticipative mention—the true Church, including every living Christian of every land and every age, a great Unity, though invisible as such, a body of which the risen Christ is the Head; and the Church of Rome, a vast worldly ecclesiastical system, whose relations are with the kings of the earth, and which stands opposed to Christ and to His truth. Why were these two thus selected? Have they actually had supreme importance in the world? Can more of the facts of history be proved to have depended on their existence and operation among men, than on any other causes whatsoever? As well inquire whether the light of day depends on the sun, or the waves of ocean on the winds of heaven!

The history of the civilized world for the last eighteen centuries is mainly a record of the conflicting acts and influences of these two all-important unities or organizations. The one has exhibited the working of Christ, the other the working of Satan. The one has evangelized and elevated the nations; the other has intoxicated and corrupted them. The one has proclaimed and spread abroad the truth of God, the other has taught lies in hypocrisy and propagated doctrines of devils; the one Christianized the pagan world, the other paganized afresh the greater part of Christendom.

We speak broadly of contrasted systems in the long run, not of individual exceptions. There have always been members of the true Church entangled in the false. God has always had His children even in Babylon—as He had in Ahab’s day seven thousand hidden ones who had not bowed the knee to Baal. But as contrasted bodies, each doing its appropriate work in the world, history portrays these two even as prophecy predicted them—as of super-eminent importance. Taking thus a broad comprehensive view of the course of history as a whole, can there be any question that the hand that drew these outlines was guided by a mind which beheld beforehand the events of the eighteen Christian centuries?

A review of this programme as a whole suggests a few thoughts with which we must close.

The facts of history have assuredly fulfilled the prophetic outline, and yet what a concatenation of improbabilities it presented! Consider! That a Redeemer should arise from a ruined race, capable, though the woman’s seed, of grappling with the mighty foe of God and man; that of the three races of mankind the mightiest should become the meanest and most degraded, and the least conspicuous the most enlarged and influential;1 that an aged and childless couple should become the parents of many nations, and especially of one great and important people; that a fate terrible as that predicted by Moses for Israel should overtake that special nation, through whom the world was to be blessed; that a Jewish king who lived 3,000 years ago in Palestine should have a Son who should sit on the throne of God in heaven as well as on an earthly throne in Zion, and should be adored by angels and by all nations, though “a reproach of men and despised of the people”; that this great Heir of the throne of Judah should exercise an everlasting and universal sway, though a suffering and dying man; that Messiah the Prince, whose kingdom was to last for ever, should come at a certain predicted time, and, instead of ruling and reigning, be cut off; and, lastly, that our Lord should be rejected by the Jews, and executed by the Romans, and yet conquer the world, without sword or spear, by the force of truth alone; that He should depart, yet remain with His people to the end of the age; that Christendom should become so corrupt as to oppose Christ, and persecute His people to the death; that Rome pagan, becoming Rome Christian, should prove Rome anti-Christian, and be a far worse foe to Christianity than ever paganism had been—all these things seemed, when announced, paradoxical, so unlikely were they ever to occur. Any one of them was a great improbability, and the entire succession was simply a stupendous improbability!

¹ When Moses recorded the Noahic prediction, the race of Ham was far more prominent than any other; it was, indeed, the only one exercising empire at the time.

In no single instance could experience of an analogous character have suggested these predictions. Human sagacity could not have foreseen the facts that fulfilled them, nor could imagination have pictured them. Yet none can question that the course of history broadly regarded has run precisely on these lines. Historians, ancient and modern, the inscriptions and monuments of antiquity, the very constitution and customs of the society amid which we live, all attest that facts have fallen out in harmony with the prophetic programme. There can be no reasonable doubt entertained as to the dates of these predictions, nor, consequently, that they preceded their own fulfilment by hundreds and sometimes by thousands of years. Whatever date be assigned to the Pentateuch, it certainly preceded the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, which it minutely predicts; and whatever the date of the Book of Daniel, it must have been in circulation centuries before the Christian era, since it appears in the Greek Septuagint version. Yet it predicts the exact chronology of the First Advent era, and the desolations of the temple and of Judea, which should follow the rejection of Messiah.

Such announcements of future events cannot, therefore, have been mere fortunate guesses. If any one thinks it possible that they may have been such, let him try whether he can describe in advance, in this year 1888, what will happen in Europe for hundreds and even thousands of years to come; let him insert the precise dates at which certain events will take place, and give the chronological measures of the leading episodes of the future history. The attempt might teach the supernatural nature of the task!

Nor can the long correspondence between prediction and fulfilment which we have indicated have been brought about by chance. The law of probabilities forbids the supposition. Chance might account for a few fulfilments out of many failures, but not for uniform fulfilment without exception. Chance? What! In fulfilments as wide as the world and as broad as humanity, and extending over six millenniums? Impossible!

Had Daniel’s prophecies been mere guesses at what the order of history would be, is it likely that he should have chanced to hit just the right number of the universal Gentile empires—four, and only four? Why should he not have guessed six or seven? Why should he not have made the first the strongest, since Babylon in its might and magnificence was actually before his eyes, instead of making the last so? Could he guess at the iron-like strength and universal dominion of Rome at a time when its first mud wall was the only fortification of the little cluster of outlaws’ huts on the banks of the Tiber? Common sense revolts at the suggestion! The Tiber and the land through which it flows were alike buried beneath the mists of an undreamed-of futurity in Daniel’s day! Was it by chance that he predicted a tenfold division of Rome’s vast empire? Why did he not make it fivefold or fiftyfold, if he shot at a venture? Why did he foresee a double existence for this last of the four empires—a united and a divided? Why did he not attach this singular feature to Medo-Persia, instead of to Rome? Why did he not attribute the swiftness of the he-goat to the Persians, and the heaviness of the bear and the ram to Alexander the Great? How could he by chance assign his emblems with the perfect appropriateness they actually exhibit? Could he imagine the strange phenomena with which the lapse of time has familiarized our minds—that the old Roman empire of the sword should pass into the new papal empire of the crozier, and that millions more should submit to the latter than ever submitted to the former rule of Rome? No sane man can suppose that happy imaginations account for this prophet’s brief but accurate outline of the events of twenty-five centuries—an outline in which experience itself can detect no flaw!

In the Bible foreview of the history of 6,000 years no single instance can be indicated in which events have falsified the Divine programme. This is a startling fact, and an unquestionable one. It foretells, of course, much that is still future, much that is not yet fulfilled; but as regards the 6,000 years that have passed away, its anticipative outline is invariably correct.

Let it be noted, also, that the evidence of Divine inspiration afforded by this prophetic programme is strictly cumulative; it grows in strength with each separate fulfilment. Some of these are on a small scale, as the birth of individuals; others on a vast one, as the history of Rome; some are national, others ecclesiastic, and others are political and international. Like all the works of God, they comprise infinite variety. We need both microscope and telescope to study them. They contain minute and astronomically accurate statements of chronology, which it requires some exact erudition to unravel, and they contain announcements so comprehensive that we must glance over all lands and ages to appreciate their truth. Their cumulative testimony is all the more irresistible. From various quarters, and from various epochs, these prophecies bring each its own witness that the mind which inspired it was omniscient—Divine.

They are all, moreover, evidently the fruit of one and the same mind, for they unfold one plan. The Bible programme is no mass of disconnected and unrelated predictions. There are many petals, but one flower; many cantos, but one grand epic; many chapters, but one book. These prophecies unfold one harmonious scheme for the redemption of the human race; they carry it steadily forward, through patriarchal, Levitical, and gospel economies, to ages to come, when its glorious issue shall be attained. There is no contrariety between one section and another; they form a consecutive series—patriarchal, national, universal.

The channels varied at different times, but the water that flowed through them was always one and the same. Abraham and Moses were very unlike Peter and Paul, and the worlds in which they respectively moved were most dissimilar. But they all unfolded one revelation—the Lamb slain, and the salvation of our race through Him.

Now this is very noteworthy, for, outside the realm of inspiration, nothing similar can be found. Can the entire literature of humanity produce a work wielded into one whole by its own contents, by the unity of purpose that runs through it, by the identity of its successive prophecies, and which was yet written by authors some of whom were contemporary with the Pharaohs of the pyramids, others with Cyrus and Darius, and others again with Josephus and Caesar? The lapse of ages alters merely human religions and philosophies, as it alters customs, manners, and languages. But the prophetic words of Abraham—”My son, God shall provide Himself a lamb”—find their illustration in the lambs of the Mosaic ritual, their echo in John’s “Behold, the Lamb of God!” and their distant reverberation in the Apocalyptic “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain” of the heavenly hosts hereafter.

Nor is it only as regards the First Advent that we find this absolute agreement in their anticipations between authors who were separated by long ages one from the other. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, announced the Second Advent to judge and punish the ungodly; Daniel does the same, and the apostles quote and confirm both. Moses foretold the present Jewish dispersion; so did Jesus Himself. Isaiah and Jeremiah foretold Jewish restoration, and so did Paul (Note: Israel was already restored by the time of Christ! Matthew 10:6  But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.).

Again we say, literature has no parallel case. Compare this with the Avestas of Persia, the Vedas of India, the Koran of Mohammed! “Holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” This is the only rational explanation.

Note, again, the singular definiteness of this programme. How far removed is it from the elastic, hazy, and purposely ambiguous utterances of the oracles of antiquity, which were vague enough to fit any event! Is this the case with Noah’s ethnology? How completely would his predictions have been falsified by history had he assigned Shem’s destiny to Japheth, or vice versa! Is it the case with David? How natural it would have been for him to foretell the glories of his great Son, and to omit His sufferings and humiliations—to dwell on His throne in Zion, and omit His prior Melchizedek reign in heaven! The angularity, order, and exact chronology of Daniel’s predictions again are as far removed from oracular ambiguity as pole from pole! These prophetic foreviews admitted of one fulfilment, and of one only. History must take one certain sharply defined course, or else they would be palpably falsified.

There is nothing general or vague even in the earliest Eden section of our programme, elementary, brief, and enigmatical as it is. Only one great event could fulfil it—the overthrow of moral evil and its author by a suffering Redeemer born of woman. So as to the apostolic outline. It is not content to predict apostasy in a general way, but it defines beforehand the doctrines of the apostate Church, its geographical seat and sphere, and its chronological epoch. This alone is a stamp of truth. No false oracle would risk its reputation by such precision. Our programme does not grope its way doubtfully along, as a blind man might do. It marches boldly forward, planting its feet firmly on the only stepping-stones amid the rushing waters, as one moving with clear, keen vision and steady tread. Amid ten thousand possibilities it selects one, and says, with unhesitating authority at each juncture, although the event be thousands of years ahead, This is what will happen—this, and nothing else. Is this the manner of man? or bears it not rather the stamp and seal of Divinity?

The sublime and dignified moral character of these prophecies is another proof of their Divine origin. They are worthy of God. How far are they removed from anything transitory or trivial, worldly or wicked! Do they subserve any objects of earthly ambition? Do they foster a selfish greed of gain, or pander to pride and human selfishness? Are they not linked with the promulgation of a holy, just, and good law, and with the proclamation of a gracious gospel? Do they not form an integral part of a great economy, the object of which is avowedly and evidently the moral deliverance of a ruined race, the removal of alienation between the blessed God and His creature man, and the everlasting renovation of the earth and of the human race? The very nature of the plan bespeaks the source whence it emanated! Redemption, as revealed in its gradual development, is and can be the fruit of eternal power and infinite love alone.

IN CONCLUSION THEN, IF THE BIBLE OFFERS AS A PLEDGE OF ITS DIVINE INSPIRATION A COMPLETE PROGRAMME OF FUTURE HISTORY; IF IT HAS RECORDED IN ADVANCE THE EVENTS OF AGES TO COME, AND PLACED THE DOCUMENT CONTAINING THE RECORD IN THE POSSESSION OF MANKIND; IF ALL THE EVENTS OF THE SLOWLY UNFOLDING AGES HAVE ACTUALLY FALLEN OUT ACCORDING TO ITS PROPHETIC FOREVIEW; IF ALL THAT WAS PREDICTED HAS HAPPENED, AND NOTHING HAS OCCURRED CONTRARY TO ITS PROGRAMME: THEN, BEYOND ALL QUESTION, WE ARE BOUND TO HOLD THE BIBLE TO BE FROM GOD, AND PRACTICALLY TO ACKNOWLEDGE ITS DIVINE AUTHORITY.

If we reject it, we do so at our peril. We cannot but recognise that The Infinite Intelligence which created our finite intelligence has, by an intellectual proof of the most conclusive kind, commended to us His revelation of Himself and His purposes. He has given to these last days the supreme miracle of fulfilled prophecy.

We may not say, Had we seen the miracles of Christ, had we been convinced by ocular demonstration of His supernatural wisdom and power, we would have believed. Fulfilments of predictions such as we have indicated are every whit as conclusive evidence of supernatural wisdom and power. They are miracles in the realm of mind, and higher than any miracles in the realm of matter. They are also, by their very nature, the proper miracles of the closing days of dispensations. The lapse of time is essential to them. The predictions of Christ and of Paul were no miracles to those that heard them, but they are the mightiest proofs possible of their Divine inspiration to the generations of the nineteenth century.

Men crave in these days some demonstration from the unseen world. Here is abundance of such evidence! Here is clear proof of an unseen and almighty intelligence presiding over human history, and showing us that He does so by describing beforehand the whole course of its events. What need we any further proof? The order of the visible world is evidence of the invisible to him who reads history in the light of prophecy! He beholds the hand of God in human experience, and watches the development of the Divine plan in the progress of the world. He knows, moreover, what events to expect, for he discerns his own chronological position in the stream of time; and as nine-tenths of the programme have already been fulfilled, he doubts not that the remaining tenth will be in its predicted and fast-approaching season.

And further, it is clear that if by so many infallible proofs we are convinced that the Bible as a whole is from God, no difficulties as to the mode of its inspiration, no scientific or critical objections, should be suffered to interfere with our hearty and thankful reception of its revelation. If God has spoken, man is responsible to hear, to believe, and to obey.

And lastly, may we say, that to study the Christian evidences, whether of this or of any other kind, is merely to examine the foundations of the house. It is well at times to do this, But it is better to enter and abide in the house! It is infinitely better to avail one’s self of its shelter from the stormy blast, to enjoy its rich and spacious accommodation, to dwell in safety and peace under its blessed roof, and to gaze on the widespread prospect from its windows.

There are evidences of the truth and Divine origin of the Christian faith, blessed be God!—evidences enough to satisfy any candid inquirer. But, oh, that faith itself— the faith or revelation thus evidenced! What thought can measure its unspeakable preciousness! What tongue can utter, what pen can write, its glorious soul-satisfying, world-transforming nature and effects! Darker than midnight is the problem of existence apart from it,—blank as the grave our prospects, whether as individuals or as a race. Man without a revelation from his Maker, like a rudderless and dismasted vessel, driven by mighty winds over raging billows towards a rock-bound coast, drifts helplessly, hopelessly towards destruction. Redeemed man, enlightened by the beamings of the Sun of righteousness, steers steadily and peacefully into the desired haven. The pilot is at the helm, home is in sight, and though the voyage has been dark and dangerous, it is all but over, and its blessed end and eternal issue is the kingdom of righteousness and glory, prepared and promised “from the foundation of the world.”

Download a PDF file of the entire book of The Divine Programme of The World’s History.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

Continued from Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part III..

Paul—the apostle who was commissioned to unfold the hidden mystery of the vital union of Christ and His members, the mystery of the true Church—was inspired also to reveal a second and strangely contrasted “mystery,” the mystery of the false Church, or great apostasy of the Christian religion.

He does this especially in his first letter to Timothy and in his second letter to the Thessalonians. His words are as follows:—

In his letter to Thessalonica, Paul tells them that the second advent of Christ will not take place—

These passages are evidently prophetic; they predict what had not come to pass at the time they were written, what was to happen later on, “in the latter times” of the dispensation. Hence it falls within the scope of our investigation to ask, Have these predictions been fulfilled? Before adducing the facts which constitute the reply, we must conjoin with these Pauline notices of the great apostasy John’s more detailed though symbolic prediction of it, as it will be convenient to consider the apostolic outline of this subject as a whole. If two artists have painted portraits of the same individual, one giving the face only, and the other the full figure, any question of identification will be best decided by an examination of both.

In the symbolic language of the Apocalypse the true Church is described as “the bride, the Lamb’s wife,” and as clad in fine linen, clean and white. She is also seen under a second figuration as the heavenly Jerusalem. The false Church is also represented as a woman and as a city, but of wonderfully contrasted character.

John wondered at this vision, and the angel interpreted for him its leading features, as follows:

The last verb is in the present tense, implying that the city was regnant at the time when the angel spoke to John, A.D. 96,—i.e., in the days of Domitian.

Now, as the bride and the heavenly Jerusalem represent the true Church, this harlot, who is also called “Mystery, Babylon the Great,” represents a false Church.¹

¹ These prophecies present two broadly contrasted women, identified with two broadly contrasted cities, one reality being in each case doubly represented as a woman and as a city: the harlot and Babylon are one; the bride and the heavenly Jerusalem are one. It is evident that the true interpretation of either of these double prefigurations must afford a clue to the true interpretation of the other. The two women are contrasted in every particular that is mentioned about them: the one is pure as purity itself, “made ready” and fit for heaven’s unsullied holiness; the other foul as corruption could make her, fit only for the fires of destruction. The one belongs to the Lamb, who loves her as the bridegroom loves the bride; the other is associated with a wild beast, and with the kings of the earth, who ultimately hate and destroy her. The one is clothed with fine linen, and in another place is said to be clothed with the sun, and crowned with a coronet of stars—that is, robed in Divine righteousness, and resplendent with heavenly glory; the other is attired in scarlet and gold, in jewels and pearls, gorgeous, indeed, but with earthly splendour only. The one is represented as a chaste virgin, espoused to Christ; the other is mother of harlots and abominations of the earth. The one is persecuted, pressed hard by the dragon, driven into the wilderness, and well-nigh overwhelmed; the other is drunken with martyr blood, and seated on a beast which has received its power from the persecuting dragon. The one sojourns in solitude in the wilderness; the other reigns “in the wilderness” over peoples, and nations, and kindreds, and tongues. The one goes in with the Lamb to the marriage supper, amid the glad hallelujahs of heaven; the other is stripped, insulted, torn, and destroyed by her guilty paramours. We lose sight of the bride amid the effulgence of heavenly glory and joy, and of the harlot amid the gloom and darkness of the smoke that “rose up for ever and ever.” It is impossible to find in Scripture a contrast more marked; and the conclusion is irresistible, that whatever the one may represent the other must prefigure its opposite. They are not two disconnected visions, but a pair—a pair associated, not by likeness, but by contrast.

Now Scripture leaves us in no doubt as to the signification of the emblematic bride, the Lamb’s wife, the heavenly Jerusalem, What, then, must the contrasted symbol, the Babylonian harlot, represent? Surely some false and apostate Church—some Church which, while professing to belong to Christ, is in reality given up to fellowship with the world, and linked in closest union with the kings of the earth; a worldly Church, which has left her first love, forgotten her heavenly calling, sunk into carnality and sin, and proved shamelessly and glaringly faithless to her Lord.—(“Approaching End of the Age,” pp. 143-145.)

Hence John presents the same contrast as Paul. For the apostasy which the latter describes as headed up in “the man of sin” was an organization contrasted in every respect to the true bride and body of Christ. It was one which would owe its origin and existence to “the working of Satan,” instead of to the operation of the Spirit of God. It was a “mystery of iniquity,” instead of a mystery hid in God; its votaries are “wicked,” full of lying, of deceivableness, of unrighteousness; deluded and unbelieving, instead of being fruitful in every good work, through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. It has a mere earthly human head instead of a Divine and heavenly one; and its ultimate destiny is “everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord” at His second coming, instead of the rapture to be “for ever with the Lord” which awaits the true Church at that crisis.

Both apostles thus predicted that there would arise in the course of the Christian dispensation a great, powerful, and conspicuous ecclesiastical organization, like the true Church in some respects, but utterly unlike it in others, produced by Satan to oppose and counterwork Christ and the true Church.

Now this was a strange prediction. It would have been natural to foresee for the Church Jewish opposition, or heathen opposition, or even general declension and backsliding. But Christian opposition! —that was something which human intelligence would never have surmised as possible in the apostolic era. That the Christian Church should ever reign over the kings and nations of the world at all seemed extremely improbable. But that, being so exalted, its influence should be for evil, and not for good,— used to oppose Christ and His true witnesses,—that would have seemed well-nigh incredible! An evil world? Yes! But an evil Church? That was no native idea in Paul or in John! It was inspiration that foretold the actual though most improbable future. True, Christ had Himself predicted that Christendom would present a mixed condition of wheat and tares, good and bad; but this is something very different. It is a revelation that just as out of the incoherent mass of a Christianized world there would be gathered, by the working of Christ’s Holy Spirit, a true Church, so out of the same mass would be also gathered, by the working of Satan, a false Church. This last would equally with the first be an organic unity, something different from a number of individual false professors, scattered all over Christendom like tares in a wheat-field. It would be one whole, a body with a head, which would govern and direct all its movements. But as no bond of true spiritual life would exist between its members, as in the case of the true Church, this body would have visible bonds of outward uniformities to unite each to all and all to the head. Moreover, this false Church would also be in some sense a bride. Not the chaste and beloved bride of Christ, joined to the Lord in one spirit, but a corrupt, faithless, worthless “harlot,” selling herself to the kings of the earth for filthy lucre, until by them detested and destroyed prior to being whelmed under Divine judgments at the second advent of Christ.

It would be a counter “mystery,” a Satanic parody of God’s true Church. And its head would be a counter-Christ, an anti-Christ,—not by opposition, but by imitation,—not by fighting against Christ, but by substituting himself for Christ, putting himself in Christ’s place, making men regard him as Christ’s vicegerent. Just as the real Church would be the salt of the earth and the light of the world, so this false Church would be the leaven of the earth, corrupting it more than it is naturally corrupted, and would obscure the gospel light, love darkness, teach lies, and deny the truth. So far from witnessing for Christ, she would kill His witnesses; and so far from shedding her own blood for His sake, she would drink herself drunken with the blood of His martyrs.

Moreover, and this is a most important point, the existence of this false Church with its sinful human head—this imitation Church born of the working of Satan—would run parallel with the existence of the true Church; it would form the most conspicuous of the dangers and difficulties of the saints of God during the Christian dispensation. Its incipient workings were already apparent in the days of Paul; they would never cease until they produced, in his full-blown iniquity, “the man of sin,” or human head of this false Church, and he would continue his career of blasphemous self-exaltation until destroyed by the second advent. Thus the entire interval from Paul’s day to the end of this age at the return of Christ, would be occupied by the rise, culmination, reign, and decay of this corrupt Church system and its head. No time of peace and purity, no age of truth and righteousness, could consequently be expected. The reign of “the man of sin,” the rule of a false and persecuting Church, a Satanic propagation of delusion and error,—this was the future which the apostles foretold—this, and nothing but this, —until Christ comes again, and His people are caught up to meet Him in the air.^!

¹ Our subject here forbids us to do more than make A.D.ssing reference to the strange fact that while this is unquestionably the apostolic programme, the Church has so neglected its predictions as positively to have come to expect a state and age of millennial blessedness before the return of Christ! No prediction of such an age can be found in the New Testament programme. On the contrary, it uniformly presents the interval as one filled with most un-millennial characteristics—wars, famines, bloodshed, persecution of the truth, sackcloth witnessing, Jerusalem trodden down, the Jews dispersed, the leaven working corruption, the anti-Christ tyrannizing, iniquity abounding, love growing cold, faith failing, the virgins slumbering, the servants, many of them unfaithful, scoffers mocking, perilous times, even in the last days; and the question asked is, “When the Son of man cometh, will He find faith on the earth?” Where in such an age shall we place a millennium? Our New Testament programme never speaks of one at all until after the return of Christ, consequently the second advent must be pre-millennial.

This is, however, a question of unfulfilled prophecy, and hence beyond our subject here. Those who wish to consider it are referred to our work on “The approaching End of the Age.”

The apostolic predictions of this apostate Church are copious. They comprise more points than space will permit us to take up here. As our argument is evidential and not controversial, it will suffice if we show that an organization of immense importance, calling itself a Christian Church, and answering to every feature of these prophetic portraits, came into existence centuries after the prophecy was given, rose to a position of supremacy in the earth, ruled and reigned for ages, and exists in a decadent state to this day, awaiting the just judgment of God.

As the prediction of this apostasy is but one feature of one section of our programme, we can give but a few pages to its consideration; less than the immense evidential value of the fulfilment demands, but sufficient, we trust, to prove that it has been fulfilled.

Combining, then, the features of these two apostolic predictions, what is foretold in relation to the great apostasy of the Christian dispensation as to—

1. The place where it should arise.
2. The historic juncture at which it would appear.
3. The period which it would last.
4. The political relations it would sustain.
5. The moral character of its influence.
6. The agents by which it will be wasted.
7. The climax at which it will be destroyed.

Now, just as in looking for a certain place on the map we take its latitude and longitude from the table, and at the point where the two intersect find the spot we seek; or as in searching the heavens for a certain star we learn first its right ascension, and then its declination, and are thus guided to its exact position;—so the intersection of all the above lines cannot fail to enable us correctly to apply this complicated prophecy; and the application gives us the fulfilment.

If, at the place and in the sphere indicated, there arose at the predicted juncture an ecclesiastical power which has lasted for the period and stood in the political relations prophesied, which has borne the moral character and done the deeds foretold; if it has been gradually undermined and consumed by the very agents described, can we doubt that we have found the power intended?

The last point, the climax of its destruction, is still future. If all the other lines intersect in one and the same organization, and in no other, it must be the fulfilment we seek. Our point here is neither controversial nor theological, but simply evidential. If the result of search for a fulfilment leads us, as it inevitably must do, to stigmatize a certain ecclesiastical power as the great predicted apostasy, that is an incidental result only in this place; as the prophecy predicts an apostasy, the historic fulfilment, when discovered, must of course be an apostasy. We glance, then, over the whole eighteen Christian ages looking for the predicted apostasy, for a great, long-lasting, mighty, influential, reigning ecclesiastical power calling itself the Church of Christ.

We see many Churches—the “Catholic” Church, the Greek Church, the old Armenian and Nestorian and Coptic Churches, the young Protestant Churches of many lands. Many of them are grossly corrupted, some of them are decayed, half-dead. Which is THE great apostasy? Which is the false Church par excellence, the great enemy, the principal and cruel foe of the true Church, of that invisible “body” consisting of all true saints?

The apostolic predictions say you will find it seated at a certain place, and that place the seven-hilled city which reigned over the kings of the earth in John’s day—ROME.

Now we have our longitude! Turning away, therefore, from all Churches which have not had their centres at Rome, we fix our attention on those that have. We note that the apostles themselves planted a Church there, and that throughout the pagan persecutions that Roman Church yielded crop after crop of blessed martyrs, who fought and died in the Colosseum and other amphitheatres of the city, who were burned for Jesus’ sake on its lamp-posts, and whose ashes were laid in the dark catacombs, “in peace,” “in hope,” “in love.” Could this early Church—before the conversion of Constantine—be the apostasy? or can the young Protestant communities which have grown up in Rome of late years, can they be the Church of Rome which we seek?

We want our latitude as well as our longitude. The predictions give it. The great apostasy was to arise at a certain juncture of history —in that notable period of time when the old Roman empire of the Caesars was just breaking up under the barbarian invasions, and when the young Romano-Gothic kingdoms were forming out of the fragments; that is, during the sixth and seventh centuries. The Western empire fell when Romulus Augustulus was persuaded by Odoacer to abdicate, A.D. 476; and the settlement of the new kingdoms which emerged from the flood occupied at least a couple of centuries. Hence the martyr Church of the first three centuries, though it was a Church of Rome, will not at all fit the prediction, nor will the modern Protestant Church there, since it only rose this century.

But there is a Church which, according to its own account of itself, exactly answers to this test. It is the Church of Rome, which began at that very period, has ruled all Europe from Rome for twelve centuries, and whose head is called the Pope of Rome. The prophecy shows that the head of this apostate Church would be a temporal sovereign as well as a chief priest. Cardinal Manning’s “Origin of the Temporal Power of the Popes” traces it back to the historical juncture in question, and shows that the simple primitive bishops of the local Roman Church grew into popes after the fall of Romulus Augustulus, in consequence of the absence of imperial rulers in Rome.

So Paul said, alluding to the then existing imperial dynasty, “He who letteth will let” (or that which hinders will hinder) “until he be taken out of the way” (or providentially removed). “And then shall that Wicked” (the great head of the apostasy) “be revealed.” On the removal of the imperial throne from Rome, the papal throne took its place.

The intersection, then, of these two lines of place and time withdraws our gaze from all other Churches, and proves that we must seek the fulfilment of all the other features of the prophetic portrait in THE PAPAL CHURCH OF ROME.

And here we must make a distinction, and quote one more prediction to make the matter clear, There is a great difference between a body and its head. We must distinguish between the papacy or papal dynasty—which is the head of the Church of Rome—and the Church which it founded, governed, and used as its tool. There is a difference similar in kind, though greater in degree, between the Head of the true Church and the Church which He founded, governs, and uses as His instrument to do His will in the world. Now the duration of the corrupt Church is never mentioned, but only that of the reign of its head. The prophecy represents this papal dynasty of temporal rulers, as it had previously symbolized other dynasties, as “a beast,” a head of the ten-horned Roman beast. What period does it assign to the power of this dynasty? Twelve hundred and sixty years— between twelve and thirteen centuries.¹

¹ Rev. xiii. 5, xi. 3, xii. 6. The period indicated is the same in each case,—42 months of 30 days is 1,260 days,—and a day is the miniature symbol for a year, as a beast is for an empire. Daniel assigns the same period to the “little horn” of the Roman beast, which rules during its later history—another symbol of this power of the Roman papacy.

Can this period be traced in the history, not of the Romish Church, but of the reign of the papal dynasty? When did it rise? Between the two pope-exalting decrees of the Roman emperors of the East, Justinian and Phocas. Each of these potentates made a decree conceding to the bishops of Rome the headship “of all the holy Churches, and of all the holy priests of God”; or, as the latter put it, “the headship over all the Churches of Christendom.” The first was issued A.D. 533, and the second A.D. 607, while Phocas died in A.D. 610, The seventy-seven years between these dates were in a special sense the era of the rise of the papacy. It includes the life of the celebrated Gregory the Great, whose successor, Boniface III, may be considered in certain senses the first of the popes.

To these dates add 1,260 years, and the result is the period from A.D. 1793 to A.D. 1870. This period may be broadly considered as that of the downfall of the temporal power of the popes, the close of their reign over Europe, which had lasted for between twelve and thirteen centuries, as predicted. The first year marks the date of the reign of terror and crisis of the great French revolution, in the course of the wars of which the pope was dethroned by Bonaparte, Rome seized by the republican armies, a Roman republic proclaimed, and the pope removed from the Vatican and obliged to take refuge in Florence. In 1849 the pope (who had been restored) was again deposed, and a republic proclaimed; in 1860 there was an insurrection in the Papal States; in 1866 papal Austria was overthrown by Protestant Prussia at Sadowa; next year the monasteries in Venetia were suppressed, and the country annexed to the newly-formed Italian kingdom; the year after papal Spain was convulsed by a liberal revolution, and Garibaldi attempted an insurrection in Rome, which was suppressed only by French troops; while in 1870 came the great war between France and Germany, which led to the overthrow of the popish French empire, the withdrawal of her troops from Rome, and the union of Italy under Victor Emmanuel. He established his throne on the ruins of the temporal sovereignty of the popes in Rome, which had lasted for between twelve and thirteen hundred years.

Thus the series of events which ended in the complete destruction of the papal temporal sovereignty occupied a period of seventy to eighty years, removed by 1,260 years from the similar period which witnessed its first establishment. The popes are still rulers in their own apostate Church, and will be till the end. They are no longer rulers in Europe, and never wilt be again. Divine prophecy limited the days of their domination, and the same year which witnessed the decree of the new and blasphemous doctrine of papal infallibility witnessed also the downfall of the papal sovereignty, which had endured for more than twelve centuries.

How came John, in Patmos, in the days of Domitian, to foresee a downfall so distant? How came those events to fall out in harmony with his predictions—ay, and with Daniel’s still earlier prophecy?

The line of duration intersects the others in this same Church of Rome with its dynastic papal head.¹

¹ There is an elaborate exactitude about the fulfilment of this chronological prophecy which we cannot even indicate here. The period has various termini, and is measured by lunar, calendar, and solar years, and crises of rise and fall correspond. The subject is carefully and fully treated in our work “Light for the Last Days.” (Hodder & Stoughton.)

The Apostle John represents this apostate Church as corrupting the nations of the earth, and its head as ruling over them. He represents the woman as sitting upon “many waters,” and the angel explains that the waters are “peoples and nations.” He represents her also as sitting on and upborne by the Roman beast—another expression of the same thing. What was the fact? That all through the middle ages the Romano-Gothic kingdoms of Europe submitted to papal Rome, and secured to her temporal benefits, in return for her supposed spiritual favours and blessings. Enlargement is needless for those familiar with history: Rome’s domineering and tyrannical relations to the kingdoms of Europe in the past is a gigantic fact, and the cessation of that power of late is equally conspicuous.

The moral character attributed by the apostles to this power is exceedingly evil—about as dark as it well could be. Its main features are the practice and inculcation of idolatry under Christian names, corruption of doctrine, blasphemous self-exaltation of a man in the Christian Church, “showing himself that he is God,” quasi Deus, as the popes claim to be, together with false miracles and lying wonders, and, above all, sanguinary persecutions of the saints of God, and systematic opposition to His truth.

Were these features one and all characteristic of the false apostate Church and her papal head?

Let the Reformation and its copious literature reply! The great fact of the secession of the sixteenth century speaks for itself, and its causes may be appreciated by a study of the burning accusations against Romish corruptions of such men as Wycliffe, Jerome of Prague, and John Huss, Tyndale and John Frith, Luther and Zwingle, Calvin and Melancthon, Cranmer, Latimer, and Hooper. The deceptions, wickednesses, and crimes of Rome are incredible, and all the more so because of her Christian profession. Her prohibition of marriage to the clergy, in opposition to the apostolic direction that a bishop should be the “husband of one wife,” deluged Europe with the grossest immorality for centuries. Her withdrawal of the Bible from the people, her mixture of licentiousness and formality, her saint and virgin worship, her Jesuit principles, her tortures and inquisition, what words shall describe or what mind conceive their effect in darkening and exterminating the truth of God! Well are the ages of Rome’s dominion styled “the dark ages”!

In brief, the apostles predict “a tyrannical power, of a Christian kind, to be seated at Rome, dressed in a robe of gaudy decoration; spreading its abuses and errors over the kingdoms of the earth, persecuting the Church of Christ, and deeply stained with its blood, especially that of its martyrs, its public witnesses and confessors, that same State holding a number of dependent kings under its yoke, and turning their strength and power, with their consent, to the furtherance of its designs. The complexity of the things in this single prophecy is sufficiently manifest. And since the complex whole has, point by point, been fulfilled, and that not in an obscure corner, but in the heart of Christendom, . . . the inference is not to be evaded.”

And lastly, the fate which Paul predicts for this apostasy prior to its final judgment is that it shall be “consumed” or wasted by the spirit of God’s mouth; while John foretells also that political judgments will overtake it. The ten horns will at last hate, and reject, and desolate the whore they have so long carried and supported.

This double prediction has been fulfilling for the last 300 years. The recovered Word of God—the “spirit of His mouth”—was the cause of the Reformation—a movement that diminished and consumed Rome to an enormous extent. Prior—just prior to the beginning of the Reformation there was not for a brief time a single witnessing Church in Europe. They had all been exterminated by persecution. There was not an avowed meeting of protesters against Rome’s corruptions anywhere. Now there are about a hundred and fifty millions of Protestants in the world! Rome’s dominion was all but universal in Christendom in the sixteenth century, in the nineteenth nearly half Christendom (omitting the Greek Church) has escaped her tyranny, rejected her corruptions, and spurns her intoxicating cup. That is one fact; and another is, that even nations which remain in Romish darkness have, ever since the French revolution, been throwing off the yoke of Rome’s authority, refusing her guidance, secularizing her revenues, closing her monasteries, expelling her Jesuits, neglecting her confessionals, and ridiculing her pretensions. Infidelity, as well as true religion, has been at work for her overthrow. The spirit of God’s mouth on the one hand, and the revolt of human intelligence against superstition and selfish tyranny on the other, have combined to lower the pride and abate the power of the once mighty papal dynasty; and, though its claims are as great and as blasphemous as ever, its ability to enforce them is gone.

All the six tests we proposed to apply concur, therefore, in showing that the papal Church of Rome has fulfilled, in the course of its long career, every feature of these apostolic predictions, and that on a scale which, before the event, no one would have believed possible. The marks of Divine prescience in these predictions are singularly clear.

“To foretell that a religion pure and excellent as that of the gospel would in some future time be depraved was to foretell nothing improbable. For what is there so sacred in truth which the wickedness and mistakes of men, or the love of novelty, or the spirit of enthusiasm, or policy and interested designs, will not model anew, and distort from its original rectitude? Error and heresy are nearly coeval (existing during the same period) with truth. They began to work as soon as Christianity was taught, and they may be expected to attend it to its latest day of trial. But in the predictions of the corrupted state of the Christian faith, which we are now considering, there are definite signs of a foreknowledge very different from the deductions of probability, calculated on the general principles of human weakness or human depravity. The prophetic criteria are precise, and they are such as must be thought to have militated with all rational probability, rather than to have been deduced from it. For that the doctrines of celibacy, and of a ritual abstinence from meats, against the whole genius of the gospel, by an authority claiming universal obedience, should be set up in the Christian Church; that “a man of sin” should exist, exalting himself in the temple of God, and openly challenging the rights of faith and honour due to God; that he should advance himself by signs and lying wonders, and turn his pretended miracles to the disproof and discredit of some of the chief doctrines or precepts of Christianity; and that this system of ambition and falsehood should succeed, that it should be established with the submission and, indeed, with the deluded conviction of men still holding the profession of Christianity, which is the prophecy of St. Paul, is a paradox of prediction which must be allowed to surpass the ordinary limit of human observation, and almost to exceed the power which man has to corrupt the best gifts of God. The natural incredibility of it is, not that such errors and abuses should be established in the world, but that they should be grafted on the Christian faith, in opposition to and in outrage of its genius and its commands, and take a bold possession of the Christian Church. There, however, they have been grafted, and there they have had possession, and the strength of the improbable fact is the proof of the prophetic inspiration.” (“Davidson on Prophecy” (Warburton Lecture), pp. 327, 328.)

Continued in Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part V. The Apocalyptic Section of the Programme

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

I found this article years ago on a forum called “The Origins of Dispensational Futurism.” That website is no longer online. For some reason the webmaster didn’t renew the domain name. Websites can go offline without notice at any time. I’m glad I grabbed this info before its website went down.

The Jesuits created the modern system of dispensational futurism. Although the Jesuits derived certain aspects of this myth from “futuristic elements” embedded in the teachings of the early church fathers, the evidence is clear that they elaborated the elements of this myth from the early church fathers as a tool to destroy and counter the Protestant Reformation by attempting to lift the heat off the Papacy as the identity of Antichrist.

The theological elements of Futurism are derived from the extra-biblical writings, such as: The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, The Sibylline Oracles, Baruch, 1st and 2nd Esdras, T. Levi, The Ascension of Isaiah, etc. etc.

The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha writings were written by Hellenistic Jews. These Jews mixed Babylonian, Persian, and Greek paganism with Judaism.

Long before the first advent of Christ, mystical Jews believed that an anti-messiah would come and oppose the Messiah; the anti-messiah was called “Beliar”; and he was believed to be the devil incarnate in human form.

The early Church Fathers such as Ireneaus, Hippolytus, Apollinaris and others, borrowed Futurist elements from these mythical, pseudepigraphal writings, which served to shape their views of end-time events.

The Jesuits created Futurism from the Beliar myth found in these writings, indicating that modern Dispensational Futurist theology is nothing more than pagan mythology convoluted around real scripture.

The Protestants of the Reformation era knew about this fable, and Protestants separated the real Bible from the extra-Biblical writings.

When the Protestants studied the Bible without the fables of the Catholic Church fathers – the Beliar myth – they clearly identified the Papacy as the Antichrist.

Modern Protestant Churches the world over have abandoned the Protestant Reformation, and they now teach Catholic theology from the Council of Trent which commenced in 1545 A.D. The Jesuit Cardinals Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) and Robert Bellarmino (1542-1621) in the 16th and 17th centuries were foremost at setting out to accomplish this Protestant destroying task in scraping every bit of knowledge they could formulate from the Early Church Fathers to concoct and repackage the fantastical Jesuit scheme of Futurism. Jesuit Cardinal Manuel de Lacunza in the early 19th century, also an advocate of Futurism, deliberately attempted to take the pressure off the papacy by proposing that the Antichrist was still off in the future, and also laid the foundation for much of modern-day dispensational ideology. On the other hand, the Spanish Jesuit Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613) in the 16th and 17th centuries was set to the task of concocting the Preterist scheme. Both schemes blossomed about the same time and successfully got the “heat” off the Papacy from the detection of Antichrist. It took about 300 years before the Protestant world allowed itself to become infected by these two deadly viruses. Dr. Maitland, James H. Todd, Henry Newman (who later became a Catholic Cardinal after accepting Futurism), Irving, and later Darby and Scofield all came to accept major elements of Ribera’s and Bellarmine’s fantastical views of a singled-out, future, one-man Antichrist (stemming from the Beliar myth that comes from Persian dualism and Zoroastrianism) as well as the incredible disjointed “gap” theory by which the Jesuits adopted from Hippolytus’ erroneous construing of the first 69 units, or weeks of years, as reaching from the first year of Cyrus (or Darius the Mede) to the incarnation of Christ–a chronological impossibility without elongating the period. This “faulty reasoning” of Hippolytus inspired modern Futurism’s “gap” theory.

Dispensationalism is simply another branch of Catholicism—developed by the Jesuits in the Counter-Reformation. After all is said and done, the Roman Catholic Jesuits must still be identified as being responsible for concocting and inventing the Futurist schemes of prophetic interpretation seen so rampant today in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Why? Because they concocted their Futurist interpretations based on outdated futuristic elements embedded in the teachings of the Church Fathers who thought the world would end no later than AD 500, not to mention many of their Futuristic views were shaped through the lenses of the extra-Biblical, Psuedepigraphal books written by uninspired authors. After the passing of some 1000 years, the Protestant Reformers were able to look back in retrospect comparing history with prophecy and were clearly able to see the manifestation of Antichrist and that Little Horn of Daniel 7 in the Roman Church-State.

Continued from Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part II.

In his address to the Jews on the occasion of the healing of the lame man at the Beautiful gate of the temple, after showing them what they had done in rejecting Christ,-—that they had “denied the Holy One, and the just, and killed the Prince of life,”—Peter re-echoes the Lord’s statement about His departure and its limits, saying, “Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all the holy prophets since the world began,”—that is, until the dawn of the glorious kingdom of God on earth at the second advent. Peter here places the same limit to the present “kingdom of heaven” which our Lord Himself had indicated. He says Christ is gone from earth—heaven had received Him for a time; but it is for a time only; and when Israel repents, His absence will terminate,—He will return, and bring “times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord.” Both these expressions, “times of refreshing” and “times of restitution of all things,” refer to the yet future kingdom of God on earth,—the kingdom predicted by David and by Daniel, and expected by Israel, and for the coming of which Christ bade us pray. The apostle here, like his Master, interposes between the time then present and the advent of that kingdom an age during which, the Jews having disowned Christ, the heavens receive Him; that is, this present time of His absence, in which those who have never seen Him yet believe in Him, and are saved.

Note: We can see here the influence of John Nelson Darby’s Dispensationalism in the proceeding paragraph. Rev. Guinness seems to be making a distinction between the “kingdom of heaven” and the “kingdom of God.” There is no such distinction! There’s no difference between them! God has only one Kingdom because He has only one people, the Ecclesia, the Called-Out-Ones, the Church! The phrase, “Kingdom of Heaven” is found 32 times in 31 verses in Matthew’s Gospel, but that phase is found only in Matthew’s Gospel and none of the other three Gospels. The other three say “kingdom of God” instead of “kingdom of heaven.” The reason for that is that Matthew wrote his Gospel to the Jews who don’t like to use the word “God”. The “kingdom of God” is also found Matthew’s Gospel, but only in five verses. This could be the reason why Darby thought there was a difference between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven.

A primary proof from Scripture that the “kingdom of heaven” and the “kingdom of God” mean the same thing is:

Matthew 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mark 1:15  And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

These two verses from two different Gospels of the same discourse are rock-solid proof that the “kingdom of God” is synonymous with the “kingdom of heaven.” Mark wrote his Gospel to the Romans and saying the word “God” to them was not a problem.

Darby also made a distinction between the Church and Israel, but there is no such distinction. God’s people have always been only those of faith.

It seems to me the reason why false interpretations of God’s Word occur in the Church is because preachers latch on to pet doctrines without comparing the Scriptures that support their doctrines with other Scriptures. For example, if you compare Matthew chapter 24 with Luke chapter 21, you will see the “great tribulation” of Matthew 24:21 is called “days of vengeance” in Luke 21:22. Days of vengeance upon whom? Upon the Jesus Christ-rejecting Jews who perished during the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Roman army in 70 A.D. The great tribulation of Matthew 24 is therefore fulfilled prophecy and not a future event. Why would, therefore, preachers constantly talk about a future “great tribulation” and even try to specify its length as either 7 years or 3.5 years? It’s because of their false interpretation of the 70th Week of Daniel in Daniel 9:27! That’s not to say we shouldn’t expect any future tribulation. I think Christians have already suffered plenty of tribulation and persecution over the past 2000 years, and some continue to suffer it to this very day in certain Muslim nations.

The Book of Acts traces the story of apostolic witness to Christ in Jerusalem and in Judea, in Samaria and to the uttermost parts of the earth, and shows that this was the way in which historically it spread. In these ever-widening circles the gospel was preached when the members of the Church of Jerusalem were “all scattered abroad” by persecution. Samaria received the word with joy; so did the eunuch of Candace, an Ethiopian, who was the first-fruits of Africa unto God. Then Saul of Tarsus, a Jew of the Western dispersion, was converted. Then Cornelius, the Roman centurion, and his household received the gospel and the effusion of the Holy Ghost, to the utter astonishment of the Jews who were with Peter, and to the perplexity and disturbance of the Church in Jerusalem, who even “contended” with Peter about it, so little had Christ’s disciples at that time realized that the field was the world! The rehearsal of Peter’s vision, however, brought them to consent, though with surprise, to this new providence, saying, “Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”

Gospel preaching had at first been deliberately addressed to “none but unto the Jews only”; (Acts xi. 19) but some of the early disciples were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, Jews belonging to the great Western dispersion. On their return from Jerusalem, they began, we read, “to speak unto the Grecians also, preaching the Lord Jesus; and a great number believed and turned to the Lord.” Then afterwards Paul, who had from his conversion been designated as the apostle of the Gentiles (Acts ix. 15; xxvi. 17; Rom. xv. 16), went forth with Barnabas or with Silas on his wide and lifelong mission to the nations. Antioch, Seleucia, Cyprus, Pamphylia, and Pisidia received the gospel, the Jews constantly opposing and hindering, until at last Paul formally abandoned them, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us.”

By special providences the great apostle is led to cross from Asia to Europe, when Thracia, Macedonia, and Achaia, philosophic Athens, luxurious Corinth, and at last imperial Rome, also received the word. It had then extended from the Jewish metropolis to the metropolis of the vast Gentile world. Thus, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, it was practically proved that the field was the world, and the sphere of the new dispensation universal.

But to Paul especially was granted very clear light on the relation of this new Gentile age to the past and to the future of Judaism, and his dispensational programme is peculiarly distinct. He intensely loved his people, and highly appreciated their peculiar privileges. But he recognised frankly in his letter to the Romans that as a nation they had “stumbled,” that Christ had been to them “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence,” that they had proved themselves to be “a disobedient and gainsaying people.” He announced that though God had not cast them away for ever, they had for the time fallen, and been “broken off” as branches from the olive tree of promise, because of their unbelief, and been made an illustration of “the severity of God.” But that, on the other hand, though blindness had befallen the nation as such, there was even then “a remnant according to the election of grace,” and that ultimately (if they abode not still in unbelief) they would be grafted again into their own olive tree, clearly predicting “so all Israel shall be saved.” He foretells also that this crisis of their recovery would be the riches of the world at large, and like “life from the dead” to mankind in general. If the blessing that had come to the Gentiles through their fall was great, that which should result from their restoration would be far greater.(Rom. xi.)

Note: Please see a deeper explanation of “And so all Israel shall be saved” on this website.

In the meantime, he says that through their fall salvation had come to the Gentiles. Blindness in part had happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should be come in. The interval of Jewish rejection was to be filled up with a gathering out of a Gentile Church. Is not this revelation harmonious with what Christ had previously intimated in His parable of the vineyard taken from the wicked husbandmen and given to others, and is not the limit which He fixed in Luke xxi. again laid down here? He said, “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,” and Paul says, “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” Similarly, in his letter to the Corinthians, Paul says that a veil is on the heart of Israel when Moses is read, and that only when their heart shall turn to the Lord will that veil, or blindness, be removed. Israel’s repentance is the antecedent to the earthly kingdom of God promised to them, and to the world, and the salvation of a Gentile Church is the antecedent to Israel’s repentance. This is Paul’s programme, and it agrees with the outline of Christ.

It is an enlargement or development of our Lord’s final and all-important revelation, that the Holy Spirit of God would in future dwell in and abide with the disciples. The further unfolding of this great subject was committed, not to Peter, James, or John, who had been with Christ in His mission to Israel, and whose ministry was mostly confined to the Jews, but to the one who knew Him only in His glory, and who was in a special sense the founder of the Church among the Gentiles.

It is important to note that St. Paul distinctly and repeatedly claims to have received a special ministry, to have been commissioned to reveal what had previously been concealed from the beginning of the world, No assertions could be more emphatic than his reiterated declarations on this point. There is nothing like them in the Bible; no other apostle uses language at all similar. Paul, we learn, was chosen by God to be the channel through which He would communicate to men—a new conception—the revelation of a new and quite peculiar relationship to Himself. He was the messenger through whom a new calling or “vocation” was expounded. This plainly stated fact is not so generally understood as it should be, though ignorance or confusion on the point, a non-recognition of the absolute novelty—at the time it was given—of this Pauline revelation, leads to many and most serious mistakes as regards the revealed purposes of God, as we will presently show.

Meantime, let us gather from the following sentences what the new revelation was, and let us also note the insistance of the apostle as to the fact that it was new. “God,” he says, “BY REVELATION MADE KNOWN UNTO ME the mystery which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel: whereof I was made a minister, . . . to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. iii, 3-10).

In his letter to the Colossians, Paul says he was made a minister of the gospel of Christ “for his body’s sake, which is the Church: whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil” (or fully to preach) “the Word of God; even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to His saints: to whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. i, 24-27).

Again, in closing his long letter to the Romans, he says: “Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, . . . the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began but now is made manifest ” . . . (Rom. xvi. 25, 26).

These sentences, addressed respectively to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Romans, all three Gentile Churches, sufficiently attest:—

1. That there was a special element in Paul’s Gospel which was of a new and additional character.

2. That this new revelation had been by God kept secret until that time; it was a mystery hidden from all previous ages and generations, something entirely new.

3. That it is something, therefore, which we cannot find either in the prophets of the Old Testament, or in the Gospels, or in the teachings of the other apostles,—something we must learn from Paul alone, to whom, in the Divine wisdom, a stewardship of this “mystery” was committed, so that through him it was, for the first time, “manifested,” or revealed.

Let us observe, first, this is a striking instance of progressive revelation. We have here the unquestionable assertion of a principle which is of supreme importance to a correct understanding of the Scriptures. For thousands of years God had been revealing His will and His purposes ever more and more clearly to mankind. He had but lately spoken by His own Son, and since then by His Spirit in Peter and John, Philip and Stephen, James and Jude. Yet here was a new and most important revelation committed to Paul.

What should we learn from this fact? The duty of not attempting to limit later prophecies by earlier, of not doubting a Divine revelation because it is given subsequently to others and contains additional matter, and especially of not making confusion by saying, “This new thing is the same as the old.” The ascended Saviour committed to Paul something He had not committed to the twelve, something not to be found either in the Gospels or in the Old Testament, something which had been “a mystery” in all previous ages and generations.

What then was this new revelation, which Paul calls “my gospel,” and says he was specially commissioned to preach among the Gentiles?

It was that of the Church,—it was the revelation that a vital, spiritual, organic union existed between the ascended Saviour and all His believing people, whether Jew or Gentile, so that they together formed ONE BODY, OF WHICH HE WAS THE LIVING HEAD.

Was not this revelation peculiar to Paul? Can the doctrine be found anywhere else save in his Epistles? This conception of one body composed of the God-man, Jesus Christ, and redeemed men and women, whether Jew or Gentile, can nowhere else be found. Paul only presents it, but he does so constantly. He dwells much on its varied, deeply important, present, practical consequences, and traces it also to its glorious results in the future.

How had he learned this great truth? The very circumstances of his conversion had been a revelation of it! The position of Christ at the time, the glory from amid which He had called the zealous Pharisee breathing out threatenings and slaughter, the question which he had addressed to him,— all these were in themselves an unveiling of the mystery. For the glorified Christ had identified Himself with His suffering saints on earth, as the head with the members of the body. He had said to Saul of Tarsus, who had been persecuting men and women on earth: “Why persecutest thou ME?” That was a revelation of oneness. And He had then sent the new apostle to bear His name before “the Gentiles and kings, and children of Israel,” not excluding the latter, but giving them no pre-eminence. How natural then for Paul to understand and teach first that the members of the Church are vitally connected with the risen Christ, and that Jews and Gentiles are alike called to fellowship with Him, and with each other in Him, A more formal and explicit revelation may have been and probably was made to Paul on the subject, though no particulars of it are recorded. But the circumstances of his call to the apostolate were in themselves almost sufficient.

We must now consider a little more fully what this Pauline doctrine of the Church was,—what it involved. “The Church, which is HIS BODY, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.” What does this mean? How was it a new revelation?

To answer these questions we must ask another—What is a body? It is an organized whole, made up of parts and members? It is the temple of a spirit—a living temple; it is the visible dwelling of the invisible soul, the material house of the immaterial mind; it is an organic unity, not a mere collection of separate individuals, like a nation or other community. The Church is a Spirit-born and Spirit-governed body, whose Head is a risen and exalted Saviour, whose very life is Christ; a body to every member of which He says, “Because I live, ye shall live also.” It is a body controlled by internal spiritual intelligence and vitality, not by external laws and regulations merely; it is a community in which nothing is lacking and nothing superfluous, but in which each member is necessary; an organization in which there is the greatest diversity of gifts for the well-being of the whole, and all under the control of the Head. As a living body, it is, moreover, separated from all else,—it may grow, develop, and change, but it remains still the same distinct entity. “Now ye are THE BODY OF CHRIST, and members in particular.”

It is easy to see that this new truth is closely connected with our Saviour’s earlier revelation of the advent and indwelling of the Holy Ghost, but it goes beyond it, showing results of that indwelling, which He did not develop and define, though in His parable of the vine and its branches, and in the prayer which followed, He anticipated some of them.

Now the Pauline revelation is that the new dispensation of Providence inaugurated at Pentecost and by the descent of the Holy Spirit, was characterised and distinguished from all previous dispensations by the existence of such a body composed of the risen Christ and all true believers.

He represents this body as having been formed for the first time, not by Christ’s advent and call of the twelve, not by the group of disciples which gathered around Him in the days of His flesh, but by the effusion of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. (I Cor. xii. 13) And he represents it as continuing on earth until “the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain” (i.e. the then existing generation of the Church) “shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”

Hence, until the glorious advent of Christ at the end of this age, until the resurrection of those that are Christ’s at His coming, there was to be on earth a Church which would be vitally united to Christ. There was to be, in other words, not merely the Christendom which Christ had predicted in the parables, with its tares, its foolish builders, and its unfaithful servants, but a body of Christ, of which nothing spurious, nothing evil, nothing dead, could ever form part, but only those between whom and the Divine, yet human, Head there existed a bond of life;—only those in whom the Holy Spirit dwelt abidingly; for “if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His”—no member of this wonderful, living body.

Here, then, we have the crowning prophetic revelation of the Apostle Paul. The dispensation then commencing would, it is true, be marked by the substitution of one outward constitution of things for another—of Christendom for Judaism, of a professing Christian world for the Jewish and heathen worlds of the first century; but in the midst of that mixed state of things there would be something very different, a new thing in the earth, a new incarnation of Deity,—THE BODY OF CHRIST,—a true and living Church, its Head in heaven, its members here, its animating spirit Divine, its earthly form human.

This revelation, be it observed, is something wholly distinct from any mere call of the Gentiles to share Jewish blessings. That call had been distinctly predicted in the Old Testament; even from Abraham’s day it had been promised that, not his own family only, but all the nations of the earth should be blessed in his seed, which is Christ. The new revelation is something wholly different, or it could never have been spoken of as a mystery hidden from all previous generations.

Peter had received and taught the call of the Gentiles; and the Church at Jerusalem, after hearing his account of Cornelius, had admitted that God had “to Gentiles also granted repentance unto life.” They perceived—for facts proved it— that Gentiles were to share in Christ’s salvation. That was not, therefore, Paul’s new and distinctive gospel. It was not that Gentiles were to come into a Jewish faith, or share Israel’s privileges merely, but that out from among Jews and Gentiles alike individuals would be gathered and formed into a new organization, a body of which Christ was the Head, and the Spirit of God the life. This truth is fully and frequently asserted in Paul’s Epistles, and was no doubt very prominent in his preaching. In writing to the Colossians, and enumerating some of the glories of Christ, he says:

“He is before all things, and by Him all things consist; and He is the Head of His body, the Church.” (Col. 1:18) In the First Epistle to the Corinthians, he dwells very fully on the subject, showing that the phenomena of spiritual life in the Church correspond very closely with those of physical life in the natural body. “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased Him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: and those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: that there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured all the members rejoice with it. NOW YE ARE THE BODY OF CHRIST, AND MEMBERS IN PARTICULAR.” (I Cor. 12:12-27)

Sixteen times over in this one passage is “the body” mentioned, and so perfect is the union, so complete the identification, that the words “so also is Christ” speak— wondrous fact!—of the Head and all His members under that one name!

In the Epistle to the Ephesians (chap. v.) the apostle presents the same truth, that the Church is the body of Christ, under a somewhat different form, speaking of it as “the bride” which He loved and for which He sacrificed Himself, and arguing that man and wife are one, that “he that loveth his wife loveth himself,” and that though it is a great mystery, this is so as regards Christ and the Church, “for we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.”

It is clear, then, if we combine into one programme our Lord’s earlier predictions of the kingdom of heaven with Paul’s revelations as to the bride and body of Christ, that two greatest and most characteristic features of the Christian dispensation of the last 1,800 years were foreseen and foretold in the first century of the era. Christ foretold the history of CHRISTENDOM, and Paul unveiled the mystery of the TRUE CHURCH.¹ (Eph. v. 32; 1 Cor. xv. 51; 1 Thess. iv. 15.)

The two things are as distinct as the kernel of the nut from its shell, as the outer nature from the inner core. The first—Christendom, the professing Church—is the sphere in which the preaching of the word has taken effect as distinguished from heathendom, which has scarcely heard the gospel. In this sphere there is, and always has been, a twofold result—good and bad, false and true, profession and reality. That is one thing.

On the other hand, from that sphere has been gathered out, by the action of the Spirit of God, A BODY which, although invisible as such, has yet made its presence and power felt in the world. It has been the salt of the earth, the light of the world, the teacher of heathendom, the transformer of the Roman society of the first century to the Christian society of the nineteenth. It has been the mother of the multitudes, which no man can number, who have already joined the glorified Head in heaven. It has been the living temple of the Holy Ghost, the body through which Christ has acted in the world for the last 1,800 years. Through its eyes He has seen and wept over the sins and sorrows of men; through its heart, moved with compassion, He has healed, and fed, and taught, and saved; through its lips He has uttered the invitation, “Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”; by its feet He has gone into all the world, and proclaimed the glad tidings of salvation among all nations. In its actions. He has glorified God on the earth, and in its sufferings He has continued to manifest His own self-sacrificing love. Yes! in spite of the false pretensions of all who merely profess His name, in spite even of the inconsistencies, errors, and sins of true believers, there has been a body of Christ on earth ever since Pentecost, and it is here still.

Was not Stephen a member of it when he said of his murderers, “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge”? Was not Paul a member of it when he said, “I, yet not I, but Christ that dwelleth in me”? Were not the martyrs, who died that they might not worship idols, members of it? Have not the very thoughts and tones of Christ been heard hundreds of times since He personally left the earth? Are we not ourselves true believers, conscious of a heavenly life, a Divine spirit indwelling and influencing us—a fellowship with each other and with our Head in heaven?

As surely as Christ’s predictions of Christendom have come to pass, so surely has the Pauline programme of a body of Christ on earth, during the age which opened at Pentecost, been realized in human history. It has been sustained amid persecution, preserved amid corruption, revived even when apparently dead, and enabled to withstand all the fiery darts of the wicked. The gates of hell have not prevailed against it, and after 1,800 years of perils from without and from within, it is more conspicuous by its action on the world now than ever before. This is not only a miracle of grace, but a marvel of history, and a marked fulfilment of Pauline prediction.

Continued in Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part IV.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

Continued from Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part I..

He said much more on the subject to His disciples shortly afterwards. Seated together with Him on the Mount of Olives, and gazing across the valley of Jehoshaphat on the striking view of Jerusalem outspread before them, with its beautiful temple, and temple area, in the foreground,—the twelve, pondering the sad future He had predicted for their holy house, and finding it hard to believe, remarked to Him, in a deprecatory, expostulating tone, on the extent, variety, magnificence, and solidity of the structures recently erected by Herod. They pointed out how richly the temple was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, and seemed anxious to elicit, if possible, some qualification, if not contradiction, of the doom that had been foretold. It was a perfect vision of beauty from that point, with its marble courts and golden gates glittering in the glorious sunshine of the East, and contrasting in its massive magnificence with the graceful palms, the feathery tamarisk, and the dark cypress around.

The scene was the pride of Jewish hearts, and, as they challenged Christ’s admiration of it, His gaze was troubled, and in accents of deep sincerity and sorrow He assured them that His previously expressed anticipation was only too correct. “See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” He then went on to assure them that they would themselves see Jerusalem compassed with idolatrous Gentile armies; and that when they did so, they and all His Judean disciples should flee to the mountains, for that days of dreadful vengeance would then be commencing; that a time of great and unparalleled tribulation for the Jews would be opening; that many of them would fall by the edge of the sword, many more be led away captive into all nations, and that Jerusalem itself would not only be taken and destroyed, but that the very site of it would—throughout an entire dispensation—be held by Gentile conquerors. “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,” He prophesied, “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” Now, as the times of the Jews, or Jewish age, had lasted for 2,000 years, these words might well suggest to the disciples that “the times of the Gentiles” would be no brief seventy years, like the Babylonian captivity, but, as has proved to be the case, a long dispensational “age” analogous to that of Judaism.

Our Lord thus foresaw and foretold as definitely and clearly as possible, both in parabolic and plain predictions,—

1. The fall of Judaism as a religion;

2. The destruction of Jerusalem as a city, and of the temple as a sanctuary;

3. A time of great tribulation, and of prolonged dispersion of the Jewish people;

4. An age-long desolation of the land, and Gentile domination of Jerusalem.

Here are four distinct elements of the future; and it should be noted that any one of the four might have happened without the other three. The religious economy of Judaism might have come to an end without the political extinction of the nation; the city and temple might have been destroyed and rebuilt within a century, as after the Babylonian captivity; the Jews might have been scattered and restored; or Jerusalem might, like Nineveh, or Palmyra, or Ephesus, have lain long in its ruins without being trodden down by Gentile occupants all those ages. The foreview given on this one point alone was no simple, obvious one, easy to invent, certain to be realized. On the contrary, it picks its way carefully amidst a crowd of probabilities, possibilities, contingencies of all kinds. It announced, simply and authoritatively, the future will be thus and thus, at a time when no human wisdom or prescience could have decided—out of a thousand contingencies—which was even most likely to occur.

An elaborate series of events, embracing complicated, intricate, and long-continued episodes of Jewish and Gentile history, which it has taken volume upon volume to record, is predicted in a few sharp clear sentences. The prophecy is precisely such a one as no pretender to supernatural prescience would have ventured on. But just as there are portraits, landscapes, sea pictures, and cloudscapes that could only have been painted from the actual sight of the originals, so this outline of the future of the Jews, uttered 1,800 years ago by Jewish lips, amid scenes of Jewish peace and prosperity, could only have been drawn by One whose all-seeing eye could gaze on events which lay at the time hidden in the womb of the future.

For we need scarcely tell how history justified the daring predictions. The tragic and wonderful story is so familiar that it suffices to recall our knowledge of it in the briefest way. Who has not shuddered over the pages of Josephus, as he narrates, with the exactness of an eye-witness, the episodes of the long drawn-out agony, all the more painfully impressive because the tale is traced by a Jewish pen? If we inquire of this writer, Did many fall by the sword, as Jesus here predicted?—humanity itself sickens over the reply. Christian faith in considering it exclaims in awe: Behold “the severity of God,”—the proof that severity is as truly one of His attributes as “goodness.” We may not quote Josephus, for his story is far too full. The following summary from the pages of Bishop Newton will recall some of the facts so vividly described in full in his “Wars of the Jews”:—

The Emperor Hadrian, whose first name was AElius, placed a Roman colony on the site of Jerusalem, and built there a city, which he called, after himself, AELIA. It had a temple dedicated to Jupiter Capitolinus. The erection of the temple excited to revolt the remnant of the Jews left in Palestine. They rose in rebellion under Barchochab, a robber and murderer, and then came the final catastrophe, the last act of the tragedy in the land, in A.D. 135.

The tears which Israel’s Messiah shed over Jerusalem and her children welled up from eyes that foresaw what was coming—foresaw all this and much more of the same sort.

For 1,800 years exile, persecution, and cruel oppression have, as we showed in the Mosaic section, been the portion of the Jewish nation—for all that we have recalled here was only the beginning of sorrows. The entire interval up to the time of the French revolution at the end of last century was to Israel a time of great tribulation, though its extremest severity was not continuous, but intermittent. Our century has seen a very marked change in the fortunes and condition of the Jews, for the times of the Gentiles are well-nigh over and Israel’s long story is not finished yet. It is only beginning, indeed, for it will need eternity to tell it all.

Twice over our Lord employed the important little word “until” in His predictions of these Jewish experiences. Your house is left unto you desolate, He said, until ye are ready to welcome, instead of reject, Me; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until their age has run its appointed course. What do these limits mean? If a judge says to a criminal, “You are to remain in prison until five years have run their course,” what does he imply? If an architect says, “T will not begin to rebuild that house until funds have been secured for the purpose,” what is the inference? He who foretold the present doom of Israel indicated its limits, and indicated also what would follow.

For Christ foretold His own return, as well as His departure—His return to reign on earth and over Israel, as the prophets of the Old Testament had promised. He did not set aside the Jewish hope for ever, but only postponed it for a time, and revealed an intermediate dispensation. The gifts and calling of God are without repentance. The kingdom promised to Israel under their Messiah cannot be fulfilled by the present Gentile dispensation, while Christ is in heaven and the Jews under great tribulation. It is derogatory to the truth and inspiration of Scripture to suppose it!

Note: I beg to differ! It seems to me that Rev. Guinness is ignoring the fact that the only Israel God recognizes today are those who embrace Christ Jesus as their Savior! Paul was speaking to the Gentiles when he wrote this:

Ephesians 2:12  That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13  But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14  ¶For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15  Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16  And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

And Paul writes in the book of Romans,

Romans 12:5  So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

If we, both Jews and Gentiles, are one body in Christ, what other body is there?

The angel, in announcing the birth of Jesus, predicted that He should be great, and that the Lord God would give unto Him the throne of His father David; that He should reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and that of His kingdom there should be no end. This prediction has yet to be fulfilled. It is not and cannot be fulfilled by the present kingdom of heaven. On the contrary, Christ predicted that He would establish it at His second advent. He sets His seal to all the old predictions, and adds new ones. The kingdom, He tells them, when it does come, will be a far more glorious one than they imagined. The Son of man will come in clouds, with power and great glory. He will send forth His angels, and gather His elect. He will come in the glory of His Father, and of the holy angels, and sit on the throne of His glory. He will reckon with His servants, and award places of honour in the kingdom to His faithful followers {Luke xxii. 29). But Israel’s repentance would have to be the preliminary, “Until” then they would see Him no more. All this was in perfect harmony with Old Testament prophecy, with Zechariah xi, and xii, and many other passages. As all this is, however, at present unfulfilled prophecy, we do not dwell on it here.

Note: For reasons explained above, I can’t agree with this. The only true Israel today, the only true people of God, are only those in Christ Jesus. The second advent will not be primarily a reign mainly over the descendants of Israel, but over the entire world.

We have now seen what the programme given by Christ was in its negative aspect. The coming age would not be a continuation of Judaism. The favoured nation, which for 2,000 years had been the channel of revelation, and the sole witness for the living and true God in an idolatrous pagan world, was to be removed from the position of which its rejection of Christ had proved it unworthy. This predicted destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, with which Jewish ritual worship was inseparably connected, involved a change in God’s providential action towards mankind. What would be substituted for Judaism? What was the positive side of the prophetic programme presented by our Lord Jesus?

He announced THE RISE, CHARACTER, COURSE, AND ISSUES OF AN ENTIRELY NEW AND PREVIOUSLY UNPRECEDENTED ECONOMY OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE, of which He speaks under the name of “the kingdom of heaven.” He did not Himself personally reveal all that the programme was to contain on this subject. Much could not properly be revealed until after His resurrection. As we shall presently see, this part of the prophecy was left to be communicated subsequently, through the inspired apostles. But Jesus Himself sketched its outline. He neither defined fully what the true Church would be, nor what the outward professing Church, which we call Christendom, would be. That was foretold later on. But He gave similitudes of the coming “kingdom of heaven,” which prove that the eighteen Christian centuries lay naked and open before His all-seeing eye, though during the days of His flesh a full disclosure would have been premature.

This “kingdom of heaven,” or present spiritual kingdom of God on earth, must be broadly distinguished from the other kingdom of which we have just spoken. It is in mystery only a kingdom, not in manifestation. None can see its King or its court, its hosts or its palaces, nor even distinguish its subjects, by any outward sign, from its enemies. Christ speaks of “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,” and He paints it as wonderfully different from the earthly kingdom of God which Israel had been expecting, and which, owing to their rejection of its King, was postponed sine die (indefinitely), and is still future. That kingdom was to be introduced by the return of the King in power and great glory, characterized by His personal presence, by His session on the throne of David, and by the exaltation of repentant and restored Israel. This kingdom, on the other hand, exists during the absence of the King in heaven, runs its course during His Melchizedek session on the throne of God, and coincides with the time of Israel’s dispersion and rejection. The two are contrasted in every respect: the one is a rule on earth, the other a rule from heaven; the one is over peoples and nations, the other is over the hearts and lives of Christ’s disciples mainly, though involving also a hidden providential government of the world; it is an invisible rule, a mysterious sway, an intangible dominion; it is a kind of kingdom of which the Jews had no conception, and of which the disciples themselves were slow to catch the idea; it was one which had never been clearly predicted in the Old Testament, and they had failed to understand the hints of it which the prophets had given; it was practically a new revelation. Hence our Lord began His gradual unfolding of it in simple parables, in order that the homely analogies might make way for the novel conception.

Note: Again, I cannot agree with the author on this point. Are there really two kingdoms? “Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom (singular, not plural) come…”

Combining all the intimations given by its Founder as to this kingdom of heaven, we must now deduce, from the mass of parable and prediction in the Gospels, the positive side, or Christian aspect, of Christ’s programme of the future.

And first, in His prophetic parables, our Lord foretold that the coming dispensation, or kingdom of heaven, would have no national limits, but be cosmopolitan—universal in its scope. “The field” of Divine operation would in future be “the world.” This was a novel and most startling idea for Jewish minds, and the disciples sought an explanation of what to them seemed so strange, though to us so simple and familiar. The world? Yes. “The field is the world.” As if He had said: In the future no one nation will enjoy any religious advantages more than another. All distinction of Jew and Gentile will be done away, The revelation of God will be for all, to all. There will be no planting and hedging of a vineyard. “The field is the world.” Absolute equality of religious privileges among men, irrespective of nationality, is here clearly predicted.

Secondly, the future operations of God in this field would be dissimilar tn character from any past operations of His in the world. He would establish no outward visible theocracy nor ritual religious service. He would enact no new code of laws, as from Sinai, nor establish ceremonial worship and a separate priesthood. He would work no special miracles of preservation and deliverance for His people; on the contrary, His action would be like that of a sower sowing the seed. “Behold, a sower went forth to sow.” The new dispensation would be marked by a wide distribution of living seed; that is, by a world-wide diffusion of truth—living and life-giving truth. Hence its one great ordinance would not be, as of old, sacrifice, but preaching, teaching, imparting to men the Word of God. The Sower’s object was to diffuse His precious seed, and the seed possessed, latent in itself, the powers of life and of self-multiplication. All life comes from seed, and tends to produce seed, which, in its turn, gives birth to new life. The kingdom of heaven would grow, by inward life-power, from small beginnings to immense development. The seed would grow secretly,—the progress of the kingdom of heaven would be by the hidden and concealed operations of spiritual life; for as seed is capable of being quickened into wondrous action, so the Word of God has in it the germ which can produce rich and ever-increasing results.

This was clearly a prediction that the coming age would see inward and spiritual operations on the part of the Divine Being, that He would work in the hearts and minds of men, and that, instead of imposing a new law, He was about to impart a new life. It was a prediction that the kingdom of heaven would not be established by force, like the empire of Caesar or the subsequent sway of Mohammed. The Jews expected Messiah to establish His kingdom by force, by the subjugation of enemies and the punishment of all opponents. The only kingdoms the Jews had ever known, or indeed that the world had ever seen up to that time, had been won by force, and been held by force alone. But Christ told them there was coming a dominion wider and longer than any earth had seen, that would be established solely by a gradual dissemination and spread of the truth of God.

He intimated, thirdly, that the subjects of the new kingdom would not be received en masse, as nations, but only individually, and that in every case the growth of the seed would depend upon the condition of the soil into which it fell. There would be a recognition of individuality: the state of heart and mind of each hearer of the word would in each case determine the issue of the sowing. This again was something wholly new, for a man was a Jew, whether he would or no, but no one would enter the kingdom of heaven against his will.

Fourthly, the new age was to present a mixed condition of things. He tells them that the kingdom of heaven will in this respect bear no resemblance to the future kingdom of God, in which He will “gather out all things that offend, and those that do iniquity,” in which righteousness will reign triumphant, and sin will not be suffered, nor enemies and evil-doers tolerated. He predicts that, on the contrary, in the kingdom of heaven tares will grow as well as wheat, that the enemy will be at work as well as the sower, that the husbandman will not suffer the tares to be eradicated, that both good and bad fish will be gathered in the net, and that no separation will take place until the end of the age. This mixed condition of things is predicted again and again as a feature of the coming kingdom in later parables: there would be foolish virgins without any oil in their lamps, as well as wise ones; there would be foolish builders laying their foundations on the sand, as well as wise ones, who would build on the rock; there would be wicked and evil servants, who wasted their Lord’s substance, as well as good and faithful ones; and there would at last be goats on the left hand, as well as sheep on the right.¹

¹ The meaning of the parable of the leaven has been much controverted, yet we have ourselves no question but that it teaches the same truth, only in a more definite form. It speaks of a state of things which exists not so much in the world as in a small and pure mass—“three measures of meal”; it says that leaven will be hidden in this pure mass, and will work till the whole is leavened. That is, evil will be introduced into the Church, and will permeate it completely. Though it is often supposed to do so, this prediction cannot possibly point to the action of the gospel in the world, gradually evangelizing it, and that for two reasons: First, because Scripture is always consistent, and never employs the very same emblem to signify two opposite things. Now everywhere else in the Bible leaven is used as a symbol of evil, not of good: Exod. xiii, 3; Lev. ii, 11; Amos iv. 5; Luke xii. 1; 1 Cor. v.7; Gal. v. 9. The only passage which could be supposed to be an exception to this rule (Lev. xxiii, 17) is in reality the strongest instance of it. It commands the presentation on the day of Pentecost, not only of the wave sheaf, typifying Christ, but of two loaves baked with leaven, typifying the Church, in which sin continues to exist, even though it be redeemed and sanctified. Secondly, the gospel never has influenced “the whole” world, and never will in this age, seeing that it is distinctly predicted that when Christ returns to close it there will be vast numbers who know not God and obey not the gospel, and who will be punished with everlasting destruction from His presence. Hence we take the parable of the leaven to be a further revelation of the fact that the kingdom of heaven would witness not only the co-existence of evil and good in the world, but an active and corrupting influence in the Church.

It is objected to this statement, that Scripture symbolizes Christ as a lion in Rev. v. and Satan as a lion in 1 Pet. v.” But in this and all similar cases the characteristic differences make the symbols employed virtually two distinct and widely different ones, though they have an identical base. Just as in the science of heraldry a lion couchant (lying down with the head raised) and a lion rampant are not the same, so the “lion of the tribe of Juda” and the “roaring lion” seeking whom he may devour are widely different emblems. Leaven, on the contrary, is one and the same.

Thus our Saviour’s very earliest parables—before there were any signs that Israel would reject their Messiah, and thus interpose a barrier to the immediate coming of the kingdom which they expected—predicted four of the most salient features of the new dispensation, which He alone foresaw. Its sphere was to be universal; its nature was to be spiritual, as He taught the woman of Samaria in plain words; it would deal with men individually, and not nationally; and its character, though a kingdom of heaven, would be mixed, imperfect, good and bad.

In later parables He revealed many additional features of the coming age, to which we must only allude. In His story of the labourers who, though they had toiled for dissimilar periods, were equally rewarded by the householder, He foretold that the exercise of sovereign grace would be a leading principle of God’s providence, for this was a similitude of the kingdom of heaven. In giving every man his due,—the wages for which he had agreed,—the master acted in strict and simple justice. So God had acted in Judaism. In giving some men much more than their due, the owner of the vineyard had acted in free grace, for the labourers had no claim to so much, and had made no bargain at all. That was undeserved kindness, unmerited generosity, for which the recipients made no return. This principle was to mark the future in contrast to the past. So “the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”

In the parable of the ten virgins, again, Christ not only teaches the duty of watchfulness, but indicates in advance facts concerning the future, to name which is to recall the fulfilment of His prediction. He foresaw that His own second advent would be long delayed. The Bridegroom tarried,—came not when He was expected. He foresaw also the effect of this on the Church,—”They all slumbered and slept.” For a thousand years the Church did so: the hope of the Lord’s coming, so bright at first, so bright again now since the warning cry went forth, was lost sight of throughout the middle ages. He foresaw also that false profession would be exceedingly prevalent. Half the virgins would have no oil in their vessels with their lamps. We are accustomed to look at this parable and similar ones as teaching needed moral and spiritual lessons. They do this, but they are also prophecies. They foretell a new state of things, and one contrasted with Judaism. Jews did not slumber and sleep as to their Messianic hopes! The longer Messiah’s advent was delayed, the more impatient they became for it. They did not make false profession of being Jews, for they were such by blood. This sketch portrayed a future state of things, and one without any previous precedent; in other words, it was distinctly part of a prophetic programme.

The wide extension of the kingdom of heaven in the world had been distinctly predicted in the similitude of the mustard seed. Later on Christ foretold the bitter persecution of His disciples; the hatred and opposition of the world to them and their mission. He told them that He Himself was leaving them, that they would lose the help of His Divine wisdom and supernatural power, and be like sheep among wolves. And yet they were to witness for Him to the uttermost ends of the earth, and spread the story of a despised, rejected, and crucified Prophet among all nations. They were practically to establish this “kingdom of heaven,” which was to become so great, and they were but a few poor, ignorant, unlearned, and very commonplace Galilean peasants, with no power, or wealth, or experience, or special talent of any kind. The plan seemed very unlikely to succeed, and yet we know it did succeed, as was predicted, so that the apostles turned the world upside-down; and that the Christendom which now is, owes its origin instrumentally to their lives and labours.

How was this? The question brings us to the last of our Lord’s predictions, which we must notice here,—those we have noticed being only a sample of many more, which our readers will recall on reflection,—the last, and, with one exception, the most important and distinctive.

The Lord Jesus foretold repeatedly and emphatically the advent from heaven to earth of God the Holy Ghost, and His future indwelling in the disciples.

This was no mere doctrine which He taught. It was a stupendous fact of the first magnitude which He predicted. No other facts, save His own incarnation and atoning sacrifice, can even be compared to it in importance.

The Holy Ghost, the mighty Spirit of God, who brooded on the face of the deep before the world was; the Spirit of truth, who could reveal things to come; the Comforter, whose presence would so replace His own as to make it even “expedient” that He should go away; whose coming would prevent their being lonely and helpless “orphans”; who would be to them “power from on high”; who would reprove the world of sin and righteousness and judgment; who would teach them all things, and recall Christ’s own words to remembrance, illuminating with heavenly light sayings which had been dark to them when uttered, and enabling them also faithfully to record the words He had spoken to them;—this Divine Being should not only come, and influence them as He had often done before, but, said the great Prophet, “He dwelleth with you, AND SHALL BE IN YOU.”

Here we have a present and a future. The Holy Spirit had in earlier ages come upon God’s saints and influenced them from an external position, as it were; and in Christ’s own presence He had dwelt with them. But in the coming age His relation to the disciples would be an altogether different one. ‘He shall be in you,” said the Saviour. And He described this indwelling in figure as a fountain springing up from the inmost depths of a man’s being—“in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.”

This advent of the Holy Ghost was to succeed Christ’s own ascension. “The Holy Ghost,” says John, “was not yet given, because Christ was not yet glorified.” “If I depart,” said Jesus, “I will send Him unto you.” What a magnificent indication of the Divinity of Jesus of Nazareth! Who but God can send the Spirit of God? “I will send HIM!”

But this is not the aspect in which we must here consider the words. We regard them only as a prediction by Christ of the distinguishing feature of the kingdom of heaven—the indwelling in His disciples of His own Holy Spirit. The prediction began to be fulfilled, as we know, at Pentecost and has been fulfilling ever since; and nothing else but its fulfilment accounts for the spread of the religion of Christ which has taken place. Christians alone could have done nothing; Christ, in His people, by His Spirit, has changed the face of the world, and established a spiritual kingdom which has embraced already unnumbered millions, who have been translated from the power of darkness into the kingdom of God’s dear Son.

To this point we shall have to revert in considering the Pauline view of the Christian age. In the meantime we must ask, before going further, Has the section of the programme given by our Lord Himself been—so far—borne out by subsequent events?

It is, of course, of the religious history of the world we must think mainly in seeking the answer. Political events were mentioned under the negative Judaic section; here it is mainly with Church history, with the aspect of the world in its relation to God and to religion, that we have to do. We have pointed out that the state of things predicted differed widely from anything that had existed on earth up to that time. Need we point out that it corresponds precisely with that which came into being soon afterwards, has lasted from that day to this, and is all around us now? In the first century there was one nation, and one only, that knew anything at all about the one living and true God. In the nineteenth, over four hundred millions of men, of all nations, profess to adore Him through Jesus Christ. In the first century there was one temple only to Jehovah—that of Jerusalem. Then Egypt, Greece, and Rome with all the nations she had subjugated, were “without hope and without God in the world.” Now, in the nineteenth century, churches for the worship of God may be found from Eastern Japan girdling the globe to California, and studding it everywhere, from Greenland in the north to New Zealand in the south. Is it not true that the field is the world? Did Moses ever give such a command as, “Go ye into all the world and preach to every creature”? Limitation by nationality was not more characteristic of Judaism than universality and individualism of this Christian age. Yet when Christ sketched this outline, no eye but His own foresaw the change that was coming.

Again. What has wrought the change from Judaism and heathenism to the Christendom of our days?

Sowers sowing the seed, preachers preaching the word, martyrs witnessing for Jesus, the Holy Spirit convincing and converting individuals one by one. Nothing else! No warlike aggression, no philosophic speculation, no scientific discovery, no miraculous intervention, no political organization. It has “pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.”

It is so with every other point: the fact and the foreview correspond as the scene and its photograph. They do this so obviously that it would only be wearisome to particularize. Reflection will discover countless such correspondences be tween Christ’s own plain or symbolic predictions and their fulfilments in the eighteen Christian centuries, and the only thing needed to produce an overwhelming sense of wonder and adoration in the mind as we contemplate the harmony is to realize the condition of the world when the programme was given. It is nothing now to say, “We shall one day see China intersected with railways,” because we have seen England and Europe so intersected. But to have conceived and described the steam engine, the train, and the iron road, with the speed of transit and the number of travellers, in the days of stage coaches would have evinced the foresight of genius. So to describe beforehand a great change in the providence of God, and in the religious state of men, demanded Divine prescience, and that Christ did so proves that He possessed such foreknowledge.

But we must turn now to His indirect revelations through His apostles, which, from the nature of the case, were even more full and definite than His own direct prophecies.

The nature of the case rendered it inevitable that much about the future should not have been clearly or fully revealed by our Lord Himself during His earthly lifetime. There were features of the coming age consequent on His own death, resurrection, and ascension which were necessarily veiled in mystery until these all-important events had taken place. Hence He said to His apostles, “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will show you things to come.”

This promise and prediction would lead us to expect to find in the recorded utterances and still extant writings of the apostles further details as to the programme of the eighteen Christian centuries. Nor are we disappointed, for on examining the Book of Acts, and especially the Epistles of Paul and the Revelation of John, we find the outline of Christ filled in with a thousand details, and the sketch which He drew coloured with the rich and glowing tints of a finished picture. Yet He was Himself the great Prophet, for not only did He give in embryo all that is afterwards developed into the full Christian programme of the apostles, but it was HE who spake by the apostles, and He who gave to John the wonderful Apocalypse of the future which he transmitted to the Church. The programme is all from Himself, therefore, though it was given in three successive sections: the first from His own lips, the second through the apostles, and especially through Paul, and the third through John.

It should be noted that Paul had never companied with our Lord in His earthly lifetime, like the twelve. He was called by the ascended Saviour from heaven, and was acquainted only with Christ risen and glorified. This imparted, as we shall presently see, a peculiar character to his revelations. John, again, wrote long after the other apostles had sealed their witness with their blood. He wrote after Jerusalem had fallen, and the temple been destroyed by the Romans, in the year A.D. 96.

In considering the apostolic programme, we shall find that it consists almost entirely of an enlargement and amplification of Christ’s own predictions. It shows how the future which He foretold would work itself out, and the actual form which the results of the great changes He announced would take. There is in it nothing independent or disconnected with the earlier predictions in the Gospels, though much that is apparently new. We can trace back each of the fresh revelations to its root in the Lord’s own previous teachings. His prophetic words are seen in the light of the apostolic foreviews to have been seeds—germs of great things. A whole group of predictions connects itself with each one of His brief similitudes and simple statements. This will at once be perceived, if we consider the apostolic programme under the three main heads of,—

I. ITS DISPENSATIONAL PREDICTIONS
II. ITS REVELATIONS ABOUT THE TRUE CHURCH
III. ITS PROPHECIES OF THE APOSTASY.

The first set will be found to grow out of and harmonize perfectly with our Lord’s predictions about Judaism; the second with His revelation of the coming Comforter and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost; and the third with His foreview of the mixed condition of Christendom and of the conduct of the unfaithful servants.

I. THE PROPHETIC STATEMENTS OF THE APOSTLES ON DISPENSATIONAL SUBJECTS.

Inspired by the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost itself, Peter quotes and applies Joel’s prediction of the effusion of the Spirit of God on people of all ages and both sexes in the last days,¹ and claims that the wonderful event which had just taken place, and as to which all Jerusalem was marvelling, fulfilled the ancient prophecy.

¹ This expression “last days” may be and is applied either to the whole of the Christian dispensation, or to its closing portion, So a British officer returning from the East might say he had entered on the last stage of his journey when the P, and O. steamer left Gibraltar, because its next stop would be in England. But the ship might touch at Plymouth, and he might run up to town by train. That would be in another sense the last stage of his long journey, and only the drive from the terminus of the line to his own home would be absolutely the last stage. In Joel’s day, and in Daniel’s, the whole of this dispensation is spoken of as the last days, that is to say, the last dispensation of Providence; but we now live in the last stage of the last days.

Now that prophecy was not one of Jewish blessing, but of universal blessing, and speaks of a time when the distinctively Jewish age will have passed away and given place to another. It speaks of “all flesh,” and strikes the keynote of the gospel age in the words, “Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Peter thus endorses our Lord’s own statement, that the kingdom of God had been taken from the wicked husbandmen and given to others; that the universal age had begun, and that henceforth the field was the world.

Continued in Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part III.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

This article is from www.herealittletherealittle.net by Bryan T. Huie. It’s the clearest explanation I have read to date of Daniel 11. Scriptures I had previously attributed to be fulfilled by a future Antichrist were actually fulfilled by a king of one of the four divided parts of the Grecian empire – the King of the North — Antiochus IV, in 168 BCE!

I first posted this on July 23, 2018, but I am bringing it back to the home page because I got a deeper insight about a phrase in Daniel 9:27.

Dispensationalists and Futurists confuse the 70th Week prophecy of Daniel 9:27 with the prophecy of Daniel 11:31. These two prophecies are NOT saying the same thing!

Daniel 9:27 says,

 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,…

Jesus and His Apostles confirmed the covenant of grace through faith that God made with man with Abraham by preaching the Gospel to the house of Israel for seven years. Jesus was “cut off” (verse 26) or executed as a criminal in the middle of the seven years. Because Jesus was the “lamb of God,” His death was the ultimate sacrifice for sins which meant there was no more need for further animal sacrifices. God finally caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease in 70 A.D. with the destruction of the Temple by the Roman army. If you are expecting a rebuilt third Temple in Jerusalem so that the Jews can resume animal sacrifices, just think how God must look at it! A THIRD REBUILT TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM WOULD BE AN UTTER ABOMINATION TO GOD BECAUSE IT REPRESENTS FURTHER REJECTION OF THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST!

Daniel 11:31 says,

And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength (the Temple), and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

This is not talking about the same thing as “cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease” as it says in Daniel 9:27. It was fulfilled nearly 200 years before Jesus began His ministry!

Antiochus IV’s army desecrated the Temple and stopped the daily sacrifices. On the 15th of Kislev, in December 168 BC, the Syrians built a pagan altar over the altar of burnt offering in the Temple and placed an image of Zeus Olympius upon it. Ten days later, on the 25th of Kislev, swine’s flesh was offered on the altar to Zeus.

I hope you see the problem here. When we fail to see from history how a prophecy was fulfilled, and/or if we interpret two different unrelated prophecies to mean the same thing, we are bound to wind up deceived. And even worse than that would be to teach that false interpretation to others and deceive them as well!

Folks, I’m not claiming to be smarter or more spiritual than others who don’t hold my views. Nothing I’m teaching you on this website came from my own mind. It’s all supported by the great men of God who lived before me. The only difference between me and those who don’t agree with my views is that I value history and I value the views of the men of the first 400 years of Protestant Reformation. As far as contemporary B ible teachers go, the ones I would be most inclined to listen to are former Catholic priests who became Protestants, people like Richard Bennett of Berean Beacon. Richard went on to his heavenly reward in 2019.

I hold to the Protestant interpretation of prophecy which is called Historicism. This school of interpretation is not popular anymore because it was replaced by the Futurism of C.I. Scofield which was picked up by the prestigious and influential Dallas Theological Seminary. I believe the Church of Rome and its Jesuits were the ones who ultimately were behind the deception.

DANIEL 11 – PROPHECY FULFILLED!

The longest continuous prophecy in the Bible is found in the 11th chapter of Daniel. It details events affecting the Jews from the 5th to the 1st centuries BCE. According to the internal dating of Daniel, it was compiled during the mid-6th century BCE. However, the prophecies found in Daniel (especially chapter 11) have caused some liberal Bible scholars to assign a much later date to the book of Daniel, as this quote from The Oxford Companion to the Bible plainly demonstrates:

The book of Daniel is one of the few books of the Bible that can be dated with precision. That dating makes it the latest of all the books of the Hebrew Bible, and yet it is still early enough to have been known by the sectarian community at Qumran, which flourished between the second century BCE and 68 CE.

 The lengthy apocalypse of Daniel 10-12 provides the best evidence for date and authorship. This great review of the political maelstrom of ancient Near Eastern politics swirling around the tiny Judean community accurately portrays history from the rise of the Persian empire down to a time somewhat after the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple and the erection there of the “abomination that makes desolate” (Dan. 11:31) . . . The portrayal is expressed as prophecy about the future course of events, given by a seer in Babylonian captivity; however, the prevailing scholarly opinion is that this is mostly prophecy after the fact. Only from 11.39 onward does the historical survey cease accurately to reproduce the events known to have taken place in the latter years of the reign of Antiochus IV. The most obvious explanation for this shift is that the point of the writer’s own lifetime had been reached. (p. 151, “Daniel, The Book of”)

 

Regardless of how liberal scholars and doubting theologians now view Daniel, the Messiah Yeshua proclaimed him to be a prophet (Matt. 24:15; Mark 13:14). Therefore, we can trust ALL the prophecies given to Daniel. In this article, we are going to examine this most detailed prophecy that Gabriel gave to Daniel. In the course of our review, we’ll see how ALL of it has been fulfilled.

In the 10th chapter of Daniel, we are told that Daniel had a vision in the third year of Cyrus king of Persia. Based on the available information, it appears that this vision came on the 3rd day of the first Hebrew month (Nisan). The angel Gabriel was sent to explain the vision to Daniel; he arrived 21 days later on the 24th of Nisan (Dan. 10:4). Gabriel explained that he had been dispatched to give Daniel understanding of the vision he had seen, which dealt with the fate of the Jews in the latter days (Dan. 10:14). His explanation of the prophecy begins in the 11th chapter of Daniel.

Daniel 11:1 Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.

According to Gabriel, he had strengthened Darius the Mede. There is much scholarly dispute over the identity of the Darius mentioned in verse 1. Various theories have been advanced by eminent scholars to identify this ruler. Some believe he is Gubaru (Gobryas), the general who led the actual attack on Babylon. Others, following the Greek historian Xenophon and supported by Josephus (Ant. 10.11.4), have adopted the view that Darius was “the son of Astyages” – namely, Cyaxares II. One other suggestion is that Darius was a title for Astyages, the last king of the Medes and the grandfather of Cyrus the Great. Regardless of the actual identity of Darius, it is clear that he ruled by appointment (Dan. 5:31; 9:1).

This introduction by Gabriel has a meaning that has rarely been recognized. In the Daniel 9:1-2, we see that in the first year of Darius the Mede, Daniel realized how long Jerusalem would remain desolate (70 years), based on the prophecies of Jeremiah. Because of this realization and in accordance with God’s instructions in the Torah (Lev. 26:40-42), Daniel prayed to God and confessed the sins of his people (Dan. 9:3-19). After doing so, Gabriel was sent to Daniel and gave him the prophecy of the 70 weeks (Dan. 9:24-27), which was a time line showing when the Messiah would appear in Israel. The mention of Darius the Mede here by Gabriel is not random, but was rather intended to point Daniel (and us) back to this previously specified period of time in order to understand WHEN the prophetic events he is about to outline would occur. Therefore, we can look for the fulfillment of this prophecy within that prophesied 70 weeks of years.

Daniel 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.

This prophecy was given in the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia (c. 535 BCE). The next three Medo-Persian kings after Cyrus were: (1) his son, Cambyses II (530-522 BCE); (2) Gaumata the Magian (also known as the pseudo-Smerdis – 522 BCE); and (3) the Persian Darius I (the Great – 522-486 BCE). The fourth king was (4) Xerxes (486-465 BCE).

Xerxes’ mother was Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus the Great. His father, Darius the Great, left him the task of punishing the Greeks for their part in the Ionian rebellion (499-494 BCE) and their defeat of the Persian army at the battle of Marathon (490 BCE).

Xerxes began extensively preparing for his expedition against the Greeks in 483 BCE by raising money and accumulating provisions. He had a channel dug through the isthmus of the peninsula of Mount Athos, stored supplies along the road through Thrace, and had two bridges constructed across the Hellespont. In preparation to punish the Greeks, Xerxes also entered into an alliance with Carthage. Even many of the smaller Greek states sided with the Persians. A large fleet and a vast army (numbered by some at over two million men) were gathered. He certainly did “stir up all against the kingdom of Greece.”

In the spring of 480 BCE, Xerxes set out from Sardis. At first, he was victorious. But when Xerxes attacked the Greek fleet under negative conditions at the Battle of Salamis (September 28, 480 BCE), he lost, even though his fleet was more than three times as large as the Greek navy (1,207 ships to 371). This battle decided the war; Xerxes was forced to retire to Sardis, and the army which he left in Greece was finally beaten the next year. The Delian League (also known as the Athenian Empire), was formed in 477 BCE as an offensive and defensive alliance of the Greek city-states against the Persians. The Greek empire had begun its rise.

Daniel 11:3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.

After the military defeat of Xerxes by the Greeks, a number of additional Persian kings ruled the empire. But Xerxes had set the stage for a strong Greek ruler to arise. This ruler was the Macedonian Alexander the Great, who defeated Persian King Darius III Codomannus in 333 BCE at the battle of Issus (located on the Mediterranean coast in what is now southeast Turkey). This defeat signaled the beginning of the end of the Persian empire.

At the height of his power, Alexander conquered and ruled an empire that stretched from southern Europe to north Africa to central Asia. But the Greek empire of Alexander was not destined to endure. He fell ill and died on June 10, 323 BCE in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon.

Daniel 11:4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.

Alexander left a huge empire at his death. His family and his generals jostled for control of this kingdom. When the dust settled, only two of his top officers remained alive. His other generals, his mother, his wife, his son, his illegitimate son, his sister, his half-sister, and his half-brother, were all dead. Of this group, only one general (Antipater) died of natural causes.

After much fighting and jockeying for position, Alexander’s empire was divided into four major portions by 301 BCE: (1) Cassander ruled over Greece, (2) Lysimachus ruled in Asia Minor, (3) Seleucus I Nicator ruled in Babylon and Persia, and (4) Ptolemy I Soter ruled over the Holy Land and Egypt.

Daniel 11:5 And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.

Twenty years later (281 BCE), when Seleucus I killed Lysimachus in battle, only two dynasties remained in Alexander’s old empire – the Seleucid kings in the north and the Ptolemaic kings in the south.

Daniel 11:6 And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king’s daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.

In 249 BCE, king of the South Ptolemy II Philadelphus sent his daughter Berenice to king of the North Antiochus II Theos. His plan was to stop the war that was raging (the Second Syrian War) and unite the two kingdoms through their marriage. Unfortunately, this plan had a flaw: Antiochus II was already married. However, because he knew his marriage to Ptolemy II’s daughter would ensure peace and allow him to regain most of the Syrian possessions his father had lost to the king of the South, Antiochus II put away his wife Laodice and married Berenice. She persuaded him to reject Laodice’s children and set up her own to succeed him on the throne.

However, after Ptolemy II died in 246 BCE, Antiochus II repudiated his marriage to Berenice and left her and their infant son to return to Laodice. Doubting his faithfulness, Laodice quickly murdered Antiochus II with poison. She then convinced her son, Seleucus II Callinicus, to kill both Berenice and her son. So, just as the prophecy said would happen, Ptolemy II king of the South, his daughter Berenice, and Antiochus II king of the North all lost in their struggle for power.

Daniel 11:7 But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail:

Ptolemy III Euergetes, the eldest son of Ptolemy II and brother of Berenice, was not happy about the murder of his sister. He immediately invaded the Seleucid empire. His armies defeated the forces of new king of the North, Seleucus II, who was the son of Antiochus II and Laodice. His campaign was successful, and his armies achieved victory from the Tigris River to the coasts of Asia Minor. Ptolemy III captured and put to death Laodice. He was even able to enter Seleucia, the port city on the Tigris River of the capital Antioch, and leave a garrison there.

Daniel 11:8 And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north.

During the Third Syrian War, king of the South Ptolemy III is credited with recovering many of the sacred statues that the Persian forces of Cambyses had carried off during their conquest of Egypt some three hundred years earlier. Because of this, he was known as Euergetes (“Benefactor”). Ptolemy III acquired much gold and silver during his victorious campaign; in fact, from Seleucia alone he received 1,500 talents of silver annually as tribute (about 10% of his annual income). He outlived Seleucus II, who died after falling from his horse, by four or five years (222 BCE).

DANIEL 11:9 “Also the king of the North [lit. “he”] shall come to the kingdom of the king of the South, but shall return to his own land.” (NKJV)

Editor’s Note: Daniel 11:9 in the KJV says, “So the king of the south shall come into his kingdom, and shall return into his own land.” According to the context of the chapter, this doesn’t seem correct.

In 240 BCE, the king of the North, Seleucus II, attempted to invade Egypt in response to the humiliation he had suffered at the hands of Ptolemy III. However, he had to return in defeat after his fleet perished in a storm.

DANIEL 11:10 “However his sons shall stir up strife, and assemble a multitude of great forces; and one shall certainly come and overwhelm and pass through; then he shall return to his fortress and stir up strife.” (NKJV)

The sons of Seleucus II were Seleucus III Ceraunos (“Thunder”) and Antiochus III (the Great). Seleucus III, the eldest son of Seleucus II, began a war against the Egyptian provinces in Asia Minor. However, he was unsuccessful, and was assassinated by members of his army in Asia Minor in 223 BCE. Seleucus II’s younger son, Antiochus III, took the throne at the age of 18 after his brother’s death. In 219-218 BCE, Antiochus III victoriously went through Judea, coming almost to the borders of Egypt.

DANIEL 11:11 “And the king of the South shall be moved with rage, and go out and fight with him, with the king of the North, who shall muster a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given into the hand of his enemy.” (NKJV)

Antiochus III met Ptolemy IV Philopater at the Battle of Raphia (also known as the Battle of Gaza) in 217 BCE. Antiochus III, the king of the North, had 62,000 infantry, 6,000 calvary, and 103 war elephants. But the forces of Ptolemy IV, king of the South, were victorious in the battle. Antiochus III was forced to withdraw into Lebanon.

DANIEL 11:12 “When he has taken away the multitude, his heart will be lifted up; and he will cast down tens of thousands, but he will not prevail.” (NKJV)

After his victory over Antiochus III, Ptolemy IV spent only three months settling affairs in the Holy Land before heading back to Alexandria. He was apparently eager to return to his luxurious and decadent life in Egypt. In his haste to go home, Ptolemy IV left the important port of Seleucia-in-Pieria on the Phoenician coast (which his father had first captured) in the hands of Antiochus III. After his victory at Gaza, the Egyptian troops trained to fight the Seleucids began a successful guerilla campaign against his rule in Egypt. By the end of Ptolemy IV’s reign, they had achieved total independence in the southern part of Egypt.

DANIEL 11:13 “For the king of the North will return and muster a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come at the end of some years with a great army and much equipment.” (NKJV)

After the death of Ptolemy IV in 204 BCE, Antiochus III rallied his forces once again to attack the kingdom of the South. In the Fifth Syrian War (202-195 BCE), Antiochus III swept down into Judea from Syria. He retook the territory that he had occupied some eighteen years previously. When Antiochus III withdrew for the winter, the Egyptian commander Scopas reconquered the southern portions of the lost territory, including Judea and Jerusalem.

DANIEL 11:14 “Now in those times many shall rise up against the king of the South. Also, violent men of your people shall exalt themselves in fulfillment of the vision, but they shall fall.” (NKJV)

Antiochus III negotiated an alliance with King Philip V of Macedonia to divide up Egypt’s Asian possessions. After some temporary setbacks (particularly at Gaza), Antiochus III’s army inflicted a crushing defeat on the Ptolemaic forces about 199 BCE at Paneas, near the headwaters of the Jordan River. Regarding the prophesied actions of the Jews, the Jewish historian Josephus wrote:

Yet was it not long afterward when Antiochus overcame Scopas, in a battle fought at the fountains of Jordan, and destroyed a great part of his army. But afterward, when Antiochus subdued those cities of Celesyria which Scopas had gotten into his possession, and Samaria with them, the Jews, of their own accord, went over to him, and received him into the city [Jerusalem], and gave plentiful provision to all his army, and to his elephants, and readily assisted him when he besieged the garrison which was in the citadel of Jerusalem. (Ant. 12.3.3)

Unfortunately, this Jewish assistance was not to be remembered when Antiochus IV later came against Jerusalem.

DANIEL 11:15 “Then the king of the North shall come and throw up siegeworks and take a well-fortified city. And the forces of the South shall not stand, or even his best troops, for there shall be no strength to stand.” (ESV)

Following his defeat at Paneas, Scopas fled to the fortified port city of Sidon. But after Antiochus III besieged it, Scopas surrendered in 199 BCE in exchange for safe passage out of the city back to Egypt. He and his troops were allowed to leave the city naked after giving up their weapons.

DANIEL 11:16 “But he who comes against him shall do according to his own will, and no one shall stand against him. He shall stand in the Glorious Land with destruction in his power.” (NKJV)

With his final victory over Scopas at Sidon, Antiochus the Great took the Holy Land away from the Egyptians for good. Judea and Jerusalem had passed from the king of the South to the king of the North.

DANIEL 11:17 “He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do. And he shall give him the daughter of women to destroy it; but she shall not stand with him, or be for him.” (NKJV)

Young Ptolemy V had entered into a treaty with Antiochus III after his military defeat in the Fifth Syrian War. Through this treaty, Antiochus III tried to strengthen his position and expand his empire even further. Ptolemy V surrendered his Asian holdings to the king of the North and accepted Antiochus III’s daughter, Cleopatra I, as a bride. They were married in 194 BCE. Through this marriage, Antiochus III sought to gain a foothold in Egypt itself through his daughter. But his plan backfired. Cleopatra I was a true wife to Ptolemy V, standing by him instead of seeking to benefit her father. Cleopatra I was beloved by the Egyptian people for her loyalty to her husband.

DANIEL 11:18 “After this he shall turn his face to the coastlands, and shall take many. But a ruler shall bring the reproach against them to an end; and with the reproach removed, he shall turn back on him.” (NKJV)

In 192 BCE, the ambitious Antiochus III crossed into Greece to aid the Aetolians. He sent ambassadors to Rome asking for friendship. However, the Roman senate replied that they would be friends if Antiochus III left the Greeks in Asia free and independent and if he kept away from Europe. Antiochus III refused, and went to war against Rome. With 10,000 men, Antiochus III sailed across the Aegean Sea and took some strongholds in Asia Minor.

But in doing so, he alienated his former ally, Macedonian king Philip V. The Roman army entered Asia Minor and defeated the larger forces of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia in 190 BCE. In the peace treaty of Apamea in 188 BCE, Roman general Publius Scipio set a high cost on Antiochus III for peace. He demanded twenty hostages (including his son, Antiochus IV), a reduction of naval ships to twelve, and payment to Rome for the cost of the war totaling 15,000 talents over the next twelve years. The all-consuming ambition of Antiochus III had finally brought defeat to the kingdom of the North.

DANIEL 11:19 “Then he shall turn his face toward the fortress of his own land; but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found.” (NKJV)

As a consequence of the Roman victory over Antiochus III, the outlying provinces of the Seleucid empire again reasserted their independence. With his kingdom now reduced to Syria, Mesopotamia, and western Iran, Antiochus III was in dire need of funds with which to pay Rome for the cost of the war. In 187 BCE, while attempting to plunder a pagan temple in Babylon near Susa (Shushan), Antiochus III was murdered.

DANIEL 11:20 “”His successor will send out a tax collector to maintain the royal splendor. In a few years, however, he will be destroyed, yet not in anger or in battle.” (NIV)

Antiochus III’s eldest son, Seleucus IV Philopater, took over after his father’s death. Due to the heavy debt burden imposed by Rome, he was forced to seek an ambitious taxation policy on his shrunken empire. This included heavy taxation on the people of Israel. In fact, Seleucus IV even sent his treasurer, Heliodorus, to the Temple in Jerusalem to extract money.

The Roman senate decided to trade hostages; therefore, they ordered Seleucus IV to send his son Demetrius, the heir to the throne, to Rome. In return, the Romans released Seleucus IV’s younger brother, Antiochus IV. When released, Antiochus IV went to Athens.

In 175 BCE, after Demetrius had been sent away to Rome, Seleucus IV was poisoned by his minister Heliodorus. Some historians think that Heliodorus desired the throne for himself, while others believe that Antiochus IV was behind the murder. Seleucus’ young son, (another Antiochus – age 5) was put on the throne in his place. However, Heliodorus was the actual power behind the throne.

DANIEL 11:21 “And in his place shall arise a vile person, to whom they will not give the honor of royalty; but he shall come in peaceably, and seize the kingdom by intrigue.” (NKJV)

With Seleucus IV dead, the rightful heir to the throne was the young Demetrius. However, he was no longer available, having been sent to Rome as a hostage. At the time of the murder, Antiochus IV was in Athens. However, when he heard of his brother’s death, he quickly sailed to Pergamum. Once there, he sought the help of Eumenes II, the king of Pergamum. By flattering Eumenes II and his brother Attalus, he received their support and backing.

Antiochus IV arrived in Seleucia with a powerful ally and thwarted Heliodorus’ designs on the throne. He became co-regent and protector of Seleucus IV’s infant son (also named Antiochus). In 170 BCE, the younger Antiochus was murdered while Antiochus IV was conveniently absent, paving the way for him to take sole possession of the throne.

DANIEL 11:22 “With the force of a flood they shall be swept away from before him and be broken, and also the prince of the covenant.” (NKJV)

Because of his ability to charm people and ally himself with them, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (“God manifest”) was able to overcome all threats to his throne. The prince of the covenant here is a reference to the Jewish high priest Onias III. He was the high priest at the time that Antiochus IV came to the throne. A brother of Onias named Joshua, who had become hellenized and changed his name to Jason, made a deal with Antiochus IV. Jason told him that he would pay Antiochus IV a large bribe if he would remove Onias and make him high priest in his place. So Antiochus IV forced Onias out and installed his brother Jason as high priest in Jerusalem in 174 BCE.

In 172 BCE, Jason sent a priest named Menelaus to Antiochus IV with his tribute money. However, Menelaus took Jason’s money, added some of his own to it, and bribed Antiochus IV to secure the high priesthood for himself. Menelaus then returned to Jerusalem and deposed Jason, who fled for his life. Antiochus IV’s double-cross of Jason shows the true nature of his character.

DANIEL 11:23 “And after the league is made with him he shall act deceitfully, for he shall come up and become strong with a small number of people.” (NKJV)

Once again, the “king of the North” set his sights on the kingdom of the South. In Egypt, the 14-year old Ptolemy VI Philometer had become king. He was the nephew of Antiochus IV; his mother (Cleopatra I) was Antiochus IV’s sister. Antiochus IV sought an alliance with Ptolemy VI, seeking to take advantage of what he perceived as weakness in the Ptolemaic kingdom and gain Egypt for himself. He moved through Syria and Judea into Egypt with a small army, so as to not arouse suspicion to his true motive, and seized Egypt. His cover story was that he was coming to act as the “protector” of his nephew, Ptolemy VI.

DANIEL 11:24 “He shall enter peaceably, even into the richest places of the province; and he shall do what his fathers have not done, nor his forefathers: he shall disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches; and he shall devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time.” (NKJV)

Antiochus IV pursued a novel plan for gaining the Egyptian-controlled provinces. He moved into the parts of the kingdom that were the richest. Then he did something that no other Seleucid king had ever done. Antiochus IV spread around some of the spoils from his war campaigns to secure the loyalty of the people. The historical book of I Maccabees states that he spent much on the public (I Mac. 3:30). It is even reported that he would go into the streets and throw money to the citizens there. However, this was only the beginning of Antiochus IV’s plan. Using his cunning, he visited Egyptian strongholds to find out their power.

DANIEL 11:25 “He shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South with a great army. And the king of the South shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall not stand, for they shall devise plans against him.” (NKJV)

In 170 BCE, when Antiochus IV felt secure about the state of his own kingdom, he decided to take Egypt by force in what came to be known as the Sixth Syrian War. He regarded Ptolemy VI as a weak ruler and therefore not capable of successfully waging war against him. Antiochus IV was able to move his army to the border of Egypt before he was met by the Egyptians at Pelusium, which is near the Nile Delta. The Egyptians had a large army arrayed against him there. Antiochus, risking death by riding into the midst of the battle of Pelusium, ordered the Egyptians to be taken alive instead of slain. By this policy, he gained Pelusium and later took Memphis.

DANIEL 11:26 “Yes, those who eat of the portion of his delicacies shall destroy him; his army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain.” (NKJV)

Ptolemy VI’s army, although large, was not able to withstand Antiochus IV. In large part, this was due to the intrigues of Antiochus IV, who corrupted several of the Egyptian ministers and officers. This was one of the main causes of the defeat of Ptolemy VI. Those who were in his confidence and possessed the secrets of the state betrayed him to Antiochus IV. For example, Ptolemy Macron (also called “Ptolemy the son of Dorymenes”) had been appointed by Ptolemy VI as governor of Cyprus. However, sensing the young king’s weakness, he deserted to Antiochus IV, who made him governor of Coele Syria and Phoenicia.

DANIEL 11:27 “Both these kings’ hearts shall be bent on evil, and they shall speak lies at the same table; but it shall not prosper, for the end will still be at the appointed time.” (NKJV)

After he took control of Pelusium and Memphis, Antiochus IV set his sights on Alexandria. Due to the intrigues of Antiochus IV mentioned in verse 26, the Alexandrians had renounced their allegiance to Ptolemy VI, and had made his younger brother, Ptolemy VII Euergetes, king in his place. While at Memphis, Antiochus IV and Ptolemy VI had frequent conferences. Antiochus IV professed his great friendship to his nephew and concern for his interests, but his true plan was to weaken Egypt by setting the brothers against one another.

Conversely, Ptolemy VI professed gratitude to his uncle for the interest he took in his affairs. He laid the blame of the war upon his minister Eulaeus, one the guardians appointed to watch over him after his father’s death. All the while, Ptolemy VI sought to smooth over things with his brother Ptolemy VII so they could join forces against their deceitful uncle, Antiochus IV.

DANIEL 11:28 “While returning to his land with great riches, his heart shall be moved against the holy covenant; so he shall do damage and return to his own land.” (NKJV)

While Antiochus IV was engaged in Egypt, a false rumor arose in Judea that he had been killed. This prompted deposed high priest Jason to raise an army of 1,000 men and attack Jerusalem. His army captured the city and forced the high priest Menelaus to take refuge in the Akra fortress in Jerusalem. When news of the fighting in Jerusalem reached Antiochus IV, he took it to mean that Judea was in revolt against him.

Antiochus IV left Egypt; on his way home, he and his armies marched against Jerusalem. He commanded his soldiers to kill everyone they encountered (men, women, and children). Within the space of three days, his forces had killed somewhere between 40,000 and 80,000 people. A similar number were captured and sold into slavery.

Not satisfied with the slaughter, Antiochus IV entered the Temple and (guided by Menelaus) took the holy vessels, including the golden altar, the menorah, the table for the showbread, the cups for drink offerings, the bowls, the golden censers, the curtain, the crowns, and the gold decoration on the front of the temple. He took all the silver and gold, as well as the hidden treasures which he found. After appointing the Phrygian Phillip as governor in Jerusalem, Antiochus IV then returned to Antioch.

DANIEL 11:29 “At the appointed time he shall return and go toward the south; but it shall not be like the former or the latter.” (NKJV)

Meanwhile, in Egypt brothers Ptolemy VI and Ptolemy VII reconciled and agreed to share power. This annulled Antiochus IV’s alliance with Ptolemy VI and caused his loss of control over the Ptolemaic kingdom. Because of this, in 168 BCE Antiochus IV once again sought to go to war against Egypt. However, this time he would not have the same success as he achieved previously.

DANIEL 11:30 “For ships from Cyprus [Kittim] shall come against him; therefore he shall be grieved, and return in rage against the holy covenant, and do damage. So he shall return and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant.” (NKJV)

Because they knew that they could not defeat Antiochus IV alone, the Ptolemy brothers appealed to Rome for help. In order to check the threat of Greek expansion, the Romans agreed to provide assistance. The “ships from Kittim” here refer to the ships which brought the Roman legions to Egypt in fulfillment of the defense pact.

As Antiochus IV and his army marched toward Alexandria, they were met by three Roman senators led by Gaius Popillius Laenas in Eleusis, a suburb of Alexandria. There, Roman ambassador Popillius delivered to Antiochus IV the Senate’s demand that he withdraw from Egypt. When the king requested time for consultation, Popillius drew a circle around Antiochus IV with a stick he was carrying and told him not to leave the circle until he gave his response. The king of the North was astonished at this display of Roman arrogance, but after a brief time, said he would do all that the Romans demanded.

On his return to Syria, Antiochus IV tried to ease the sting of the humiliation he had suffered at the hands of the Romans by taking out his frustration on the Jews in Judea. His armies encircled Jerusalem and then attacked. All those Jews who resisted were executed. However, the pro Hellenistic Jews who allied themselves with Antiochus IV were left unharmed.

DANIEL 11:31 “And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation.” (NKJV)

Antiochus IV’s army desecrated the Temple and stopped the daily sacrifices. On the 15th of Kislev, in December 168 BC, the Syrians built a pagan altar over the altar of burnt offering in the Temple and placed an image of Zeus Olympius upon it. Ten days later, on the 25th of Kislev, swine’s flesh was offered on the altar to Zeus.

DANIEL 11:32 “Those who do wickedly against the covenant he shall corrupt with flattery; but the people who know their God shall be strong, and carry out great exploits.” (NKJV)

After venting his anger upon the Jews and desecrating the Temple, Antiochus IV decreed that his entire kingdom should become one people, each giving up his own customs. The other peoples under his rule accepted Antiochus IV’s command. Because of his flattering approach, many of the people of Israel also forsook the Law and adopted his religion.

Antiochus IV commanded a change in all the ordinances of God. No sacrifices were to be offered in the sanctuary, the Sabbaths and feasts were to be profaned, and that the Jews were not to circumcise their sons. Upon pain of death, they were commanded to profane the true religion so that eventually the Law would be forgotten. Antiochus IV appointed inspectors to watch the Jews and commanded the cities of Judah to offer pagan sacrifices. Yet many in Israel stood firm and rejected the innovations of the king of the North.

DANIEL 11:33 “And those of the people who understand shall instruct many; yet for many days they shall fall by sword and flame, by captivity and plundering.” (NKJV)

Whenever Antiochus IV’s men found copies of the Torah, they tore them to pieces and burned them. Whoever was found in possession of a Torah was put to death. According to Antiochus IV’s decree, women who had their children circumcised were put to death, along with their entire families and those who had circumcised them. Still, many in Israel chose to die rather than to break the holy covenant.

DANIEL 11:34 “Now when they fall, they shall be aided with a little help; but many shall join with them by intrigue.” (NKJV)

As the historical book of I Maccabees shows, the decrees of Antiochus IV eventually led to a rebellion started by the priest Mattathias and his five sons (including Judas Maccabee). He and his family had fled from Jerusalem to Modein when the Seleucid forces took the city. There, Mattathias killed a Jew who was sacrificing according to Antiochus IV’s command, as well as the king’s officer who was forcing them to sacrifice. From this first act of rebellion, a guerilla war against the forces of Antiochus IV began. After the death of his father Mattathias in 167 BCE, Judas Maccabee defeated the large army of Antiochus IV’s general Apollonius. This victory helped Judas to gather a sizable force; however, only a minority of the soldiers were actually faithful men.

Next, Seron, the commander of the Syrian army, came against the forces of Judas. His army was also defeated by Judas, and his fame spread all the way to Antioch. King Antiochus IV was greatly angered by the exploits of Judas and his men, and he gathered his army. He opened the royal treasury and gave his soldiers a year’s wages, ordering them to be ready for whatever action needed to be taken.

This approach quickly emptied the royal treasury of funds and made it necessary for Antiochus IV to seek additional tribute and spoil from his lands. In 166 BCE, he decided to go to Persia to collect or seize by force the needed money. Antiochus IV left his general Lysias in charge of his son and half of his army, with instructions to attack and destroy Jerusalem and Judea. Lysias sent an army of 40,000 infantry and 7,000 cavalry and marched into Judea. He met the forces of Judas Maccabee (3,000 poorly equipped men) near Emmaus. However, despite being vastly outnumbered, Judas’ army routed the Syrians, killing 3,000 and putting the rest to flight.

In 165 BCE, Lysias again sent the Syrian army (now numbering 60,000 infantrymen and 5,000 cavalry) against the Jewish forces, which had risen to 10,000. This time, 5,000 Syrians were killed and Lysias fled back to Antioch. Because of his great victory, Judas and his men were able to recapture the Temple.

The pious Jews cleansed and renewed it, and on Kislev 25, 165 BCE, three years to the day after the first abominable sacrifice had been offered, the new altar was rededicated and holy sacrifices offered. The Jews celebrated the rededication of the Temple for eight days. In memory of the Jewish victory and rededication of the Temple, Judas Maccabee decreed that the Feast of Dedication (called Chanukah in Hebrew) was to be observed every year thereafter for eight days, beginning on Kislev 25.

In 164 BCE, Antiochus IV’s army was defeated at Elymais, Persia when he attempted to plunder the city of its gold and silver. Soon thereafter, a messenger came from Antioch and notified him of the defeat of his armies by Judas and the Jews. Terribly shaken by these events, he fell sick and became bedridden. Antiochus IV died shortly after that.

DANIEL 11:35 “And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, until the time of the end; because it is still for the appointed time.” (NKJV)

When the Gentile nations around Judea heard of their victory over the Seleucids, they became very angry. They began to kill those Jews who lived among them. Judas Maccabee and his brother Simon went out to fight against those Gentiles who sought to kill the Jews and defeated them.

After the death of Judas Maccabee in battle in 161 BCE, persecution continued upon the Jews, as history records. Many wicked Jews who had opposed Judas and his goals took opportunity after his death to persecute and kill righteous Jews.

Beginning with Mattathias’ leadership of the rebellion against Antiochus IV, the rule of the Hasmoneans (named after Mattathias’ grandfather, Asmoneus) lasted from 168 until 37 BCE. The words “until the time of the end” refer to the end of this second period of Jewish sovereignty. The “appointed time” refers to the 70 weeks of years that Gabriel had earlier told Daniel about (Dan. 9:24-27), which led to the appearance of the Messiah.

DANIEL 11:36 “And the king shall do as he wills. He shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished; for what is decreed shall be done.” (ESV)

In this verse, the king being spoken of changes. Starting in verse 21, Antiochus IV Epiphanes was the referenced king. Verses 32 through 35 prophesy his defeat by the Maccabees (the Hasmoneans) and encompass the subsequent fall of their dynasty. But the context shows that the remaining verses in this chapter cannot apply to Antiochus IV.

Most Christian scholars try to insert a huge chronological gap in the prophecy here, making the rest of it apply not to the antetype Antiochus IV, but to the end-time type, the Antichrist. But staying in the time sequence context earlier alluded to by Gabriel (Dan. 11:1), what should we expect to see next in this prophecy? Was there a king who ruled Israel after the end of the Hasmonean era?

What appears to have caused scholars to stray away from the correct understanding at this point of the prophecy is that they were unable to find a successor to Antiochus IV who matched the description of “the king.” But two points must be kept in mind in order to properly understand this prophecy. The subject is the Seleucid or Ptolemaic dynasties ONLY as these kingdoms affected Daniel’s people. Therefore, the expression “the king,” without any other description, could certainly mean one who was king over Israel. Secondly, the immediately preceding verses (Dan. 11:32-35) refer to the Jews and their situation during and after the Maccabean revolt. Based on the history of this period, we should look for the fulfillment of this verse by a “king” other than Antiochus IV or the Hasmonean rulers.

Both secular history and the New Testament record the acts of a king who appeared on the scene in Israel at the end of the Hasmonean period. As we shall see, this king fulfilled every prophetic description given in verses 36 through 39. That king was Herod the Great. In verse 36, the one spoken of is not identified as either the king of the North or the king of the South, but simply as “the king.” Herod was seated as king on the throne of Israel when Messiah Yeshua was born. He is the called “the king” in the Gospels (Matt. 2:1, 3, 9; Luke 1:5). He, like Antiochus IV before him, was an antetype of the coming Antichrist, as his actions revealed. Let’s look at the specific points in the prophecy and see how Herod fulfilled them.

“The King Shall Do According to His Own Will”

The first thing said of this king is that he would “do according to his own will.” While most take this to mean that the king would do as he pleased, it is instructive to see how this phrase is used elsewhere in the prophecy. In Daniel 11:3, we see that it is said of Alexander the Great that he would “do according to his will.” Similar words are used of Antiochus the Great in Daniel 11:16. This means more than simply a strong-willed ruler who did things his own way. Both of these rulers (Alexander and Antiochus III) were exceptionally successful in achieving their goals.

Success in achieving and maintaining power also defined Herod the Great. History shows that Herod was an Idumean (the Edomites were forcibly converted to Judaism under the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus about 130 BCE). His father Antipater II, a friend and advisor of Hasmonean ruler Hyrcanus II, was made procurator of Judea by Julius Caesar. In that position, Antipater II made Herod the governor of Galilee at the age of 25 in 47 BCE. Herod ingratiated himself with Rome following the assassination of Julius Caesar and eventually married Mariamne, a granddaughter of Hyrcanus II (even though he was already married with a young son). Due to a recommendation by Hyrcanus II (as well as a bribe paid to Roman ruler Mark Antony), Herod was appointed as a tetrarch over Judea in 41 BCE.

Shortly thereafter, the Parthians overran Judea in 40 BCE and installed Antigonus, the Hasmonean brother of Hyrcanus II, as king. Herod fled and eventually came to Rome, where he was appointed king of Judea by Gaius Octavius (the grandnephew of Julius Caesar) and Mark Antony. He left Rome with an army and by 37 BCE had captured Judea and deposed Antigonus. He bribed Antony to have Antigonus killed, lest his claims to the Judean throne be found to be more legitimate than Herod’s own. All in all, Herod’s rise to power showed that he was very successful at doing “according to his own will.”

Viewing the expression in the sense of doing as he pleased, history shows that Herod was ruthless and cruel in doing his own will. He did not hesitate to murder those he considered to be threats to his rule, including Hyrcanus II and almost the entire Hasmonean line. Even those closest to him, his own family, were not safe. Herod had his beloved wife, Mariamne, executed on a trumped-up charge of adultery, as well as three of his own sons because he suspected them of conspiring to take his throne. These and other deeds of evil willfulness characterized his entire reign.

“He Shall Exalt and Magnify Himself Above Every God”

The text also states that the king “shall exalt and magnify himself above every god.” The word “god” here is the Hebrew ‘el. The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament says that “the primary meanings of this root as used in Scripture are ‘god’ (pagan or false gods) ‘God’ (the true God of Israel) and less frequently, ‘the mighty’ (referring to men or angels).” It is clear that Herod exalted and magnified himself above every “mighty one” in Israel, whether priests or rulers. He appointed whomever he chose to the sacred office of high priest. However, because he owed true allegiance only to himself in his lust for absolute power, Herod truthfully could be said to have exalted and magnified himself above all other gods (including the God of Israel, whose will he attempted to thwart by destroying the promised Messiah).

“He Shall Speak Astonishing Things Against the God of Gods”

The Hebrew word niphla’ot, rendered “blasphemies” in some translations, actually means “marvelous” (if used in a positive sense) or “astonishing” (in a negative sense). This charge against Herod primarily refers to his command to slaughter the male babies of Bethlehem. This was done for the express purpose of destroying the coming Messiah (Matt. 2:4), the one God had promised to send to be king over His people Israel. Herod chose to act directly against God’s will in this way to ensure that his throne would not be taken over by the rightful heir, Messiah the Son of David. We shall look at this action more later.

DANIEL 11:37 “He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all.” (NKJV)

“He Shall Regard Neither the God of His Fathers… Nor Regard Any God”

Even though Herod was an Idumean (a descendant of Esau), his family had converted to Judaism in the 2nd century BCE. Therefore, Herod was generally regarded as a Jew. In fact, when addressing the Jewish people, Herod customarily used the expression “our fathers” to emphasize his genealogical ties to the patriarchs. Yet Herod promoted Greek and Roman gods and built the port city of Caesarea (named after the Roman emperor Caesar Augustus), which became a symbol in Jewish eyes of everything pagan. In Caesarea, Herod built a huge temple dedicated to the worship of Caesar Augustus, the Roman emperor/god. Additionally, he built temples dedicated to Augustus in Sebaste (the rebuilt city of Samaria) and Panias (a city long associated with the worship of the pagan god Pan). He also supported the restoration of the temple of Pythian Apollo on the Greek island of Rhodes, participated in the building of the temple to Ba’al Shamim at Si’a, and contributed to temples in Tyre and Sidon. Herod extensively remodeled the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, but then placed a huge golden Roman eagle at the main entrance, which religious Jews saw as a blasphemous idol. A group of Torah students destroyed this emblem of idolatry, earning themselves the fate of being burned alive by Herod. Herod’s regard was for the benefits that he could achieve by supporting various gods; his religion was one of expedience, not conviction. He exalted himself above all the gods.

“The Desire of Women”

The phrase “the desire of women” has been variously understood. Some scholars have opined that, speaking of the end-time Antichrist, this indicates that he will have no desire for women. This is far from the intended meaning of this phrase, however. In Haggai 2:7, the Messiah is called “the desire of all nations.” The exact same Hebrew word, chemdat, is used in that verse and Daniel 11:37. It was the hope of every religious Jewish woman that she might be the mother of the prophesied Messiah. Therefore, it was primarily the Messiah who was “the desire” of Jewish women.

Additionally, children in general are “the desire of women.” The fact that Herod attempted to murder the infant Messiah by destroying numerous babies shows that he had no regard for the maternal nature of women. Each one of the slain infants was “the desire” of his own mother. Herod exalted himself above all by valuing holding onto his power and position above everyone and everything else, including the God of Israel.

DANIEL 11:38 “But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses; and a god which his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and pleasant things.” (NKJV)

Herod’s actions in securing and holding on to power provide an impressive fulfillment of this verse. The phrase “god of forces,” or “fortresses,” is uncommon enough that it provides us a ready means of identification. The Roman emperors proclaimed themselves to be “gods,” and it was by their military “forces” or “fortresses” that they enlarged and sustained their power and their empire. Herod was quick to honor the warring Roman rulers with tribute and building projects. He rebuilt many fortresses in the land and temples in surrounding Gentile areas, including three temples dedicated to Caesar Augustus. He rebuilt the ancient Phoenician coastal fort called Strato’s Tower and renamed it Caesarea in honor of Caesar Augustus; he rebuilt Samaria, and renamed it Sebaste (sebastos was the Greek word for “reverend,” equivalent to the Latin augustus). He built many other fortified cities and named them in honor of Caesar. Herod also introduced Greek-style games in honor of Caesar. He often sent delegations to Rome to deliver valuable gifts and money to show his respect to Caesar.

DANIEL 11:39 “Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain.” (NKJV)

Verse 39 continues the subject from the previous verse. Using the support and backing of the Roman emperor, Herod was able to overcome all of his foes. In the process, he promoted the glory of the Romans in Judea to his own benefit. Herod gave land and authority to those who supported him in order to secure their allegiance. When viewed properly, we can see that every item foretold of “the king” in verses 36-39 was fulfilled in the reign of Herod.

DANIEL 11:40 “At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through.” (NKJV)

Remember, this prophecy is not primarily concerned with Syria, Egypt, Rome or any other foreign power, but with the fate of Daniel’s people, the Jews. Verses 40-43 are a parenthetical insert describing the last major battle over the land of Israel before the Messiah appeared.

For the final time in this prophecy, we see the king of the South and the king of the North engage one another in battle. Here, the king of the South is Mark Antony and his ally Cleopatra (the last monarch to occupy the Egyptian throne). The king of the North is Octavius, who as the official representative of Rome, was ruler of the former Syrian empire of the Seleucids.

Antony and Octavius made a pact with a third party (Marcus Aemilius Lepidus) to rule Rome after the assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 BCE. In the civil war that followed Caesar’s death, they defeated the assassins’ forces in 42 BCE. The next year, Antony fell in love with Egyptian queen Cleopatra. After Antony suffered a military defeat against the Parthians in 36 BCE, he and Octavius had a falling out. Worsening the situation was the fact that, in 32 BCE, Antony divorced his Roman wife, Octavia (the sister of Octavius) and ceded many of the eastern Roman territories to Cleopatra and their children. Finally, in 31 BCE, a new civil war broke out between the Roman Senate-supported Octavius and Antony/Cleopatra.

The Roman historian Plutarch wrote that the first move in the war was made by Antony (at the insistence of Cleopatra). Thus we see that the “king of the South” indeed first attacked the “king of the North.” The Roman Senate quickly pronounced Antony an outlaw and declared war on Cleopatra.

In this war, Herod supported Antony and sent supplies to his forces. He wished to join Antony for a final showdown with Octavius, but fortunately Antony dispatched him and his troops to fight the Nabatean king Malichus I.

Amazingly, the prophecy was accurately fulfilled in regard to the composition of the forces engaged in the war. Despite the fact that each side had assembled large infantry forces, Plutarch records that these infantry were not engaged at all in the short war. Although his generals advised Antony to use his overwhelming infantry advantage to defeat Octavius, Antony decided to prosecute the war primarily with ships in order to satisfy the request of Cleopatra. Thus the conflict was decided by chariots, horsemen, and in a major naval battle, approximately 630 ships. After the navy of Antony and Cleopatra was routed off the promontory of Actium in Greece on September 2, 31 BCE, the infantry deserted and never saw battle.

Seeing that Antony was all but defeated, Herod helped Quintus Didius, the Roman governor of Syria, prevent a troop of Antony’s gladiators from reaching Egypt to aid Antony. Herod then undertook a dangerous sea voyage in winter 30 BCE to meet with Octavius on the Greek island of Rhodes. Herod came to him humbly and stated that he would be as loyal to Octavius as he had previously been to Antony. Octavius accepted Herod’s pledge and promised him continued rule over Judea.

DANIEL 11:41 “He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon.” (NKJV)

The course Octavius took after his victory over Antony and Cleopatra accurately follows the prophecy. He passed through Syria, Judea (the “glorious land”), and Egypt in his pursuit of the pair. However, the lands of Edom, Moab, and Ammon were not invaded during this excursion. A later expedition into these areas (about 25 BCE), under the command of Aelius Gallus along with 500 troops from Herod, was not successful and no further efforts were made against them.

DANIEL 11:42 “He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape.” (NKJV)

Antony’s plans to regroup their forces in Alexandria failed, since most of his soldiers had deserted to join Octavius. Based on a false report that Cleopatra had killed herself, Antony committed suicide with his own sword. Cleopatra actually lived for some weeks after Antony’s death and met Octavius on at least one occasion to negotiate the best possible situation for her children. Realizing that Octavius was planning to publicly exhibit her as a captive in his victory parade in Rome, she too committed suicide, reportedly by allowing a venomous asp to bite her.

DANIEL 11:43 “He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Ethiopians shall follow at his heels.” (NKJV)

The prophecy refers specifically to the vast treasures of Egypt. Therefore, its fulfillment must be looked for in the days of Egypt’s power and wealth. It cannot have been fulfilled in the debased and poverty-stricken Egypt of later centuries. In the days of Antony and Cleopatra the treasures of Egypt were of immense value, having been accumulated over the years of the Ptolemaic rule. Octavius captured the accumulated riches of Egypt with his victory over Antony and Cleopatra, and celebrated his triumph in Rome in 29 BCE. He became the first Roman emperor, entitled “Caesar Augustus.” Interest rates in the Roman empire fell greatly due to the influx of plunder from Egypt. Octavius returned in victory to Rome. Octavius’ general, Cornelius Balbus, later took Libya and Ethiopia for Rome.

Why are the parenthetical events of verses 40-43 singled out? Because they illustrate how Rome’s domination over Judea was fully established and show the end of the separate history for the kingdom of the South. It also sets the stage for the political conditions that would exist at the time the prophesied Messiah was to arise, according to the 70 weeks prophecy given to Daniel earlier.

DANIEL 11:44 “But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many.” (NKJV)

Having updated the story flow in verses 40-43 to show the Roman dominance of Judea and the end of the “king of the South,” the prophecy now reverts back to its earlier subject, Herod the king. What news came “from the east” to trouble Herod? Clearly, it was the arrival of the magi heralding the birth of the one “who had been born King of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2). As the next verse in Matthew’s Gospel states, “When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him” (Matt. 2:3).

Nothing could “trouble” Herod more than reports of a claimant to his throne. After the magi failed to return with a report of the location of the newborn king, Herod became extremely angry and commanded that all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, be slain, according to the time frame which he had determined from the wise men (Matt. 2:16).

Also in the last years of Herod’s life, his oldest son Antipater conspired to take over his throne. Antipater was in Rome (which at this time had become the seat of what is indefinitely called “the north” in this prophecy). He sent letters to his father giving information that two of his other sons, whom Herod meant to make his successors, had denigrated their father to Caesar. These “tidings out of the north” troubled Herod to the extent that he had the two sons killed. Later, Antipater himself was executed for his conspiracy and intrigue.

Herod’s “great fury” was not confined to the infants of Bethlehem or to the members of his own family. It was also, at nearly this same time, that he burned alive those who had pulled down his golden image of the Roman eagle from the gate of the Temple.

Realizing that his death was near and that he and his family were generally hated by the Jews, Herod commanded that all the chief men of the Jewish nation be summoned to him at Jericho. Out of fear of not obeying a royal decree, they came. Herod, in a seething rage, ordered them all to be shut up in the hippodrome there. He placed his sister Salome and her husband Alexas in charge of them, ordering that they were all to be killed when he died. He reasoned that only due to the death of so many noble Jewish men would his own death be mourned. Sanity prevailed, however, and his order was not carried out.

DANIEL 11:45 “And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the seas and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him.” (NKJV)

Herod had many royal palaces throughout Judea, including two in Jerusalem. But as his illness worsened in March, 4 BCE, he retired to his winter palace at Jericho, less than 10 miles northwest of the Dead Sea, about 45 miles east of the Mediterranean Sea, and less than 20 miles northeast of Jerusalem.

The final part of the prophecy shows that, in his last days, the king would seek deliverance from a threat to his life, but would not receive it. This was literally fulfilled at the end of Herod’s life, as the Jewish historian Josephus vividly documented. After years of suffering from a painful disease (probably syphilis), Herod finally became so despondent that he attempted to take his own life with a paring knife. He was stopped from this act by his cousin Achiab. Immediately after his suicide attempt, Herod ordered the execution of this son, Antipater. Just five days later he finally succumbed to his illness. Herod the king was 70 years old at the time of his death.

DANIEL 12:1 “At that time [uva’et] Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, every one who is found written in the book. 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt. (NKJV)

Chapter 12 starts with the Hebrew phrase uva’et, which is translated “at that time.” When used in prophetic writings, this phrase always denotes the time of the appearance of Messiah to save Israel (Jer. 33:15; 50:4, 20; Joel 3:1; Zep. 3:20). At the beginning of this chapter, we finally see the time gap most seek to insert at Daniel 11:36. The context of the first verses in chapter 12 show that the prophecy has now jumped forward to the time of the ultimate salvation of Daniel’s people, which includes a resurrection from the dead (cf. Rev. 11:15-18).

CONCLUSION

The expansive prophecy recorded in Daniel 11 shows the political maneuverings of the powers which fought over and ruled Judea and the Jews throughout the period of the 70 weeks prophecy earlier given to Daniel (Dan. 9:24-27). These powers included the northern Seleucid kingdom of Syria, the southern Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt, the Jewish Hasmonean dynasty, the Roman Empire, and Rome’s vassal in Judea, Herod the Great. Like many prophecies, this one is likely dual in some ways; events that have occurred in ancient times could be replicated at the time of the end. Obviously, Antiochus IV and Herod the Great are antetypes of the coming Antichrist. But to assign much of this prophecy to a yet future time is to miss the fact that this prophecy conclusively shows God is in control and world events happen according to His plan and purpose.

Bryan T. Huie

December 30, 2005

Continued from Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part IV. The Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks.

WITH the first advent of Jesus Christ our Lord came the final outburst of prophetic light as yet granted to our world. Through Him personally, and through His Holy Spirit in the apostles, were revealed things to come —the closing section of the Divine programme of the world’s history as far as it is at present unfolded. What additions may be yet made to it in the ages to come, who shall say? The infinitude and eternity of God forbid the thought that the section we have now to consider is the last in any absolute sense, but it is the last at present published to mankind.

Previously to the first century of our era, the voice of prophecy had for four hundred years been perfectly silent, and it has been similarly hushed ever since. The century of the first advent stands thus as the only one in the course of twenty-three hundred years during which the Omniscient condescended to reveal the future, and exhibit His Divine prescience for human consideration in future ages. Prophecy has no more been granted lavishly and at all times than miracle. Both have been restricted to special eras when they were needed to attest Divine intervention in the affairs of the human race, and when they could best subserve their all-important ends. These ends are similar in some aspects, different in others. Miracle serves to convince unbelievers, and to confirm faith, in its own age. Prophecy is intended to do the same in distant ages. The one consequently witnesses for God to man at the beginning of great dispensations of providence; the other at the close of such. It is given at the outset, that it may by fulfilment demonstrate its own inspiration of God at the end of the age.

The miracles of 1,800 years ago have so far lost their force in our days that their very occurrence is doubted and denied. But the power of fulfilled prophecy, to prove the existence and the providential government of God, only increases as time passes on, and will increase until the next great climax in the history of our race. It is the peculiar witness in the last days, and by neglecting it the Church deprives herself of the help of the most effective weapon in her armoury for the combat with modern unbelief.

If Jesus Christ revealed the future well-nigh two thousand years ago, and if intervening ages have fulfilled every one of His predictions,—and can be shown to have done so,—what shall we say? what shall we think? Shall we lightly esteem His mission? Shall we give no heed to His message from God? Shall we dare to despise His warnings? Shall we argue that, though He foretold a hundred events, and ninety-five of them have come true, we need not anticipate the fulfilment of the remaining five? Or shall we bow the head and worship, and believe with the heart His every word?

The fact that we have 1,800 years of authentic and detailed history with which to compare and by which to test the New Testament prophecies gives them a special evidential value.

There can be no question as to the date of these predictions. Skeptics may raise a cloud of dust about the date of Daniel, though their desperate efforts to assign it an epoch late enough to deprive it of its conspicuously prophetic character fail to conceal its true origin, but they cannot do the same about the New Testament. It was not concocted and published in modern times, or even in the middle ages. Abundant writings still extant of the first and second centuries attest that it was already in wide circulation in Asia, Africa, and even Europe, and that is enough for our argument. We need not pause to settle the exact date of each Gospel, nor of each of the letters of the Apostle Paul. We know that even the Apocalypse of St. John—which was published long after all the rest of the New Testament— dates from the close of the first century, and that therefore, in considering the final section of our programme, we may be confident that it was published to the world 1,800 years ago, the bulk of it between A.D. 38 and A.D. 70, and the last work in A.D. 96 or 97. If we can prove the fulfilment of its predictions, consequently, we have unquestionable evidence of inspiration, and of Divine foreknowledge and providence.

No human sagacity could have correctly outlined the history of the eighteen Christian centuries, complicated and marvellous as it has been. Superhuman wisdom prompted the utterances and guided the pens of the prophets of the New Testament as of those of the old. This section of the programme is in some senses the most interesting of any to Christian students, as it deals with our own dispensation, predicts our own experiences, and enlarges on our own hopes. It contains, moreover, chronological statements of peculiar interest, as indicating our own position in the stream of time, and our proximity to the end of the present age. Further, it not only sketches the present condition of Christendom, affording as it does so precious practical guidance, but it reaches out into the ages to come far more fully than any previous portion of the programme, so that its vistas of glory and joy are calculated to sustain faith and hope in these dark and perilous times of doubt and infidelity.

The subject is so rich and full a one that our introductory sketch must be brief, but a few words seem needful to connect this first advent era and Christian outburst of prophetic light with that which occurred in the captivity and restoration era, on which we dwelt in the last chapter.

When the Persian monarch Artaxerxes passed away, his commission to Nehemiah had been executed. Jerusalem was once more the defensible capital of a re-constituted state and nation, and the temple was once more the centre of the reestablished worship of God. Both the national polity and the national religion were again visible among men, and recognised by neighbouring nations. But the centuries which intervened between the return from Babylon and the advent of Christ were to the restored Jews in Palestine anything but a time of peace or an era of national glory. They were, to some extent, like sheep among wild beasts. Weak, small, and defenceless, they fell successively under the fierce pagan rulers of the second, third, and fourth of the wild-beast Gentile empires which dominated one after the other during the four or five centuries which preceded the advent of Christ.

The restored remnant was at first too feeble and too obscure to be of much account among men. The Medo-Persian kings were for the most part kind to the Jews, and even Alexander showed them favour.

Judea had been, after the death of Nehemiah, added to the prefecture of Syria, and it ultimately shared in the miserable lot of that province, and became the battlefield of opposing nations. The Jews suffered very severely in the long struggles and incessant warfare which was waged, on the break-up of the Greek empire, between the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucidae of Syria. In the second century before Christ especially, they passed through a most bitter experience.

Antiochus Epiphanes, the infamous monster who—as is agreed by most—foreshadowed a greater persecutor still, caused them the severest sufferings. At one time he took Jerusalem by storm, slew 40,000 of the Jews, and sold as many more into slavery, and defiled the temple by offering a sow on the altar, and sprinkling the broth of it all over the sacred enclosures. He tried to compel the nation to abandon the faith of their fathers, and succeeded in inducing many to apostatize. But after the Babylonish captivity Israel dreaded and detested the idolatry to which in earlier ages they had been so prone, and nothing could induce them to comply with the tyrant’s orders. At last, in B.C. 168, he ordered his general, Apollonius, to destroy Jerusalem; and the order was as far as possible carried into execution. The men were put to the sword, and the women and children enslaved. The houses were demolished or fired, and the walls broken down; the temple was re-dedicated to Jupiter, and Antiochus erected his statue on the altar of burnt-offering. It was a rehearsal on a small, brief scale of the subsequent doings of the Roman soldiery of Titus. Antiochus subsequently swore that he would destroy the entire nation of the Jews, and make a common cemetery for them at Jerusalem. But God smote him, and he died in torment, like Herod in after-days.

In these dark and dreadful times Jewish faith and heroism shone more brightly, perhaps, than at any previous or subsequent period. Had it not done so, Judaism might have become extinct, under the combined influences of persecution from without and apostasy within. But Israel’s great mission was not over then, any more than it is over now. The people were preserved once more. The bush burned with fire, but it was not consumed. When hope itself was almost dead, up rose the Asmonean Mattathias, and his still more illustrious son, Judas Maccabeus, and did exploits for their faith and people. They delivered Israel, cleansed the temple, restored the Divine worship, and ruled as priests and princes in Jerusalem for many generations. The struggle with this fierce storm had strengthened the faith and courage of the Jews, and they clung to their monotheistic creed more firmly than ever.

The Asmoneans continued to rule the Jews under the later Syro-Macedonian monarchs until family dissensions arose, and a struggle for power, in which Aristobulus called in the help of the then rapidly rising Romans. Judea soon became tributary to the fourth empire, which was at the time in its full career of conquest, and fast approaching its day of undisputed sway. An Idumean named Antipater was subsequently, by Julius Caesar, made procurator of Judea, and from this man were descended the Herods who ruled the Jews in the days of Christ. An Edomite dynasty would, in any case, have been hateful to the Jews. Its outrageous vices made the Herodian dynasty peculiarly so. But they were powerless to resist the iron will of Rome, though often sorely tempted to revolt; and the Herods, by a cruel tyranny, kept the people down. Never, therefore, was the longing expectation of the advent of Messiah to deliver Israel stronger or more intense than at the time when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea.

It is important, however, to realize that at that time the Jews of Palestine formed only a minority of the Jewish nation. To say nothing of the ten tribes, whose fate and whose locality were more or less unknown, the number of the two tribes which had returned from Babylon to Judea was very small compared with their whole number. This relative proportion continued to exist in the days of our Lord. The home Jews were far less numerous than the foreign Jews, who were known as “the dispersion.” (John 7:35) True, they were no longer scattered as a penal judgment, or by the will and power of Gentile conquerors. They were voluntary exiles,—but exiles still,—whatever the motive of business or pleasure, policy or interest, which kept them so.

Year by year the temple courts were thronged with crowds of foreign Jews—Jews “out of every nation under heaven,” as they were “when the day of Pentecost was fully come.” A Babel of languages might be heard in the streets of Jerusalem, even as there would be now were Jews from every land to congregate in one city.

But, though living among other nations, all these Jews looked to Jerusalem as their centre, and felt themselves strangers in the lands where they dwelt. There was an Eastern and a Western dispersion. The Babylonian Jews, and all who dwelt beyond the Euphrates, were much more closely connected with the restored people than were the Western dispersion. From the language which they spoke, they were called Hebrews as much as those who lived in Palestine. They were the “Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and dwellers in Mesopotamia” mentioned among the crowds gathered in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. The Western dispersion included all the rest, the pilgrims from Cappadocia, Pontus, Phrygia, Pampylia, Egypt, Cyrene, and Rome. Josephus and Philo estimate that millions of Jews belonged to the Eastern dispersion, which was the most influential and wealthy part of the nation, The Persian monarchs had treated the Jews kindly, Alexander the Great had favoured them, the Parthians, who succeeded the Seleucidae in governing those regions, found them so influential that they avoided making enemies of them, and even the Romans in the first century before Christ shrank from provoking their hostility. They were united, though scattered, and had already become a sort of world nation, as they still are.

The Calendar of the feasts of the Lord observed by this Eastern dispersion was identical with that of Jerusalem, the Sanhedrim indicating to them by fire signals from mountain top to mountain top the visibility of the new moon. The Babylonian Rabbis were very highly esteemed at Jerusalem. Ezra, Rabbi Hillel, and Rabbi Chija, who all three did good service in restoring the law, were from Babylon. This dispersion extended to the Black Sea, northward to the Caspian, and eastward as far as India. They were intensely Jewish, kept their genealogies with the utmost strictness, and observed the customs of the Talmud as well as the precepts of the law.

They must not be confounded with the wanderers of the ten tribes, whose destiny is involved in obscurity, and the only indications of whom from early sources are laid in the countries to the north of India, the Kurdish mountains of Armenia, and the region of the Caucasus. They ceased to be known as Jews at all, with the exception of the comparatively few who settled in Palestine, like the family of Anna, which belonged to the tribe of Aser, and the few who had mingled with the exiles of Babylon, and formed part of that Eastern dispersion which never lost its nationality.

It was otherwise, however, with the Grecian, or Western dispersion. This also was very extensive—Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Spain, and other lands contained at the time of the first advent very numerous Jewish colonies and scattered residents. They were merchants, traders, doctors, craftsmen, and artisans; and though they were regarded as strangers and foreigners by the heathen, and often hated on account of their peculiar laws and customs, yet their higher religious faith had its influence on the Grecianized world which despised them, and their sacred writings, translated into Greek more than two hundred years before Christ, were widely known and read among philosophers. The Jews, in their turn, felt strongly the effect of the mental atmosphere in which they lived. The Stoic and Epicurean philosophies current in those centuries could not but affect the Jewish mind, with its keen and meditative cast. Their faith as Jews rested on authority, on Divine revelation.

But what were the grounds of this authority, what the proofs of this revelation? These questions never troubled the Rabbis of Palestine and the East. But they were rife among the Jews of Alexandria and the Mediterranean. Young Judaism, waking up under the influence of what was to them modern thought, were tempted to compromise, to endeavour to conciliate Greek philosophy, to admit that Socrates as well as Moses was inspired, and to try to blend the teachings of Plato with those of the Pentateuch. The Palestinian Jews so dreaded the influence of Hellenistic writings that they forbade their perusal entirely, and endeavoured to repress he curiosity awakened by them about the philosophies of Greece. When a young Rabbi, Ben Dama, asked his uncle whether, since he had thoroughly mastered every aspect of the law, he might not study Greek philosophy, the old Rabbi referred him to the words of Joshua about meditating in the law day and night: “Go search for the hour which is neither day nor night; in it thou mayest study Greek philosophy.”(Edersheim: “Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah,” p. 22.)

Not only the books of the Apocrypha, but a whole literature, sprang up, in the two centuries preceding the advent, from the effort to blend Grecian thought and Hebrew revelation. Some of it remains to this day, though much has perished. Philo of Alexandria was perhaps the greatest of uninspired Jewish writers, and lived about twenty years before Christ. He treated the Old Testament as symbolical, and drew from it, by very arbitrary interpretations, doctrines which approached those of the popular philosophies. His writings and similar ones bridged over to some extent the great gulf between Judaism and Greek thought; and though they were full of error, they led to a Gentile consideration of the Jewish Scriptures. Alexandria, where three worlds meet —Europe, Asia, and Africa—a city then of about a million inhabitants, was the home of this Jewish Hellenism; an eighth of the people were Jews, synagogues abounded, and the city had a great Jewish basilica, or cathedral. Rome also had its synagogues and its large Jewish population, which was cordially hated by the rest of the people.

But wherever they dwelt, and however much they were Grecianized, the scattered Jews in east, west, north, and south, were all one in their expectation of a coming Messiah. This especially united them amid many diversities of language, custom, and thought. “The links which bound them together were—a common creed, a common life, a common centre, and a common hope.” They all believed in the God of Abraham, in the law of Moses, in the observance of the Sabbath, and feasts and fasts of Leviticus; and they all maintained synagogue worship. Jerusalem was the centre of the world to the Jew, whether he lived on the Euphrates, the Nile, or the Tiber; and thither, whenever possible, the pilgrim proceeded, at least once in his life. The advent of Messiah to deliver and restore them all to Palestine was the common hope of Jews both in the East and in the West, and never was that hope stronger or so full of expectancy as at the time of the first advent. The unrest and expectancy were heightened by the fact that the chronological prophecy of the seventy weeks from Artaxerxes pointed to the near future as the time of Messiah’s manifestation. The hour at which the great Deliverer was due would soon strike.

Daniel’s prophecy was, it was true, mysterious, and did not say much about the glorious kingdom which they anticipated from other sacred promises and predictions. But still it fixed the time for Messiah’s advent; and when He was come, He would restore all things. This prophecy of the seventy weeks would not seem to have been generally understood, but it was influential with the pious few who looked for redemption like the godly Anna, and waited like Simeon for the consolation of Israel.

Such then was the condition of the chosen people at the time when the last section of the prophetic programme was published. There was a vast dispersion in all lands: the “Hebrew,” or Eastern one, speaking Aramean, intensely conservative, ritualistic, and learned in Rabbinic and Talmudic lore; the Western one, progressive, liberal, Hellenized, and philosophic; and between the two the nation, in its own home, Palestine, gathered around its restored temple, yet oppressed by aliens and under tribute, hating its Gentile rulers, though unable to oppose them, and waiting impatiently for Messiah to deliver them and destroy their foes.

The ancient synagogue referred to Messiah not only all the passages in the Psalms and prophets which Christians so refer, but many more. More than four hundred and fifty passages of the Old Testament are by ancient Rabbinic writings applied to the coming Messiah; 75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa.(Edersheim, p. 163)

To the Jewish mind every hope and expectation centred in the Messianic age. The present night might be dark, but the coming day would be glorious, and meantime the midnight sky was illuminated by the brilliant stars and constellations of Messianic prophecy. Their expectation was of a Messiah King, however, rather than of a Messiah Saviour, and their hope was of One who should be the glory of His people Israel, rather than a light to lighten the Gentiles. Their own national exaltation was the great result to be attained, for there reigned among them an overweening idea of their exclusive divine privileges. In the glory of the prospect of their own universal domination they to some extent forgot the great Deliverer who was to raise them from their low estate to the pinnacle of earthly glory. Yet there are passages in the writings of the Rabbis which intimate that some of them realized that Messiah would be more than human and even super-angelic, and also that through Him reconciliation for Israel’s sins would somehow be effected. With passages like Isaiah liii. and Daniel ix., it would indeed have been impossible that such thoughts should not have been forced on some minds. But Jewish understanding of these evangelical predictions was hazy, confused, and even contradictory, and the national mind rested only on the contrasted and more numerous predictions of the glorious earthly kingdom which Messiah was to found.

And what was the condition of the Gentile world outside? The fourth empire was in its glory. The “dreadful and terrible and exceedingly strong” wild beast had been for some time in the ascendant, ravaging, devouring, and breaking in pieces the nations with its great iron teeth, and stamping the residue with the feet of it, as Daniel had predicted.

The empire of Rome filled the scene. Julius Caesar had subdued the world; Augustus ruled it. From the Euphrates to the Atlantic, and from the Sahara to the German Ocean, the earth was for the first time crushed, stilled, united under one mighty sceptre. Liberty was dead. The paw of the Roman wild beast had pressed on her heart until it ceased to beat. All nations bowed in submission before the mighty Caesar. The Mediterranean Sea was a Roman lake. “The empire of the Romans,” says Gibbon, “filled the world; and when that empire fell into the hands of a single person, the world became a safe and dreary prison for his enemies.”

Gibbon, as we saw before, tells us that the empire was 2,000 miles in depth from north to south, from the wall of Antoninus and the northern limits of Dacia, to Mount Atlas and the tropic of Cancer, and 3,000 miles in length, and that it contained 1,600,000 [square] miles of fertile land in the finest part of the temperate zone. The capital of this vast empire was a magnificent city, whose population is variously given as from 1,200,000 to six or seven millions, varying probably according to the amount of suburbs included. The civilized world had been welded into one great monarchy for the first time, and the temple of Janus was closed, announcing that the earth was at peace, twenty-three years before the birth of Christ. This great calm of the stormy sea of nations lasted long, for who could oppose such overwhelming power? The commands of the Roman Caesar were obeyed through all this vast domain, and its inhabitants were all citizens of one great state.

This widespread power of Rome was one of the preparations for the advent of the world’s Redeemer. Jewish law, Grecian philosophy, and Roman conquest and policy had each done its preparatory work. Conscience had been educated, language refined and perfected, and fitted to receive a new and final revelation, while the habitable world had been united under a wise and strong government, opened up by Roman roads and posts, and tranquillized by Roman civilization.

Morally and socially also the state of things was ripe for a fresh crisis of Divine interference and illumination. The world was, in spite of the peace and plenty which prevailed, profoundly unhappy. The old faiths had lost their power, “The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true, by the philosopher as equally false, and by the magistrate as equally useful.” The rankest polytheism was the result, and religion was dissociated from morality. Irreligion was fashionable, immortality was denied, and vice reigned as a result.

One of the strongest indications of the hopeless moral condition of the Roman world was the utter and incredible degradation and suffering of the masses of the people. The great were very powerful, the rich were marvellously and uselessly wealthy. The small and select upper class had all the pleasures and refinements that luxury could invent or selfishness desire; magnificent cities studded the empire, architecture was in its glory, and an elegant literature flourished; but all this was only for the few—the very, very few. The misery of the industrial classes was indescribable. The tillers of the soil, forming everywhere the largest part of the population,—in Europe four-fifths,—and the domestic slaves of the rich and noble,—individuals among whom sometimes held many hundreds or even thousands of such,—were beyond the pale of the law, and regarded as scarcely superior to cattle. Augustus himself at one time gave up to their masters 30,000 slaves, who had fought for Sextus Pompeius, to be executed, though he had pledged his word not to do so!

Even the good Trajan amused the populace for 123 days by the horrid spectacle of 10,000 slaves killing each other in fights in the amphitheater! The rural peasantry were oppressed and ground to the earth by cruel bondage. The slaves won in war were treated worst of all. These wretched beings worked almost constantly with chains on their feet; they were worn down with fatigue in order to crush their spirit, and were shut up nightly in subterraneous holes. The frightful sufferings of so large a portion of the population its bitter hatred against its oppressors, produced continual servile insurrections, plots, assassinations, poisonings. In vain did a sanguinary law condemn to death all the slaves of a master who had been assassinated; vengeance and despair multiplied crime and violence. (Sismondi: “Fall of the Roman Empire,” vol. i. p. 23.)

The condition of woman, even in the highest ranks, was one of slavery. The law regarded her as the property of her husband. The bonds of marriage were utterly relaxed, and immorality reigned among all classes. Tacitus speaks with amazement of the purity and fidelity to the marriage bond which existed among the comparatively uncivilized Germans. In every relation of life the weak were oppressed. Might was esteemed right. There was no fear of God, no hope of life after death, no law of love and brotherhood: Regarded from a moral standpoint, nothing could well be worse than the Roman world into which Christ was born. Darkness covered the nations. But the light of the world arose with healing in its beams, and moral light, religious light, and prophetic light alike streamed forth in abundance. A very era of light succeeded an era of darkness so dense that it is difficult for us even to conceive it.

Such then was the political, moral, and religious state of the Gentile world in the first century of our era, at the crisis when the final section of the Divine programme of human history was given, the foreview of the dispensation in which we live.

And who was the channel of the new revelation? It was neither David, the founder of Jewish monarchy, nor Nebuchadnezzar, the founder of Gentile monarchy, but

The role of history contains no other name that can for a single moment be placed beside that of Jesus of Nazareth under any one single aspect of His wonderful character and career. He came fulfilling all previous prophecy: the seed of the woman, He crushed the serpent’s head;(Heb. ii, 14.) the seed of Abraham, He has brought blessing to all nations; the seed of David, He has founded a kingdom that shall never end; the Messiah of Israel, He has “finished transgressions, and made an end of sins, made reconciliation for iniquity, and brought in everlasting righteousness.” He proved Himself, moreover, to be the Prophet of whom Moses spoke, and it is in this last character as a prophet that we have now to regard Him as the author of this, the last section of the Divine programme of the world’s history.

“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days SPOKEN UNTO US BY His SON, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds.” (Heb. 1:1,2)

This statement includes the prophetic utterances of Christ, though it goes far beyond them, and refers principally to the revelation made by Him as a whole—that wonderful revelation of God which was the main object of His incarnation, life, and death. “I have declared unto them Thy name” (or character), “and will declare it,” He said in His last prayer; and to His disciples, “He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.”

From the full and glorious moral and spiritual revelations made by Christ, from all His wonderful and new doctrinal teachings, we must, however, turn our thoughts. They are not here our theme. He illumined every subject of vital importance to mankind; to receive His teachings was and is to have eternal life. But our present subject is limited to that foreview of future events given directly or indirectly by the Prince of prophets, and which has come down to us from the first century of our era. We must not, indeed, dwell on the whole, even of it, for it is too vast, and it extends to yet future ages. We must confine ourselves mainly to that portion of it which has already been fulfilled by history.

The New Testament prophecies, as will at once be recognised, divide themselves naturally into four groups.

I. There are first the beautiful annunciatory predictions of the approaching advent of Christ by the angels,—to Zacharias and Mary, and then to the shepherds,—followed by the exultant prophetic songs of Zacharias and Mary, and by the words of Simeon and John the Baptist. These were partly fulfilled in gospel history, though in their full scope they embrace the present and the future. But on them we need not dwell; they are but as the porch to the temple. They mark, however, the commencement of the new prophetic era.

II. The predictions, parabolic (similar to a parable) and plain, of our Lord Himself in the days of His flesh.

III. The revelations given by the Holy Ghost to the apostles, and through them—and especially through Paul— to the Church.

IV. The latest revelation of Christ risen and glorified, from heaven to John in Patmos: “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him, to show unto His servants things which must shortly come to pass,” and which He sent and signified by His angel to His servant John.

This last prophecy of the Bible is closely related to the entire Old Testament, and to the prophetic parables of Christ. It is given by the same person, deals with the same theme, is couched in the same symbolic form, and is perfectly harmonious in its statements with all the rest of the programme.

For brevity’s sake we shall not refer in detail to all the Scriptures to which we must now allude, much less quote them in full. This is not, indeed, needful. We may count on our readers’ familiarity with the text of the New Testament. Our endeavour will be merely to recall their knowledge, both of predictions and events, in order to lead them fairly to compare the two, and draw the supremely important inferences which are suggested by the comparison. We begin, then, by a consideration of

during His earthly life, both parabolic and plain. That many of even His earliest parables are prophetic none can question. Of the thirty or three and thirty parables in the Gospels, fifteen or sixteen, at least, are of this character. Take, first, the group recorded in Matthew xiii, which were given near the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. In them, omitting—for the sake of simplicity of statement and clearness of impression—all detail, He drew an outline blank map, as it were, of the eighteen Christian centuries. He described, in advance, the broad aspects of the new dispensation He was about to inaugurate.

Under various similitudes of the kingdom of heaven, He presented the essential characteristics of the Christian age as contrasted with the Jewish age, then drawing to a close. The revelation made in the parables of the sower sowing the seed, the wheat and tares, the mustard seed, the leaven working in the three measures of meal, the treasure hid in the field, the pearl of great price, and the net cast into the sea, was a startlingly new one when it was given, though long familiarity with its fulfilment makes it seem most natural to us.

It is the same with our Lord’s later parables, and especially with His plain predictions in non-parabolic form. Perplexing, and almost incredible, even on His authority, to Jewish minds, filled with expectation of the future such as we have previously considered, must have been the predictions given in such parables as those of the wicked husbandman who killed the heir, and lost the vineyard; the marriage of the king’s son; the nobleman who went into a far country, and of whom his citizens said, “We will not have this man to reign over us”; of the talents used or wasted in a long interval which was to elapse before the establishment of the kingdom; of the dark night-watch of the ten virgins for the expected bridegroom, which was so prolonged that they all slumbered and slept;—all these foreviews were not only puzzling, but painfully startling, to men convinced that Messiah had come, and that the long-promised kingdom of God, in all its glory, was on the point of being introduced by Him.

For what did all these parables with ever-increasing clearness foretell? A course of history with which we are acquainted as well as with the air we breathe, but which in the first century of our era must have seemed to Jew and Gentile alike not only unnatural, improbable, impossible, but absolutely inconceivable. As a matter of fact, they could not, and did not, conceive it, even after all the prophetic instructions of their Lord and Master. Notwithstanding all He had foretold them to the contrary, they still thought that the kingdom of God would immediately appear; and even as they stood around the ascended Saviour in their last earthly interview, they asked: “Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?”

It is exceedingly difficult for us to divest ourselves of our Christian knowledge and consciousness, and transport ourselves in imagination back into the mental and moral condition of the society in the midst of which Jesus Christ promulgated this programme of the future. Yet we must endeavour to do this if we would estimate aright the altogether supernatural character of the foreview. It was like a description of the tropics given to Lapps and Esquimaux (the old spelling of Eskimo who are now called the Inuit, the people of Arctic North America and Greenland. Inuits hate be called Eskimo!), who have seen nothing but snow and ice, aurora borealis, and the midnight sun! It was like a sketch of the wide ocean presented to men who had no conception of anything but the inside of a temple! They could not take it in: it was too strangely incredible! He could not mean what He said! They sought explanation, hoping to elucidate the mystery, but His interpretations only added to it instead. For, combining in one view all the predictive utterances of Christ, what did He announce as the main features of the age which He was about to inaugurate? Let us try, as we enumerate them one by one, to regard them from the standpoint of Peter or John, as if we were wholly ignorant of all that has since happened in the world.

They were convinced that Christ was the long-looked-for Messiah, and they were expecting that He would bring consolation to Israel, deliverance, exaltation, and supremacy. They had heard out of the law that He was to abide for ever, that of the increase of His kingdom there would be no end, that He would sit on the throne of David for ever, and be the glory of His people Israel. They expected, and rightly expected, from Old Testament prophecy, that He would exalt the Jews, and destroy their enemies, and make Jerusalem the joy of the whole earth. Having long delayed His advent, the Anointed of God, the Christ, the King, the Lion of the tribe of Judah was at last come. They had no doubt of it. “Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel.” At last the Son and Lord of David was in their midst, the King was present, the kingdom must follow!

****Bottom of 383

But the parables and predictions of Jesus assured them, on the contrary, that a future of a wholly different character lay before them and the world. He did not set aside or destroy their hope and expectation of the oft-predicted kingdom of God on earth. On the contrary, He confirmed their expectation of it, and put into their lips a prayer for its advent: “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” It would come at last, it would be revealed in due time. But

of an entirely different character was opened to their astonished gaze. It was predicted by our Lord—

I. That He Himself, the King, would be rejected. The husbandmen would say, “This is the heir; come, let us kill him.” The invited guests would refuse to come to the marriage, and would even slay the messengers sent to invite them. The citizens would say, “We will not have this man to reign over us.” The builders would reject the stone which should become head of the corner. And mingled with these and similar symbolic intimations were still plainer hints of the foreseen issue. He told them that the Son of man would be “lifted up,” like the serpent in the wilderness; that He, when He was “lifted up,” would draw all men to Him. He spoke of His blood, or sacrificed life, being the life of the world; told them He was going to lay it down, and at last distinctly predicted that the Jews would deliver Him to the Romans, and that they would crucify Him; that, like Jonas, He would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth; and that though, like Jonas, He would rise again, yet that it would not be to destroy His enemies and establish His reign on earth. On the contrary, before He did that, the King would go into a far country, to receive investiture of His kingdom and to return,—as Archelaus, king of Judea, had recently gone to Rome to be invested by Caesar with his crown,—that there would be opportunity for the evil servant to say, “My Lord delayeth His coming,” to smite his fellow-servants, and eat, and drink, and be drunken; that there would be time for a prolonged probation of the King’s servants, and for use or misuse of the talents committed to their care; that it would not be till “after a long time” that the Lord of the servants would return to take account of them; and at last, in plainer words, that He was returning to heaven, where He would prepare a place for them,—going back to the Father from whom He had come forth; and that the only kingdom which would then be established would be a kingdom of heaven,—that is, a rule which would be exercised by a king unseen on earth —exalted in heaven.

This was the first main, clear, strong feature of Christ’s programme of the future. No one can question its prominence in His predictions, and no one can doubt that it was a strange, unexpected, and incredible announcement to those who heard it. The Jews express their astonishment and mental confusion. “How sayest Thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? The law says that the Christ will abide for ever!” But the great Prophet repeated again and again, without a shadow of hesitation or wavering, that it would be even so.

Was it mere human foresight that gave this prophecy? Was it likely that the eager, impatient, enthusiastic, and ambitious Jewish people would reject and murder their mighty, miracle-working, Divine Messiah, when, after ages of waiting expectation, He was at last in their midst? Was such a prediction one which a mere man in Christ’s position would have put forward? Would authors of spurious gospels put such a programme into the lips of their imaginary hero? Would one who was merely acting the role of Israel’s Messiah have counted certainly on his own rejection, and persisted in predicting it? The adhesion and enthusiasm of the crowds that shouted “Hosanna!” never misled for a moment or blinded Christ to what was coming. He foresaw the cross; He foretold the cross, and the grave, and the ascension from Olivet, when none but Himself could have even conceived such events. And we know what happened.

II. But that was not all! Christ foresaw and foretold also the twofold result of this apparent miscarriage of His mission as Messiah: the fall of Judaism and the rise of Christianity. Apart from all question of the invisible spiritual consequences, the eternal salvation of millions—a consideration which as an invisible, intangible one to sight and sense, we must not here adduce—He foresaw and foretold the approach of two conspicuous and contrasted series of outward events, each series extending over ages—events of national and cosmopolitan importance; events of a mundane, material, historic nature, about which no two opinions can possibly be entertained; events which submit themselves to the evidence of our senses, which historians could record and artists paint, and poets and musicians sing; events most momentous in the history of humanity. Such have unquestionably been the fall of Judaism and the rise of Christendom.

Neither of these great changes was in the days of Christ within the range of the most keen-sighted mental vision; no human sagacity could descry anywhere on the horizon a cloud as big even as a man’s hand portending their approach. The prescience that anticipated and foretold them was and must have been, therefore, supernatural— Divine.

And first, as to THE FALL OF JUDAISM. The Saviour’s revelations on the subject were, as usual, progressive—hints only at first, then statements, then full and clear descriptions. The moral reason for and cause of the event is also exhibited: the Jews are made to pronounce their own doom. What would the householder do to the disloyal men who had killed the heir of the vineyard? “He will miserably destroy those wicked men,” say the chief priests and elders of the people, “and will let out the vineyard to other husbandmen, who will render him the fruits in their season.” The Lord endorses their judgment, and adds, “Ye are the men!” For He says, “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” Here is foretold a loss of all the peculiar privileges of Judaism, as a result of their rejection of Christ; as well as that others—some who had never enjoyed it previously—would gain “the kingdom of God,” which they would lose.

The same prediction was oft repeated. The carefully cultured but still fruitless tree would, after long and patient waiting, be cut down. The barren fig-tree afforded a visible symbol of what was to happen to the nation when it withered away. The enemies who would not have the King to reign over them would be slain before His face. Strangers from the east and from the west would sit down in the kingdom with Abraham, while the children of the kingdom would be cast out. As the great tragedy drew near its climax, and the leaders of Israel ranged themselves decidedly against their Messiah, the utterances of Christ became plainer. Not that His convictions were deepened by such indications of what was likely to come, but that He would not anticipate rejection too distinctly before it had been resolved on by His foes.

It was only in the last week of His earthly life that He spoke out fully on this subject, and His most memorable and touching utterance about it was made on that festive Palm Sunday, when, for a brief moment, it seemed as if the result might be different. Amid thousands of grateful disciples—the lame and the blind whom He had healed, the lepers whom He had cleansed, the very dead whom He had raised, and the multitudes whom He had taught—Zion’s King came to her that day, meek, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass. The crowd were waving palms of victory as they escorted Him from Bethany, and laying their garments for Him to ride over. The children sang “Hosanna!” and greeted Him as Son of David. But the present could not conceal from Him the future, and as He approached Jerusalem His tears flowed as He bewailed, in tender and animated utterance, her terrible approaching fate and self-inflicted doom. She had rejected all His loving efforts, and failed to recognise her day of gracious Divine visitation.

In sad and solemn prophecy Jesus foretold, “The days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another.”

This seemed a strange future to be announced to Israel by the Messiah, for whom she had so longed and waited, as the harbinger of better and brighter days. It was enough to shock men who were indulging half-worldly and half-religious ideas of approaching deliverance from their enemies, and triumph over all Gentile foes. What! their enemies not only to rule them as Herod, Pilate, and Caesar were already doing, but actually to raze Jerusalem to the ground !

Judea was then a flourishing province of the mighty Roman empire. Jesus Christ was simply a young Galilean prophet to the outward eye, nothing more. The Herodian dynasty was safely seated on the throne, and the temple—of which Jesus said, “Your house is left unto you desolate”—had been rebuilt in much magnificence and almost regardless of cost; cities and palaces of Roman and Grecian architecture studded the land; Roman soldiery guarded the country, and kept the people in order. Nothing boded change, ruin, banishment, extermination for some, and age-long exile even unto this day for others. How could even the unjust execution of any individual involve such consequences? Could anything be more unlikely than the delivery, not to say fulfilment, of these predictions? Imagine a parallel case. Some young and humble religious teacher who has, however, great power and originality, comes up to London from the northern counties, takes the position of a bold reformer, claims the right to overthrow existing religious abuses, upbraids the Church leaders of the land for their simony, worldliness, and traditional customs opposed to the word of God ventures to purify the Church by some bold, practical, measures, is, in consequence, arrested and accused by those who reject his religious pretensions. He is tried and condemned—and then, without the least personal feeling, but seriously, sadly, and even solemnly, he predicts that the result of his rejection will be the utter overthrow of the Protestant religion, the downfall of the British empire, the complete destruction of St. Paul’s and Westminster Abbey, so that not one stone will be left on another, and ages of a foreign occupation of England!

Yet it was thus Jesus of Nazareth, the prophet of Galilee, forewarned the Jews as to the results of their rejecting Him; and the wonderful fact is that the event justified the prediction, and all subsequent history attested its Divine inspiration.

Continued in Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part II.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

Continued from Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part III.

THE PROPHECY OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS

But we must turn now to a consideration of the second great feature of the Daniel programme. If the first be, as we have seen, a world-wide and most comprehensive outline of the political changes of twenty-five centuries, the second is an absolute contrast to it.

The Messianic revelation of the ninth chapter of Daniel relates mainly to a single half-century of history, to Daniel’s own people, to one individual among them, and a few years of his one brief life. If the earlier visions threw their beams abroad over the known world, and onward through the ages of history, this concentrates its rays on one limited spot,—sheds its brilliant blaze of prophetic light on one specified era, on one human life, the life of all lives—the life on which the salvation of the world depends.

The political prophecies were like a wide landscape painting, with a Babylonian and Persian foreground, a Greek and Roman middle distance, and a papal extreme distance, stretching away to a glorious golden horizon line where earth and heaven meet and mingle in the coming kingdom of God. But this Messianic prediction is, on the contrary, like a beautiful portrait, and the eye, that like Noah’s dove could only rove restlessly over the blood-stained scenes of earth’s ever-shifting empires, can rest with joy on this matchless miniature, for the impress of Divinity sits on the holy brow, and the light of infinite love and benevolence beams from the eye, while the lips have language and utter wondrous words of pardon, peace, reconciliation, renewal, and everlasting righteousness.

Of all the prophecies in the Bible, Daniel’s of the “seventy weeks” is the most wonderful and the most important. It stands erect among the ruins of time like the solitary and colossal obelisk amid the mounds of Heliopolis, grandly evident, archaic in its rugged simplicity, covered with an ancient script, whose decipherment demands indeed some study, but richly repays it; its authoritative assertions cut clear and deep in the hard granite, defying time’s power to efface their record; its sentences few, but full of meaning, their very style betraying their origin and Divine authority.

Not dynastic but personal, not Gentile but Jewish, not temporal so much as spiritual, this prophecy is framed in a setting altogether unlike that of the previous ones. They were given in dreams and visions, and expressed by hieroglyphic signs. This falls gently from angelic lips on the ear of the man greatly beloved, and comes at a moment when the prophet’s heart is tender from recent prayer, his spirit contrite after heartfelt confession, his hope fresh kindled by study of previously given predictions, and his faith strengthened by earnest supplication.

Daniel had set his face unto the Lord, with prayer and fasting, sackcloth and ashes; making a confession remarkable in its fulness of the sins of his people. Thirteen times over in the course of his prayer he uses expressions confessing sin—we have done wickedly, we have rebelled, we have transgressed, we have sinned. He speaks of “our sins and the iniquities of our fathers,” “my sin and the sin of my people,” and makes earnest supplication for pardon. “O Lord, hear! O Lord, forgive! let Thine anger and Thy fury be turned away from Thy city Jerusalem . . . and cause Thy face to shine upon Thy sanctuary that’s desolate.” He urges the Christian argument, if we may so say, “for the Lord’s sake,” and pleads, “We do not present our supplications before Thee for our righteousnesses, but for Thy great mercies.”

Daniel was an old man at this time. The monarch whom he had served so faithfully for over forty years, Nebuchadnezzar, had long since passed away, with all his weak and unworthy successors. The short-lived empire of Babylon was over, and Darius the Median was now master of the city. Cyrus, the promised deliverer of Israel, was commander of the army, though not yet king. Daniel was still honoured and respected at court, but his heart yearned more intensely than ever over his fatherland, though he had been exiled from it since boyhood. His longing for the restoration of his people was a perfectly unselfish one, as he knew that he personally could never again set foot on Mount Zion. His tomb in any case would have to be by the banks of the Euphrates, for the patriarch of fourscore years could not journey over desert and mountain back to Palestine. But Daniel thought not of himself, but of his people, of the house of God, of the sanctuary of Israel lying desolate, of the name of Jehovah dishonoured; he thought, too, of the cause of all this, and blameless and holy as his own life had been, he appropriates all the sins of his people both before and during the captivity, confesses with heartfelt contrition the righteousness of God in afflicting them, praying that the Divine displeasure may cease, and that Israel’s sin may in mercy be forgiven.

While asking the restoration of Israel, his deepest desire seems to be for forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with God. What a contrast this to Nebuchadnezzar’s frame of mind when revelations of the future were made to him! The mighty monarch cared for worldly matters only, and such alone were made known to him. The holy prophet yearns after heavenly blessings, pardon, peace, and purity; and Gabriel’s visit is God’s answer to his holy aspiration.

It will be perceived that this prediction given in response to Daniel’s prayer says nothing at all about the restoration of Israel, which was then close at hand. The reason for this is evident: the restoration, and even its date, had already been predicted with singular distinctness by Jeremiah, and the name of the appointed deliverer, Cyrus, had actually been mentioned by Isaiah. Daniel had not prayed that any further revelations should be granted on this point; such were needless. He had prayed rather that the thing promised might be performed. His prayer was itself a fulfilment of prophecy.

Jeremiah had said, “After seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. . . . Then shall ye call upon Me, and ye shall go and pray unto Me, and I will hearken unto you. And ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall search for Me with all your heart. I will be found of you, and will turn away your captivity.” The great burden of Daniel’s petition was not therefore for any new prediction of Israel’s return to their own land, but it was an echo of David’s words when he received the promise of God: “Now, O Lord God, the word that Thou hast spoken concerning Thy servant, and concerning his house, establish it for ever, and do as Thou hast said” (2 Sam. vii. 25). There was therefore no need for Gabriel to inform Daniel that the restoration edict of Cyrus would be issued within twelve months or so. The prophet well knew that the captivity was all but over, and that fact is taken for granted in the new prediction, and that restoration becomes the starting-point instead of the goal, the terminus a quo of a fresh prophetic period, the point of departure for this prophecy of seventy weeks.

As the ambassadors of God are never lavish in their performance of miracle, so His angelic messengers never waste words. Gabriel’s message here goes directly to the heart of the matter. The thing about which Daniel had been most deeply exercised was the forgiveness of sin, and the answer which was given promised first that blessing—addressed itself to the fundamental desire of his heart, lifted once more the veil of futurity, and allowed him to behold what the earlier visions had not shown him—the first advent of Christ “to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

From Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and his own vision he had learned the coming and kingdom of Messiah at the end of the fourth empire, but that glorious reign seemed to have no connection with the question of sin and its pardon. Now a new thing is revealed to him—an advent of Messiah “to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness.” Here indeed was a response to Daniel’s deepest yearnings; here was strong consolation for the aged saint. The promise in Eden, the covenant with Abraham, were then approaching their fulfilment; sin was to be put away; redemption was to be brought into the world; God would actually bring near to man His everlasting righteousness. This was a renewal of all the highest and holiest hopes of the nation through whom the redemption of the world was to come; and, for the first time, the period of Messiah’s coming was indicated.

Many things had been revealed about it before, but never its time. The period of the second advent had been fixed in history as at the close of the fourth empire, though this assigned no actual date. But now the precise interval to the appearance of Messiah the Prince is revealed, together with the results both spiritual and temporal of His first advent. The spiritual results were to include the putting away of sin, making reconciliation for iniquity, the introduction of everlasting righteousness, the scaling up of vision and prophecy, the anointing of a most Holy One, and the establishment of a covenant with many—a new covenant, a covenant that should replace that of Sinai, and secure all these blessings for ever to those who have a share in it.

The temporal results were to be strange indeed, and to Daniel probably incomprehensible. Messiah—and the word is here used for the first time as a proper name—the name of the hope of Israel—Messiah was indeed to come and to accomplish this glorious redeeming work; but He was not at that time to rule over Israel as expected, or to establish the kingdom so long foretold. Instead of that, He was to be “cut off’ Cut off? How Daniel must have paled and started at the strange announcement! Messiah the Prince, the glorious King who was to reign in righteousness, and whose kingdom was to be like a mountain filling the whole earth for ever—Messiah—to be “cut off”! The word admitted of no double sense, however; it was one used for the execution of a judicial sentence by death. Messiah was to be “cut off.” What could the unexpected announcement mean? The next words of the angel implied that this cutting off would be the result of His rejection by His people. They are rendered in our version by a clause which is beautiful, but incorrect,—“but not for Himself.” However true this thought as regards Christ, the original here does not bear this translation, and contains no intimation of the vicariousness of the death of Jesus. It would, indeed, be out of place in this immediate connection—the treatment of Messiah at His advent by the Jewish nation. The marginal reading is a better rendering of the brief and rather obscure clause in the Hebrew. Messiah will be “cut off” and “shall have nothing.” The literal expression is, “and none unto Him,” the meaning being apparently that no one was for Him, no one on His side in the crisis of His fate, that He would be rejected as Messiah by His people, and “cut off” because of this rejection.

The strange prediction was therefore doubly clear: Israel’s Messiah would come at the close of a certain definite period, and—marvel of marvels!—His people would doom Him to die. In punishment of this crime, the city and temple about to be rebuilt would be again destroyed, and the people and land given up to desolation. There is some obscurity as to certain points of this great prediction, though the drift of the whole is perfectly clear. The extreme condensation and brevity which mark it are one cause of the difficulty, and an occasional ellipsis in the Hebrew affords room for alternate constructions in one or two of the expressions.

An immense amount of controversy has for ages been carried on about this prophecy—controversy attributable to several causes: first, its absolute clearness as a whole combined with its difficulties in minor points; secondly, the inveterate determination of the Jews to silence its glorious witness to the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth; thirdly, the equal anxiety of infidels to blunt the edge of a prophecy which establishes indubitably Divine inspiration; and, lastly, the intrinsic difficulties of sacred chronology. We cannot here enter into any controversial exposition of the prophecy, as that would require a volume, and it is not necessary to our argument to settle the exact force of every word, or the precise application of every detail. The obvious and unquestionable meaning of the prediction as a whole, together with its marvellous fulfilment, are all that we need establish.

This prophecy was given just as the seventy years’ captivity in Babylon was drawing to a close. It announced the duration of the restored national existence of Israel, up to the great epoch of all history—the advent of Messiah the Prince. It was foretold that within 490 years from the date of the decree to restore and to build Jerusalem, the long-foreshadowed, long-predicted atonement for sin was to be accomplished by the advent of Messiah, reconciliation for iniquity effected, and everlasting righteousness brought in; that vision and prophecy should be sealed up, and the Most Holy anointed.

The period was then subdivided into three parts: 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and one week; i.e. 49 years, 434 years, and 7 years. The rebuilding of the city and the re-establishment of the Jewish polity would occur in the first forty-nine years, or “seven weeks.” Four hundred and thirty-four years more would elapse, and then Messiah the Prince would appear. After that, at some time not accurately defined, but within the limits of the seventieth week, or last seven years, of the period, Messiah would be cut off and “have nothing.” It is further foretold that Jerusalem and its temple would subsequently, and as a consequence, be destroyed; and that a flood of foreign invasion would overthrow the land. But though thus cut off, Messiah would confirm the covenant with many (not the whole nation) during the course of the “one week” (i.e., the last week of the seventy); in the midst of it He would “cause sacrifice and oblation to cease.” Jerusalem should then be made desolate, until a certain predetermined doom should fall upon the power that should desolate it; a fact which our Lord afterwards foretold in the words, “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

All this was accomplished with wonderful exactness. The edict to restore and build the city was issued by Artaxerxes, and Ezra and Nehemiah were the two great restorers of the Jewish people, polity, and religion. Their joint administration occupied about “seven weeks,” or forty-nine years; the wall and the street were rebuilt in troublous times. After the lapse of 434 years more, Messiah the Prince did appear, saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand”; i.e., the time indicated by this very prophecy. He came unto His own, and, alas! His own received Him not! He was cut off, and had nothing.

Shortly after the Roman soldiery—“the people of a prince that shall come”—(Titus) —destroyed the city and the sanctuary; the end of Jewish independence came with a flood of foreign invasion, and predetermined desolation fell on land and people. But though the nation was thus judged, Messiah did “confirm the covenant” with many; not with Israel as a people, but with an election according to grace.

What covenant? and how did He confirm it? “This is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you,” said He to His disciples the night before His passion; (Luke xxii. 20) or as Matthew and Mark give the words: “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” “He shall confirm the covenant with many,” said the angel to Daniel. “My blood of the new covenant shed for many,” said Christ. Is not His blood declared to be “the blood of the everlasting covenant”? And is not He Himself repeatedly styled, “the Mediator of the new covenant”? (See Heb. viii. 6: ix. 15; xii. 24) And can any Bible student doubt what is the event predicted, when in immediate connection with the coming and cutting off of Messiah, it is added, “He shall confirm the covenant with many”?

The chronological precision with which this prophecy was fulfilled is most remarkable, and the more so because it was accomplished both in solar and lunar years. To prove this, it is necessary to go a little more carefully into the chronological measures and historical facts. The starting-point was to be a decree to restore and to build Jerusalem, and thy terminus was to be “Messiah the Prince.” Now there were two restoration decrees issued by Artaxerxes, and they were thirteen years apart. Either of them may be taken as the starting-point, as each involved a measure of rebuilding of Jerusalem and of re-establishment of Jewish polity and national existence. The two decrees are associated with the two names of Ezra and Nehemiah, and the second of the two —that given to Nehemiah—answers most fully to the terms of the prophecy. The first was given by Artaxerxes in the seventh year of his reign, B.C. 457, and the second in the twentieth year of his reign, B.C. 444. The 490 years ran out on the solar scale from the first date, in A.D. 34; and, more accurately, on the lunar scale from the second date, A.D. 32-3. In both cases the last or seventieth week of years included most of the ministry of Christ, His death, resurrection, and ascension; together with the formation of the Church by the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, and the early proclamation of the gospel in Palestine.

But the prophecy states that the Messiah was to be cut off before the close of the seventy weeks (or 490 years), “after” the sixty-ninth had elapsed, and before the seventieth fully ran out; that is to say, in the course of the seventieth week. He was to be cut off “in the midst of the week,” i.e. of the last supreme week, the one week which is marked off from its fellows; the week which stands pre-eminent, not only among the seventy, but among all the weeks the world has ever seen; the week of seven years which witnessed the miracles, the death, the resurrection, and the ascension of the Son of man and Son of God.

In the middle of this terminal week of the seventy, Messiah would, according to the prophecy, be “cut off,” and by shedding of His own blood would confirm the new covenant with “many ”—not with the nation of Israel, but with many, both Jews and Gentiles. He would also cause all Jewish sacrifice and oblation to cease by putting away sin for ever “by the sacrifice of Himself.”

This chronological prediction was fulfilled on the solar scale from the first edict of Artaxerxes, and on the lunar scale to a day from the second. A simple calculation shows this. Seventy weeks are 490 years, but sixty-nine and a half weeks are only 486 & 1/2 years; this is therefore the number of the years predicted to elapse between Artaxerxes’ decree and the death of Christ. Nehemiah commenced his journey to Jerusalem in accordance with the decree given in the twentieth of Artaxerxes, during the passover month, the month of Nisan, B.C. 444; and, as we know, our Lord was crucified at the same season, the Passover, A.D. 29.¹ From Nisan, B.C. 444, to Nisan, A.D. 29,—472 ordinary solar years only elapsed, not 486 & 1/2. But 472 solar years are exactly 486 & 1/2 lunar. Hence sixty-nine and a half weeks of lunar years, from Passover to Passover, did extend between Artaxerxes’ decree in the twentieth year of his reign, and the crucifixion, or cutting off, of “Messiah the Prince,” A.D. 29, and the prophecy was accurately fulfilled, even to a day, on the lunar scale. Who but He who foresees the end even from the beginning could thus have foretold the exact time of Christ’s crucifixion, five hundred years in advance? Let the date of Daniel be as late as any critic has ever placed it, we still have here prediction—and that of the most exact chronological kind.

¹ JULIUS AFRICANUS ON THE SEVENTY WEEKS OF DANIEL.

The prophecies whose fulfilment we have now traced are by no means the only ones contained in the Divine programme of the world’s history given to Daniel—they are the principal ones. But the EIGHTH chapter and the ELEVENTH also contain remarkably full and detailed political foreviews of certain portions of the history. The prophecy of the four empires is like a map of Europe comprising all its countries in outline and their entire history for twenty-five centuries. The Messianic ninth chapter is, on the contrary, a map of one country only; its predictions concern the people and holy city of Daniel, it announces the duration of the restored nationality of the Jews, the advent and rejection of Messiah, with its consequences in the renewed dispersion of the Jews and desolation of their land.

The eighth chapter enlarges another detached portion of the previous all-comprehensive map. It amplifies the account of the second and third empires. It was given in the third year of Belshazzar, fifty-two years after Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, when the Babylonian power was falling, and the Medo-Persian, which was to destroy it, rising. The chapter should be carefully studied, as it is profoundly interesting, and with it we must associate the eleventh chapter, which goes into similar subjects and succeeding events in still greater detail.

Space forbids our tracing the fulfilment of these wonderful predictions by quotations from the historians who narrate the facts. Suffice it to say, that the prophecy gives beforehand, with all the accuracy of history written afterwards, the events of three or four hundred years especially, and then passes on more in outline to those lying at a greater distance. The centuries whose events are so fully predicted are those which lay between the time then present and the first advent—a period when the light of prophecy was to cease, when Israel would be under the power of Gentile rulers, and exposed to many wars and troubles and to some cruel persecutions, and when their faith in Divine providence would greatly need to be sustained by the evidence of prophecy fulfilling before their eyes. The days of miracles had passed, the age of prophets was over, and from the time of Malachi the last 400 years which preceded the advent of Messiah was a time of peculiar trial of faith to the people of God.

The revealing Spirit graciously spans this interval with a prophecy so full and accurate, that sceptics have rejected the entire book which contains it, on the ground that these chapters must be historical and not prophetic; a groundless objection to which we will allude more fully in a note at the end of this chapter.

Starting from the time then present, the close of the Babylonian empire, the eighth chapter begins by describing the rise of the Persian empire, the conquests of Cyrus westward in Lydia, northward in Armenia, southward in Babylon; while chapter xi. 2, speaks of his successors, Cambyses, Smerdis, Darius, and Xerxes: “There shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion.”

There are distinctly indicated the succession of Persian monarchs and their overthrow by Alexander, the rapidity of his course of victory, his mighty exploits, his total conquest of Persia, his universal dominion, his sudden death in the height of his power, the fourfold partition of his kingdom among his generals, the early extinction of his own posterity, and the division of his dominions—not among his children—but among “others beside those,” (Chap. viii. 7, 85 xi. 3, 4.)

Space obliges us to refrain from any detailed explanation of the eighth and eleventh chapters of the prophecy, the last of which foretold, four hundred years beforehand, the long complicated struggles between the dynasties which succeeded Alexander, especially those between the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucidae of Syria. It has been carefully expounded by many writers, and the correspondence of its statements with the records of history prove to be absolute and exact, although scores of persons and incidents are definitely mentioned in their order.

Jerome observed on this prophecy: “To understand the last parts of Daniel, many histories of the Greeks are necessary; namely those of Sutorius, Callinicus, Diodorus, Hieronymus, Polybius, Posidonius, Claudius, and Andronicus Alypius, whom also Porphyry professes to have followed; that of Josephus also, and those whom Josephus names, and especially of our own Livy, Pompeius Trogus, and Justin, who relate the whole history of this latest portion.”

To the same effect, Bishop Newton justly observes: “There is not so complete and regular a series of these kings, there is not so concise and comprehensive an account of their affairs to be found in any other writing of those times. The prophecy is really more perfect than any history. No one historian hath related so many circumstances, and in such exact order, as the prophet hath foretold them. So that it was necessary to have recourse to several authors, Greek and Roman, Jewish and Christian, and to collect here something from one, and there something from another, thus to explain and illustrate the great variety of particulars contained in the prophecy.”

The Rev. T. R. Birks remarks: “If any one continuous history of these wars and alliances were now extant, the correspondence between the prophecy and the events would be easier to trace. But now, when it results from the careful collation of separate fragments, gathered from eight or ten authors, Polybius, Diodorus, Appian, Josephus, Justin, and Trogus Pompeius, the writers of the two books of Maccabees, Livy, Porphyry, and Dexippus with medals and inscriptions; and in several of them, from incidental allusions, or brief and passing statements, where the leading object of the history is quite different; the moral evidence becomes far more striking to every ingenuous mind.”

NOTE To CHAPTER VI. ON THE DATE OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

The prophecies of Daniel stand pre-eminent among all others in their evidential value. Not only does his brief book give a foreview of twenty-five centuries of Jewish and Gentile history, including the first and the second advents of Christ, but it also fixes the chronology of various episodes of the then unknown future, with a simple certainty which would be audacious if it were not Divine. Would any mere man dare to foretell, not only a long succession of events lying far in the remote future, but the time at which some of them would occur and the periods they would occupy? This Daniel did, and the predictions have come to pass.

This unquestionable fact can be explained away only on one of three grounds.

I. The accord between prediction and fulfilment must be purely accidental and fortuitous; or,—

II. The events must have been manipulated, so as to fit the prophecy; or,—

III. The prophecy must have been written to fit the events, i.e. after them; it must, in other words, be a forgery of a later date.

None of these three explanations can account for the agreement between Daniel’s predictions and history, as reflection will show. For,—

1. Such an agreement cannot be merely fortuitous. It is too far-reaching and detailed, too exact and varied. Chance might produce a few coincidences of fulfilment out of a hundred predictions, not a hundred or more without a single exception. Common sense perceives this at a glance. As far as time has elapsed every single point predicted in Daniel has come true, and there remain but a few terminal points yet to. be fulfilled.

2. The events were certainly not made to fit the prophecy by human arrangement. The rise and fall and succession of monarchies and of empires, and the conduct and character of nations, for over two thousand years, are matters altogether too vast to be manipulated by men. Such a notion is clearly absurd. What! did Babylonian and Persian monarchs, Grecian and Roman conquerors, Gothic and Vandal invaders, mediaeval kings and popes, conspire for long ages to accomplish obscure Jewish predictions, of which the majority of them never even heard?

3. The third and last solution is consequently the only possible alternative to a frank admission of the Divine inspiration of the book, and of the Divine government of the world amid all its ceaseless political changes. Can the prophecy have been written to fit the events? In other words, can it be a forgery of a later date? This is the theory adopted by all the unbelieving critics, who start with the assumption that prophecy in any true sense is impossible. They endeavour to assign to the book a date later than the true one, a date towards the close of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, who died in the second century before Christ. Then they endeavour to compress all the four empires into the four centuries previous to that date, excluding therefore from the prophecy any allusion to the Roman empire and the first advent of Christ. Multitudinous have been the attacks made on these lines on the fortress of this Book of Daniel; for skepticism has realized that while it stands impregnable, a relic of the sixth century before Christ, all rationalistic theories must fall to the ground, like Dagon before the ark.

But the fortress stands firm as ever, its massive foundations revealed only the more clearly by the varied assaults it has repelled. The assailants, German as well as English, have been beaten off time after time by one champion after another, earnestly contending for the faith. The superficial and shallow nature of the linguistic, historic, and critical objections has been demonstrated, and one line of assault after another has had to be abandoned.¹ But even if this were not the case, and the later date could be substantiated, it would not in the least establish the skeptical denial of the existence of prophecy in Daniel. The predictions of the first advent and of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem would be in no wise affected by the later date, nor those of the tenfold division of the Roman empire, and of the great Papal and Mohammedan apostasies.

¹ It is simply a historical fact, that unbelief has been always the parent of this criticism, not the criticism the cause of the unbelief. The pseudo-criticism is a mere plea for unbelief.

Candour is shut up to the conclusion that real, true, and marvellous foreknowledge is, beyond all question, indicated by the predictions of the book, since twenty-five centuries of history can be proved to correspond with it accurately, in their chronological as well as in all their other features. If this be so, the question of inspiration is settled for honest minds. Nor that alone. For the rule of God over the kings of the earth—the fact that history is working out His Divine purposes, and that all the changing kingdoms of the Gentiles are merely introductory to the eternal kingdom of the Son of man and of the saints—is also established beyond controversy.

It was alleged by the skeptical school that the late origin of Daniel was demonstrated by the presence of Macedonian words, and of impure Hebrew expressions; that its spurious character was proved by its position in the canon, as not among “the prophets,” but among the “hagiographa”; that it contained historical errors, and irreconcilable contradictions; that it had traces of later ideas and usages; as well as—and this was evidently the head and front of the offending—that the predictions were so clear and definite, that they must have been written after the events.

The defence has been twofold. First, a demonstration which leaves nothing to be desired of the utter baselessness of the objections; and, secondly, an array of unanswerable arguments in support of the authenticity and date of the book. The contention has given rise to a whole literature, to which we can merely allude in a few sentences. Those who wish to examine into the subject for themselves will find the works of Hengstenberg and Dr. Pusey thorough, candid, and learned, giving not the results of investigation only, but the process and the fullest reference to original documents. We must indicate briefly the nature of the defence, though we cannot do more.

Porphyry, in the third century, in his attack on Christianity as a whole, devoted one of his fifteen books to an assault on Daniel. He asserted that it must be the work of a Jew of Palestine, written in Greek in the time of Antiochus; and assigned as the main ground of his theory the exact correspondence of events with the predictions, asserting that Daniel “did not so much predict future events as narrate past ones,”—as Jerome remarked, “this method of opposing the prophecies is the strongest testimony to their truth, for they were fulfilled with such exactness that to infidels the prophets seemed not to have foretold things future, but to have related things past,”—and bearing thus a noble testimony to the prophet! Porphyry’s book was by imperial command condemned to the flames, and we know it mostly from fragments preserved in the writings of Jerome. Spinoza, the infidel Jew, was the first modern to renew this old attack; and then Hobbes and Collins, and other English deists. It was J. D. Michaelis who made the first scholarly attempt to undermine confidence in the authenticity of Daniel, and even he decidedly maintained the genuineness of the greater part of it. The names of more recent German critics are legion, and we need not give them here, but simply indicate the arguments that prove the futility of the objections alleged.

To a Christian mind the highest and most conclusive testimony lies in the fact that our Lord speaks of Daniel as a prophet, and quotes from him. The name by which He most frequently speaks of Himself, “the Son of man,” is taken from Daniel vii. 13. Many of His descriptions of His own coming and kingdom are also distinctly connected with Daniel’s predictions of them.¹ Surely our Lord would not thus have endorsed an impostor! Josephus tells us that the book was eagerly studied in Christ’s days; would He have treated it as Scripture, and allowed His disciples to regard it as such, if it were a forgery?

¹ Compare Dan. 13, 14, and 26, 27, with Matt. x. 23; xvi. 27, 28; xix. 28; xxiv. 30; xxvi. 64; John v. 27 3 Dan. xii. 2.

The apostles uniformly recognise Daniel as a prophet. Peter alludes to his inquiries as to the “times,” and states that he was inspired by the Spirit of Christ. Paul in 2 Thessalonians ii. builds his argument on Daniel’s prediction of the man of sin and the apostasy. Hebrews xi. 33 alludes distinctly to Daniel and his companions and their heroic deeds; and the whole Book of Revelation is so closely connected with that of Daniel, that we might almost style it Second Daniel, or Daniel First Revelation.

The allusion to Daniel as one of the holiest and one of the wisest of men, by his contemporary Ezekiel, shows how early he attained his high position in the court of Nebuchadnezzar, and how far the fame of his blameless, holy life had spread, even in his own days. As he most distinctly and repeatedly claims to be the author of his own book, and writes much of it as an autobiography, the very holiness of his character makes the thought of deliberate forgery and falsehood revoltingly inconsistent.

That the book was widely distributed and well known and revered by the pious in pre-Maccabean times can be demonstrated. The very accurate and reliable First Book of Maccabees makes exact, though brief and simple, reference to the stories in Daniel. The dying words of Mattathias to his sons are recorded, in which he encourages them to fidelity to God amid persecution by recalling various Bible histories, and among the rest that of the Hebrew children in the fire, and Daniel in the lions’ den. Hence it is evident that the book was known and regarded as Scripture at that time.

Further, Josephus makes several remarkable and explicit statements on the subject. Speaking of one of the predictions, he says, “Now this was delivered 408 years before the fulfilment,” thus recognising the received date as unquestionable, and as generally admitted to be so in his day. In a still more conclusive and very interesting passage he asserts that Daniel’s prophecy was shown to Alexander the Great when he visited Jerusalem, and that this monarch took the prediction about a Greek who was to overthrow the Persian empire to mean himself, and was much encouraged thereby in his enterprise, and very favourably disposed towards the Jews in consequence.

Josephus was indeed much impressed by the remarkable fulfilments of Daniel’s predictions, which even in his day were evident. After expounding several of these he says, “All these things did this man leave behind in writing, as God had showed them to him: so that those who read his prophecies, and see how they have been fulfilled, must be astonished at the honour conferred by God on Daniel.” (“Antiquities,” x. 11, 7.) This eminently learned man, whose works were published towards the close of the first century, and who lived, therefore, comparatively near the days of Daniel, thus broadly asserts the date of Daniel, expressing, of course, the conviction of the learned of his day—an opinion which had never apparently been even questioned. He affirms the predictions of the book to be of an extraordinary character, and challenges attention to their fulfilment. He was most unlikely to have been taken in by a mere forgery, and ought surely to have been better informed about the matter than modern critics can possibly be.

A strong argument in favour of the received date may be drawn from the languages in which the book is written, Hebrew and Aramaean. Both were familiar to the Jews of the captivity era, and to those of no later date; the one was Daniel’s mother tongue, the other the language in which he had been educated, and by which he was surrounded for the greater part of his life. Hebrew ceased to be used by the Jews in and from the captivity, except as a sacred learned language. It had been entirely superseded before the Maccabean days, and no writer of the time of Antiochus could have counted on being even understood had he written in that language! Daniel reckons on such a familiar acquaintance with both languages, that it is evidently a matter of indifference to him and to his readers which he uses. “The use of the two languages, and the mode in which the prophet writes in both, correspond perfectly with his real date; they are severally and together utterly inexplicable according to the theory that would make the book a product of the Maccabean times. The language is a mark of genuineness set by God on the book. Rationalism must rebel, as it has rebelled; but it dare not now with any moderate honesty abuse philology to cover its rebellion.” (Dr. Pusey: “Lectures on Daniel.”)

Further, the exact knowledge of contemporary history evinced in Daniel is such that no writer of the time of the Maccabees could possibly have attained it. Almost every single circumstance mentioned in the book is confirmed directly or indirectly by contemporary historians, and proved to be absolutely and even minutely correct. In the Maccabean age, as existing remains prove, the utmost ignorance of the history and geography of foreign countries prevailed among the Jews in Palestine, and an exact and comprehensive knowledge of the history of a period so dark and already so remote as the captivity era, did not exist and could not have existed. And the same may be said of the accurate knowledge exhibited in the book of the institutions, manners, usages, and entire state of things, existing in the Babylonian and Medo-Persian times.

Again, it has been remarked that “the complexion of the prophecies of Daniel corresponds so exactly with what is related in the historical part of the circumstances of his life, that even the most crafty impostor would not have been able to produce this agreement artificially. Daniel occupied high offices of state; he was witness to great revolutions and changes of rulers and empires; and this circumstance is very significantly impressed on his prophecies. The succession of the various empires of the world forms their principal subject. In the representation of the Messianic idea also he borrows his colours from his external relations. Throughout there is apparent a religious, as well as a political gift, such as we meet with in no other prophet.”

Lastly, the canon of the Old Testament contains the Book of Daniel, and that canon was closed by Ezra the scribe, and Nehemiah, the second Moses in Jewish estimation, about 400 B.C. Hence the prophecies of Daniel were already at that date recognised as inspired writings. It is true the book does not appear in the list of the prophets, because Daniel Was not officially a Jewish prophet, but a Babylonian statesman. David, also, though a prophet, was officially a king, and thus his writings, like Daniel’s, are classed among the hagiographa, or sacred books, rather than among the prophets. The principle of the Jewish arrangement of the canon was, that sacred writings by men in secular office, and not occupying the pastoral or prophetic position, were put in a class apart from the prophets. Hence Daniel appears not in the list with Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, but rather with David and Solomon, and Mordecai the writer of Esther. But the Jewish rabbis hold his prophetic revelations in the highest esteem, and the Talmud places him above all other prophets.

There is therefore no question at all for candid minds that the book is authentic, and rightly attributed to the time of the Babylonish captivity; and if so, it must be granted by all that it contains prophecy—definite predictions which have been most marvelously fulfilled.

The importance of this conclusion can scarcely be over-estimated, though it seems to be less appreciated by Christians than by skeptics. They regret their inability to wrest a mighty weapon out of the hands of the Church. But we—what use are we making of it? What execution are we doing with it? Is it not a pity that it is allowed to so great an extent to lie idle?

If eight or nine centuries of fulfilled prophecy drove Porphyry, in the third century, to feel that we must either admit Divine inspiration or prove the Book of Daniel spurious, ought not the twenty-five centuries of it, to which we in our days can point, be even more efficacious in convincing candid inquirers and confounding prejudiced opponents? The battle of authenticity has been fought and won; no fresh objections can be invented. Archaeological discovery may yet find Daniel’s name among the Babylonian records; it will certainly produce no evidence against the book which it has already done so much to authenticate. It rests with Christian teachers and preachers to use the miracle of the last days, fulfilled and fulfilling prophecy, for the conviction and conversion of men.

Continued in Chapter VII. The Christian Programme – Part I.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

This class is for students of Bible prophecy, and especially of prophecy about the Endtime.

I used to believe that Daniel 9:27 will be fulfilled by the Antichrist being processed by Satan during a final 7 year reign on earth just before the return of Jesus Christ. Imagine my surprise to learn Daniel 9:27 was considered a Messianic prophecy by all Protestant Christians before the 19th century! They believed it was fulfilled by Jesus Christ 2000 years ago! I came to this realization from December 2014 after holding the popular but mistaken interpretation for 40 years. It was thanks to a dear brother in Christ, David Nikao, who opened my eyes by his website: http://70thweekofdaniel.com/

King James Bible (KJV)

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

KJV Daniel 9:27 included with my comments in parentheses:

And he (Jesus Christ) shall confirm (not make but confirm the Covenant that already existed) the (definite article) covenant (the Covenant God made with Abraham) with many (people of Israel) for one week (seven years): and in the midst of the week (at the 3 1/2 year point when Jesus was crucified) he (Jesus) shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (cease animal sacrifices for sin because Jesus the Lamb of God became the ultimate sacrifice. The second half of the 7 year Covenant or 3 1/2 year period was the ministry of the Apostles to the Jews up to the stoning of Stephen and the calling of Paul to give the Gospel to the Gentiles.) and for the overspreading of abominations (the invasion of Jerusalem by the Roman Army) he (Jesus, through General Titus) shall make it desolate (destroy Jerusalem and the Temple, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate (the Jews, Jerusalem and their Temple, i.e. the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple 40 years later in 70 A.D. by the Roman Army which was an abomination to the Jews and which desolated Jerusalem and the Temple.)

I hope you see clearly the second half of Daniel 9:27 is talking about the destruction of the Temple of Solomon and Jerusalem. This is also what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 25:15,16

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

The “abomination of desolation was not some idol the Antichrist plants in a third future Temple of Solomon which is what nearly all evangelicals today believe, it was the Roman army’s attack of the city of Jerusalem which resulted in the desolation of that city, the destruction of the Temple of Solomon, and the death of over one million Jews. The Bible is its own best commentator. Luke who wrote the Gospel of Luke tells us clearly what exactly the Abomination of Desolation is!

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

I submit therefore as Luke unequivocally states, the Abomination of Desolation was the Roman Army which destroyed and desolated both Jerusalem and the Temple. This was fulfilled in 70 A.D. When you understand this, you will see why “let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains” makes perfect sense! Jesus was talking to the Jews of His time, NOT us! You will also understand what Matthew 24:34 means.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Which generation? The generation of the people Jesus was talking to when sitting at the foot of the Temple! Its destruction was 40 years later, and most of them would be alive. The attack on Jerusalem by the Roman Army was the Great Tribulation Jesus was talking about! But due to a twisted interpretation of Daniel 9:27 and Matthew 24, many evangelicals today believe the generation Jesus is talking about are the baby boomers who were born around the time of the creation of the State of Israel by the antichrist United Nations in 1948. This is what I call Endtime delusion!

Now let’s compare the King James version translation of Daniel 9:27 to modern translations:

New International Version

He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

Notice it says “a covenant” rather than “the covenant”. This denotes something not specifically talked about previously. In the KJV, “the” is used to show this covenant already existed from years past and is not something in the future. The covenant is referring to the covenant God made with Abraham which Daniel talks about in verse 4 of Daniel 9:

And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

Also, the KJV does not say, “at the temple he will set up an abomination”. The NIV translation of that verse is itself an abomination!! It sounds as if the translators were thinking of Daniel 11:31 when they translated that verse:

And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

I submit to you that the events of Daniel 11:31 and Daniel 9:27 are two different events! Daniel 11:31 is talking about Antiochus IV placing an image of Zeus in the Temple of Solomon.

Antiochus IV’s army desecrated the Temple and stopped the daily sacrifices. On the 15th of Kislev, in December 168 BCE, the Syrians built a pagan altar over the altar of burnt offering in the Temple and placed an image of Zeus Olympius upon it. Ten days later, on the 25th of Kislev, swine’s flesh was offered on the altar to Zeus.

Please see http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Daniel11 to read the true historical fulfillment of Daniel chapter 11.

New Living Translation

The ruler will make a treaty with the people for a period of one set of seven, but after half this time, he will put an end to the sacrifices and offerings. And as a climax to all his terrible deeds, he will set up a sacrilegious object that causes desecration, until the fate decreed for this defiler is finally poured out on him.”

See the difference between this and the KJV? “a treaty” “set up a sacrilegious object”

English Standard Version

And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”

Note the indefinite article a used before strong covenant. Moreover, “for half of the week” is not the same meaning as “in the midst of the week” which is what the KJV says.

Good News Translation

That ruler will have a firm agreement with many people for seven years, and when half this time is past, he will put an end to sacrifices and offerings. The Awful Horror will be placed on the highest point of the Temple and will remain there until the one who put it there meets the end which God has prepared for him.”

“The Awful Horror will be placed on the highest point of the Temple”? Where do they get this from?

English Revised Version

And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and for the half of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the consummation, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolator.

“and for the half of the week” is not the same meaning as “in the midst of the week”.

Young’s Literal Translation

And he hath strengthened a covenant with many — one week, and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.’

“strengthen a covenant” is not the same thing as “confirm the covenant”.

I value the King James Version above other English versions except for the Geneva Bible which is nearly the same and has great notes that clearly teaches the correct interpretation of Daniel 9 and Matthew 24.

Daniel 9:27 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)

And he ^[a]shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to ^[b]cease, ^[c]and for the overspreading of the abominations, he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Footnotes:

1. Daniel 9:27 By the preaching of the Gospel he confirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.
2. Daniel 9:27 Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.
3. Daniel 9:27 Meaning, that Jerusalem and the Sanctuary should be utterly destroyed for their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague shall be so great, that they shall be all astonied at them.

Wow! Is that clear as a bell or what? The footnotes of the Geneva Bible confirm what I am trying to teach in this article, namely Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled by Jesus Christ, not a future Antichrist, and that this is what the early Protestants believed and taught.

I really wonder sometimes about the motivation of King James in creating another English translation of the Bible in the year 1611. He didn’t like the commentaries in the footnotes in the Geneva Bible. He thought some of the commentaries challenged his authority as king. What if the KJV was never translated and the English speaking world continued to use the Geneva Bible? I dare say if English speaking Christians stuck with the Geneva Bible, they would not have followed the false doctrines of Dispensationalism created by John Nelson Darby, they would not be supporting the State of Israel, they would not believe in a rapture of the saints before a great tribulation period, they would not be expecting a rebuilt 3rd Temple of Solomon in the Endtime, and they would absolutely KNOW who the Antichrist is — the Pope who stands in the midst of the Temple — the Church — and proclaims he is the successor of Christ and without him, the Pope, you cannot be saved.

I submit to you the reason for all the bad modern translations of Daniel 9:27 is part of the “Counter Reformation” which is a Jesuit plot to undo the Protestant Reformation. The Jesuits aim was to get Christians’ eyes off the Pope as the biblical Antichrist! Did it work? What do you think?

The Timeline of Daniel 9:24-27 Illustrated

This meme is courtesy of David Nikao Wilcoxson 70thweekofdaniel.com

Continued from Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part II..

It should be realized that during the period of its dominion, and while the exploits of Nebuchadnezzar were engaging the minds of men, Greece and Rome—much more Spain, France, and Britain—were merely occupied by nomadic tribes, and not known even by name to the kingdoms of the East. The birthplace and nursery of mankind was the sphere in which the first empires were developed. The two rivers of Paradise, the Tigris and Euphrates, had numerous and populous cities all along their courses; and Mesopotamia was the busy, rich, and influential part of the world, when Europe had not yet emerged from obscurity, and was unknown even by name to the Assyrians and Babylonians.

How wonderful the contrast with the present state of things! What remains of all this ancient wealth and power? The mounds of Babylon, the ruins of Nineveh, the shattered temples of Mesopotamia, a few traditional sites and names, broken tablets and buried inscriptions, and a history contained for the most part in a few chapters of the Word of God.

The spirit which inspired Daniel foresaw the transitory nature of the glory of the then existing empires; his predictions dwell very briefly on them, mention them only in a verse or two, and pass on rapidly to the more important dominion of the fourth empire. An uninspired writer would have done the reverse—dwelt on the then absorbing present at length, and paused lightly over the dim, uncertain future.

But things are not what they seem. The glory of Babylon was the passing incident, the mighty king would soon be forgotten. The true greatness is moral, not material. The fame of Daniel remains; his writings are pondered and studied to this day; the record of the faith and fortitude of the Hebrew children stimulates and influences mankind even now; while the doings of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, except in as far as their histories were a fulfilment of prophecy, are simply matters of literary curiosity.

THE SECOND, OR MEDO-PERSIAN, EMPIRE, represented by the breast and arms of silver, and by the bear which raised itself up on one side, is in the subsequent vision (chap. viii.) represented as a ram having two horns, interpreted as “the kings of Media and Persia” (ver. 20). History shows us that Media was originally the stronger power of the two, but that it yielded to the ascendant of Persia in the days of the talented and enterprising young Cyrus. The way in which he rapidly obtained empire is well described by Herodotus, recalling the words of this prediction that “no beasts could stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand, but he did according to his will and became great” (ver. 4). He says of his prosperity in war: “Wherever Cyrus turned himself to march, it was impossible for that nation to escape.” Xenophon also describes in detail his conquests:—

THE THIRD, OR GRECIAN, EMPIRE is represented in the image by “the belly and thighs of brass,” and in Daniel’s own vision by “a leopard with four wings of a fowl and four heads.” Both are remarkably suitable emblems for the Grecian empire. Brass is frequently used as a symbol of eloquence, a feature in which Greece surpassed all other nations, and one which was applied by the Greeks to themselves. Theodoret writes: “The prophet has very fitly compared Alexander to the leopard, for swiftness, speed, and variableness.”

The empire of Greece in another part of the prophecy is compared also to a he-goat with a notable horn on his head, on the breaking of which four other horns appear. Rapidity of conquest, irresistible power, and geographical origin are all expressed in the words:

The history could not be more exactly symbolised. Its period is that following the close of Scripture history. Thucydides tells the story and traces the struggle between the he-goat and the ram. The rapidity of Alexander’s conquests in Asia was marvellous; he burst like a torrent on the expiring Persian empire, and all opposition was useless. The gigantic armies collected to oppose him melted like snow in the sunshine. The battles of Granicus B.C. 334, Issus in the following year, and Arbela in B.C. 331, settled the fate of the Persian empire, and established the wide dominion of the Greeks.

The entire and wonderful career of Alexander the Great was comprised in twelve brief years and seven months; he was only thirty when he drank himself to death. From the straits of Gibraltar to the banks of the Indus, ambassadors came to congratulate him on his glory and to seek his friendship. He had himself traversed Asia victoriously from the Hellespont to India, stamped upon the Persian ram, destroyed its power, and none could deliver out of his hand. But when the world lay at his feet, and its suppliant embassies came seeking his favour,—“when the he-goat was strong, the great horn was broken.”

The connection of this great conqueror with the Jewish people is peculiarly interesting. The story is related by Josephus, and there seems no ground for questioning its truth. The Jews had taken an oath of allegiance to Darius, and did not feel at liberty to provision the troops of Alexander engaged in the siege of Tyre as he had ordered them to do. He was enraged, but could not at once punish them. As soon as he was at liberty, he started on this errand, however; and the fate of Jerusalem would have been that of Tyre but for a remarkable providential deliverance.

Jaddua, the high priest, warned of God in a dream, opened the gates and decorated the city, and dressed in his official robes, and with the priests and people dressed in white following him, he went forth to meet Alexander. On seeing them, the conqueror’s anger was at once abated, and he told Parmenio, his general, that while still in Macedonia he had in a dream seen this person Jaddua, who had promised him victory. He entered Jerusalem in company with the priest, who then showed him this very prophecy of Daniel (then between two and three hundred years old), thereby greatly encouraging his hope of overthrowing the Persian empire. Alexander not only did no harm to the Jews and their city and temple, but granted them immunities and gave them gifts.

“When the Book of Daniel was shown him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended.” —(Antiq. Bk. XI. viii. 5.)

It is interesting to observe that in the two visions we are specially considering, the whole history of this heroic period from Cyrus to Alexander, a period more celebrated probably than any other in history, is again passed over in a few verses. Profane historians and poets have dwelt on the glorious epoch which included the conquests of Cyrus, Cambyses, and Darius, the wars of Greece, the expedition of Xerxes, the battles of Marathon, Thermopyle, and Salamis, the names of Miltiades, Themistocles, Aristides, Cimon, and Pericles, the struggles of Athens and Sparta, of Sparta and Thebes, the eloquence of Demosthenes, and the victories of Alexander. Arts and arms, taste and genius, conspire to make the era memorable for ever in the eyes of men. And yet how briefly does the Spirit of God dismiss the whole narrative. Alexander’s empire was divided on his death among his generals, and formed the four kingdoms of Asia Minor, Syria, Greece, and Egypt. The mutual relations of these kingdoms are given in a later prophecy (chaps. x. and xi.), which we must not here attempt to consider fully. The prediction of the fourfold division was fulfilled, when Ptolemy Seleucus, Lysimachus, and Cassander shared Alexander’s dominions between them, and assumed the title of kings.

THE FOURTH, or iron, kingdom symbolised the great EMPIRE OF ROME, which was to exist in two different stages: the first united with a strength like that of iron, which would devour the whole earth and break it in pieces; the second divided into ten, the iron sharing the weakness of clay. The first or unbroken stage covers a period of about six centuries, from the conquests of Scipio, Sylla, and Pompey to the fall of the last emperor of Rome, Romulus Augustulus, A.D. 476. Jerome at the beginning of the fifth century clearly perceived, not only the fulfilment of the first part of the prediction, but the commencement of the second, which was observable even in his day, though abundantly more clear afterwards. He says:—

Marvellous was the announcement in the days when it was given, before even Greece had risen into notice, and when Italy was the home of only a few feeble and constantly warring tribes, that an empire born among those barbarians was to extend its sway over the East, and be endued with a firmness of which oriental monarchs knew nothing. So little known was Rome even two hundred years later that Herodotus, in describing the earth with all its towns and cities, rivers and mountains, etc., never once mentions either the city of Rome or the Tiber on which it stands. For five centuries from its foundation there was very little indication that the Roman power would ever become a great one. Even when the empire of Alexander was falling into decay, Rome was nearly brought to destruction by the Punic wars; and not till just before the end of the Macedonian monarchy were the Romans sufficiently free from domestic enemies to enter on a career of conquest. But then indeed it fulfilled to the letter the remarkable predictions in the prophecy, carried its victorious arms throughout the world by conquest, and by its singular power of governing subdued all nations and attained dimensions that had never before been equalled, and a degree of power which has never been paralleled since. When the victories of Trajan carried the power of Rome to its height, all nations were merely vassals to the mistress of the world.

Gibbon’s description of the might and majesty of the Roman empire should be read in the light of the prophecy in order to a real appreciation of the wonderful fulfilment of the latter. After reviewing in detail the different countries subjected to its sway, he says:—

We have seen that Daniel’s fourfold image and the vision of the four beasts both represent the Roman power as continuing in existence up to the time of the second advent, and as being destroyed and succeeded only by it. They represent the fourth, or Roman empire, as rising on the fall of the Grecian, and as occupying the whole interval between that date and the close of the times of the Gentiles. There is no break or gap in the image, and the fourth beast it is distinctly said continues till the establishment of the kingdom of the Son of man and of the saints.(Dan, vii. 26, 27.)

Now the old empire of Rome ended in the fifth century; has any other form of power exercised from Rome arisen, and is it now in existence, and has this revived power of Rome been exercised over a commonwealth of ten kingdoms? This is evidently an exceedingly interesting and most important part of our inquiry into the fulfilment of this Daniel programme, because if history has realized this part of the foreview as exactly as the former portion, the fulfilment must embrace our own times, since the tenfold condition of the Roman world is to continue to the end of the age. Now it is one thing to read of a fulfilment in the past, and another to see it with our own eyes in the present. The Canon of Ptolemy and Gibbon’s history of the Decline and Fall are doubtless good and trustworthy evidence; but, after all, “seeing is believing,” and there is nothing like experience for producing conviction.

Present phenomena must needs impress the mind more than past; hence the importance of the inquiry, Was the Roman world divided into ten kingdoms on the fall of the empire? Has this division continued from that day to this clearly traceable? Is it evident even now? What were the ten kingdoms at first? What have they been ever since? And what are they at present? The answer to these inquiries is profoundly interesting, because among other reasons it must needs afford an indication of our present position in the stream of time with regard to the second advent. That indication may be to some extent indefinite, but it must be there, and it is the clearest information on the all-important subject which is attainable.

The programme presents five episodes—the four empires and the tenfold commonwealth—and then follows the second advent. The four empires are past. When we have examined history on the subject of the tenfold commonwealth, we shall see how much of that is also past, and be able to judge to some extent how much remains; and this, though not the main object of our investigation, is a deeply interesting incidental result. To trace the fulfilment of the prophecy as an evidence of the inspiration of Scripture is our object; but who can fail to welcome any light on the subject of our Lord’s return?

The first question that arises for consideration is, In what sphere are we to look for the ten kingdoms? Shall we seek for them in the whole extent of the Roman empire at the time of its widest dominion? or in that part of its territory which was properly Roman as distinguished from the countries belonging to previous empires subjugated by Rome?

A very little consideration will show that prophecy regards the four empires as being as distinct in territory as in time; as distinct in geographical boundaries as in chronological limits. They rise in a definite sequence; the supreme dominion of one does not in point of time overlap the supreme dominion of the following one, nor is the territory of a former “beast” or empire ever regarded as belonging to a later one, though it may have been actually conquered. Each has its own proper theatre or body, and the bodies continue to exist after the dominion is taken away.

This is distinctly stated, both in connection with the fourfold image and with the four beasts. In the first case the stone falls upon the clay and iron feet only, but the iron legs, the brazen body, the silver breast, and the golden head, are all by it “broken to pieces together.” Now the empires represented by these have long since passed away. They cannot therefore be “broken to pieces” by the second advent. But the territory once occupied by them is still existing and still populous, and exposed to the judgments of the day of Christ just as much as Rome itself.

Similarly we read that the three earlier beasts did not cease to exist when the fourth arose. “Their dominion was taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time” (Dan. vii. 12) That is to say, the first three empires are regarded as co-existing with the fourth after their dominion has ended. This proves that they are regarded as distinct in place as well as in time. They continue to be recognized as territorial divisions of the earth after the disappearance of their political supremacy.

Now the eastern empire of Rome which it acquired by conquest occupied precisely the same territory as the Grecian empire had done, and its conquests in Asia occupied the territories which originally formed the Babylonian and Medo-Persian empires. None of this territory belongs to “the legs of iron.” It constitutes the golden, silver, and brazen portions of the image. It cannot be regarded as forming any part of the empire proper and peculiar to Rome.

The ten horns or kingdoms of the fourth empire must none of them be sought in the realms of the third, second, or first, but exclusively in the realm of the fourth, or in the territory PECULIAR to ROME, and which had never formed part either of the Grecian, Medo-Persian, or Babylonian empires. Sir Isaac Newton says on this point:

Our question then becomes more definite and takes this form—Was the territory peculiar to Rome, the territory which is sometimes spoken of as the Western Empire, and of which Rome itself was the capital, divided on the fall of the old empire into ten kingdoms? It is notorious that such was the case. From the rise of the Roman empire to its fall in the fifth century it was one and undivided; since its decline and fall as an empire, the territory peculiar to Rome has been broken up into many independent sovereignties, bound together into the one family of Latin Christendom by a common submission to the popes of Rome. The number of distinct kingdoms has always been about ten—at times exactly ten, sinking at intervals to eight or nine, rising occasionally to twelve or thirteen, but averaging on the whole ten. The prophecy distinctly predicted that the number would not be constantly or invariably ten. It represents a little horn springing up among the ten, then there must have been eleven. It represents that three of the horns were plucked up before this little horn, then there could have been for a time eight only. Fresh horns must however have taken the place of the uprooted ones, for at the close of the beast’s history the number is represented as still ten.

Hence the number of the kingdoms was to be generally, but not rigidly or unavailingly, ten; there would as a rule throughout the whole period be ten kingdoms, occupying the sphere of the western empire of Rome; but the number would be elastic, sometimes less, sometimes more, but always about ten, so that no other number of horns would as correctly represent the facts of the case.

Alexander’s empire was represented by one notable horn, the dynasties that arose amidst its broken fragments by four horns; but Rome was to break up into a larger number, and ten different kingdoms would appear upon the scene, and occupy even till the end, the territory belonging to the fourth beast, still having Rome as in some sort their centre and bond of union, for they were to be horns of the Roman beast.

Such are the symbols, and they are the more remarkable because they foretell a state of things which had never existed in the world at the time when the prophecy was given, and which never did exist till a thousand years after wards. Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome in its first phase, all sought and obtained universal dominion, and could brook (tolerate) no rival power. The prophecy foretold that in the distant future another state of things should arise, and that co-existing side by side, a family of ten kingdoms should divide the heritage of Rome, and while no longer in subjection to it as provinces, should yet, as independent kingdoms, continue to have a common connection with Rome.

The fact that the portion of the prophecy devoted to the detailed history of these horns is two or three times as long as that devoted to the history of the undivided empire, suggests that their actual history might probably extend over a much longer period than that of the undivided empire; and there is no question that they continue in existence until the coming of Christ, and the establishment of His millennial kingdom.

They rise on the fall of the empire, for there is no gap in the image, and no break in the continuity of the history of the fourth beast, no indication whatever that any interval is to exist between the united and the dismembered conditions of the Roman world. The iron legs run right on to the ten toes, and the story of the beast is continued without a break in the story of the ten horns.

What now have been the facts of history? Was the Roman empire on its fall divided into a number of separate kingdoms, and has it continued to be so ever since? Has the number of such kingdoms averaged ten? Have they retained a common connection with Rome? And how many such kingdoms now occupy the scene?

The ten kingdoms must first of course be sought among the Gothic dynasties of the fifth and sixth centuries by which the empire of the West was overthrown; and then at intervals ever since. Should we find that Europe has for ages been united under one monarch, or should we on the other hand find that it has been divided as a rule into thirty or forty kingdoms, we shall be driven to conclude that the prophecy has failed of fulfilment. But should we on the contrary find that amid incessant changes the number of the kingdoms of the European commonwealth has, as a rule, averaged ten, we must surely admit that this portion of the prophecy is as much fulfilled as the earlier portion of the four undivided empires. What further evidence of fulfilment can be desired, than that the thing predicted has come to pass?

As it would be impossible to note the exact number of kingdoms for each year of the thirteen or fourteen centuries which have since elapsed, we must content ourselves with taking a census each century.

The historian Machiavel, without the slightest reference to this prophecy, gives the following list of the nations which occupied the territory of the Western Empire at the time of the fall of Romulus Augustulus, the last emperor of Rome.

The Lombards, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Heruli, the Sueves, the Huns, and the Saxons; ten in all.

After a time the Huns disappeared, but other powers arose and obtained a home in the domains of old Rome. The changes were incessant, as horde after horde of barbarian invaders pressed in on every side to share the spoils; but still the number of established kingdoms was again and again ten. It never rose to twenty or thirty, it never fell to two or three. Charlemagne in his day reduced it for a time, and attempted, like Napoleon in a later age, to restore unity; both utterly failed, and after a very few years the normal ten kingdoms reappeared.

The following list gives the contemporary kingdoms existing in Western Europe at intervals of a hundred years apart, from the 9th to the 19th centuries. It is extracted from a much longer series in “The Four Prophetic Empires,” by the Rev. T. R. Birks, and is introduced by the remark that a measure of uncertainty must exist as to whether some of the States should be included, as “it is sometimes doubtful whether a kingdom can claim an independent sovereignty on account of the complex and varying nature of its political relations.” But as exactly as it can be estimated from the records of history, the following lists present the members of the family of kingdoms as they appeared from century to century. Where a note of interrogation follows a name, it implies that there are some elements of doubt as to whether it should be included or not.

A.D, 860.
Italy, Provence, Lorraine, East France, West France, Exarchate, Venice, Navarre, England, Scotland. Total, 10.

A.D. 950.
Germany, Burgundy, Lombardy, Exarchate, Venice, France, England, Scotland, Navarre, Leon. Total, 10.

A.D. 1050.
Germany, Exarchate, Venice, Norman Italy, France, England, Scotland, Arragon, Castile, Normandy (?), Hungary (?). Total, 9 to 11.

AD. 1150.
Germany, Naples, Venice, France, England, Scotland, Arragon, Castile, Portugal, Hungary, Lombardy (?). Total, 10, or perhaps 11.

A.D. 1250.
Germany and Naples, Venice, Lombardy, France, England, Scotland, Arragon, Castile, Portugal, Hungary. Total, 10.

A.D. 1350.
Germany, Naples, Venice, Switzerland (?), Milan (?), Tuscany (?), France, England and Scotland, Arragon, Castile, Portugal, Hungary. Total, 9 to 12.

A.D. 1453.
Austria, Naples, Venice, France, England, Scotland, Arragon, Castile, Portugal, Hungary, Switzerland (?), Savoy (?), Milan (?), Tuscany (?), Total, 11 to 14.

A.D. 1552.
Austria, Venice, France, England, Scotland, Spain, Naples, Portugal, Hungary, Switzerland (?), Lombardy (?). Total, 9 to 11.

A.D. 1648.
Austria, Venice, France, Britain (?), Spain and Naples, Portugal, Hungary, Switzerland (?), Savoy, Tuscany, Holland. Total, § to 11.

A.D. 1750.
Austria and Hungary, France, Savoy and Sardinia, Venice, Tuscany, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland (?), Naples (?), Britain (?), Holland. Total, 8 to 11.

AD, 1816.
Austria, Bavaria, Wurtemburg (?), Naples, Tuscany, Sardinia, Lombardy (?), France, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Britain (?), Switzerland (?). Total, 9 to 13.

An examination of this list reveals the surprising fact, which would only become more apparent were the list lengthened ten times, so as to present a census of each decade instead of each century, that, amidst unceasing and almost countless fluctuations, the kingdoms of modern Europe have from their birth to the present day averaged ten in number> They have never since the break-up of old Rome been united into one single empire; they have never formed one whole even like the United States. No scheme of proud ambition seeking to reunite the broken fragments has ever succeeded; when such have arisen, they have been invariably dashed to pieces. Witness the legions of Napoleon buried beneath the snows of Russia, the armadas of Spain wrecked by Atlantic storms, and all the futile royal marriage arrangements by which monarchs vainly sought to create a revived empire. In spite of all human effort, in defiance of every attempt at reunion, the European commonwealth for thirteen or fourteen centuries has numbered on an average ten kingdoms.

And the division is as apparent now as ever! Plainly and palpably inscribed on the map of Europe this day, it confronts the skeptic with its silent but conclusive testimony to the fulfilment of this great prophecy. Who can alter or add to this tenfold list of the kingdoms now occupying the sphere of old Rome?

ITALY, AUSTRIA, SWITZERLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, ENGLAND, HOLLAND, BELGIUM, SPAIN, and PORTUGAL.

Ten, and no more; ten, and no less! The Franco-Prussian war and the unification of Italy have once more developed distinctly the normal number of the kingdoms of Europe.

Nor is this all. The most marked feature of this prophecy is neither the four beasts nor the ten horns of the fourth, but the little horn with eyes and mouth that came up among them; it is neither the four empires nor the ten kingdoms, but the one supremely influential and singularly wicked dynasty that rises with, and rules over, the latter; exalts itself, blasphemes God, wears out His saints, and ultimately brings down Divine judgment on the beast and all his horns, itself included; i.e., on apostate Latin Christendom, and its centre—ROME.

What was this little horn? To answer this question we ask another. What was the central ruling power in the European commonwealth of nations throughout the thousand years of the dark ages from the sixth to the sixteenth centuries? It was a power that ruled from Rome as did the Caesars. It was the succession of Roman pontiffs, the line of tiara-crowned monarchs who for more than twelve centuries governed papal Rome; who ranked as temporal sovereigns as well as high priests in the Church, and who united under their sway the separate kingdoms of Latin Christendom. Every feature of the prophecy was fulfilled in their dynasty, and in no other. Those features are six in number. The prophecy lays its finger on the place where we are to find the great enemy—Rome; on the point of time in the course of history at which we may expect to see him rise— the fall of the empire and the division of the Roman territory into a commonwealth of kingdoms; it specifies the nature of the power—politico-ecclesiastical, a horn, and yet an overseer or bishop; its character—blasphemously self-exalting, lawless, and persecuting; it measures its duration—“a time, and times, and the dividing of time” (or 1,260 years); and it specifies its doom—to have its dominion gradually consumed and taken away, and then be suddenly destroyed for ever by the glorious epiphany of Christ and the introduction of the kingdom of God on earth.

The proof that the Papacy is the power intended is strictly cumulative. If it answered to one of these indications, there would be a slight presumption against it; if to several, a strong one; if to the majority, an overwhelming one; while if it answer to all, then the proof that it is the power intended becomes irresistible. There is not a single clause in the prophecy that cannot be proved to fit the Roman Papacy exactly, except the last, which is not yet fulfilled.

Rome, which in her pagan phase defiled and destroyed the literal temple of God at Jerusalem, in her papal days defiled and destroyed the anti-typical spiritual temple of God—the Christian Church. Was it not worthy of God to warn that Church beforehand of the coming of this dreadful anti-Christian power, and to cheer her in all the sufferings she would have to endure from its tyranny by a knowledge of the issue of the great and terrible drama? Was it not right that the Roman power, pagan and papal, should occupy as paramount a place on the page of Scripture as it has actually done on the page of history? The eighteen Christian centuries lay open before the eye of the omniscient God, and no figure stood out so prominently in all their long course as that of the great antichrist. The pen of inspiration sketched him in a few bold, masterly strokes; and there is no mistaking the portrait. The prophecy identifies the greatest power of evil that has ever arisen in the earth, and unmasks the most treacherous and deceptive foe which the Church has ever had to meet; for if the ten horns be the kingdoms of modern Europe, there can be no question as to what the little horn is.

Throughout Western Europe and throughout the dark ages all men reverenced, served, and obeyed the popes of Rome, whose dominion was exceeding evil, and whose pretension was the blasphemous one to be quasi Deus—as God on earth. The idolatry of ancient Babylon was revived under this modern Babylon in another form, and the judgment that descended on the former will ere long descend on the latter according to this prophecy. We must, however, refer to another work for the full exposition of the subject, as space forbids our going further into it here. (See our works, “Romanism and the Reformation from the Standpoint of Prophecy,” and “The approaching End of the Age,” part iii, “Foretold and Fulfilled.” (Hodder & Stoughton.))

We have now reviewed the predictions of the course of Gentile empire in the earth and the leading events of the last twenty-five centuries. Is there any harmony between the two? The reply must needs be, never did key fit a complicated lock better than Daniel’s foreview fits this extended series of facts! We have not paused to point out the precise agreement which actually exists between the minor items of the programme and the corresponding parts of the history, as in this brief sketch space compels us to confine ourselves to the broad outlines only. This we regret, for we are painfully conscious that such an outline must needs fail to exhibit the full correspondence between the prophecy and its fulfilment. No skeleton can convey the life-like appearance of the man. Vague and slight must be the impression produced by such brief reminders of long-lasting, important, and influential historical episodes. We are so apt to live in our own days and the days of our immediate ancestors, and to lose sight of the far-reaching family traditions of our race; yet we are the outcome of all that long past, and when we go into its records sufficiently to realize what it was, we are impressed with its absolute similarity to the present in all essential features.

The men and women of Egypt and Assyria were precisely what the men and women of Europe in this nineteenth century are. We see them in all their domestic, social, and public life, in their fashions and foibles, their virtues and vices, their work and their worship, their ambitions, hopes and fears, and we realize that conquest and captivity, barbarian inundations, bloody persecutions, political struggles, religious revivals, and similar changes, meant to them precisely what they would mean to us. The revolutions of history, the changes of dynasty, the ascendancy of one race over another—these seem little matters when we merely read of them, but what would they be if we experienced them? Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, the Gothic invasions, the papal tyranny and the dark ages, the Reformation, the French Revolution—are these things mere words to us, or do we conceive the realities they recall? Who would imagine from the outlines of the four continents in a student’s blank map the variety, beauty, wealth, and glory of the world? Every square inch of the map means a thousand square miles perhaps of land and water, mountain and valley, city and town and village; it means forests, lakes, caverns and mines, rocks bearing gold and silver, corn fields and flowers, pastures and gardens, countless living creatures, and millions of mankind, each man and woman of those millions being as precious as we ourselves are in the sight of God, and equally redeemed by the death of Christ.

So as to history. These four Gentile empires mean a hundred generations of mankind, each one of which numbered millions of individuals. These historical changes so little to us were to them all important. Marvellous is the variety and magnitude of the events condensed into the words Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, with its second still extant stage, Latin Christendom. And God foresaw each and all. He marked the ravages of these wild beasts; He noted how they would destroy wonderfully in the earth; He anticipated their oppressions and persecutions of His people; every page of the long and terrible story lay naked and open to His eye. His wisdom saw fit to suffer so long the reign of monsters, but His purpose to destroy this evil state of things and to follow it by one as blessed as this has been the reverse, is revealed for the comfort of His people and the vindication of His providence. The four empires are but the brief and passing introduction to the fifth, to the eternal kingdom of the Son of man and of the saints.

It is most important to observe that the introduction of Christianity into the world as a religion at the time of the first advent of Christ is not the fulfilment of this last blessed prophecy, though it is often alleged as such to the great weakening of the prediction, as if it taught that human history was to wind up with Christianity as we now have it become universal! This is not what Daniel’s programme presents as the outline of the future, but very far from it. The symbol of the falling stone cannot predict this reality, first because of its own intrinsic nature, and secondly because of the period at which it is placed in the prediction.

As to the first point, its nature. The sudden descent of a stone massive enough to crush a great image to powder and annihilate it utterly would be a most inappropriate symbol, and one wholly inapplicable to represent the slow and gradual spread of the healing, saving faith of Christ. He came at His first advent, not as a mighty victor overthrowing the hosts of evil, but as a helpless babe, a suffering witness to the truth, and a dying Saviour of mankind; and He sent forth His disciples as sheep amid wolves. It is an insult to Divine intelligence to suppose that such a symbol would have been selected to foreshadow such an event.

A sudden and awful catastrophe making an end at once and for ever of all monarchies—the symbol of what happened to the world, when “Jesus of Nazareth went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil,” and saying, “I came not to judge the world, but to save it”? Impossible. Besides, after the catastrophe the stone becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth, taking the place of the image. This did not happen after the first advent. A spiritual religion spread among men, it is true, but not by force. Christianity destroyed no kingdoms or nations. Force was arrayed against it. The Roman empire sought to destroy the faith of Christ. The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church, but neither Christ nor His disciples tried to overthrow the Roman empire. The fall of the stone cannot possibly represent something thus wholly distinct and even contrasted in character. Its gradual cutting out without hands, while the image still stood in all its imposing majesty, its silent and mysterious formation by an unseen power in preparation for its subsequent descent, may indeed represent the present spiritual process of the separation of the Church of Christ out of the world, and its spiritual union with Him through the invisible power of the Holy Ghost. But the fall of the stone must represent something very different, even the coming of the Lord from heaven hereafter with ten thousand of His saints in glory and judgment. The first advent and the introduction of Christianity into the world did not do to Gentile empires what the fall of the stone did to the image. The thing prefigured is a sudden crushing blow of final judgment. Nothing of the kind has ever happened under the influence of Christianity. Its operation and its results have been of another kind altogether. Mohammedanism overthrew kingdoms in abundance, though it never filled the earth, but Christianity never overthrew one. The empire of the Caesars, under which it was born, stood firm for centuries after its birth, and Gentile empire still exists as much as in Daniel’s day.

And, secondly, the first advent did not occur at the time predicted in these prophecies. The stone falls on the clay-iron feet of the image. The kingdom of the mountain, the kingdom of the God of heaven, is in both visions set up at the end of the last or tenfold state of the fourth monarchy and is in itself a fifth, more universal and more enduring than they all. It does not co-exist with the Roman power, but it follows it in chronological sequence.

Now the tenfold condition of the Roman world did not commence until the sixth century, and the first advent took place five hundred years too soon for it to fulfil this prediction, The ten-kingdomed state continues still, so the fifth monarchy, or kingdom of the mountain, cannot have commenced as yet. It is a future manifested kingdom of God on earth, which is predicted here—the same kingdom which had previously been predicted to David, the universal and eternal kingdom of the Son of David and Son of God—“the kingdom of the Son of man and of the saints.”

Is then the first advent silently ignored in Daniel’s programme of the future? Though only five hundred years distant from his own day, do his comprehensive foreviews take no notice whatever of so all-important an event? On the contrary, Daniel’s programme devotes an entire chapter to the great theme, or rather Daniel’s God granted him a distinct and supremely important revelation about it.

The first advent, as we shall presently see, forms the sole subject of a separate prophecy, but this prediction of the four empires does not introduce it at all. It were altogether beneath its inherent dignity to mention the supreme event of time and of eternity as a mere incident in the history of the fourth empire. Incarnation and redemption are properly passed by in silence here, where the succession of earthly monarchies is the subject; but the second advent of Christ to judge and rule the world as King —to establish the kingdom of God—is presented as the grand terminus of all Gentile dominion. His is the fifth monarchy—the mountain that fills the whole earth and stands for ever—and it is introduced by the sudden and complete destruction of the image whose very dust is blown into oblivion.

Continued in Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part IV. The Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

John Nelson Darby.

John Nelson Darby (18 November 1800 – 29 April 1882) was an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, one of the influential figures among the original Plymouth Brethren and the founder of the Exclusive Brethren. He is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism (“the Rapture” in the English vernacular). (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nelson_Darby)

The correct interpretation of Daniel chapter 9 and especially verse 27 is extremely important because it is the ‘linchpin’ of all Bible prophecy. If you don’t get it right, your interpretation of other prophecies in the Book of Daniel, Matthew 24, II Thessalonians 2:3,4, and the Book of Revelation will also be wrong! It all depends on whether you hold the modern popular futurism interpretation of Daniel 9:27, or the older historicist Protestant interpretation. This article proves from Darby’s own words he had a futurist interpretation of Daniel 9:27 which was contrary to the standard historicist interpretation of his contemporaries and those before him. In other words, Protestants before Darby did NOT interpret Daniel 9:27 the way he did. They held to the historicist view. And what is the historcist view of Daniel 9:27? It’s a Messianic prophecy, a prophecy already fulfilled by Jesus Christ! It’s not a futurist prophecy to be fulfilled by an Endtime Antichrist!

All Bible Scriptures quoted in this article are from the King James Version. All emphasis in italics or bold are mine.

Quotes from John Darby’s Synopsis of Daniel 9 taken from christianity.com

The prince that shall come confirms a covenant with the mass of the Jews. (The form of the word many indicates the mass of the people). This is the first thing that characterizes the week; the Jews form an alliance with the head, at that day, of the people who had formerly overthrown their city and their sanctuary. They form an alliance with the head of the Roman Empire.

Darby is referring to the covenant of Daniel 9:27. Notice how he refers to the covenant as an alliance? And Darby calls the “prince” of Daniel 9 the head of the Roman Empire though faithful men of God taught the prince is the Messiah. This is not reading what the Word says, but adding one’s subjective thoughts to the Word.

But there remained one week yet unaccomplished with this faithless and perverse, but yet beloved, race, before their iniquity should be pardoned, and everlasting righteousness brought in, and the vision and the prophecy closed by their fulfilment. This week should be distinguished by a covenant which the prince or leader would make with the Jewish people (with the exception of the remnant), and then by the compulsory cessation of their worship through the intervention of this prince.

Again Darby uses the indefinite article for covenant though the popular Bible of his time, the KJV, uses the definite article, the covenant. And Darby does not clarify the “prince or leader” he is referring to is in fact Jesus Christ! He is referring to an unknown man in the future which most evangelicals today interpret as the Antichrist. That is why Darby is called the father of Futurism. My friends, this is not how Protestants used to interpret Daniel 9:27.

What the passage tells us is this: first, the prince, the head that is of the Roman empire, in the latter days makes a covenant referring to one whole week;

Darby again is referring to someone in the future, “in the latter days” and again says “a covenant”. As you will see in this article, Protestants before him knew exactly what the covenant was and why the KJV version of the Bible in Daniel 9 uses the definite article, “the covenant”, and not just in verse 27, but before it in verse 4! Darby does not make the connection of the covenant of verse 4 being the same as the covenant of verse 27! And why? It would prove his interpretation of a future prince making an alliance with the Jews to be false!

What John Calvin has to say:

Christ took upon him the character of a leader, or assumed the kingly office, when he promulgated the grace of God. This is the confirmation of the covenant of which the angel now speaks. As we have already stated, the legal expiation of other ritual ceremonies which God designed to confer on the fathers is contrasted with the blessings derived from Christ; and we now gather the same idea from the phrase, the confirmation of the covenant. We know how sure and stable was God’s covenant under the law; he was from the beginning always truthful, and faithful, and consistent with himself. But as far as man was concerned, the covenant of the law was weak, as we learn from Jeremiah. (Jeremiah 31:31, 32.) I will enter into a new covenant with you, says he; not such as I made with your fathers, for they made it vain. We here observe the difference between the covenant which Christ sanctioned by his death and that of the Jewish law. Thus God’s covenant is established with us, because we have been once reconciled by the death of Christ; and at the same time the effect of the Holy Spirit is added, because God inscribes the law upon our hearts; and thus his covenant is not engraven in stones, but in our hearts of flesh, according to the teaching of the Prophet Ezekiel. (Ezekiel 11:19.) Now, therefore, we understand why the angel says, Christ should confirm the covenant for one week, and why that week was placed last in order. In this week will he confirm the covenant with many.

You can see John Calvin believed the covenant had to do with the grace of God, not some Endtime treaty an Antichrist will make.

Geneva Bible Commentary

And he (a) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

You can see the Geneva Bible says it is Christ who confirms the covenant, and it has to do with the preaching of the Gospel.

Matthew Henry

He is called Messiah (Dan. 9:25, 26), which signifies Christ-Anointed (John 1:41), because he received the unction both for himself and for all that are his. [5.] In order to all this the Messiah must be cut off, must die a violent death, and so be cut off from the land of the living, as was foretold, Isa. 53:8. Hence, when Paul preaches the death of Christ, he says that he preached nothing but what the prophet said should come, 26:22, 23. And thus it behoved Christ to suffer. He must be cut off, but not for himself—not for any sin of his own, but, as Caiaphas prophesied, he must die for the people, in our stead and for our good,—not for any advantage of his own (the glory he purchased for himself was no more than the glory he had before, John 17:4, 5); no; it was to atone for our sins, and to purchase life for us, that he was cut off. [6.] He must confirm the covenant with many. He shall introduce a new covenant between God and man, a covenant of grace, since it had become impossible for us to be saved by a covenant of innocence. This covenant he shall confirm by his doctrine and miracles, by his death and resurrection, by the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s supper, which are the seals of the New Testament, assuring us that God is willing to accept us upon gospel-terms. His death made his testament of force, and enabled us to claim what is bequeathed by it. He confirmed it to the many, to the common people; the poor were evangelized, when the rulers and Pharisees believed not on him. Or, he confirmed it with many, with the Gentile world. He causes all the peace-offerings to cease when he has made peace by the blood of his cross, and by it confirmed the covenant of peace and reconciliation.

Matthew Henry’s comment about the Prince of the Covenant

It is here foretold that the people of the prince that shall come shall be the instruments of this destruction, that is, the Roman armies, belonging to a monarchy yet to come (Christ is the prince that shall come, and they are employed by him in this service; they are his armies, Matt. 22:7), or the Gentiles (who, though now strangers, shall become the people of the Messiah) shall destroy the Jews.

Notice that Matthew Henry puts the prophecy of Daniel 9:27 in the past while John Darby puts it in the future? John Darby is the author of futurism, which is interpreting Bible prophecies having a future fulfillment. Before Darby Protestant theologians interpreted Christ fulfilling Daniel 9:27. They didn’t look at prophecy as God telling us the future, but as God showing how His Word was fulfilled in the past which gives glory to God and verifies the Scriptures as the very Word of God! Did Jesus’ disciples know when and how the Temple of Solomon was to be destroyed? I submit to you they did not. They only recognized the prophecy after it was fulfilled, not before.

What generation was Jesus referring to? My generation? My children’s generation? No! The generation of the people He was speaking to! His disciples of 30 A.D.! Most of them lived 40 more years and saw the fulfillment of the prophecies of Matthew 24.

Reading Darby is an exercise of my mental faculties. He is not nearly as clear as John Calvin or Matthew Henry. And his interpretation of prophecy is clearly an eisegesis which means “to lead into” — the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants. Compare that to Matthew Henry and John Calvin and others who interpreted using exegesis which means “lead out of” or letting the Bible speak for itself without speculating. A good exegesis of what the covenant of Daniel 9:27 is found in verse 4 of the same chapter:

Where did Darby get his inspiration from? I highly suspect he was influenced by writings of a Jesuit priest. Darby’s interpretation of Daniel 9 is exactly what Jesuit Francesco Ribera taught in 1585!

Any comments about this article are appreciated.

The Timeline of Daniel 9:24-27 Illustrated

This meme is courtesy of David Nikao Wilcoxson 70thweekofdaniel.com

Continued from Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part I..

The character of Daniel is lofty, beautiful, and gracious,— a model character in many respects, and one befitting a prophet of peculiar privilege. It is not deliberately sketched, but comes out incidentally; it does not obtrude itself on the attention as we read his prophecy, the book being mainly autobiographical in its form, and the prophet having no desire to make himself prominent. This style of writing, in which it is peculiarly easy to fall unconsciously into egoism, serves only to exhibit Daniel’s singular self-abnegation and noble simplicity. We learn that he was an exile, a captive, and a slave like Joseph, as is indicated by the change of his name.

This change, intended to remind the slave of his servitude, was a custom of the East and of the period, and continued even to Christian times. Chrysostom says: “The master having bought a slave, wishing to show him that he is master, changes his name.” And again, “that the imposition of names is a symbol of mastership is plain from what we too do” (St. Chrysostom, Serm. 12, Op. iii. 1). And Daniel was not only a slave, but a life-long sufferer at the hands of his captors, one of those in whom was fulfilled the prediction to Hezekiah (Isa. xxix. 7), as appears from the fact stated in chapter i. 3, This makes his noble and faithful character all the more remarkable, as his class were proverbially addicted to intrigue, assassination, and conspiracies. Gibbon dwells on their notoriously pernicious influence on courts and kings.

He was only about fourteen when he came to Babylon, as we judge from the fact that it was at that age lads were committed to royal instructors to be trained for the king’s service, on which they entered at sixteen or seventeen. The three years during which he was “taught the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans” early displayed his character, manifesting a beautiful boyish simplicity of faith, and that high-principled self-denial in trifles for conscience sake, which is the sure earnest of future greatness, and gives the best promise of a grand career. His faith grew by exercise, till it prevailed to bring down the interpretation of the king’s dream, and it lasted through life, leading the prophet in his old age to “continue in prayer,” even when the den of lions was the penalty.

Bold and uncompromising where allegiance to God was concerned, Daniel was, however, singularly respectful and deferential, sympathetic, polite, and patient. Though never dazzled or deluded by the splendours of Nebuchadnezzar’s court, he evidently both admired and respected his vast power. It had, indeed, elements of greatness as the first which changed the “robber-tyrant domination of Assyrian and Babylonian might into organized rule.”

This respect is consistently shown—in his explanation of the king’s dream of the image, and subsequently in that of the tree cut down, which predicted Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity. How reluctant is the prophet to explain this latter vision! He sat astonished for an hour, and his thoughts troubled him, not because he feared the results to himself of the unwelcome intelligence he had to deliver, but out of sincere sorrow for and sympathy with the proud monarch before him. Tenderly and respectfully he at last, when urged, reveals the counsel of God to the king, accompanying the announcement with words of gentle yet earnest exhortation, if perchance reformation of life might lead to a lengthening of tranquillity.

The same deferential, respectful tone marks his words to the weak and unjust Darius: “Before thee also, O king, have I done no hurt.” And especially it comes out in his interview with Belshazzar on the eve of the capture of Babylon, when he recalls the glory of Nebuchadnezzar as he had seen it in his own early days. “The Most High God gave thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honour: and for (or on account of) the majesty that He gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down.” (Dan. 5:18,19)

Daniel’s career of prosperity in a strange land never weaned his affections from his fatherland, or lessened his longing for the restoration of his people and the temple at Jerusalem. Three times a day he prayed “towards Jerusalem,” as we learn incidentally in his old age. He led a life of earnest, longing prayerfulness for Jewish interests, while all those seventy years doing faithfully the king’s business. So perfect was his fidelity that his enemies could find no fault in him in his official capacity, and the length of his career makes the statement remarkable.

“The stripling of seventeen sat in the king’s gate (‘in the Porte,’ as we say, retaining the oriental term), president over all the colleges of the wise men, and of the whole province of Babylon. Daniel continued even unto the first year of King Cyrus, are the simple words; but what a volume of tried faithfulness is unrolled by them! Amid all the intrigues, indigenous, at all times, in dynasties of oriental despotism, where intrigue too rolls round so surely and so suddenly on its author’s head; amid all the envy towards a foreign captive in high office as a king’s councilor; amid all the trouble incidental to the insanity of the king, or to the murder of two of his successors,—in that whole critical period for his people Daniel continued. . .

“The force of the words is not drawn out; but, as perseverance is the one final touchstone of man, so these scattered notices combine in a grand outline of one, an alien, a captive, of that misused class who are proverbially the intriguers, favourites, pests of oriental courts, who revenge on man their ill-treatment at the hand of man; yet, himself, in uniform integrity, outliving envy, jealousy, dynasties; surviving in untarnished uncorrupting greatness the seventy years of the captivity; honoured during the forty-three years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign; doing the king’s business under the insolent and sensual boy Belshazzar; owned by the conquering Medo-Persians; the stay doubtless and human protector of his people during those long years of exile; probably commissioned to write the decree of Cyrus which gave leave for that long longed-for restoration of his people, whose re-entrance into their land, like Moses of old, he was not to share. Deeds are more eloquent than words. Such undeviating integrity, beyond the ordinary life of man, in a worshipper of the one God, in the most dissolute and degraded of the merchant-cities of old, first minister in the first of the world-monarchies,” gives him a place among the highest and holiest men the world has ever seen.(Pusey: “Lectures on Daniel the Prophet,” pp. 20, 22.)

This was the prophet to whom He who sees the end from the beginning, was pleased to reveal THE SIXTH SECTION OF THE PROGRAMME OF THE world’s history.

This section was fuller and more detailed and definite than any which had preceded it, and extending from its own date, five to six centuries before Christ, to the end of the present state of things, the resurrection of the dead and the era of blessedness. It contains, with some unfulfilled predictions, a prophecy of the outline of history for twenty-five centuries; and a comparison of its statements with the well-known course of events must either attest its supernatural inspiration, or confute it even more clearly than any of the programmes we have as yet considered.

Questions as to the date of the Book of Daniel have been raised by rationalistic critics to whom real prophecy in any sense is as incredible as real miracle. The objections raised are about as baseless as objections well could be; and the counter-theories as to the date of the prophecy are one and all incredible, some even ludicrous. The true date, as we will presently show, has been abundantly confirmed and verified both from external and internal evidence. No further proof of the authenticity of the accepted date ought to be demanded—nor can any be given, until further Babylonian exploration brings to light, as it probably will do, contemporaneous evidence of the existence and career of the prophet. But our present argument requires no consideration of this question. Because, even if we accept the latest date suggested for the publication of Daniel, it fails to abate the claim of the book to contain supernatural predictions which were published hundreds and some of them thousands of years before they were fulfilled, and remains therefore an unanswerable witness to the prescient wisdom of God, to the intense reality of His providential government of the world, and to the Divine inspiration of the Scriptures.

In treating on this subject, we must presume on an acquaintance with the Book of Daniel on the part of our readers. As a mere work of very ancient literature it is an intensely interesting one, while as an important part of the Word of God it well repays study. Its life-like sketches of the state of things in which the writer lived, and of the characters of those with whom he came in contact; its graphic accounts of the tragic and wonderful incidents of his career; its pictures of saintly devotion, heroic self-sacrifice, calm faith, holy courage, and prevailing prayer, of fidelity under most ensnaring temptation, and of patriotism that nothing could shake; above all, its glorious witness to the delivering power and grace of God, and its lessons of lofty morality, to say nothing of its wonderful anticipations of the world’s history—all conspire to make it a document of surpassing attraction, The greatest and wisest philosopher may ponder its pages, as the incomparable Sir Isaac Newton loved to do; while the simplest child finds no stories more interesting than those of the den of lions, the Hebrew children, and the handwriting on the wall; and evangelists like Moody find no theme more moving than the experiences of the holy prophet. The book is partly historic and partly prophetic, facts and foreviews being blended in about equal proportions, The second and the last six chapters of the book are mainly prophecy, the remainder history, in which however detached predictions of events which were near at hand at the time occur.

The prophecies, with the exception of the one great Messianic prediction, and the few closing ones of the book, are political in character; they relate to kings and kingdoms, victories and defeats, treaties and royal marriages, and the fortunes of different nations; and in this fact we have a fresh proof of the suitability of the instruments divinely selected for the work they are destined to do. Moses, trained in college and at court, and placed in command of armies and expeditions, familiarized subsequently with the mountains and valleys and resources of the Sinaitic peninsula, was appointed to lead the Exodus of Israel, and convey the law of God to the Jewish nation. David, the first great king of Israel, is chosen to receive revelations as to the kingdom, and as to the Messiah who should rule to the uttermost ends of the earth. And now Daniel with his noble Jewish lineage, his high and careful Gentile education and training, his familiarity with the imperial politics of Nebuchadnezzar and with the varied civilization of Chaldea,—Daniel with his statesmanlike experience of government, with his personal faith and his pure aspirations, with his strong national sympathies, yet his wide acquaintance with the world,— Daniel the royal exile, the “ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief of the governors over all the wise men of Babylon” (Dan. ii. 48), is made the medium of revelations embracing the political outline of long centuries of Gentile history, the first and second advents of Messiah the Prince, the hope of Israel and the salvation of the world. His training and experience, his character and position, all adapted him peculiarly for his work, and to be the channel of the wonderful revelation which was committed to him.

So numerous are the predictions in this short book that it would require a volume to consider them in detail. We must take up the main outline only of its programme of the future, and that outline is so clear and so comprehensive that subsequent history must have either definitely verified or absolutely falsified it. There can in this case be no possible uncertainty or doubtfulness as to the correspondence of prophecy and fulfilment. When a long series of consecutive events, embracing the political fortunes of all the leading nations of the world for twenty-five centuries, together with the characters and epochs of the greatest heroes of history, are predicted in succession as luminously and clearly as if the prophecy were a narrative, it must be either plainly fulfilled or not so. In this sixth section of the programme there is evidence of greater strength than in any of the previous ones of Divine foreknowledge, and of the control of the course of history by Divine power.

The programme has four main divisions, the last of which is still unfulfilled:

I. The twice-repeated prediction of a succession of FOUR GREAT EMPIRES, followed by the kingdom of God.

II. The full and chronological prophecy of the FIRST ADVENT OF CHRIST, and the DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM.

III A long and detailed prediction of the events connected with the second and third of the four great monarchies, including especially the wars of the Ptolemies and Seleucid, the Maccabean persecutions and martyrdoms, and the career of Antiochus Epiphanes.

IV. Predictions relating to events still future—the second advent of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the restoration of Israel (

Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome; this was the order Ptolemy saw in looking back; this was the retrospect of the historian, and it accords absolutely with the outline seen beforehand by the prophet. Moreover, as Faber points out:—

“In each case the principle of continuous arrangement is identical. Where Ptolemy makes the Persian Cyrus the immediate successor of the Babylonic Nabonadius, or Belshazzar, without taking into account the preceding kings of Persia or of Media, there, in the image, the silver joins itself to the gold; where Ptolemy makes the Grecian Alexander the immediate successor of the Persian Darius, without taking into account the preceding kings of Macedon, there, in the image, the brass joins itself to the silver; and where Ptolemy makes the Roman Augustus the immediate successor of the Grecian Cleopatra, without taking into account the long preceding roll of the consular Fasti and the primitive Roman monarchy, there, in the image, the iron joins itself to the brass. In short, the Canon of Ptolemy may well be deemed a running comment upon the altitudinal line of the great metallic image. As the parts of the image melt into each other, forming jointly one grand succession of supreme imperial domination, so the Canon of Ptolemy exhibits what may be called a picture of unbroken imperial rule, though administered by four successive dynasties, from Nabonassar to Augustus and his successors.”

The same Divine care which raised up Herodotus and other Greek historians to carry on the records of the past, from the point to which they had been brought by the writings of the prophets—the same providence which raised up Josephus, at the termination of New Testament history, to record the destruction of Jerusalem—raised up also this Ptolemy, to show the historian’s view of the four great empires of their succession and chronology. Nor does Ptolemy stand alone in his review of history. Ancients and moderns all are agreed as to the main outline of the history of those nations of which prophecy takes cognizance; i.e., the nations which formed the environment of the people of God in the world, and have had to do with the Jews and the Christian Church. The ancient Jewish Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel, written shortly before the first advent; the writings of Josephus, who was born during the lifetime of our Lord, the Commentary of Jerome, and the writings of other Fathers, of the early centuries of our era, the histories of Sulpicius—all give the same outline. In fact, ancient history is written on this principle; all the best writers divide their subject thus, and the experience of school and college teaches us the truth of Daniel’s outline. Do we not study as four separate branches the histories of Rome, of Greece, of Persia, and of Babylon? The latter is often combined with the Assyrian empire which preceded it, for until recent archaeological discovery made it comparatively plain, the successions and distinctions of the earliest monarchies of the East were obscure, and their annals were often combined under the general title of “Ancient History.” The four empires of this prophecy start with the later Babylonian empire of Nebuchadnezzar.

Moreover, these empires, and especially the two latter, are the sources whence we derive the laws and politics and the foundation of the literature still prevailing among us, the arts of sculpture and drawing, and especially that of architecture. But little is known comparatively of the history of the other nations of antiquity, and there can be no question that these four had a special relation to the people of God and to the history of redemption. It was Babylon who led the Jews captive, Medo-Persia who restored them to their own land; Alexander who in his turn conquered Jerusalem and held Palestine, in and about which his successors the Ptolemies and the Seleucidae were always warring; it was under the empire of Rome the glorious redemption itself was accomplished, and the Christian Church founded, while Jerusalem was destroyed, and the Jewish people were finally expelled from Palestine.

So general is the concensus of opinion on this point among all who have any acquaintance with history, that it is needless to dwell on it. The succession of Normans, Plantagenets, Tudors, and Stuarts in our own history is not more patent than that of Babylonians, Persians, Grecians, and Romans in the history of the world since the days of Daniel, including in the last, the modern nations of Latin Christendom, the tenfold commonwealth of European nations which arose out of the ruins of the old Roman empire.

For it must be borne in mind that the double prophecy not only presents these four empires as successive, but as filling the whole interval until the second advent of Christ in glory, and the establishment of the everlasting kingdom of Messiah on earth. They exclude by implication any other or different state of things. The last, or Roman rule, continues in its tenfold state to the end of the existing order; there is nothing in the image lower than the feet, and there is no “beast” subsequent to the fourth. What follows is another age altogether. It is the kingdom of the Mountain that fills the whole earth —the kingdom of the God of heaven, to which we must revert presently. Meantime, a few details as to the history which has justified and fulfilled this first leading feature of Daniel’s programme must be given, to recall the familiar facts.

The expressions used in ver. 38 about THE FIRST BABYLONIAN EMPIRE denote universality, but they must not be taken in a strict but in a popular sense, and with reference to the then known world only. As a matter of fact, Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom never extended even at all into Europe, nor into Africa beyond the bounds of Egypt; and even over the Asiatic countries he conquered, his dominion did not descend into the actual administration of government in them all—it was simply a general control, a superior power, and the exaction of tribute. As we have seen in other cases, Scripture occasionally uses unlimited terms in limited senses, and this principle must always be borne in mind in considering such statements as those in this prophecy.

The principal conquests of Nebuchadnezzar were Syria, Palestine, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, Lydia, and Egypt. His successors were none of them equal to himself in administrative ability, and the empire did not last long. It was coterminous in its duration with the Babylonish captivity, seventy years: the conquest of Babylonia and capture of Babylon by Cyrus brought it to an end in accordance with Jeremiah’s predictions.

Continued in Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part III.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

Continued from Chapter V. The Davidic Programme. – Part II..

AS the Congo River in its onward flow across the “Dark Continent” broadens and deepens when its great tributaries mingle their waters with its own, so the stream of prophetic revelation increases continually in volume as it rolls down through the ages. From the first, its theme was redemption—the saving blessing in store for the human race; but to Adam and to Abraham the great benefit—the salvation—only was predicted, while little was said of the great Benefactor, the Saviour Himself.

To Moses and David visions of the blessed Coming One were granted, till, by degrees, His mediatorial work, His double nature, His wonderful personal experiences, and many features of His glorious kingdom were revealed. In the times of the Jewish kingdom especially, and during the captivity which followed its dissolution, the river of prophecy thus widened exceedingly. Its revelations concerned three main subjects:—

I. The fortunes of the JEWISH kingdom and people.
II. The person and work of MESSIAH THE PRINCE.
III. The GENTILE nations—pagan kingdoms and empires.

1. The JEWISH PROPHECIES included predictions of the dismemberment of the kingdom after Solomon’s reign; the overthrow of the ten tribes and its date; the deliverance of Judah from the Assyrian invasion; its subsequent conquest by Babylon; the captivity and its duration; the restoration and the means of it; the duration of its restored existence; the Roman overthrow and subsequent desolation; together with minor points so numerous that it may be safely asserted that Israel’s entire history was written in advance, and that nothing ever befell them that was not first foretold. Thus the providential government of God over His people was manifested, and the moral reasons for His dispensations expounded beforehand.

The Jewish prophets combined pastoral care and spiritual exhortation with prediction in their ministry. They were the ambassadors for God of their day, pleading with His people of “righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come.” Like the apostles, they were witnesses for the truth, and often martyrs for its sake. Some of their predictions were accomplished speedily, attesting to the then living generation their Divine commission; others were recorded for ages to come, and demonstrate in our own day the Divine prescience which inspired them.

II. The MESSIANIC predictions increased in number and in variety during this period, and included revelations as to the nature of Christ’s person and mission, His birth of a virgin and the place where it should occur, His works of mercy, His meek and compassionate character, His sinlessness, His atoning self-sacrifice, His humiliation and rejection, His sufferings, death, and resurrection; the atonement wrought by these, with its results in the gift of the Holy Ghost; the propagation of the gospel among the Gentiles, and many other particulars.

III. The predictions as to the GENTILE nations and their rulers include those relating to Assyria, Babylon, Moab, Egypt, Tyre, Philistia, Kedar, Elam —all of which had more or less direct and important connection with the Jewish people, together with others relating to individuals, such as Sennacherib, Cyrus, and Nebuchadnezzar, who influenced their fortunes seriously. Such prophecies taught the Jews that Jehovah was not their God only, but the Supreme Ruler over all the earth.

The polytheism of the day had divided the countries of the world among its false deities, and circumscribed the power of each to certain districts. The Assyrians when settled in Samaria complained that they “knew not the manner of the God of the land.” The Israelites could never thus limit Jehovah in their thoughts, since the predictions of His prophets unveiled the future of the Gentiles around them as well as their own, and their fulfilment proved that Divine providence controlled the one as completely as the other. Moreover, such prophecies abated the doubts and conflicts which must have arisen in the hearts and minds of pious Jews under the dark providences of defeat and captivity. When the enemy was permitted to triumph, and to boast in his false gods as if of superior might to Jehovah, it was a consolation to know by prophetic revelation that the triumph would be of brief duration, that the spoiler would soon himself be spoiled and the captive delivered, to understand the moral reasons for the disciplinary portions of the providential government of God, and to be led to repentance for the sins that had incurred Divine judgments.

It lies, however, outside the province of this work to examine in detail these several classes of predictions, or to trace their fulfilment. On some of them it would not be easy to base arguments of evidential value; inasmuch as it might not at this distance of time be possible to prove that the date of the publication of the prediction was sufficiently remote from the event that fulfilled it, or that the event was so beyond the power of human sagacity to anticipate, as to demonstrate supernatural prescience (foresight). Moreover, none of these predictions properly fall under either of the great programmes which we are here examining. They stand apart from the comprehensive foreviews given at the commencement of the great sections of human history, to the fathers, or founders, of the new order of things, and they need not therefore detain us.

After the establishment of Jewish monarchy in the reign of David and Solomon, at which crisis the previous foreview was granted, no great turn or change in the history of the chosen people through whom the world’s redemption was to be accomplished took place until the Babylonian captivity. The promise of the permanence of David’s dynasty as long as the kingdom existed was conspicuously fulfilled, as may be clearly seen by a comparison between his dynasty which reigned at Jerusalem and that which occupied the throne of Israel or the ten tribes.

Frequent and violent interruptions, owing to revolt and assassination, marked the succession in Samaria. Jeroboam’s line failed; Baasha’s house did the same; the usurpers Zimri and Omri were cut off; so was the house of Ahab; Jehu’s succession was expressly limited to four generations; and from that time to the fall of the ten tribes before Assyria, there was only a series of successive conspiracies which placed strangers on the throne.

In Judah, on the contrary, there was an unbroken descent in one line, so that the family of David occupied his throne for 450 years without interruption, until both king and people were carried to Babylon. The related kingdom of Israel, though it only lasted 250 years, saw three complete extirpations of the reigning family, the deposition of the house of Jehu, and perpetual confusion in the order of the kingdom.

The stability of David’s throne was not owing to an absence of danger; insurrection and conspiracy arose, but they could not overthrow it. Athaliah’s domestic treachery did not defeat the promise of God; the confederacy of Syria and Ephraim to set up the son of Tabeal on the throne of Judah in the days of Ahaz, was foiled; and even the great invasion of Sennacherib, though it threatened Hezekiah, was not allowed to overthrow the dynasty of David before the appointed time. It was upheld when ruin was all around it. A very special providence preserved the throne of Judah and the dynasty that occupied it, until by its own act it forfeited all its privileges.

But the temporal promises of the Davidic covenant had been made distinctly conditional, and held good only as long as David’s seed remained faithful to Jehovah. “If he (i.e. the king) commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men,” was one of the provisions of the original covenant; and to Solomon God had said, “If thou wilt walk before Me, as David thy father walked, in integrity of heart, and in uprightness . . . then will I establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever . . . but if ye go and serve other gods, and worship them, then will I cut off Israel out of the land that I have given them.”(1 Kings ix. 4.) Hence, as long as the kings of Judah were even in the main faithful and obedient, they were upheld in spite of many and flagrant transgressions; but when Manasseh filled the land with idolatry and the blood of human sacrifices, when all the three sons of the good king Josiah “did evil in the sight of the Lord,” then it was formally announced to the king by the prophet that the covenanted blessings were forfeited, and the penalty predicted 450 years before about to descend.

There is something specially sad and pathetic in the whole strain of Jeremiah chapter 22, where God reluctantly yet solemnly revokes the promises of the covenant. “Go down to the house of the king of Judah, and speak this word, and say, Hear the word of the Lord, O king of Judah, that sittest upon the throne of David;” and then comes the terrible message. Jehoahaz (or Shallum) was to die an outcast in Egypt; his brother Jehoiakim to perish unlamented, and “be buried with the burial of an ass”; Jehoiachin, the last independent king of David’s line, to be given into the hands of those that sought his life, cast out to die in another land, “O earth, earth, earth,” ends this touching passage, “hear the word of the Lord. Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.”

The word “childless” means here, without a successor on the throne, an heirless king; officially childless. Personally Jehoiachin had a family, and his son Salathiel enters into the line of the ancestry of Christ; Matt. i. 12; 1 Chron. iii. 17. The word might be rendered “destitute” or “deprived,” not of offspring, but of a successor.

Thus God revoked the title of David’s seed to the throne, but not for ever, for the passage goes on to speak of “the Righteous Branch” that shall yet be raised to David, “the king” that shall “reign and prosper and execute judgment and justice in the earth.” “The sure mercies of David” have not failed, his throne is only in abeyance, until He shall come whose right it is to reign.

A crisis of peculiar importance, a great turning-point in history, was reached at this juncture, which was an era of solemn and fundamental change to the chosen people. It was a fit crisis for a fresh outburst of prophetic light. The kingdom of Israel was over. The throne of Judah had fallen to rise no more until days yet to come. The times of the Gentiles were about to commence. The heritage of Jehovah lay waste, the temple of God was a heap of blackened ruins, the corporate nationality of the Jews was shattered, it was an hour of utmost gloom and deepest discouragement. The outward ordinances of religion were in abeyance, the typical ritual suspended, the Davidic covenant apparently broken— how intensely the light of further revelation was required!

The national apostasy which had sunk the people of God as low as the surrounding heathen in polytheism and idolatry, had brought down on them an early installment of the curses of the Sinaitic covenant, as a discipline which should restore them to the faith of Abraham. A foretaste of their present longer and more terrible chastisement had been allowed to overtake them—the Babylonian captivity had been sent to wean them from their besetting sin of idolatry, and draw them back to their allegiance to God. Temporal supremacy was taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles at this time, just as later on religious supremacy, “the kingdom of God,” was similarly taken from them and given to a people bringing forth the fruits thereof. But mercy was mingled with judgment at this sorrowful crisis, and it was during this captivity that the sixth section of the Divine programme of the world’s history, with its all-glorious issue and triumphant termination, was imparted to Daniel.

Before considering this gracious revelation, and in order to its better appreciation, we must take a brief glance at the then existing state of the civilized Gentile world, with whose future, prophecy thenceforth concerns itself as well as with the future of the chosen people.

The interest of history at that period centered still around the original seats of population with which we have before had to do—the great valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates, Palestine, Egypt, and Arabia, though the Medes and Persians and Elamites to the east were also coming more prominently into notice. The balance of power among these nations was, however, materially altered since the epoch we last considered.

The golden days of Egypt were over, though it was still a kingdom, and at times able to assume the aggressive. Days of decrepitude and disintegration had long since descended on the land of Ham. Twenty petty princes were sometimes ruling at the same time over feeble sections of the once mighty empire of the Pharaohs.

The powerful dominion of David and Solomon had proved as brief in its duration as it was rapid in its rise, and had been early broken into two kingdoms; the northern portion of the divided realm of Israel had fallen under the power of Assyria a hundred and thirty years previously to the Babylonian captivity. The strong, rapacious, and cruel monarchs, Tiglath Pileser, Shalmanezer, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon, had, as we know from their own still extant inscriptions, successively ravaged both the Jewish territories east of Jordan, and the fair valleys and plains of Ephraim. They had gradually subdued the ten tribes, and, according to the cruel custom of the East (which happily has never obtained in Western warfare), they had deported the superior classes of the people to Assyria and Media. Only a poor and mongrel population, though probably a large one, dwelt in Samaria, which had become a tributary province of Assyria.

Sennacherib had also overrun Judea with his vast hosts, and threatened Egypt. He had, however, been checked by Divine intervention, in response to Hezekiah’s faith and prayer. His successor Esarhaddon had taken Judah’s wicked king Manasseh captive for a time, but he was restored on his repentance, for the throne of David had still to last a little longer. Assyria’s own predicted doom was also fast approaching, for Nineveh’s temporary respite was over, and the mighty city on the Tigris, whose magnificence, idolatry, corruption, tyranny, vainglory, and horrible cruelties have been revealed to us by its modern resurrection from the dust of ages, was about to fall. The government of Assyria had fallen into the weak hands of Sardanapalus, the provinces had risen in rebellion, the capital had been beleaguered by its foes. Its own great rivers, swelled by heavy rains, had broken down its walls for a length of twenty stadii; and the consequent exposure of his city had driven the miserable Sardanapalus in despair to burn himself, his family, and his treasures in his splendid palace. The prophecies of Nahum and Zephaniah had been literally and wonderfully fulfilled in the fall of the guilty capital and empire, and out of the ashes of Assyria on the Tigris in the north-east had arisen the great empire of Babylon on the Euphrates in the southwest.

It was during the siege of Nineveh that Nabopolassar, then the Assyrian viceroy in Babylonia, had asserted his independence, and established unopposed a new monarchy, which, under the circumstances of the times, grew with amazing rapidity. The fall of Nineveh and of the Assyrian empire had left its many provinces without a ruler and without defence. Babylon and Egypt both strove for the supremacy, and the latter at first secured some successes in Asia. The good Jewish king Josiah tried to oppose the armies of Pharaoh Necho in their career of Asiatic conquest, but he was defeated and slain at Megiddo in B.C. 609—a defeat which his people bitterly mourned, and from which Judah never recovered. Necho’s triumph, however, was brief; for three years later he and his army were routed in the great battle of Carchemish on the Euphrates, where the young and talented prince Nebuchadnez —then acting for his father, Nabopolassar—utterly defeated the Egyptian forces, and thus settled the question as to the future mastery of Asia (B.C. 603). This battle is prophetically and graphically described Jer. 46:3-12.

Necho retreated with the shattered remnant of his forces into Africa, resigned all pretension to the Asiatic conquests he had made, including Judea; and, as we read in the Book of Kings, he “came no more out of his land.” Judea became shortly afterwards a mere Babylonian province; Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, and its people taken captive (B.C. 606-598).

After four hundred and fifty years of independence the kingdom of David had thus fallen. Israel, as predicted, had “come down very low,” and her enemies had risen very high. The curse causeless had not come; Israel, having broken her covenant, had justly incurred its penalties, but very terrible they were. Profoundly dark to every Jewish heart must have been the abyss of the Babylonish captivity. It had swallowed up their national existence for the present, but that was the smallest part of it. Had it also robbed them of their future? Had the promises of God failed? Was the covenant forsworn for ever? What, then, of the oath to Abraham? What of the promised seed and the blessing of the world through him? Had the throne of Judah fallen to rise no more? But what, then, of the sure mercies of David, and what of Messiah the Prince and His eternal rule over all nations?

Jeremiah had indeed limited the captivity in Babylon to seventy years, but what was to follow? Were pagan Babylonian tyrants to lord it for ever over the earth? Was the worship of the only living and true God to be extinguished? Were polytheism and idolatry still to swamp mankind with their degrading floods of superstition? Power and permanence, wealth and wisdom, art and science—all seemed to be on their side. But was this state of things to continue? What were the counsels of God, and the plans of providence? Thoughtful and godly souls must have longed and prayed for light and for the consolations of hope.

Most dazzling was the vision of Gentile grandeur on which the gaze of the Jewish exiles on the banks of the Euphrates rested in the meantime. Nebuchadnezzar their captor was not only a most energetic and successful military hero and mighty conqueror, but he was besides a builder as magnificent as Rameses II. or Menephtah of Egypt themselves! Scripture gives us on this point only his one fatal soliloquy: “Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?” but the speech was eminently characteristic of the man, and the boast was in harmony with the facts of the case, while the inscriptions he has left behind him abundantly explain and amplify the statement.

Babylon had, of course, been built ages before his day, for it was the city of the architects of the tower of Babel; and though the confusion of tongues stopped their erection of the latter, the former continued to exist. It had indeed been a seat of government from the earliest days, and had experienced a variety of fortunes. Recently in the time of the Assyrian empire it had been the provincial capital of Babylonia. But just as Augustus built Rome—in the sense that he found it brick and left it marble—so Nebuchadnezzar built Babylon; he enlarged, adorned, enriched, and strengthened it to such an extent, that he might well speak of the magnificent city as his own creation.

In a long and detailed account called the “standard inscription of Nebuchadnezzar,” he rehearses his various and splendid architectural undertakings. His father, after assuming the regal position and title, had laid the foundations of an imperial city as he fully admits, but he erected the splendid superstructures, as Solomon built the temple for which David had prepared. He calls the city “the delight of his eyes,” and exults in having made it “glorious,” and especially in the impregnable defences with which he had surrounded it. According to Herodotus, the walls formed a circuit of fifty-five miles, enclosing a square measuring fourteen miles each way. Other writers give different dimensions, but the lowest computation represents it as ten miles square, and with an area consequently of a hundred square miles—four times as large as Paris, and twice as big as London.

The whole of this immense space was not of course covered with buildings; gardens, orchards, and palm groves were interspersed among them, and the royal quarter alone extended over some miles. Outside it were streets cutting each other at right angles, like those of American cities; most of the houses were many storeys high; and the city of the poor, where dwelt the countless labourers of the great king, was at some little distance. The height of the walls is variously stated by ancient historians as from three hundred feet down to seventy-five feet; but even this lowest estimate is enormous when the width of the wall, which was fifty cubits, is remembered. More than five hundred millions of square feet of solid masonry were contained in these bulwarks at the lowest computation. The buildings they enclosed—the temples, palaces, “hanging gardens,” and towers—were gigantic and magnificent; artificial water in abundance was stored within the city, one reservoir alone being a mile long. Nebuchadnezzar’s engineering operations were astonishing, and show how great the amount of knowledge and skill in those days, and how vast his resources in the “naked human strength” of forced labourers, who were, of course, mostly captives taken in war.

A tunnel was, it is said, carried under the bed of the Euphrates, fifteen feet wide and twelve feet to the spring of the arch, and more than half a mile in length; and a magnificent drawbridge spanned the great stream, fully a mile wide at that point. Nor did Nebuchadnezzar confine his operations to the city itself. He connected the Tigris and Euphrates by a broad and deep channel called the NAHR MALCHA, or “Royal River,” and dug an artificial lake near Sippara, which was a hundred and forty miles in circumference, and nearly two hundred feet deep. He built quays and breakwaters along the shores of the Persian Gulf, and founded a city in the neighbourhood; he restored the temple of Belus, or “tower of tongues,” at Borsippa, eleven or twelve miles from Babylon; and its remains, the great Birs-i-Nimrud, are now the mightiest of all the ruins of Mesopotamia, and identified by many with the Tower of Babel, for it was already a vast and very ancient ruin when Nebuchadnezzar undertook its restoration.

His works are spread over the entire country, and Sir Henry Rawlinson calculates that nine-tenths of the bricks brought from Mesopotamia are inscribed with his name. “At least a hundred sites in the tract immediately about Babylon give evidence by bricks bearing his legend of the marvellous activity and energy of this king.”

“Altogether there is reason to believe that he was one of the most indefatigable of all the builders that have left their mark upon the world in which we live. He covered Babylonia with great works, he was the Augustus of Babylon. He found it a perishing city of unbaked clay, he left it one of durable burnt brick.” (Canon Rawlinson: “Egypt and Babylon,” chap. vi.)

“We trace the acropolis of the royal city, where stood the palaces from whose terraces Nebuchadnezzar surveyed the placid flood of the Euphrates twenty miles away north and as many south, with the city at his feet, the vast plain and palm groves along the river banks, the hanging gardens near, and temples and villages intermingled in the prospect. Closely adjacent were the mansions of Daniel and his friends, busy in the cares of state administration; and here, too, the Chaldee magicians and the Babylonian princes with their craft and superstitions. Here the banquet hall of Belshazza, and not far off the dens and the furnaces where suffered the victims of tyranny and the witnesses to truth.

Now, as the stranger treads the ground once trodden by king and prophet, he needs but little meditation to call up to view their familiar haunts; to see where once the wharves bordered the river, and where were the gates that opened to the soldiers of Cyrus, or erewhile to the captives from Jerusalem. Now a deadly silence broods over the scene. . . . All is one undistinguishable heap, and you can only be assured that on this spot Babel was first built, and the speech of man was first confounded; that the great captive of Judah found honour and consolation here, and that heathen scribes penned, even where you stand, proclamations of honour and worship to the God of Israel, and of deliverance to His captives.

“This was the proud and luxurious court of Babylon, the seat of dominion over the mightiest nation that was under heaven, at the time when its sovereign pronounced the brief soliloquy which brought down upon him the judicial insanity described by Daniel; and yonder, five or six miles south, Hillah, once populous city, yet holds its place, and marks the memorable site where the plebeians of that age dwelt apart, with a broad intervening space to separate them from the courtiers and their lord.” (Rule: “ Oriental Records,” p. 220.)

The captive Jews were for the most part, like all his other prisoners of war, forced to work for the Royal Builder in erecting these splendid structures, and carrying out these vast enterprises. Crowds of expatriated Egyptians, Phoenicians, Syrians, Jews, Ammonites, and Moabites were forcibly settled all over Babylonia, and especially near the capital, from whom forced labour was required, and whose condition was consequently one of slavery, not unlike that of Israel in Egypt 1,000 years previously.

The slavery of the Jews had been predicted: “Ye shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” Even after the restoration, the Jews in Jerusalem still speak of themselves as slaves. “Behold, we are bondsmen this day,” —slaves in the land Thou gavest to our fathers; “it yieldeth much increase to the kings whom Thou hast set over us: . . . they have dominion over our bodies, and over our cattle, at their pleasure, and we are in great distress.” (Neh. ix. 36, 37)

Nebuchadnezzar was a cruel and tyrannical monarch, as his treatment of enemies, and his conduct to Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah proves. But we must imagine him, nevertheless, as a highly civilized and intelligent ruler. He is represented both in Daniel and on the monuments as “at the head of a magnificent court, surrounded by ‘princes, governors, and captains, judges, treasurers, councillors, and sheriffs,’ waited on by eunuchs selected with the greatest care, well favoured and carefully educated; attended, whenever he requires it, by a multitude of astrologers and other ‘wise men,’ who seek to interpret to him the will of Heaven. He is an absolute monarch, disposing with a word of the lives and properties of his subjects, even the highest. All offices are in his gift. He can raise a foreigner to the second place in the kingdom, and even set him over the priestly order. His wealth is enormous, for he makes of pure gold an image, or obelisk, ninety feet high and nine feet broad. He is religious after a sort, but wavers in his faith, sometimes acknowledging the God of the Jews as the only real deity, sometimes relapsing into an idolatrous worship, and forcing all his subjects to follow his example. Even then, however, his polytheism is of a kind which admits of a special devotion to a particular deity, who is called emphatically ‘his god.’ In temper he is hasty and violent, but not obstinate; his fierce resolves are taken suddenly, and as suddenly repented of; he is, moreover, capable of bursts of gratitude and devotion, no less than of accesses of fury; like most Orientals, he is vainglorious; but he can humble himself before the chastening hand of the Almighty; in his better moods he shows a spirit astonishing in one of his country and time—a spirit of real piety, self-condemnation, and self-abasement, which renders him one of the most remarkable characters in Scripture.” (Rawlinson’s “Ancient Monarchies,” vol. iii. pp. 58, 59.)

It was towards the close of his long reign of forty-three years that the remarkable episode of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity occurred. It seems to have been an attack of what is termed lycanthropy, a disease not unknown to physicians. It was not to be expected that so proud a monarch would leave on record any account of his own lunacy; but strange to say, there is one passage in his inscription which seems to allude to the interruption which it occasioned in all his usual avocations. The monument is broken and defective, but the extant portion runs thus:—

“’In all my dominions I did not build a high place of power. The precious treasures of my kingdom I did not lay up. In Babylon, buildings for myself and the honour of my kingdom I did not lay out. In the worship of Merodach my lord, the joy of my heart, in Babylon, the city of his sovereignty and the seat of my empire, I did not sing his praises, and I did not furnish his altars (with victims), nor did I clear the canals.’

And there are other negative clauses, not yet translated. But these few lines suffice to tell of an utter abandonment of all royal care. No joy in his palace. No erection of a place of strength. No treasure laid up. An utter cessation of public works in unfinished Babylon. No observance of religion. Even the canals uncleansed are choked with mud and waterweed. Only suspension of reason, or a paralysis of all energy, could account for this.”(Rule: “ Oriental Records,” p. 224.)

The king then goes on to describe how he subsequently resumed his great building works on his recovery, including the erection of the “Ingur-bel.”

“In a happy month and on an auspicious day its foundations I laid in the earth,” he says. “I completely finished its top . . . and made it the high place of my kingdom. A strong fort of brick and mortar in strength I constructed. Inside the brick fortification another great fortification of long stones, of the size of great mountains, I made. Like Shedim I raised up its head. And this building I raised for a wonder; for the defence of the people I constructed it.” (Rule: “Oriental Records,” p. 225.)

This, then, was the proud, pagan, cruel, conquering, busy, building, wealthy, and worldly monarch, into whose court the providence of God introduced at the crisis of the fall of Judah four young scions of the Jewish royal family, taken captive among others in the destruction of Jerusalem. This Babylon was the magnificent city in the midst of whose glory, iniquity, and idolatry, Daniel and his fellows grew up wiser than their teachers, prayerful and pious, pure and holy, steadfast to the God of their fathers, faithful unto death. Blessed illustration of the truth, that without taking His people out of the world, God can keep them from the evil!

Continued in Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part II.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

Book — WHY THEY CHANGED THE BIBLE, by David W. Daniels — http://www.amazon.com/Why-They-Changed-The-Bible/dp/0758909977

If you’re a King James Bible believer, you ought to already know the obvious changes that have been made in other bible versions. Despite the mountain of evidence that the King James Bible IS the Bible, there are still many who need more evidence. There is plenty in this book. When you compare these new translations (NIV, NKJV, ASV, etc.) and see what is being changed you will weep if you are a lover of truth.

Author David W. Daniels points out in his book, Why They Changed the Bible, how all modern Bibles are increasingly slanted to support Rome’s pagan dogmas. An entire section is devoted to the scheme to include the Apocrypha in the Bible. He describes how the Bible societies were, from the beginning, infiltrated with Jesuits or Vatican sympathizers. Bible societies agreed not only to change text wording to favor unbiblical Catholic teaching, but to add in the Apocrypha whenever requested. Bible translators all over the world are subject to a 1960s agreement with the Vatican to add the Apocrypha to any translation if the Catholic people groups ask for it. The history and tragic results of this are detailed in Why They Changed the Bible.

Seminaries all over the world are starting to require their students to get Bibles complete with something called the “Deuterocanonicals.” This is another word for what we know as the Apocrypha. It is also a deceptive word. It makes the reader think these fairytales, superstitions and occultism are actually a “secondary canon” on a level just below scripture —“scripture lite.” The truth is that they have raised men’s words to the level of God’s words and have lowered God’s words to the level of man’s.

The Vatican desperately needs the Apocrypha in the Bible. When they cannot distort a Bible passage to fit one of their pagan doctrines, they resort to the Apocrypha. For example, their teaching of purgatory is based on the Apocryphal books of 2 Maccabees 12:45 and Tobit 12:9. Using money to pay for sins appears in Ecclesiastes 3:30 “Water will quench a flaming fire; and alms maketh an atonement for sins.”

The Apocrypha also contains such strange advice as using smoked fish liver to dispel demons (Tobit 6), and suggest that suicide, in some cases, is manly and noble (2 Maccabees 14:37-46). Strange historical inaccuracies also appear, such as the death records of Antiochus Epiphanes, who must have died twice when you compare 2 Maccabees 2:13-16 to 9:1-29. A search of Christianbook.com turns up 46 items for sale related to the Deuterocanonicals/Apocrypha, with over two dozen Bibles that include them. Supposedly these are only for Roman Catholics, but Daniels’ research discovered that the groundwork has been laid over the decades within the Bible Societies to ultimately produce a Bible with the Apocrypha and subtle watering-down to create one world Bible for one world religion. This Jesuit pope’s PR campaign continues to sugarcoat the bait in the trap for Evangelicals who have already swallowed the poison of the modern (Catholic) versions.

Continued from Chapter V. The Davidic Programme. – Part I..

IV. THE DAVIDIC PROGRAM FORETELLS, FURTHER, THAT THE ANOINTED KING OF DAVID’S LINE WOULD, BEFORE HIS EXALTATION, UNDERGO A PRELIMINARY EXPERIENCE OF REJECTION AND SUFFERING, OF DEATH AND RESURRECTION.

The Davidic Scriptures which might be quoted in illustration of this point are legion. The Book of Psalms is full of passages in which the contrasted elements of the sufferings and glories of the King are presented in succession and always in this order. The attentive reader cannot fail to be struck with the constant recurrence of this theme. We must allude in detail to only two or three of the most conspicuous illustrations.

The 22nd Psalm is perhaps the most perfect and typical specimen of these pictures of startlingly contrasted shadow and light, but the 69th and many others resemble it more or less closely. A careful perusal will show that it consists, first, of a long and bitter wail elicited by complicated sufferings, spiritual, mental, and physical; by soul distress and heart-breaking sorrow at apparent desertion by God; by shame and anguish of spirit; by cruel mockery and contempt of men; by agonizing conflict of mind caused by God’s dealings with His righteous servant; by the rough and brutal treatment of enemies; by bodily weakness and anguish; and by a sense of approaching death.

It is a blending of prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears which is absolutely unequalled in earth’s literature. It conveys a degree of pain, grief, and distress of body, mind, and spirit which are inconceivable to ordinary men. The strength of the poetic imagery labors in vain to embody the complicated anguish it strives to depict; the verses follow each other like the downward steps of a ladder which leads from the light of day to the depths of the bottomless pit. The expressions are singularly specific; definite speeches and gestures and actions of surrounding enemies are predicted. We meet, for instance, with the words: “They shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted in the Lord that He would deliver Him: let Him deliver Him, seeing He delighted in Him. … They pierced My hands and My feet…. They part My garments among them, and cast lots for My vesture.”

The mournful minor notes of this melancholy dirge of death follow each other with an ever-deepening tone of misery down to the middle of the twenty-first verse. Then comes a sudden change: the minor key is resolved into the cheerful major, and from the words, “Thou hast heard Me from the horns of the unicorns” (or out of death itself), starts a glad paean of victory, a psalm of triumph, a vision of glory, and the description of a world-wide kingdom succeeds the graphic picture of rejection and cruel death. “I will declare Thy name unto My brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee…. All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before Thee. For the kingdom is the Lord’s: and He is the governor among the nations.”

The rejection and sufferings of Messiah prior to His exaltation are described also with much fullness and precision in Psalm lxix. He cries for deliverance from those who hate Him without a cause, and are wrongfully His enemies. He mourns that He has become a stranger to His brethren and an alien to His mother’s children; that, because of His zeal for God’s house, the reproaches of the ungodly fall upon Him; that He was the song of the drunkard, and a proverb to the people; that reproach had broken His heart, and none pitied Him; that He looked for comforters and found none; that the floods were about to swallow Him, and the pit to shut her mouth upon Him; and says, “they gave Me also gall for My meat; and in My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink.”

The 16th Psalm goes further than any other—speaks of death not only as impending, but as accomplished. It presents the contrast between the blackest of all shadows and the brightest of all glories—that between the tomb and Hades, and the presence of God in heaven. We know the Psalm to be Messianic—that is, to treat of the great promised Son of David, from the apostolic quotations of it in the New Testament.

But quite apart from this, its prophetic character is proved by its absolute non-applicability to David himself. He, of course, expected to die and to see corruption. He writes of one who, though he was to die and be laid to rest in a tomb, would never see corruption, but be raised to tread the path of life, and to enjoy the presence of God and the pleasures at His right hand. “For Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou wilt show me the path of life: in Thy presence is fullness of joy; at Thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.”

Apart from actual suffering and death, the Davidic program makes it plain that the anointed king would encounter incessant and tremendous opposition from enemies before his enthronement. The Psalms relating to him abound with complaints of the determined opposition of the wicked to this righteous ruler and man after God’s own heart. The idea of enemies and foes occurs incessantly.

“Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against His Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure. Yet I have set My king upon My holy hill of Zion. {Ps 2:6}

“Dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.” {Ps 22:16}

“Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall under thee.” {Ps 45:5}

“They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty.” {Ps 69:4}

“The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.” {Ps 110:2}

This is the spirit that breathes through the Messianic Psalms, and, indeed, through the whole Book of Psalms, and it is evident from the context that moral antagonism is the cause of the opposition experienced by the Righteous Sufferer. He says:—

“For Thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s children. For the zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached Thee are fallen upon me.” {Ps 69:79}

The Righteous One destined to be the Ruler of the world is represented as experiencing, first, an opposition which gave Him an ever-present, all-pervading consciousness that He was surrounded by the wicked, and had to appeal to God’s righteousness against man’s iniquity. As a man, He is solitary among men, He is morally against the world, and the world against Him. He suffers from it instead of ruling it; endures its evil instead of putting a stop to it—anticipating all the time a different state of things, when the meek shall inherit the earth, the righteous flourish, the fear of God be universal, and all the workers of iniquity be fallen, cast down and unable to rise.

The question, of course, occurs: Does the program assign any reason for the strange preliminary experience of the great King—His experiences of cruel and successful opposition even unto death? Why should such a being stoop to such a life, and, above all, to such a death? If the double nature of David’s son was mysterious, not less so the double experience predicted. Why should He that was destined to rule and reign first suffer and die? Nay, why should the Son of God become man? Does the program go at all beyond facts, and hint at reasons? The 40th Psalm answers the question, and gives us the reply of the Messiah Himself to this inquiry. It is the one who, in verse 2, speaking of resurrection, says:

“He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings, and hath put a new song into my mouth;” who in verse 6, adds, as accounting for his humiliation, “Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire; mine ears hast Thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast Thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do Thy will, O my God: yea, Thy law is within my heart.”

This passage shows the unsatisfactoriness of the Levitical sacrifices and offerings to Him who had appointed them for a time. They were only temporary and only typical. It also shows that under these circumstances One whose ears God had opened—or, as it is translated in the Septuagint, and quoted in Hebrews, for whom God had prepared a body comes forward expressly to accomplish His will. Moved by his delight in doing the will of God, Messiah volunteered to be a sacrifice, and to put away human sin by becoming a sin offering.

V. THE PROGRAM FORETELLS, FURTHER, THAT IN THE INTERVAL PRIOR TO HIS ASCENT TO HIS EARTHLY THRONE, THE SON OF DAVID WOULD BE CALLED TO OCCUPY A HEAVENLY THRONE, AND RULE FROM THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD IN HEAVEN.

“Jehovah said to my Lord, Sit thou at My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Here is a throne that is clearly neither on the earth nor of the earth; it is the throne of the majesty in the heavens—Jehovah’s throne. And yet David’s son, whom he calls here “my Lord,” is invited to take his seat thereon. It is not his own throne, not the predicted throne of David which he is to occupy for ever on earth. It is God’s throne, and the invitation to sit thereon at God’s right hand has its chronological limits. It is “until” something else be done—until I make thy foes thy footstool. This temporary enthronement in heaven must not be confounded with the promised permanent enthronement on earth. The difference between the two is wide, conspicuous, unmistakable. The program presents, not two aspects of one kingdom, but two kingdoms, two reigns, two widely different exercises of power. The one rule is exercised on earth, from Zion, over Jews and Gentiles for ever. The other is exercised from heaven, and for a time only. The heavenly reign is at a certain point to give way to the earthly. David’s son is to leave Jehovah’s throne, and assume his own throne, receiving the heathen for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession, and being established as king on God’s holy hill of Zion.

Note: I can’t agree with the author’s “two kingdoms, two reigns” statement. There’s only one reference to two kingdoms in the entire Bible, and it says just the opposite of what Rev. Guinness is teaching! Ezekiel 37:22 says, 

“And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:”

It seems to me that Rev. Guinness picked up the concept of two kingdoms from Darby’s dispensationalism. Darby taught there are two kingdoms! Quote from Darby’s The Dispensation of the Kingdom of Heaven. “…to understand fully the ground on which the kingdom of heaven now stands. We have here two other kingdoms-” the kingdom of their Father,” i.e., of the righteous; and “the kingdom of the Son of man.” In my opinion, that statement is nothing more than twisting Scripture.

That the anointed king, after his preliminary experience of rejection and death on earth, and prior to his final enthronement, should enjoy a heavenly exaltation, is a distinct feature of the Davidic program. Psalm xxiv. gives another view of it. The question is asked, “Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in His holy place?” And the answer is given: “He that hath clean hands and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” And then follows a vision of this righteous man ascending. The everlasting doors of heaven are swung open to admit him; he is welcomed as king of glory; he is hymned as having proved himself strong and mighty in battle, and welcomed to the world above as Lord of hosts and King of glory.

The same feature recurs in Psalm lxviii: “Thou hast ascended on high, Thou hast led captivity captive: Thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them.” The exaltation of the rejected one is again foretold in Psalm cxviii: the opposition of enemies, the deadly struggle with evil men, the sore thrusts of the wicked are described, and the delivering help of God. “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord. The Lord hath chastened me sore: but He hath not given me over unto death,” is the glad cry that follows; and then the challenge: “Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the Lord…
The stone which the builders refused is become the headstone of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.”

VI. IT IS ALSO REVEALED THAT THE KING WAS TO EXERCISE A PRIESTLY AS WELL AS A KINGLY SWAY.

To the one who sits at God’s right hand in heaven during his rejection on earth are addressed the words: “The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” Now this is an additional feature of the program quite distinct from any that precede it. It is also one not founded on any fact in the life of David. He was never a priest; he ordered the courses of the priests, but could never assume priestly functions; he belonged to the tribe of Judah, of which Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Now, a priest is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer sacrifice for sins, have compassion on the ignorant and on them who are out of the way, and be a mediator between God and man. A priest is one who makes intercession for the erring, and bestows sympathy and benediction. The above words show that David’s royal son was to be a priest as well as a king,—was to reign from heaven over human hearts, as well as from Zion over happy nations,—was to bless men religiously and spiritually, as well as by a righteous rule; he was to be a kingly priest, a priestly king, like Melchizedek, who was a king “first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace,” and also priest of the Most High God. It was in this capacity that He blessed Abraham, the patriarch bowing as the less before the greater. So the coming king was to exercise priestly functions as well as a kingly sway. This is a very notable point, and as plain in the program as it is singular.

VII. IT FORETELLS THAT THE EARTHLY KINGDOM OF DAVID’S SON WOULD BE INTRODUCED BY HIS RETURN IN GLORY FROM HEAVEN TO EARTH, AND BY THE EXECUTION OF TERRIBLE JUDGMENTS ON HIS FOES.

Whatever else the Davidic predictions included, or did not include, whether on earth or in heaven, it is unquestionable that they did include one thing—the government of his glorious Son over His own people, the nation of Israel, and His everlasting dominion over the land of promise. Unless this its primary idea be ultimately realized, the program will not have been fulfilled. This was the special point solemnly confirmed by an oath of Jehovah, and it was this which David styled “an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure.”

Note: This is clearly based on the doctrine of Darby’s dispensationalism. He made a distinction between the Church and Israel. The Bible makes no such distinction! Galatians 3:28-29  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

It is perfectly clear, also, that the present spiritual kingdom of Christ does not include this distinctively Jewish element. It does not comprise any dominion over Israel nationally, or over the promised land territorially. The kingdom of God described in the 72nd Psalm has no resemblance whatever to the existing state of things, nor to any that ever has existed, or could exist, while the present dispensation lasts. The leading characteristic of these times is that they are “the times of the Gentiles”; that during their course the kingdom of God is given not to Jews, but to Gentiles. No extension, therefore, of what we call Christianity, could ever answer to the promised kingdom of David’s Son over the people of Israel in Palestine. (Note: But the first followers of Jesus of the early Church were nothing but Jews! Paul didn’t start to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles until after the stoning of Stephen or about three and a half years after Jesus was crucified.) No conversion and incorporation into the Church of individual Jews, however numerous, could fulfil the distinctive, solemnly confirmed promises of the Davidic covenant. And, further, never yet, even in the most Christian countries in their best and brightest days, have the perfected righteousness, peace, and blessing that are to characterize the coming kingdom of David’s Son, prevailed. No one can read the description of this without feeling at once that it pertains to the future, and not to the past or present. (Note: here again we see the influence of Darby’s doctrines of dispensationalism in Rev. Guinness’ book.)

Now, this future universal and eternal reign of David’s Son and Lord is anticipated not only in the 72nd Psalm, but in many others, and especially in the series xciii. to xcix.

“It is well known that the Messianic interpretation of each and every psalm, which is claimed as directly and exclusively predictive of Christ, was received by the Hebrews long before our Lord’s coming, and without any misgiving, or any trace of antagonistic opinion. The Rabbins, who are recognized as most faithful to old traditions, carry this system to quite as great an extent as the early Christian writers. A belief in Messiah, founded upon the prophecies, and specially upon typical or direct predictions in the Psalms, was one of the fundamentals of faith. This point is not contested by any critics; they may treat it as a superstition, as a mere delusion, but the fact remains, and it is certainly without a precedent or parallel in the history of religions. We must also bear in mind that the system was retained for centuries after the Hebrew teachers were fully aware of the difficulty which it presented in carrying on the controversy with Christians.”(Speaker’s Commentary p. 164.)

A glance at these Psalms will show that their theme is the establishment of the theocracy in its final form on earth. Their keynote is the sentence, THE LORD REIGNETH, or “has begun to reign.”

“O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness: fear before Him, all the earth. Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: He shall judge the people righteously.” {Ps 96:9, 10}

“The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad thereof. Clouds and darkness are round about Him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of His throne. A fire goeth before Him, and burneth up His enemies round about. His lightnings enlightened the world: the earth saw, and trembled. The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth. The heavens declare His righteousness, and all the people see His glory. For Thou, Lord, art high above all the earth: Thou art exalted far above all gods.” {Ps 97:16, 9}

“The Lord reigneth; let the people tremble: He sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved. The Lord is great in Zion; and He is high above all the people…. The king’s strength loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity; thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob” (Ps. xcix. i, 2, ard 4).

It is the kingdom come at last—the universal and eternal earthly kingdom of the Son of David. Its sphere is terrestrial, for the word is, “Let the earth rejoice.” He is called “The Lord of the whole earth,” and it is stated that all people see His glory. All the earth is called upon to make a joyful noise to the Lord, the world, and they that dwell therein; the people are told to tremble, and the earth to be moved, because the Lord is great in Zion. There is nothing heavenly in the description. It is a vision of the realization of the universal earthly kingdom so long foretold.

Two prominent features must be especially noted in these triumphant Psalms. There is in them the element of a personal appearing to introduce the reign, and cause the joy and bliss described; and there is in them also the element of the execution of judgment on enemies.

1. The introduction of this kingdom is by the coming of the King to earth. HE COMETH, He cometh to judge the earth. He shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with His truth.{Ps 96:13} And, again, it is repeated, “He cometh to judge the earth; with righteousness shall He judge the world, and the people with equity.” {Ps 98:9} The King who had ascended up on high, leading captivity captive, and who had taken His seat at God’s right hand in heaven, arises from that seat—the period until which He was to occupy it having been fulfilled — and descends in glory to rule and reign, not as before, to suffer and die.

2. And, secondly, let it be noted that the establishment of the kingdom is effected by means of judgment. “A fire goeth before Him, and burneth up His enemies round about.” “Zion heard, and was glad; and the daughters of Judah rejoiced because of Thy judgments, O Lord.” “His right hand and His holy arm hath gotten Him the victory.”

“Whatever historical allusions may be contained in Ps 93:3 to the past or present assaults of the world-powers upon Israel, this psalm, the first of a remarkable series of theocratic psalms, anticipates the period of Jehovah’s personal manifestation of Himself as the King of the whole earth. (Cf Rev. 11:15, 17, and xix. 6.)

The Lord reigneth. Rather, “Jehovah is King,” i.e. He now reigns: His kingdom is visibly established, His foes being made His footstool: Prayer-Book version, “The Lord is King.” The verb in the same tense is commonly used to denote the beginning of a new reign. (Cf. Kings i. 18: “Adonijah reigneth.” Cf. also 1 Kings 22:41 2 Kings 3:1, 15:13; 2 Chronicles 29:1; in all of which places it is rendered in the Authorized Version, “began to reign.”) The theocracy, as has been observed by Delitzsch in his introduction to this psalm, had its first manifestation when Jehovah became the King of Israel, {Ex 15:18} and it will receive its completion when the King of Israel becomes the King of a whole world subdued, both outwardly and inwardly, to Himself. The verb which is here rendered “is (or has become) King,” or, as Delitzsch renders it, “is now King,” is here used in reference to the inauguration of the theocracy in its final and complete manifestation. This is the watchword of the theocratic psalms. (Cf. Psalms xcvi. in, xcvii. m, xcix. i.)

Whether the first and second advents of the Messiah be or be not regarded here, as in other Old Testament prophecies, as parts of one connected whole, this psalm has reference to the coming of the Messiah as David’s Lord—not as David’s Son; as Jehovah, the Lord and King of the whole earth—not as the “man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” . . .

The Psalmist is here again carried onward by the inspiring Spirit into the great day of the Lord, and calls upon the faithful to proclaim the personal advent of Jehovah, and His assumption of the kingdom.

The psalm itself contains conclusive evidence that it reaches forward not only to the first advent of Christ, but also from thence to “the consummation of all things.”—(“Speaker’s Commentary,” 382, 389, 390-I.)

This is the period to which apply also the statements of the Messianic Psalms we have before considered:—

“Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” {Ps 2:9}

“Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, 0 Most Mighty, with Thy glory and Thy majesty. And in Thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness; and Thy right hand shall teach Thee terrible things. Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall tinder Thee. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre.” {Ps 45:3-6}

“The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of His wrath. He shall judge among the heathen, He shall fill the places with the dead bodies; He shall wound the heads over many countries.” {Ps 110:5, 6}

When we reach our last section, we shall see that this future earthly kingdom of Christ is by no means all that is foretold in Scripture. It is not by any means the highest or fullest conception which inspiration gives us of the “ages to come.” We could not expect to gather the whole truth from the Davidic program, any more than from the earlier revelations. It was given three thousand years ago, in the midst of the Jewish dispensation. It revealed immensely more than had been previously revealed, but it did not reveal all that we now know. It presented a blissful future to the faith of believing Israelites, and taught, moreover, that in the Divine Messiah who should come and restore all things lay the hope, not of Israel only, but of humanity. It gave also a glimpse of the present reign of the priestly king from God’s right hand in heaven, but it did not make known what Paul calls the mystery of God’s will.{Eph 1:9} The Messiah King is to wear “many crowns,” amongst which that of earth will be only one. Later on we shall see the outshining of this New Testament light. A clear conception of this revelation to David about the earthly kingdom of his Son will, however, prepare us to estimate with greater correctness the varied aspects of the many-sided kingdom of God.

Such then was the seven-fold program given to David. It foretold, first, the career of Solomon and the permanence of the Davidic dynasty on the throne of Judah; and then, passing from the near and easily credible future to a more distant and almost incredible one, it announced that a lineal descendant of David was destined, in the purposes of God, ultimately to succeed to his throne in Zion, and from it to exercise a righteous, peaceful, glorious, blessed, universal, and eternal sway over mankind; that this royal son of David would be also the begotten Son of God, uniting thus in His own person divinity and humanity, with their respective attributes and responsibilities; that He would experience inveterate opposition from the kings and peoples of the earth; and that, prior to His exaltation over His enemies, He would endure at their hands the utmost humiliation and suffering, be hated without a cause, betrayed by His own familiar friend, mocked, insulted, and persecuted by His foes; that He would at last be put to death by crucifixion, and laid in a grave, though His body would not remain in the tomb long enough for His flesh to see corruption; that, on the contrary, God would show Him the path of life, and, raising Him from the dead, invite Him to sit at His own right hand, and rule from heaven in the midst of His enemies, promising that ultimately they should be made His footstool, and His throne be established in Zion.

It foretells that the risen, earth-rejected but heaven-accepted King would, when thus ascending on high, “lead captivity captive,” or take others also, redeemed from the power of death, with Him; that He would “receive gifts for men, even for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them”; that He would be like a stone refused by the builders, yet made the head of the corner. It foretells that the rule He would exercise from heaven, and afterwards even for ever, would be that of a royal priest, or priestly king, like Melchizedek; and that, at last, leaving His position in the heavens, rising up from His seat at the right hand of God, He would appear in His glory on earth to build up Zion, assume the throne of His father David, destroy for ever all His foes, and establish His everlasting kingdom.

Now it is needless to say that the last part of this program is not yet fulfilled; for the manifested kingdom of God on earth we are still patiently waiting, praying daily, “Thy kingdom come.” But it is equally clear that a very large part of this Davidic program has actually already become fact. Unlikely of fulfillment as it seemed when given, incomprehensible and almost inconceivable as were some of its particulars, they have come to pass, and the lapse of well-nigh two thousand years since they did this has so familiarized them to the minds of men that they scarcely realize or observe them as fulfillments of Davidic prophecy.

Some of the leading features of the program were fulfilled in the first advent of Christ, others are now being fulfilled in this Christian age, while others remain to be fulfilled at His second coming and kingdom. The evidential argument we are developing, arises, of course, exclusively from the past and the present fulfillments. In due time the future will add its confirmation, though for the present it is matter of faith rather than of sight. The accomplishment of two-thirds of the program is, however, good ground for expecting with calm confidence the fulfillment in its season of the remaining third.

And first as to the past events which have fallen out as indicated by the Davidic program. Solomon, we know, reigned in peace and prosperity, building, as foretold, the splendid temple of God at Jerusalem; a long series of nineteen kings of his lineage and blood succeeded him, and reigned in Jerusalem for nearly four centuries. The usurper Athaliah sought on one occasion to destroy the royal seed, but she miserably failed. David’s sons continued to occupy David’s throne until the day of the captivity of the land, when for their sins God allowed them to fall before Nebuchadnezzar, and the great week of “The times of the Gentiles” began. But Israel knew that the covenant and oath of God could not fail, and they waited for the promised coming of “Messiah the Prince” to restore the throne of David. In the fullness of time He came; “Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” {Ro 1:3} He was born of a virgin of the house of David, heralded beforehand by the angelic announcement: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end.”

Continued from Chapter V. The Davidic Programme. – Part I..

IV. THE DAVIDIC PROGRAM FORETELLS, FURTHER, THAT THE ANOINTED KING OF DAVID’S LINE WOULD, BEFORE HIS EXALTATION, UNDERGO A PRELIMINARY EXPERIENCE OF REJECTION AND SUFFERING, OF DEATH AND RESURRECTION.

The Davidic Scriptures which might be quoted in illustration of this point are legion. The Book of Psalms is full of passages in which the contrasted elements of the sufferings and glories of the King are presented in succession and always in this order. The attentive reader cannot fail to be struck with the constant recurrence of this theme. We must allude in detail to only two or three of the most conspicuous illustrations.

The 22nd Psalm is perhaps the most perfect and typical specimen of these pictures of startlingly contrasted shadow and light, but the 69th and many others resemble it more or less closely. A careful perusal will show that it consists, first, of a long and bitter wail elicited by complicated sufferings, spiritual, mental, and physical; by soul distress and heart-breaking sorrow at apparent desertion by God; by shame and anguish of spirit; by cruel mockery and contempt of men; by agonizing conflict of mind caused by God’s dealings with His righteous servant; by the rough and brutal treatment of enemies; by bodily weakness and anguish; and by a sense of approaching death.

It is a blending of prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears which is absolutely unequalled in earth’s literature. It conveys a degree of pain, grief, and distress of body, mind, and spirit which are inconceivable to ordinary men. The strength of the poetic imagery labors in vain to embody the complicated anguish it strives to depict; the verses follow each other like the downward steps of a ladder which leads from the light of day to the depths of the bottomless pit. The expressions are singularly specific; definite speeches and gestures and actions of surrounding enemies are predicted. We meet, for instance, with the words: “They shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted in the Lord that He would deliver Him: let Him deliver Him, seeing He delighted in Him. … They pierced My hands and My feet…. They part My garments among them, and cast lots for My vesture.”

The mournful minor notes of this melancholy dirge of death follow each other with an ever-deepening tone of misery down to the middle of the twenty-first verse. Then comes a sudden change: the minor key is resolved into the cheerful major, and from the words, “Thou hast heard Me from the horns of the unicorns” (or out of death itself), starts a glad paean of victory, a psalm of triumph, a vision of glory, and the description of a world-wide kingdom succeeds the graphic picture of rejection and cruel death. “I will declare Thy name unto My brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee…. All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before Thee. For the kingdom is the Lord’s: and He is the governor among the nations.”

The rejection and sufferings of Messiah prior to His exaltation are described also with much fullness and precision in Psalm lxix. He cries for deliverance from those who hate Him without a cause, and are wrongfully His enemies. He mourns that He has become a stranger to His brethren and an alien to His mother’s children; that, because of His zeal for God’s house, the reproaches of the ungodly fall upon Him; that He was the song of the drunkard, and a proverb to the people; that reproach had broken His heart, and none pitied Him; that He looked for comforters and found none; that the floods were about to swallow Him, and the pit to shut her mouth upon Him; and says, “they gave Me also gall for My meat; and in My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink.”

The 16th Psalm goes further than any other—speaks of death not only as impending, but as accomplished. It presents the contrast between the blackest of all shadows and the brightest of all glories—that between the tomb and Hades, and the presence of God in heaven. We know the Psalm to be Messianic—that is, to treat of the great promised Son of David, from the apostolic quotations of it in the New Testament.

But quite apart from this, its prophetic character is proved by its absolute non-applicability to David himself. He, of course, expected to die and to see corruption. He writes of one who, though he was to die and be laid to rest in a tomb, would never see corruption, but be raised to tread the path of life, and to enjoy the presence of God and the pleasures at His right hand. “For Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou wilt show me the path of life: in Thy presence is fullness of joy; at Thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.”

Apart from actual suffering and death, the Davidic program makes it plain that the anointed king would encounter incessant and tremendous opposition from enemies before his enthronement. The Psalms relating to him abound with complaints of the determined opposition of the wicked to this righteous ruler and man after God’s own heart. The idea of enemies and foes occurs incessantly.

“Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against His Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure. Yet I have set My king upon My holy hill of Zion. {Ps 2:6}

“Dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.” {Ps 22:16}

“Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall under thee.” {Ps 45:5}

“They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty.” {Ps 69:4}

“The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.” {Ps 110:2}

This is the spirit that breathes through the Messianic Psalms, and, indeed, through the whole Book of Psalms, and it is evident from the context that moral antagonism is the cause of the opposition experienced by the Righteous Sufferer. He says:—

“For Thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s children. For the zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached Thee are fallen upon me.” {Ps 69:79}

The Righteous One destined to be the Ruler of the world is represented as experiencing, first, an opposition which gave Him an ever-present, all-pervading consciousness that He was surrounded by the wicked, and had to appeal to God’s righteousness against man’s iniquity. As a man, He is solitary among men, He is morally against the world, and the world against Him. He suffers from it instead of ruling it; endures its evil instead of putting a stop to it—anticipating all the time a different state of things, when the meek shall inherit the earth, the righteous flourish, the fear of God be universal, and all the workers of iniquity be fallen, cast down and unable to rise.

The question, of course, occurs: Does the program assign any reason for the strange preliminary experience of the great King—His experiences of cruel and successful opposition even unto death? Why should such a being stoop to such a life, and, above all, to such a death? If the double nature of David’s son was mysterious, not less so the double experience predicted. Why should He that was destined to rule and reign first suffer and die? Nay, why should the Son of God become man? Does the program go at all beyond facts, and hint at reasons? The 40th Psalm answers the question, and gives us the reply of the Messiah Himself to this inquiry. It is the one who, in verse 2, speaking of resurrection, says:

“He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings, and hath put a new song into my mouth;” who in verse 6, adds, as accounting for his humiliation, “Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire; mine ears hast Thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast Thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do Thy will, O my God: yea, Thy law is within my heart.”

This passage shows the unsatisfactoriness of the Levitical sacrifices and offerings to Him who had appointed them for a time. They were only temporary and only typical. It also shows that under these circumstances One whose ears God had opened—or, as it is translated in the Septuagint, and quoted in Hebrews, for whom God had prepared a body comes forward expressly to accomplish His will. Moved by his delight in doing the will of God, Messiah volunteered to be a sacrifice, and to put away human sin by becoming a sin offering.

V. THE PROGRAM FORETELLS, FURTHER, THAT IN THE INTERVAL PRIOR TO HIS ASCENT TO HIS EARTHLY THRONE, THE SON OF DAVID WOULD BE CALLED TO OCCUPY A HEAVENLY THRONE, AND RULE FROM THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD IN HEAVEN.

“Jehovah said to my Lord, Sit thou at My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Here is a throne that is clearly neither on the earth nor of the earth; it is the throne of the majesty in the heavens—Jehovah’s throne. And yet David’s son, whom he calls here “my Lord,” is invited to take his seat thereon. It is not his own throne, not the predicted throne of David which he is to occupy for ever on earth. It is God’s throne, and the invitation to sit thereon at God’s right hand has its chronological limits. It is “until” something else be done—until I make thy foes thy footstool. This temporary enthronement in heaven must not be confounded with the promised permanent enthronement on earth. The difference between the two is wide, conspicuous, unmistakable. The program presents, not two aspects of one kingdom, but two kingdoms, two reigns, two widely different exercises of power. The one rule is exercised on earth, from Zion, over Jews and Gentiles for ever. The other is exercised from heaven, and for a time only. The heavenly reign is at a certain point to give way to the earthly. David’s son is to leave Jehovah’s throne, and assume his own throne, receiving the heathen for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession, and being established as king on God’s holy hill of Zion.

Note: I can’t agree with the author’s “two kingdoms, two reigns” statement. There’s only one reference to two kingdoms in the entire Bible, and it says just the opposite of what Rev. Guinness is teaching! Ezekiel 37:22 says, 

“And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:”

It seems to me that Rev. Guinness picked up the concept of two kingdoms from Darby’s dispensationalism. Darby taught there are two kingdoms! Quote from Darby’s The Dispensation of the Kingdom of Heaven. “…to understand fully the ground on which the kingdom of heaven now stands. We have here two other kingdoms-” the kingdom of their Father,” i.e., of the righteous; and “the kingdom of the Son of man.” In my opinion, that statement is nothing more than twisting Scripture.

That the anointed king, after his preliminary experience of rejection and death on earth, and prior to his final enthronement, should enjoy a heavenly exaltation, is a distinct feature of the Davidic program. Psalm xxiv. gives another view of it. The question is asked, “Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in His holy place?” And the answer is given: “He that hath clean hands and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” And then follows a vision of this righteous man ascending. The everlasting doors of heaven are swung open to admit him; he is welcomed as king of glory; he is hymned as having proved himself strong and mighty in battle, and welcomed to the world above as Lord of hosts and King of glory.

The same feature recurs in Psalm lxviii: “Thou hast ascended on high, Thou hast led captivity captive: Thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them.” The exaltation of the rejected one is again foretold in Psalm cxviii: the opposition of enemies, the deadly struggle with evil men, the sore thrusts of the wicked are described, and the delivering help of God. “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord. The Lord hath chastened me sore: but He hath not given me over unto death,” is the glad cry that follows; and then the challenge: “Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the Lord…
The stone which the builders refused is become the headstone of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.”

VI. IT IS ALSO REVEALED THAT THE KING WAS TO EXERCISE A PRIESTLY AS WELL AS A KINGLY SWAY.

To the one who sits at God’s right hand in heaven during his rejection on earth are addressed the words: “The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” Now this is an additional feature of the program quite distinct from any that precede it. It is also one not founded on any fact in the life of David. He was never a priest; he ordered the courses of the priests, but could never assume priestly functions; he belonged to the tribe of Judah, of which Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Now, a priest is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer sacrifice for sins, have compassion on the ignorant and on them who are out of the way, and be a mediator between God and man. A priest is one who makes intercession for the erring, and bestows sympathy and benediction. The above words show that David’s royal son was to be a priest as well as a king,—was to reign from heaven over human hearts, as well as from Zion over happy nations,—was to bless men religiously and spiritually, as well as by a righteous rule; he was to be a kingly priest, a priestly king, like Melchizedek, who was a king “first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace,” and also priest of the Most High God. It was in this capacity that He blessed Abraham, the patriarch bowing as the less before the greater. So the coming king was to exercise priestly functions as well as a kingly sway. This is a very notable point, and as plain in the program as it is singular.

VII. IT FORETELLS THAT THE EARTHLY KINGDOM OF DAVID’S SON WOULD BE INTRODUCED BY HIS RETURN IN GLORY FROM HEAVEN TO EARTH, AND BY THE EXECUTION OF TERRIBLE JUDGMENTS ON HIS FOES.

Whatever else the Davidic predictions included, or did not include, whether on earth or in heaven, it is unquestionable that they did include one thing—the government of his glorious Son over His own people, the nation of Israel, and His everlasting dominion over the land of promise. Unless this its primary idea be ultimately realized, the program will not have been fulfilled. This was the special point solemnly confirmed by an oath of Jehovah, and it was this which David styled “an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure.”

Note: This is clearly based on the doctrine of Darby’s dispensationalism. He made a distinction between the Church and Israel. The Bible makes no such distinction! Galatians 3:28-29  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

It is perfectly clear, also, that the present spiritual kingdom of Christ does not include this distinctively Jewish element. It does not comprise any dominion over Israel nationally, or over the promised land territorially. The kingdom of God described in the 72nd Psalm has no resemblance whatever to the existing state of things, nor to any that ever has existed, or could exist, while the present dispensation lasts. The leading characteristic of these times is that they are “the times of the Gentiles”; that during their course the kingdom of God is given not to Jews, but to Gentiles. No extension, therefore, of what we call Christianity, could ever answer to the promised kingdom of David’s Son over the people of Israel in Palestine. (Note: But the first followers of Jesus of the early Church were nothing but Jews! Paul didn’t start to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles until after the stoning of Stephen or about three and a half years after Jesus was crucified.) No conversion and incorporation into the Church of individual Jews, however numerous, could fulfil the distinctive, solemnly confirmed promises of the Davidic covenant. And, further, never yet, even in the most Christian countries in their best and brightest days, have the perfected righteousness, peace, and blessing that are to characterize the coming kingdom of David’s Son, prevailed. No one can read the description of this without feeling at once that it pertains to the future, and not to the past or present. (Note: here again we see the influence of Darby’s doctrines of dispensationalism in Rev. Guinness’ book.)

Now, this future universal and eternal reign of David’s Son and Lord is anticipated not only in the 72nd Psalm, but in many others, and especially in the series xciii. to xcix.

“It is well known that the Messianic interpretation of each and every psalm, which is claimed as directly and exclusively predictive of Christ, was received by the Hebrews long before our Lord’s coming, and without any misgiving, or any trace of antagonistic opinion. The Rabbins, who are recognized as most faithful to old traditions, carry this system to quite as great an extent as the early Christian writers. A belief in Messiah, founded upon the prophecies, and specially upon typical or direct predictions in the Psalms, was one of the fundamentals of faith. This point is not contested by any critics; they may treat it as a superstition, as a mere delusion, but the fact remains, and it is certainly without a precedent or parallel in the history of religions. We must also bear in mind that the system was retained for centuries after the Hebrew teachers were fully aware of the difficulty which it presented in carrying on the controversy with Christians.”(Speaker’s Commentary p. 164.)

A glance at these Psalms will show that their theme is the establishment of the theocracy in its final form on earth. Their keynote is the sentence, THE LORD REIGNETH, or “has begun to reign.”

“O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness: fear before Him, all the earth. Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: He shall judge the people righteously.” {Ps 96:9, 10}

“The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad thereof. Clouds and darkness are round about Him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of His throne. A fire goeth before Him, and burneth up His enemies round about. His lightnings enlightened the world: the earth saw, and trembled. The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth. The heavens declare His righteousness, and all the people see His glory. For Thou, Lord, art high above all the earth: Thou art exalted far above all gods.” {Ps 97:16, 9}

“The Lord reigneth; let the people tremble: He sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved. The Lord is great in Zion; and He is high above all the people…. The king’s strength loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity; thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob” (Ps. xcix. i, 2, ard 4).

It is the kingdom come at last—the universal and eternal earthly kingdom of the Son of David. Its sphere is terrestrial, for the word is, “Let the earth rejoice.” He is called “The Lord of the whole earth,” and it is stated that all people see His glory. All the earth is called upon to make a joyful noise to the Lord, the world, and they that dwell therein; the people are told to tremble, and the earth to be moved, because the Lord is great in Zion. There is nothing heavenly in the description. It is a vision of the realization of the universal earthly kingdom so long foretold.

Two prominent features must be especially noted in these triumphant Psalms. There is in them the element of a personal appearing to introduce the reign, and cause the joy and bliss described; and there is in them also the element of the execution of judgment on enemies.

1. The introduction of this kingdom is by the coming of the King to earth. HE COMETH, He cometh to judge the earth. He shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with His truth.{Ps 96:13} And, again, it is repeated, “He cometh to judge the earth; with righteousness shall He judge the world, and the people with equity.” {Ps 98:9} The King who had ascended up on high, leading captivity captive, and who had taken His seat at God’s right hand in heaven, arises from that seat—the period until which He was to occupy it having been fulfilled — and descends in glory to rule and reign, not as before, to suffer and die.

2. And, secondly, let it be noted that the establishment of the kingdom is effected by means of judgment. “A fire goeth before Him, and burneth up His enemies round about.” “Zion heard, and was glad; and the daughters of Judah rejoiced because of Thy judgments, O Lord.” “His right hand and His holy arm hath gotten Him the victory.”

“Whatever historical allusions may be contained in Ps 93:3 to the past or present assaults of the world-powers upon Israel, this psalm, the first of a remarkable series of theocratic psalms, anticipates the period of Jehovah’s personal manifestation of Himself as the King of the whole earth. (Cf Rev. 11:15, 17, and xix. 6.)

The Lord reigneth. Rather, “Jehovah is King,” i.e. He now reigns: His kingdom is visibly established, His foes being made His footstool: Prayer-Book version, “The Lord is King.” The verb in the same tense is commonly used to denote the beginning of a new reign. (Cf. Kings i. 18: “Adonijah reigneth.” Cf. also 1 Kings 22:41 2 Kings 3:1, 15:13; 2 Chronicles 29:1; in all of which places it is rendered in the Authorized Version, “began to reign.”) The theocracy, as has been observed by Delitzsch in his introduction to this psalm, had its first manifestation when Jehovah became the King of Israel, {Ex 15:18} and it will receive its completion when the King of Israel becomes the King of a whole world subdued, both outwardly and inwardly, to Himself. The verb which is here rendered “is (or has become) King,” or, as Delitzsch renders it, “is now King,” is here used in reference to the inauguration of the theocracy in its final and complete manifestation. This is the watchword of the theocratic psalms. (Cf. Psalms xcvi. in, xcvii. m, xcix. i.)

Whether the first and second advents of the Messiah be or be not regarded here, as in other Old Testament prophecies, as parts of one connected whole, this psalm has reference to the coming of the Messiah as David’s Lord—not as David’s Son; as Jehovah, the Lord and King of the whole earth—not as the “man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” . . .

The Psalmist is here again carried onward by the inspiring Spirit into the great day of the Lord, and calls upon the faithful to proclaim the personal advent of Jehovah, and His assumption of the kingdom.

The psalm itself contains conclusive evidence that it reaches forward not only to the first advent of Christ, but also from thence to “the consummation of all things.”—(“Speaker’s Commentary,” 382, 389, 390-I.)

This is the period to which apply also the statements of the Messianic Psalms we have before considered:—

“Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” {Ps 2:9}

“Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, 0 Most Mighty, with Thy glory and Thy majesty. And in Thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness; and Thy right hand shall teach Thee terrible things. Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall tinder Thee. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre.” {Ps 45:3-6}

“The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of His wrath. He shall judge among the heathen, He shall fill the places with the dead bodies; He shall wound the heads over many countries.” {Ps 110:5, 6}

When we reach our last section, we shall see that this future earthly kingdom of Christ is by no means all that is foretold in Scripture. It is not by any means the highest or fullest conception which inspiration gives us of the “ages to come.” We could not expect to gather the whole truth from the Davidic program, any more than from the earlier revelations. It was given three thousand years ago, in the midst of the Jewish dispensation. It revealed immensely more than had been previously revealed, but it did not reveal all that we now know. It presented a blissful future to the faith of believing Israelites, and taught, moreover, that in the Divine Messiah who should come and restore all things lay the hope, not of Israel only, but of humanity. It gave also a glimpse of the present reign of the priestly king from God’s right hand in heaven, but it did not make known what Paul calls the mystery of God’s will.{Eph 1:9} The Messiah King is to wear “many crowns,” amongst which that of earth will be only one. Later on we shall see the outshining of this New Testament light. A clear conception of this revelation to David about the earthly kingdom of his Son will, however, prepare us to estimate with greater correctness the varied aspects of the many-sided kingdom of God.

Such then was the seven-fold program given to David. It foretold, first, the career of Solomon and the permanence of the Davidic dynasty on the throne of Judah; and then, passing from the near and easily credible future to a more distant and almost incredible one, it announced that a lineal descendant of David was destined, in the purposes of God, ultimately to succeed to his throne in Zion, and from it to exercise a righteous, peaceful, glorious, blessed, universal, and eternal sway over mankind; that this royal son of David would be also the begotten Son of God, uniting thus in His own person divinity and humanity, with their respective attributes and responsibilities; that He would experience inveterate opposition from the kings and peoples of the earth; and that, prior to His exaltation over His enemies, He would endure at their hands the utmost humiliation and suffering, be hated without a cause, betrayed by His own familiar friend, mocked, insulted, and persecuted by His foes; that He would at last be put to death by crucifixion, and laid in a grave, though His body would not remain in the tomb long enough for His flesh to see corruption; that, on the contrary, God would show Him the path of life, and, raising Him from the dead, invite Him to sit at His own right hand, and rule from heaven in the midst of His enemies, promising that ultimately they should be made His footstool, and His throne be established in Zion.

It foretells that the risen, earth-rejected but heaven-accepted King would, when thus ascending on high, “lead captivity captive,” or take others also, redeemed from the power of death, with Him; that He would “receive gifts for men, even for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them”; that He would be like a stone refused by the builders, yet made the head of the corner. It foretells that the rule He would exercise from heaven, and afterwards even for ever, would be that of a royal priest, or priestly king, like Melchizedek; and that, at last, leaving His position in the heavens, rising up from His seat at the right hand of God, He would appear in His glory on earth to build up Zion, assume the throne of His father David, destroy for ever all His foes, and establish His everlasting kingdom.

Now it is needless to say that the last part of this program is not yet fulfilled; for the manifested kingdom of God on earth we are still patiently waiting, praying daily, “Thy kingdom come.” But it is equally clear that a very large part of this Davidic program has actually already become fact. Unlikely of fulfillment as it seemed when given, incomprehensible and almost inconceivable as were some of its particulars, they have come to pass, and the lapse of well-nigh two thousand years since they did this has so familiarized them to the minds of men that they scarcely realize or observe them as fulfillments of Davidic prophecy.

Some of the leading features of the program were fulfilled in the first advent of Christ, others are now being fulfilled in this Christian age, while others remain to be fulfilled at His second coming and kingdom. The evidential argument we are developing, arises, of course, exclusively from the past and the present fulfillments. In due time the future will add its confirmation, though for the present it is matter of faith rather than of sight. The accomplishment of two-thirds of the program is, however, good ground for expecting with calm confidence the fulfillment in its season of the remaining third.

And first as to the past events which have fallen out as indicated by the Davidic program. Solomon, we know, reigned in peace and prosperity, building, as foretold, the splendid temple of God at Jerusalem; a long series of nineteen kings of his lineage and blood succeeded him, and reigned in Jerusalem for nearly four centuries. The usurper Athaliah sought on one occasion to destroy the royal seed, but she miserably failed. David’s sons continued to occupy David’s throne until the day of the captivity of the land, when for their sins God allowed them to fall before Nebuchadnezzar, and the great week of “The times of the Gentiles” began. But Israel knew that the covenant and oath of God could not fail, and they waited for the promised coming of “Messiah the Prince” to restore the throne of David. In the fullness of time He came; “Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” {Ro 1:3} He was born of a virgin of the house of David, heralded beforehand by the angelic announcement: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end.”

The common people and the little children, with truer instincts, might indeed shout: “Hosanna to the Son of David! blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Pilate in mockery might announce the truth in the exclamation: “Behold your King”; but the nation, represented by its chief priests, rulers, and scribes, denied the Holy One, and said: “We will not have this man to reign over us.” They chose Barabbas the robber, and shouted: “We have no king but Caesar! As to this son of David, crucify Him. Whosoever maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar.” They were offended by Pilate’s inscription over the cross; alleging that the title, though claimed by Christ, did not belong to Him. Yet there it remained in spite of their protest, a public recognition that the rejected Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the King of the Jews.

Then lastly, and still in accordance with the Davidic program, even down to the minutest particular—piercing His hands and His feet, casting lots for His vesture, and in His thirst giving Him vinegar to drink—they killed the Prince of life. And here their action and their power ended, and God’s action began. In harmony with the outline in the Psalms, Messiah’s soul was not left in Hades, nor did His body see corruption. God raised Him from the dead, and exalted Him to His own right hand in heaven. The earthly kingdom was postponed for a time, but only postponed, not finally set aside for something different.

Jesus Himself admitted that He was a king, and born to rule and reign on earth and over Israel; but He said to Pilate: “Now is My kingdom not from hence”; and He bowed His head to receive from man the crown of thorns, and submitted to the soldiers’ mockery, saying, “Hail King of the Jews.” Earth offered Him no throne at that time, and still “we see not yet all things put under Him” in this world—but do we therefore see no exaltation? Have the predicted sufferings of Christ come true, and have the glories that should follow failed? Far, very far from it! “We see Jesus crowned with glory and honour. {Heb 2:9} “When He had by Himself purged our sins, He sat down (as predicted in the program) on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” {Heb 1:3} The apostles saw Him ascend: “While they beheld, He was taken up; and a cloud received Him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into heaven. (Acts 1:9-11)

Stephen beheld heaven open, and saw the Son of man in glory at the right hand of God, Saul of Tarsus heard His voice from out the ineffable glory; John saw Him in His superhuman radiance, and was overwhelmed by the vision. The records leave no room to doubt that He “ascended up on high” as predicted; and He led captivity captive when He did so.

In proof of His power to rifle the grave and rob death of his victims, He said to the dying thief: “To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise.” When He died, the graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints arose. He received also gifts for men; Peter said, “Him hath God exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel and remission of sins.”

And He received a greater gift still, the supremest gift of all. Before His ascension He had said: “It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you.” Peter, speaking of the effusion of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, said of Christ: “Being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, He hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” (Acts 2:33)

And it must be noted that these were gifts for “the rebellious also,” according to the program. They were given to those who had rejected and murdered Him; the first church was composed of Jerusalem sinners: and they were in order “that the Lord God might dwell among them,” by His Holy Spirit. He did so, and in a short time, through this mighty indwelling power, thousands and tens of thousands had become disciples of the ascended Savior, and the early Church had turned the world upside-down. In less than three centuries it had overthrown the paganism of the mighty Roman empire; in a few more it had evangelized the Gothic barbarians; and now the religion of Christ is the religion of the civilized world. Year by year it is spreading in the heathen world. Already a third of the human race has received it, and bows the knee to the once crucified Jesus. Whence all this power and progress? Whence this strange spectacle of the creed of Christ spreading evermore by its own indestructible vitality, while other faiths are languishing and dying out? Is it not because the ascended Savior is working with and through His people according to His word: “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the age?” His Divine co-operation alone can account for the spread of such a religion in such a world, in spite of all the obstacles that opposed and still oppose it. Christ is ruling even now in the midst of His enemies, as well as governing His own people, who willingly obey Him. The second great feature of the program—the exaltation of the crucified King—is as clearly fulfilled as the first. The sufferings have been followed by glory. Jehovah has appointed Him a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek; for He is the ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN—the great High Priest of humanity.

The third section of the program, the second advent in glory to govern the world in righteousness, is confessedly future; and we do not consequently treat of it here. He Himself said, “I will come again,” and the final revelations of the apostolic age confirm the unfulfilled part of the program in the amplest way. Our present theme is, however, fulfilled and not unfulfilled prophecy, so we do not dwell further on this.

There is thus no difficulty in demonstrating the marvelous fulfillment of the Davidic program to those who accept the Gospel narrative as true. There is both a broad general correspondence and a minute specific agreement between the predictions and the facts which, taken together, are irresistible. It is not merely that we have the inspired testimony of apostles to the fulfillment of some of the prophetic sayings, and the still more authoritative assertions of the Savior Himself, that David wrote of Him; but it is that the outline of the Davidic program as a whole is met by Christianity, and by it alone. Nothing else in the wide world has even the remotest resemblance to it. Consider! An individual man, member of a certain definite family, of a certain definite tribe of the Jewish nation, was to become the ruler of the world for ever, exercising first a spiritual, priestly power from the heavens to which He ascends from a cross and a grave, and then a regal power on earth to which He again descends in judgment and glory. This broad outline corresponds in all its strange sublimity with Christian doctrine, experience, and hope, and with nothing else. Yet David knew nothing of Christianity. Incarnation was a thing of which he never dreamed. The session of a risen man at God’s right hand in heaven was a conception impossible to the Jewish mind; and a spiritual, priestly reign over a people gathered out of all Gentile nations was a providence which no Israelite would have anticipated! How came the sweet psalmist of Israel to embody such conceptions in his prophetic poems? That is the first question. And, secondly, How came history to realize them?

The Jews did not intentionally frustrate their own Messianic anticipations by crucifying their King. Pilate and Herod little thought that they were fulfilling ancient Jewish predictions in their cruel and unjust treatment of the innocent Man arraigned at their bar. The Roman soldiers who pierced His hands and His feet, gave Him vinegar to drink, and parted His raiment among them, had never heard the twenty-second Psalm. There was and there could be no collusion in the case! A thousand years had intervened since the prophetic words were written. Empires had risen and passed away; the kingdom of David had become a province of the Roman empire; the temple of Solomon had been burned, that of Ezra and Nehemiah had arisen on its ruins, and in its turn fallen into decay, and been restored by Herod. Judah had been carried captive and had returned to her land, the ancient predictions were all the while read and sung in the synagogue of the Jews, and at last a startling and inexplicable series of events fulfilled them both in the letter and in the spirit.

As, however, not a few in these days hesitate as to the measure of credence which may be safely accorded to the Gospel narratives, and will scarcely feel the force of any proof of the fulfillment of the Davidic program drawn from the New Testament records, we must remind them that no events of Roman history are better attested than the events of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Looking at them simply as historical incidents which occurred eighteen hundred years ago, they are abundantly evidenced by just the same sort of proof as that on which we base our belief in other events of authentic history. And the fact that we have, besides all this, four copious and almost contemporaneous biographies of Christ, together with an original account of the acts of His apostles, may be regarded in this sense as so much superfluous evidence. If this latter did not exist at all, it would be easy to make out the whole of the Gospel story as to its outline, as well as that of the early spread of Christianity, from other writings of the period—pagan, controversial, and Christian; from monuments and imperial decrees, from ancient inscriptions in the catacombs and elsewhere, and from similar sources. Those who prefer doing so may therefore leave the Gospels out of account, and compare the Davidic program, which we have been studying, with the facts of the Christian era as attested by other authorities.

And there is even a simpler way still of regarding the subject. Christianity is unquestionably in the world to-day; it is the most widespread and influential religion that exists, or ever has existed, on earth; it commands the intelligent assent and the more or less sincere reverence of the foremost nations of the world; and it has done this for many long ages. It is the parent of modern civilization, and its influence in the earth spreads every year. Its existence is a fact of gigantic importance—a very king of facts—the most conspicuous fact in the whole history of the human race; and it is, moreover, a fact which is evident to our senses, as well as to our intelligence. The foremost nations of the world, to the number of at least four hundred millions of mankind, bow at the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth and confess it to be the only one given under heaven or among men whereby they can be saved. Speaking broadly, and passing over exceptions which only prove the rule, this is the case. Much of this widespread Christianity may be, and is, apostate in character; much of it may be, and is, a mere profession rather than a reality; but this does not alter the fact of its existence, which is the thing that has to be considered and accounted for.

However corrupt and apostate, its professors hold their own form of Christianity to be the primitive one, and vehemently repel the accusation that it is anything else, or anything new.

Now every effect has a cause, and every great effect a great cause. This is a great effect—great, not only by reason of its extent, but by reason of its duration; for this fact is not observable now only, but it has been observable for the last fifteen hundred years. Christianity has been the leading religion of the world ever since Constantine proclaimed it the faith of the Roman empire. We have, therefore, to find an adequate cause for a fact which not only exists to-day but has existed for fifteen centuries, all through which the state of things has been in this respect what it is to-day. Since the time when the gorgeous and venerable, established and endowed paganism of the old Roman world, together with the benighted philosophies of Greeks and Romans alike, were overthrown by the young faith which less than three centuries previously had been born in Judea—since then, Christianity has unquestionably held the highest place among the nations that make history, and exerted the greatest power over them.

Now, as sensible and reasonable beings, we have to find a cause sufficient to account for this unquestionable and long-enduring fact. That cause must be sought in a comparatively short period of time; that is, between the days of Constantine (AD. 306-337), when the supremacy of Christianity was evidenced for the first time to the world, and the days of its Founder and His apostles. This is not a very long period, it is one of about the same length as that which has elapsed since James the First reigned over England; and it must be borne in mind that these first centuries are no terra incognita, they constitute no dim region of mythical legends or vague traditions like the days of the flood. We are not dependent on the New Testament for a clear conception of what was going on in the world at that time. The eight writers in that book Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude were by no means the only writers of that great era. Historians, essayists, satirists, poets, and philosophers in abundance were living and writing, for the period was one of unusual intelligence. It was the Golden Age of Augustus. Cicero, Sallust, Virgil, Horace, Strabo, Philo, Seneca, Ovid, Livy, Tacitus, Plutarch, Pliny, Suetonius, all lived in, or immediately before, the first century, when Christianity came into existence; and many others only a little less celebrated, in the two succeeding centuries.

Now of these clever and observant writers, none who were contemporary with the birth and early growth of Christianity, deny or impugn in the slightest degree the Gospel narrative of its origin. Does not this look as if it were the true account? One of our strongest reasons for believing the Gospels to be true is that their story was never disputed by any of those who had the most ample opportunity to show up its falsehood, had it been false. No other account of the origin of Christianity was ever even suggested. The facts stated in the Gospels were public events, which occurred in populous places; the actors in the scenes described (especially in the Acts of the Apostles) were numbered by thousands; the witnesses, of course, by tens of thousands. Their lineal descendants must have been still living in the days of Constantine, their martyr tombs were still fresh; the churches they had formed all over the empire were still in existence, in many cases the very buildings in which they had worshipped were still standing; family and local traditions were still strong and clear; early copies, and even the very original manuscripts of the sacred writings were still extant, and preserved with the most scrupulous veneration; and secular writers not only do not deny but most clearly recognize the facts of the case. If it was impossible to deny them then, is it not unreasonable to doubt them now?

Profane historians and secular writers naturally did not go into detail on the subject of Christianity, which was a comparatively obscure phenomenon in their day, and, to some extent, outside the scope of their writings; but they allude to it in precisely the way one would expect. Tacitus, for instance, in his annals (which were written A.D. 100), mentions the Christians incidentally in connection with the burning of Rome in the reign of Nero. He explains who and what they were by a retrospective glance in which he outlines the story, distinctly mentioning their connection with Christ as founder; His death, and the time, place, and manner of it; the wide and rapid spread of this faith throughout the Roman empire: and Gibbon, in quoting this testimony, admits that the most skeptical cannot question its authenticity or authority.

“But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration. Hence, to suppress the rumour, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. CHRISTUS, the founder of that name, was put to death as a criminal by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, whither all things horrible and disgraceful flow, from all quarters, as to a common receptacle, and where they are encouraged. Accordingly, first those were seized who confessed they were Christians: next, on their information, a vast multitude were convicted, not so much on the charge of burning the city, as of hating the human race. And in their deaths they were also made the subjects of sport, for they were covered with the hides of wild beasts, and worried to death by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set fire to, and when day declined, burnt to serve for nocturnal lights. Nero offered his own gardens for that spectacle, and exhibited a Circensian (circus) game, indiscriminately mingling with the common people in the habit of a charioteer, or else standing in his chariot. Whence a feeling of compassion arose towards the sufferers, though guilty and deserving to be made examples of by capital punishment, because they seemed not to be cut off for the public good, but victims to the ferocity of one man.”—(Tacitus, Bk. xv., ch. 44.)

Tacitus says that there were already in his day a vast multitude of Christians scattered in various parts of the empire, even in Rome itself. Pliny again, in his well-known correspondence with Trajan, mentions the great number of Christians in his own jurisdiction, and the severe persecutions they had suffered. Indeed, it is evident, on careful examination, that nearly all the secular writers of the first three centuries, whose works have come down to us, make allusions more or less full to Christianity, its origin, its rapid growth, its distinctive tenets and practices, the opposition it encountered, and the sufferings of its professors. Nor are these writings the only proofs of the early and rapid spread of Christianity. The persecuting edicts of the emperors of these three centuries, the Christian literature of the time (controverting the false teachings of the heretics), the apologies addressed by the leading Christian Fathers to the reigning governors and emperors, the monumental remains, the catacombs of Rome and their inscriptions, all these and many similar proofs confirm in the fullest way the conclusion that the Gospel account of the origin of Christianity is the true and only one.

Now if this be so, if the New Testament as we have it presents the very story whose proclamation had already revolutionized the world in the days of Constantine, and has continued ever since to mould the development of our race, then the things related, however hard to believe, must have occurred; otherwise we should have a gigantic result without a cause—a mighty moral movement without any adequate initiatory force—a great fire kindled without even a spark to ignite it! This is impossible! If this Gospel story produced Christianity, common sense argues that the story must be a true one. What! Could a silly fable or a wicked lie accomplish the mighty results which Christianity has produced? Could a mere delusion, or a myth, magnified and distorted by human imagination, do what the Gospel has done and is doing in the world? Fact is mighty; falsehood is weak. The Gospel statements, regarded as facts, are enough to account for everything that has happened.

They may be summed up in the two great leading doctrines of Incarnation and Resurrection and Ascension, the latter accompanied by the Pentecostal effusion of the Holy Ghost. This means a personal revelation of God; it means that God has been “manifest in the flesh” to redeem mankind. Clearly, if that is a fact, it is no wonder the world has been revolutionized! If that is a fact, we have a moral cause sufficient to account for the past and the present, and to lead to glorious anticipations for the future in full harmony with the Davidic program. And, that a religion the Founder of which was ignominiously executed as a criminal, and the apostles of which were thereby plunged into hopeless despair, should have suddenly and immediately after this fatal crisis risen up and gone forth with a courage and faith that braved shame and loss, suffering and danger, defeat and death, that it should have marched straight from the cross and the grave and the upper chamber in Jerusalem to the conquest of all-conquering Rome, and to a seat on the very throne of the Caesars, that it should have gone on from that day to this subjugating the minds and hearts of the most intelligent races of men, changing human laws and customs, inspiring all that is good and true, pure and noble, and creating, in fact, a new moral world, that it should have done all this shows that it was a fact.

If so, we may boldly say that two-thirds of the Davidic program were in a most astonishing manner fulfilled about a thousand years after it was given. Its mysterious and apparently contradictory prophecies were explained and reconciled in the person, character, and career of the Messiah of Israel, the Christ of the Gospel, the Savior of the lost, the priestly King who has already for eighteen hundred years reigned over myriads of willing hearts, and who shall yet reign for ever over the happy nations of a redeemed humanity, in the glorious kingdom of God on earth.

Now this is fulfilled prophecy on the greatest and widest scale. No one can question that the Psalms came down to us from the days of David. No one can read them without perceiving that they contain statements which were never fulfilled in David’s experience, and therefore are not history. He never had his hands and feet pierced, or his raiment parted among executioners, as in Psalm xxii.; he was never invited to sit at Jehovah’s right hand, or appointed to be a priest for ever, as in Psalm cx.; he was not raised from the dead, as in Psalm xvi. These statements cannot possibly be history. What are they, then? Mere imagination or poetry? They are far too peculiar and too definite for that. What should cause a Jewish poet’s imagination to take such a strange, non-natural form?

David knew perfectly well that he himself would die, for on the death of his infant child he said, “I shall go to him.” Could he then, even as a poet, express the anticipation that his flesh would never see corruption? Why should he in imagination picture himself as being put to death by having his hands and feet pierced? Crucifixion was not a Jewish form of punishment, but a Roman one; and his poems date from centuries prior to the foundation of Rome. Such an idea in David’s writing can be nothing else than prediction. They who refuse to recognize his character as a prophet, or to see inspiration in these utterances, are bound to suggest some explanation of the words, which has at least an appearance of plausibility which they cannot do. And even if they could, the difficulty would remain, because it is on record as a matter of history that a thousand years after he wrote, a great Son of David did actually undergo these experiences, fulfilled these very predictions, did suffer death by crucifixion at the hands of Romans, was raised from the dead, and was exalted to God’s right hand.

The predictions then do not fit David; they are not history, and they cannot be mere poetry. As such they would be utterly unnatural. They must be inspired prophecy, for they were fulfilled a thousand years after they were written both in the spirit and in the letter, fulfilled exactly and literally, and quoted as fulfilled predictions by the generations that witnessed the fulfillment.

Grasp clearly the argument. We have before us three things:—

I. The Book of Psalms—a collection of Hebrew poems, published three thousand years ago, and in constant use from that day to this in Jewish ritual worship. Most of these hymns proceeded, as is universally acknowledged, from the pen of David, king of Israel, though they describe experiences that he never tasted, and express anticipations which he can never have indulged. These poems are regarded by the Jews as prophetic.

II. We have a series of most remarkable facts which happened about two thousand years ago, and which were very fully recorded by reliable eye-witnesses at the time, in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. These facts exactly fulfil the Davidic predictions embodied in the Psalms a thousand years previously.

III. We have a condition of things around us in the world now which can be accounted for only on the hypothesis that the story of the Gospels, which fulfils the Davidic program, is in the main true. Christianity as it exists at this day—a vast and all-influential system, growing stronger year by year, and spreading continually among men—rests on the basis of the Gospel facts, and is itself a reflex witness to their truth.

Hence we have palpable present evidence that the Davidic program was fulfilled. David spake as he was moved by the Holy Ghost, and the sufferings and glories of Christ were before the Mind that inspired the Messianic Psalms. This conviction should not be lightly accepted as a matter of opinion merely, but allowed to sink down into the heart. The scene on Golgotha, even to its minutest incidents, lay naked and open before the Omniscient Eye; every physical, moral, and spiritual feature—whether in the victim or the executioners or the crowd—was foreseen. The items foretold are but specimens—samples of what might have been predicted. All was noted. The self-sacrifice of Christ, oh, how deliberate! how long contemplated!—how thoroughly anticipated! And as surely as the sufferings came in their season, as surely as the Melchizedek session at God’s right hand has succeeded them, so surely will the throne of David be hereafter re-established on earth, and occupied by the Lord’s Anointed.

Continued in Chapter VI. The Daniel Programme – Part I.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness

John Fullerton MacArthur, Jr. (born June 19, 1939) is an American pastor and author known for his internationally syndicated radio program Grace to You. He has been the pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Los Angeles, California since February 9, 1969 and also currently is the president of The Master’s College in Newhall, California and The Master’s Seminary in Los Angeles, California. (Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._MacArthur)

Note: My wife and I used to listen a lot to John MacArthur. We don’t necessarily agree with everything he says, and especially we don’t agree with his eschatology because it’s tainted by dispensationalism, but what he has to say here is spot on it my opinion.

The Pope and the Papacy

And for tonight I want to talk about the Pope and the Papacy because it’s been in the news so much. This isn’t really going to be a sermon, I’m just going to try to take you through a little bit of an understanding of it. I want to talk about the Pope himself and then talk about the Papacy in general. I want to tell you at the beginning what is at stake, because what I am going to say will surely offend those who are devout Catholics. It will surely offend those who believe that Catholics are brothers and sisters in Christ. Some will read it as unkind and unloving, but nothing is more loving than the truth. To let somebody perish in a false system isn’t loving at all. To rescue people out of a damning and false religion is the only loving thing to do.

And there’s a lot at stake here. Not too many years ago, some evangelical Protestants got together, Chuck Colson and some others, Bill Bright and some others, and they met with some Roman Catholics and they came up with a document called “Evangelicals and Catholics Together.” And in that document they celebrated a common faith and a common mission. They said we need to embrace each other and carry out this gospel mission together. This was shocking, to put it mildly, to many – to all of those people who affirm clearly a Biblical gospel. There was immediately a counter to that and all kinds of things brought to bear upon the signers of ECT. Perhaps the most notable, at least in my experience, was a special private session called in Florida where I was locked up with a very formidable group of people for a period of seven hours, including those on the other side, J.I. Packer, Charles Colson being the notable ones; Bill Bright from Campus Crusade.

There was myself and R.C. Sproul, Michael Horton representing the biblical side and reformed theology, and for seven hours we talked about this. What is the gospel? Are the Catholics saved or not saved? That’s really important. It became a discussion of are the Anglicans saved or not saved? Is everybody who’s within “Christendom” automatically saved? Are they saved because they’re baptized? Are they saved because they “believe in Jesus?” It was a very heated discussion at many points. What was at stake? I’ll tell you what was at stake. What was at stake is whether or not we evangelize Roman Catholics. That’s what’s at stake. One billion of them in the world, are they a mission field or are they our co-laborers for Christ? That changes everything. Everything.

On the other side one of the leading evangelicals said, “I think it’s so wonderful that we can now see Catholics as Christians because that means millions and millions of people are Christians.” As if somehow by them deciding they were Christians they became Christian. I was absolutely incredulous. I almost fell off my chair. It was like what a monumental meeting this is. We just redeemed millions of people without leaving the room. But that is what is at stake in this. Are Roman Catholics the mission field or do we embrace them as fellow believers in Jesus Christ?

The mood of Evangelicalism today is to embrace them. That’s what all the spokesmen, self-appointed spokesmen for Evangelicalism keep saying in the media; some of them evangelists, most of them evangelists by their own definition. These people are our brothers and sisters in Christ, indeed the Pope is our brother in Christ, indeed the Pope is the greatest spiritual and moral leader of the past 100 years in the world. Is the Pope in heaven? Of course the Pope is in heaven. He was good and he suffered, etc.

Reclassifying the Pope, reclassifying Roman Catholics as believers isn’t that simple. It has massive implications. It has implications that literally overturn centuries of missionary effort. It has massive implications that overturn centuries, if not millennia, of martyrdom. In the long war on the truth, the most formidable, relentless and deceptive enemy has been Roman Catholicism. It is an apostate, corrupt, heretical, false Christianity. It is a front for the kingdom of Satan. The true church of the Lord Jesus Christ has always understood this. And even through the Dark Ages, from 400 to 1500, prior to the Reformation, genuine Christian believers set themselves apart from that system and were brutally punished and executed for their rejection of that system.

It’s not my purpose tonight to go into all that is Roman Catholicism and we will do that in the fall. We will do that. We’ll take a look at it from many angles, but those believers throughout those centuries along with genuine and discerning believers today understand this is a false system. It has a false priesthood. It has a false source of revelation, tradition in the magisterium. It has illegitimate power granted to it by this magisterium, this papal curia. It engages in idolatry by the worship of saints and the veneration of angels. It conducts an horrific exultation of Mary above Christ and even God. It conducts a twisted sacrament of the Mass by which Jesus is sacrificed again and again.

It offers false forgiveness through the confessional. It calls for the uselessness of infant baptism and other sacraments. Motivated by money, it has invented Purgatory. And by the way, Purgatory is what makes the whole system work. Take out Purgatory and it’s a hard sell to be a Catholic. People hang in there because of the deception of Purgatory. Purgatory is the safety net. When you die you don’t go to hell, you go there and get things sorted out and finally get to heaven if you’ve been a good Catholic. Take away that safety net, that’s a hard sell because in the Catholic system you can never know you’re saved. You can never know you’re going to heaven. You just keep trying and trying. As the priest said on a television program the other night, we are all engaged in a long journey toward perfection. Well, if you’re engaged in a long journey toward perfection it’s pretty discouraging.

People in that system guilt-ridden, fear-ridden, no knowledge of whether or not they’re going to get into the kingdom. The threat of a mortal sin which throws you back out again, and the only thing that makes it work is Purgatory. If there’s no Purgatory, if there’s no safety net to catch me, then give me some opportunity to get into heaven. It’s a second chance. It’s another chance after death. I can’t buy into this. So they had to invent Purgatory. It’s just too much without it.

The harm of indulgences, selling forgiveness for money, the false gospel of works – you participate in your salvation by your good works – the abomination of idols and relics, prayers for the dead, the perversion of forced celibacy, and so it goes. But at the top of the pile of all of this is the amazing, amazing Papacy. The Pope is the one at the top of the Roman Catholic Church who has, in a word, usurped the headship of Christ over his church. The reformers have always understood this. With unashamed boldness, they understood this and they declared this and they faced death for it. Martin Luther, 1483-1546, Luther proved by the revelations of Daniel and John, by the epistles of Paul, Peter and Jude, says the historian D’Aubigné, that the reign of antichrist predicted and described in the Bible was none other than the papacy and all the people said, “Amen.” “A holy terror seized their souls. It was the antichrist whom they beheld seated on the pontifical throne. This new idea which derived greater strength from the prophetic descriptions launched forth by Luther in the midst of his contemporaries inflicted the most terrible blow on Rome.”

Based on his study of scripture, Martin Luther finally declared, “We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the seed of the true and real antichrist. I owe the Pope no other obedience than that I owe to antichrist.” Luther said, “I am persuaded that if at this time St. Peter in person should preach all the articles of Holy Scripture and only deny the Pope’s authority, power and primacy and say that the Pope is not the head of all Christendom, they would cause him to be hanged.” Yet if Christ himself were again on earth and should preach, without all doubt the Pope would crucify him again.

John Calvin, 1509-1564, “Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff antichrist, but those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself after whom we speak and whose language we adopt. I shall briefly show that Paul’s words in 2 Thessalonians 2 are not capable to any other interpretation than that which applies them to the papacy.” They saw in the antichrist the papacy, the Pope. Why? Because they had some special insight that, in fact, the final antichrist was actually to be a Pope? No. Because the Pope personified everything that the scripture described the antichrist to be.

John Knox, 1505-1572, the great Scottish Presbyterian sought to counteract the tyranny which the Pope himself had for so many ages exercised over the church. He himself said the Papacy is the very antichrist, the Pope being the son of perdition of whom Paul speaks. Thomas Cranmer, one of the great martyrs in England, died in 1556, said, “Whereof it follows Rome to be the seat of antichrist and the Pope to be the very antichrist himself, I could prove the same by many scriptures.” The Westminster Confession was written in 1647. The Westminster Confession, the confession of the reformers says, “There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God.”

And again I say it isn’t that he is the final antichrist, but he is in his time and in this age the very embodiment of antichrist. And there are, says John, many antichrists in the world before the final one. Cotton Mather, again an American Puritan who died in 1728, “The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them.” And Spurgeon, “It is the bound and duty of every Christian to pray against this Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is, no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name.” Again, I say John said there are many antichrists. Here is the supreme embodiment of it to these great leaders, these great reformed leaders through the ages.

Spurgeon went on to say, “Popery is contrary to Christ’s gospel and is the antichrist and we ought to pray against it. It should be the daily prayer of every believer that the antichrist might be hurled like a millstone into the flood and for Christ, because it wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of his glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of his atonement and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Savior and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Spirit. And puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the Vicar of Christ on Earth. IF we pray against it, because it is against him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors. We shall love their souls though we loathe and detest their dogmas. And so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened because we turn our faces toward Christ when we pray.”

It was 1553-1558, a terrible five years in England, the reign of Bloody Mary and all that began seven years after Luther’s death. Mary came into England and restored the Pope’s authority in England and immediately all Bibles were removed from the churches. All Bible printing ceased and was forbidden. It became a capital crime. Eight hundred English ministers fled to Geneva. Three hundred Protestants were burned at the stake. The first martyr to Mary was John Rogers, a London minister who translated the wonderful Tyndale-Matthews Bible – I’ve held one of those first editions in my own hand. Ridley and Latimer, the two famous martyrs burned at the stake at Oxford. And William Tyndale, blessed William Tyndale; chaste for years and finally martyred for the crime of translating the Bible into English. All this under the leadership of, and for the satisfaction, of the Roman system and the Pope.

Luther, in the small called articles wrote this, “All things which the Pope, from a power so false, mischievous, blasphemous and arrogant has done and undertaken, have been and still are purely diabolical affairs and transactions for the ruin of the entire Holy Christian Church and for the destruction of the first and chief article concerning the redemption made through Jesus Christ.” Luther didn’t mince words. He said further, “The Pope is the very antichrist who is exalted himself above and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved.” Further Luther said, “It is nothing else than the devil himself, because above and against God he urges and disseminates his papal falsehoods concerning Masses, Purgatory, monastic life, one’s own works, fictitious divine worship, which is the very papacy, and condemns, murders and tortures all Christians who don’t exalt and honor these abominations of the Pope above all things. Therefore just as little as we can worship the devil himself as Lord and God we can endure his apostle the Pope. For to lie and to kill and destroy a body and soul eternally, that is wherein his papal government really consists.”

Back to Spurgeon, “Of all the dreams that have ever deluded men, and probably of all blasphemies that ever were uttered, there has never been one which is more absurd and which is more fruitful in all manner of mischief than the idea that the bishop of Rome can be the head of the church of Jesus Christ.” No, these popes die and how could the church live if its head were dead? The true head ever lives and the church ever lives in him. And Spurgeon said, “A man” – this is very interesting – “A man who deludes other people by degrees comes to delude himself. The deluder first makes dupes out of others and then becomes a dupe to himself. I should not wonder but what the Pope really believes that he is infallible and that he ought to be saluted as “His Holiness.” It must have taken him a good time to arrive at that eminence of self deception. But he’s got to, I daresay, by now and everyone who kisses his toe confirms him in this insane idea. When everybody else believes a flattering falsehood concerning you, you come, at last, to believe it yourself or at least to think it may be so.

“The Pharisees, being continually called to learned rabbi, father, the holy scribe, the devout and pious doctor, the sanctified teacher, believed the flattering compliments. They used grand phrases in those days and doctors of divinity were very common, almost as common as they are now. And the crowd of doctors and rabbis helped to keep each other in countenance by repeating one another’s fine names until they believed they meant something. Dear Friends,” says Spurgeon, “It’s very difficult to receive honor and expect it, and yet to keep your eyesight, for men’s eyes gradually grow dull through the smoke of the incense which is burned before them. And when their eyes become dim with self conceit, their own great selves conceal the cross and make them unable to believe the truth.”

Spurgeon said, “Christ did not redeem his church with his blood so the Pope would come in and steal away the glory. He never came from heaven to earth. He never poured out his very heart that he might purchase his people. That a poor sinner, a mere man, should be set upon high to be admired by all the nations and to call himself God’s representative on earth, Christ has always been the head of his church.” Spurgeon knew what the reformers knew, what any true student of scripture knows. The Pope stood at the top of an illegitimate system, particularly and specifically at the top of an illegitimate priesthood. And Spurgeon wrote this, “When a fellow comes forward in all sorts of curious garments and says he’s a priest, the poorest child of God may say, “Stand away and don’t interfere with my office. I am a priest. I know not what you may be. You surely must be a priest of Baal.” For the only mention of the word vestments in scripture is in connection with the Temple of Baal.

“The priesthood belongs to all the saints. They sometimes call you laity, but the Holy Ghost says of all the saints, “you are God’s klēros.” You are God’s clergy. Every child of God is a clergyman or a clergywoman. There are no priestly distinctions known in scripture. “Away with them,” said Spurgeon, “away with them forever.” The prayer book says, “Then shall the priest say.” What a pity that word was ever left there. The very word priest has the smell of the sulfur of Rome about it, that so long as it remains, the Church of England will give forth an ill saver. Call yourself a priest, sir. I wonder, men are not ashamed to take the title. When I collect what priests have done in all ages, what priests connected with the Church of Rome have done, I repeat what I have often said. I would sooner a man pointed at me in the street and called me a devil than call me a priest, for bad as the devil has been, he has hardly been able to match the crimes and cruelties and villainies that have been transacted under the cover of a special priesthood.

From that may we be delivered, but the priesthood of God’s saints, the priesthood of holiness which offers prayer and praise to God, this we have because thou hast made us priests. That is what the saints are. The Roman Empire then is, in the view of these men of God through the ages, a front line for Satan. And for Spurgeon Rome is a deadly enemy, first of all, as well as a mission field. Spurgeon said we must have no truce and make no treaty with Rome. He said this, “War. War to the knife with her. Peace there cannot be. She cannot have peace with us, we cannot have peace with her. She hates the true church and we can only say that the hatred is reciprocated. We would not lay a hand upon her priests. We would not touch a hair of their heads. Let them be free, but their doctrine we would destroy from the face of the earth as the doctrine of devils.

“So let it perish, O God, and let that evil thing become as the fat of lambs, into smoke let it consume. Yay, into smoke let it consume.” You can just hear him preaching that in the tabernacle in London. He went on to say, “We must fight the Lord’s battles against this giant error, whichever shape it takes, and so must we do with every error that pollutes the church. Slay it utterly. Let none escape. Fight the Lord’s battles even though it be an error that is in the evangelical church, yet we must smite it.” We stand on those shoulders. What is our response to this current issue, a truce with Rome? Are we going to betray the martyrs? Are we going to betray the history of our faith? Are we going to betray those who lived and died to get us the truth? Are we going to betray the Tyndales and the Luthers and the Calvins and all the rest? Are we so senseless, are we so blind, are we so ignorant, are we so faithless, are we so cowardly that we will not fight?

The doctrinal ignorance of the evangelical church is shocking, matched only be its cowardice, I fear. That has certainly been revealed to everybody in the recent response to the death of the Pope and the installation of his successor. The promotion of Catholicism that we’ve seen in the media in the last couple of months has had no equal in history. This is the single greatest promotion of the Roman Catholic system in the history of that system. The world media has set aside the sickening pedophilia, the abuse issues, to parade the pomp and circumstance of this false system as if it were truly all glorious. It is a classic illustration of the old story of the emperor’s new clothes. Spiritually it’s naked. And here we are at the very time when Roman Catholicism is receiving through the devil’s medium – since he controls both – its greatest exposure, it is perpetrating on the world its greatest seduction. It is bringing to the world its damning delusion as never before and protestants and evangelical representatives are just embracing it and its damnable heresies.

The media, have you noticed how uncritical they are? Have you noticed how they don’t ever bring up the scandal of the priests? We hear people say, “Well, Catholicism is a different denomination.” Catholicism isn’t a different denomination, it’s a different religion. I don’t think people know the difference between a denomination and a religion. Has Rome changed? No. Oh, Rome morphs. Rome is chameleon. Whatever it needs to be in any nation at any time it will become. Whatever it takes. That’s how the devil always works. He moves, changes, to become whatever wins over people. But here is protestant evangelicalism abandoning sound doctrine, shaming the name of Christ, and all in bold relief so the whole world can see. And the world was watching the death of Pope John Paul II in an unrivaled spectacle of worship given to a man.

The question came up is the Pope in heaven? And you hear all these people say yes, yes. People have asked me, “Is the Pope in heaven?” And my answer is, “Is the Pope Catholic?” Isn’t that the answer? I think he is. I think the Pope is Catholic. Does he believe Catholic theology? Yes. He is the guardian of Catholic theology. You get in by works, by Mary, by penance, by baptism, by confession, by rosary. No, this is another gospel. This is not the true gospel. A couple of weeks ago, two messages, we talked about the nature of saving faith and we reminded you salvation is by faith alone. Not in Catholicism, by a combination of grace and faith and works. But we know what the New Testament teaches.

“No one,” Romans 3:20 says, “Will be declared righteous in God’s sight by observing the law.” Romans 3:26, “God justifies those who have faith in Jesus.” Faith alone, Christ alone. Romans 3:28, “We maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.” Romans 4, “Abraham was justified not by works. If he was justified by works he had something to boast about.” But what does scripture say? He believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. When a man works his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However to the man who doesn’t work but trusts God, who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.

Romans 4, “It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise,” verses 13 and 14, “it was through faith.” Romans 9:30-32, “The gentiles who didn’t pursue righteousness have obtained it; righteousness, that is, by faith.” Romans 10:4, “Christ is the end of the law so there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.” Romans 11:5-6, “There’s a remnant chosen by grace and if by grace it is no longer by works. If it were, grace would no longer be grace.” Galatians 2:16, “A man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So too we have put our faith in Jesus that we may be justified by faith, not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.”

Galatians 3:10, “And all who rely on observing the law are under a curse because cursed is everyone who doesn’t continue to do everything written in the book of the law.” “The righteous will live by faith,” Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace you are already saved through faith and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God and not of works, so that no one can boast.” Paul in Philippians 3 gives his testimony. He says, “Not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law but a righteousness which is through faith in Christ; the righteousness which comes through God and is my faith.” Titus 3, “God saved us not because of righteous things which we have done, but because of his mercy having been justified by his grace. We have become heirs of the hope of eternal life.”

You know all those verses. Salvation is by faith alone, in Christ alone, through God’s grace alone. When you put your trust in Jesus Christ, God declares you righteous not because you are, but because he imputes the righteousness of Christ to you, because he imputes your sin to him. Christ bears your sin, you receive his righteousness. This is the glory of the great doctrine of justification. Roman Catholicism does not believe that. The Council of Trent, 1545-1563, came out with statements. Listen to some of them.

“To those who work well unto the end and trust in God, eternal life is to be offered.” That doesn’t sound like anything I just read. “To those who work well unto the end and trust in God, eternal life is to be offered.” Listen to this. “It is given as a reward promised by God himself to be faithfully given to their good works and merits. By those very works, which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life and to have truly merited eternal life.” Eternal life in the Catholic system is something you earn by your works. You merit it and you receive it because of your merit. That is absolute and total contradiction. That is another gospel.

There are hundreds of canons that came out of the Council of Trent. I’ll just share a few. I did a few of these two weeks a go, but some of the Canons, just listen. This is what Trent, this is Catholic dogma. “If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone,” – meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate – “in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema.” And the pronounced damnation on anybody who said salvation was by faith alone. These were directed directly at the reformers.

Another one, “If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.” And they keep saying it again and again. Another one, “If anyone says that the righteousness received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained and not the cause of its increase, let him be anathema.” In other words, the reformers understood the Bible as well, as all true believers had, that works are the results of justification not the cause. But if you say that you’re cursed by Roman Catholicism and the Council of Trent.

Here’s the final one. “If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such a manner that gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of Him justified or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life and in case he dies in grace the attainment of eternal life itself and also increase in glory, let him be anathema.” The idea is you keep doing more works, more works, more works. You increase grace. God increases grace. You increase works and together you achieve a higher and higher rate of sanctification, which they call justification, until finally you have obtained eternal life. That’s what it says. “The attainment of eternal life.” If you don’t believe that you attain your eternal life by your works, you’re cursed.

Did Pope John Paul II believe that? Of course he believed that. Why? Because the church is infallible. Catholic theology can’t be amended because it’s infallible and he is the faithful guardian of that system. We should grieve for that man because he gained the whole world and lost his soul. The most loved and admired man by Catholics in the world, blinded by the prince of this world, never saw the light of the true gospel. I grieve for the many who are deceived by this Pope and his religion. It breaks my heart to see so many people in that system who can’t discern truth from error, genuine Christianity from its counterfeit. And my heart really breaks to hear from protestant evangelicals that this man was a true Christian, leading others to true Christianity.

The religious corruption of Rome has been on constant display for the whole world to see. Literally, the splendor and pageantry are extraordinary; people standing in long lines for hours to virtually worship a dead man with a rosary in his hand and a twisted crucifix by his side. One man said on the television, one Catholic bishop, “We prayed for him and now we’re going to pray to him,” meaningless repetition of prayers which are an abomination of God. Twenty-six years in that position, never knew the truth. And the princes underneath him in their purple and scarlet robes are disguised as angels of light along with him. The magnificence and grandeur of this corrupt religion that has become so rich at the expense of people, at the impoverishing of people, as bewitched a gullible world. They preach another gospel. How can we not see that? And for any man to be called Holy Father and accept it – Jesus called God “Holy Father” in John 17 in his high priestly prayer. Jesus said, “Call no man Father as if any man is the source of spiritual life.” Call no man Father, yet the whole priesthood, they’re all called Father. Occasionally I’m even called Father, which is no small offense to me. He is called Holy Father. He has usurped the title intended for God. He’s called the head of the church. He’s usurped a title intended for Christ. He’s called the Vicar of Christ, vicar connected to the word vicarious – the one who stands in the place of Christ. And he has stolen that from the Holy Spirit. He has set himself in the place of God, he has set himself in the place of Christ and he has set himself in the place of the Holy Spirit and that is overstepping your bounds.

I don’t think Jesus or God the Father or the Holy Spirit would go to a meeting with Muslims, say they share a common spiritual bond and kiss the Koran. I’m reminded of Luke 16 where there is a rich man dressed in purple and fine linen living in splendor every day. He dies and he finds himself in Hades, tormented and begging for people to go back and warn them. I think the Pope is in that very situation. But what did he actually believe? What did he actually say, this Pope John Paul II, that was just buried? We know that he believed salvation was not in Christ alone, and there in is another gospel that damns. But let me ask the question what did he believe about Mary? “In Christ alone,” we heard it and we sang it. After the death of his mother when he was eight years old. Karol Wojtyła, that’s how you say his name – the Pope that died – after the death of his mother when he was eight he developed an intense devotion to Mary. When he became Pope in 1978 he formally rededicated himself and his whole pontificate to Mary. He traveled around the world making visits to numerous Marian shrines around the world so he could venerate her in the fashion that Catholic theology calls him to. That’s hyperdulia or a higher dulia or higher veneration than for angels.

An example of his preoccupation and devotion to Mary motivated thousands, if not millions, of Roman Catholics to make Mary the primary focus of their lives, the primary focus of their prayers. He had a papal crest that was developed and a simple coat of arms that in the middle was a huge M for Mary. When he died his coffin was decorated with a large M. His personal slogan, which he embroidered into all his papal robes in Latin, “Totus tuus ego sum, Maria,” – I am totally yours, Mary. “Totus tuus ego sum.” By the way, those are the opening words in his last will and testament, and in that will and testament after devoting himself to Mary he said, “I place this moment,” referring to the moment of his death, “in the hands of the mother of my master, totus tuus. In the same eternal hands I leave everything and everyone to whom I have been connected by my life and my vocation. In these hands I leave above all the church and also my nation and all of humanity.” He put his own life, the church and the whole world in the hands of Mary. That is ridiculous. That is ludicrous. He says, “Each of us has to keep in mind the prospect of death. I, too, take this into consideration constantly and trusting the decisive moment to the mother of Christ and of the church; to the mother of my hope.” That’s paganism. That would nauseate Mary if she knew about it, and she doesn’t. She never heard a prayer from anybody ever. Neither did any other saint.

In notes included in his will, John Paul II quoted the words of a former Polish cardinal, “Victory, when it comes will be a victory through Mary.” And if you closely follow the preaching of this man, you can see that intense devotion to Mary in a message to the general audience in May of 1997. John Paul said, and I quote, “The history of Christian piety teaches that Mary is the way which leads to Christ.” When the assassination attempt, if you remember, failed in 1981 I think it was, he credited Mary with saving his life. On the anniversaries of that assassination attempt in 1992 and 1994, he made a special pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in order to offer ceremonial prayers of thanksgiving to Mary.

He wrote a book. John Paul II’s Book of Mary. The ad copy inside the book says the book is for people “who seek a deeper relationship with Jesus and his mother.” The table of contents lists all the titles that the Pope applied to Mary: Gate of Heaven, Mediatrix of all Graces, Mirror of Perfection, Mother of the Church, Mother of Mercy, Pillar of Faiths, Seed of Wisdom. Let me just tell you what some of the things in the book say. I’m quoting here, “Mary shares our human condition but in complete openness to the grace of God. Not having known sin she is able to have compassion on every kind of weakness.” Not having known sin. Why, then, in her magnificat did she call God her savior?

He says, “She understands a sinful man and loves him with a mother’s love. Precisely for this reason she is on the side of truth and shares the church’s burden in recalling always and to everyone the demands of morality.” He says, “For every Christian, for every human being, Mary is the one who first believed. Precisely with her faith, as spouse and mother, she wishes to act upon all those who entrust themselves to her as her children. And it is well known that the more her children persevere and progress in this attitude, the nearer Mary leads them to the unsearchable riches of Christ.” Again here’s this whole life of effort and effort and you’re trying to get to Christ and you can’t. You’re trying to get to Christ and it’s hard to get to Christ and Christ is a tough guy, but he can’t resist his mother, so you get to his mother and she gets on his case about you and you get in. That’s it.

He says further, “According to the belief formulated in the Psalm documents of the church, the glory of grace referred to in Ephesians 1:6 is manifested in the mother of God, to the fact that she has been redeemed in a more sublime manner. As Christians raise their eyes with faith to Mary in the course of their early pilgrimage, they strive together to increase in holiness. Mary, the exalted daughter of Zion, helps all her children wherever they may be and whatever their condition to find in Christ the path to the Father’s house.” The Father’s house is just really hard to find. Christ knows the way, but you can’t get Christ’s attention so you work on his mother and he can’t resist her and that’s how the whole deal works.

He further says, “Nobody else can bring us, as Mary can, into the divine and human dimension of the mystery of the gospel.” Let me stop here and say Mary has nothing to do with the salvation of anybody. This pope wrote, “We can turn to the blessed virgin trustfully imploring her aid in the awareness of the singular role entrusted to her by God, the role of cooperator in redemption, which she exercised throughout her life and in a special way at the foot of the cross.” This new Pope, Benedict XVI, Ratzinger is his given name, in his first statement as Pope said, “I place the church and myself into the hands of Mary.” Both of them make Mary responsible for everything. If you go to Catholic churches around the world – I’ve been to them all over the place – you’ll see the paintings or the décor and at the top is always Mary; rarely ever God – the image of God – rarely ever Christ, almost always Mary.

What about the issue of salvation? How did Pope John Paul II view salvation, being an informed Catholic? Well, he was a modified universalist, okay, a modified universalist. He stopped short of saying plainly that he believed everybody in the world would eventually be in heaven, but he used the phrase universal salvation hundreds of times in his writings. And he often expressed uncertainty about whether any human being would ever go to hell. In a message to the general audience in July of 1999, the Pope said this, “This images of hell that sacred scripture presents to us must be correctly interpreted. They show the complete frustration and emptiness of life without God.” So he transports hell into now and says hell is just a way to describe living your life now without God. “Rather than a place” – this is his book, this is what he said in his speech, “Rather than a place, hell indicates the state of those who freely and definitively separate themselves from God who is the source of all life and joy.” So hell is your life now without God.

“Eternal damnation remains a real possibility, but we’re not granted, without special divine revelation, the knowledge of whether or which human beings are affectively involved in it.” We have no idea who’s going to go there. It is a possibility, but we have no idea who’s going to go there. And then he said, this, “The thought of hell must not create anxiety or despair.” Well, isn’t that kind? That is so kind. And you know the devil would want to minimize hell, wouldn’t he? Make it go away? In his encyclical titled Redemptoris Mater, the Pope said, “The eternal design of God the Father, his plan of man’s salvation in Christ as a universal plan. Just as all are included in the creative work of God in the beginning, so all are eternally included in the divine plan of salvation.” It sounds like universalism to me.

In a 1995 message he said, “Christ won universal salvation with the gift of his own life. For those, however, who have not received the gospel proclamation as I wrote in encyclical Repemptoris Missio, salvation is accessible” – these are people who have never heard the gospel – “salvation is accessible in mysterious ways in as much as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the church. It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace because they do not know the church and sometimes even outwardly reject her.”

Ah, so you don’t know the church, you don’t know the gospel, but in some mysterious way you get saved. There are evangelicals who have written books and said the very same thing. The Pope wrote, “Followers of other religions can receive God’s grace and be saved by Christ apart from the ordinary means which he has established.” From the same document about Redemptoris Missio, he says, “The redemption that brings salvation to all.” He says, “The Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing the paschal mystery in a manner known only to God. Salvation always remains a gift of the Holy Spirit. It requires man’s cooperation both to save himself and to save others.” So what you have is this: salvation by works in which you cooperate with God, but not necessarily knowing the gospel or knowing about Christ.

So he denies the exclusivity of salvation through Christ, affirms a universal kind of salvation by which people can get there by doing good in whatever way they know to do good. This is something else he says – it’s just amazing – “The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ.” Since salvation is offered to all it must be made concretely available to all, but it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the church. Since Christ died for everyone and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and it’s there for a universal one, we are obliged to know that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this paschal mystery, again in a manner known only to God.

One of his best-known books is called Crossing the Threshold of Hope, an aggressive and ecumenical manifesto really. He said this: “The Muslims worship the one true God. Hinduism is another means of taking refuge in the one true God. Buddhists have God’s help in reaching true enlightenment.” He said that there is much that is holy and true in all false religions and even animism can prepare a person’s heart to receive the truth of Christ. Basically he said God helps every man create his own personal salvation by doing good, and the Holy Spirit, he said, operates in every religion. This is the message everybody would like to hear, right? Stay where you are and do your best.

You say how can he ever draw this conclusion out of scripture? It doesn’t come out of scripture. If you want to know what he believes about scripture, I’ll give you a little of it. John Paul II, like all Roman Catholics since the Council of Trent, flatly deny that scripture is supreme authority in all matters of faith, conduct and doctrine. The words of Vatican II, “The Roman Catholic Church does not draw her certainty about all revealed truth from the holy scriptures alone, but both scripture and tradition must be accepted and honored with equal feelings of devotion and reverence.” What it really comes down to is you deny what the scripture says, you twist and pervert what the scripture says, and you invent another religion based upon tradition.

The Catholic Church says tradition is equal to scripture and the Catholic Church determines what is tradition. He also says of the church that the popes determine the true meaning of scripture and they alone know the true meaning of scripture and the meaning that they determine to be the true meaning is infallible. So you have a man who claims to be the head of the church, the Vicar of Christ. He arrogates to himself an authority that belongs to God alone. He feels free to interpret scripture any way he wants to and it is infallible. And in the process, of course, abandons the plain sense of scripture that teaches Christ alone is the way to salvation by faith alone.

Well enough about him. Let me just kind of conclude by looking at the papacy itself, because he’s representative of it. He’s not as deadly as some popes have been, not as immoral as some popes have been. He’s a nobler soul, humanly speaking, than many. Let me just talk about what the papacy affirms for itself. I have a source for this, The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott written in 1952 and into English translated in 1955. It’s been a staple in my own understanding of Catholic theology for years. Here are statements of Catholic dogma from the primary source, “The Pope possesses full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, not merely in matters of faith and morals, but also in church discipline and the government of the church.”

The Vatican Council declared, interpreting that, “If anyone shall say that the Roman pontiff has the office merely of inspection and direction and not a full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals but also in those which relate to the discipline and government of the church spread throughout the world, or asserts that he possess merely the principal part and not the fullness of this supreme power, or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the churches and over each and all the pastors and the faithful, let him be anathema.”

You question his authority in any sense and you’re cursed. It’s a mortal sin. He’s unassailable. It goes on to say a true power, a universal power, a supreme power and a full power is possessed by any pope who can “rule independently on any matter without the consent of anyone else, he himself is judged by nobody because there is no higher judge on earth than he.” He is the king of the earth. That’s why the Vatican is its own nation, because he can’t submit to any monarch. He is the king of the world. Further Catholic dogma says the Pope is infallible when he speaks ex cathedra. Ex cathedra is when he speaks out of his seat. When he speaks as Pope, he is infallible. Catholic dogma says, “God in heaven will confirm the Pope’s judgment in his capacity as supreme doctor of the faith, he is preserved from error.”

By the way, papal infallibility was voted in in 1870. That was convenient. It was voted in by a split vote. Interesting. They had to vote several times to finally get it through and it never was unanimous. John Paul II apologized for the historical failings of Catholics in a very vague way because when he was confronted with some of the issues of the past, some of the embarrassing things like forced conversion and anti-Semitism and some of the horrible things that were done, he apologized in a vague way. And you have to understand this. How can you apologize if you’re infallible? How can an infallible church apologize? But listen to what they believe. They do not believe that the church consists in the laity. The church does not consist in the laity. The laity are the sons and daughters of the church, but the church is the Roman curia, the papal court of cardinals, bishops and priests. And when John Paul apologizes for the short failings of the Catholics, he is not meaning the infallible church that consists of the papacy and the curia. “They are not guilty, for they are always to be held as immaculate.” The sins have been committed by the sons and daughters of the church who make up the laity. This is absolutely ridiculous given the sexual perversion of the priesthood, which even Benedict XVI tried to sweep under the rug with a silly comment about the percentage of perverted priests – he wouldn’t use that word – but the percentage of pedophile priests is no different than the normal population.

All of this is brushed under the carpet as fast as it can be in an effort to protect the illusion of holiness. Really it’s hard to say whether the claim to infallibility is more ridiculous or more wicked – wicked because it attributes to man what belongs only to God, ridiculous because popes have been so wrong so often and because the whole system is so wrong. One might conclude that they are infallible when it comes to being wrong. Let me just conclude with three thoughts. 1. The papacy is unbiblical. It is unbiblical. There’s not one tiny shred of evidence in scripture for the papacy nor is there any evidence for cardinals, bishops, priests, nuns. It’s all an invention of men and demons to create an illusion of spirituality and an illusion of transcendents. It was all developed by evil people Satanically led to create a false religion that would be the enemy of the truth. The appeal is because of the power, the prestige and the money.

Do they try to support the papacy from the Bible? Yes. Listen to this. Again, this is their theology from Ludwig Ott, The Fundamentals of Roman Dogma. “Christ appointed the apostle Peter to be the first of all the apostles and to be the visible head of the whole church by appointing him immediately and personally to the primacy of jurisdiction.” What they do is go back and say Peter was the first pope appointed by Christ. “If,” says the Vatican Council, “If anyone says” – this is back in 1823 – “If anyone says that he, the blessed apostle Peter, was not constituted by Christ our Lord, prince of all the apostles and visible head of the church militant, or that he directly Peter and immediately received from our Lord Jesus Christ the primacy of honor only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction, let him be anathema.” If you deny the papacy of Peter, you are cursed. You are cursed. So if you say the Pope is not the successor of Peter, you are also cursed, says Ott.

Here’s another test of biblical fidelity that the Roman Catholic system fails utterly. No student in the New Testament would deny that Peter was important. He is important; important apostle, leader, spokesman for the 12, at the top of all four lists of the 12 – he’s always at the top. He was a spokesman. I wouldn’t want to call him Holy Father or Holy anything. He was weak and selfish and sinful and cowardly and unfaithful. He may have been in Rome. He may have died in Rome, but there’s no evidence. They say he went to Rome, was the pastor of a church in Rome, died in Rome, was buried in Rome. St. Peter’s is supposed to be built where he was buried. There’s no evidence for that at all. One thing is certain, he never pastured a church in Rome, if he ever went there. How do you know that? Well, Paul wrote Romans in the year 56 and made no reference to Peter. If Peter was in Rome there was already a church there. If Peter was the pastor of the church in Rome why doesn’t he refer to Peter? He greets a whole bunch of people in chapter 16. He just keeps greeting one after another, after another, after another. It would be pretty serious to overlook Peter.

When Paul was later imprisoned in Rome in the year 60-62 he wrote four letters and he included in those letters all who came to him. Never mentions Peter. In his last letter, 2 Timothy written in the year 64 or about that, he gives greeting to 10 people in Rome; not Peter. Not Peter. Galatians 2:7-8, you might want to look at that for just a minute. Galatians 2:7-8, “I have been entrusted,” Paul says, “with the gospel to the uncircumcised” – to the gentiles – “just as Peter had been to the circumcised.” Peter was never called to pastor a gentile congregation, to take the gospel to the gentiles. Never. Galatians chapter 2 talks about, verses 11 to 14, when Peter came to Antioch, Paul had to oppose him to his face because he stood condemned because of his terrible, terrible compromise. It was he who denied the Lord, as you know. It was he who disobeyed the Lord. It was he who was cowardly.

By the way, the head of the Jerusalem church – you might think at least Peter would be the head of the Jerusalem church, but he’s not. According to Galatians chapter 2 and Acts chapter 15, the head of the Jerusalem church was James. It was James, not Peter at all. There’s no indication whatsoever that Peter had anything to do with the city of Rome. In 1 Corinthians 1, the apostle Paul addresses the factions in the Corinthian church. He says, “Some of you say I am of Paul, Apollos, I am of Cephas or Peter and I of Christ.” He doesn’t sort Peter out. He doesn’t make any great thing of him at all. In fact, he makes it very clear that none of these people are particularly significant. They’re not the ones who deserve the credit for the work of God. Go to chapter 3, “What, then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants to whom you believe. I planted, Apollos watered, God was causing the growth.” It’s a very low-key way to treat yourself. He doesn’t give any elevation to anybody. Furthermore, Paul went to Rome to preach and in Romans 15:20, he says, “I aspire to preach the gospel not where Christ was already named.” If Peter had been there and planted a church then that would not be true. He didn’t go where somebody else had been. Peter was already the bishop of Rome. Why would Paul want to go there and strengthen and establish that church?

In 1 Peter, let’s hear it from Peter himself. 1 Peter 1, “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ.” That’s all; an apostle of Jesus Christ. He introduces himself as nothing more than that, not the apostle, not the head of the church. 1 Peter 5, “I exhort the elders among you as your fellow elder.” As your fellow elder. I’m just one of you. I’m just a partaker of the glory to be revealed. Shepherd the flock of God. Exercise oversight not under compulsion but voluntarily according to the will of God. Not for money, but with eagerness. “Not as” – here it comes, verse 3 – “lording it over those allotted to your charge.” Boy, there’s a direct hit at the papacy. We’re just fellow elders. Don’t ever lord it over. Peter himself actually taught against the priesthood, which of course the papacy is the highest place. First Peter 2:5 he says, “You are living stones. You are to build up a spiritual house for a holy priesthood.” This is what we know as the priesthood of believers. In verse 9, “You are a chosen race. You are a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession.” There’s no priesthood but the priesthood of believers.

By the way, Peter completely disappears after Acts 15. Completely. But in spite of all of this, the Roman Catholic Church affirms that Peter was the first Pope, the head over the whole church, and the author of papal succession. Where do they get it? They get it from three passages completely misrepresented, Matthew 16, and this one you know, “Jesus said, “I say to you you’re Peter and on this rock I’ll build my church.” You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church. It’s a play on words. He’s not saying you are Peter and upon you’ll build my church. You are Peter – petros. Petros, small stone. Upon this petra, rock bed, I will build my church. What rock bed? The rock bed of the reality of Christ. Simon Peter in verse 16, “Thou art the Christ, the son of the Living God.” And Jesus says, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, because flesh and blood didn’t reveal this to you. My father who is in heaven I say you are a small stone but it’s on the rock bed of who I am that I will build my church.”

How can that be perverted? The language is crystal clear. Verse 19 – they like this one – “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Wow, that sounds like authority. You get to open and shut. Whoever controls the door is in charge. You get to decide who comes in and who goes out. Isn’t he saying that to Peter? Yes, because it was true of Peter, but he didn’t just limit it to Peter. If you look at chapter 18 where you have the discipline section he says to anyway in verse 15, “If your brother sins go and reprove him in private. If he listens you’ve won your bother. If he doesn’t listen take two or three witnesses. If he still doesn’t listen, tell the church and if he still doesn’t listen to the church put him out. Truly I say everybody, to all of you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Peter wasn’t given any authority that every believer doesn’t have. Same thing.

So what is this? It’s the authority to say to someone your sins are forgiven or your sins are not forgiven based on what? Based upon whether they believe, whether they repent. If you have the right to say to someone you can enter the kingdom by how they respond to the gospel. You can say to someone you’re loose from your sins because you put your trust in Christ. You can say to someone your bound in your sin because you refuse Christ. You can say it as well as I can say it, Peter can say it, anyone can say it. We have that authority based upon how people respond. The Pope is wrong to say we don’t know the mystery of who’s going to be in heaven and who’s going to be in hell. Yes we do. We have the authority to say you are inside the kingdom and you are outside. You are forgiven; you are not based upon the response to Christ.

They also use a second passage, Luke 22:31. Luke 22:31 where Jesus says, “Simon, behold Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat. I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail and once you have turned again strengthen your brothers.” They say that is sort of a declaration of his papal primacy. Boy, that is some stretch. He says I’m turning you over to Satan and your faith isn’t going to totally fail, but you’re going to deny me “before the cock crows,” he says in verse 34. But you’re going to be restored. Strengthen your brother. So they say here is the great commission to be the ultimate, supreme strengthener, the Pope. Again ludicrous interpretation of that text.

The other one they use is John 21. John 21. I have to keep reminding people that they use the scripture but they don’t need it because they can just invent doctrines. Verse 15, John 21, Jesus finishes breakfast and says to Peter, “Do you love me?” “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” “Tend my lambs.” Then he says it again, “Shepherd my sheep.” Then he says it again, “Tend my sheep.” They say in this three-fold all of Peter he was made the supreme shepherd. No. In 1 Peter 5, I just read it to you. He said I’m nothing but a fellow elder under the chief shepherd. They say that from Peter on there’s an unbroken chain of papal succession. That’s absurd. The first person who was actually Pope was in the 6th century. And then they had to go back and pick, out people who could fill in the gaps back to Peter. I wish I had time to give you the history of the papacy. It is one ugly story. Just remember nobody was really an official pope until 600. Before that there were elements of the church, the institutional church – there were powerful elements of the church in Rome and Constantinople and other places, about five of these huge ones. It was a battle for power.

The bishop of Rome, because Rome was significant, wanted to be the head of everything and finally got his wish after a long and unhappy history. But there were periods of time when there was no bishop in Rome at all: 304-348, 638-640, 1085-86, 1241-43, 1267-71, 1292-1294, 1314-1316, 1415-1417 there weren’t any. The point I’m making is there’s no succession here. Certainly there’s no divine succession. The papacy was bought and sold and bartered. It was invented, it was reinvented. At some points there was as many as three who all called themselves popes at the same time fighting for power. Alexander VI bought the papacy as an illustration. Having purchased enough votes, the majority was obtained when he voted for himself. In his days, the Vatican was the scenes, say historians, of frequent orgies, such as the banquet of chestnuts attended by 50 or more prostitutes who squirmed and crawled naked amidst lit candles to pick up chestnuts scattered on the floor and afterwards entertained the guests in carnal indulgence.

One historian says, “With Alexander VI, the papacy stood forth with all the strength of its emancipation from morality.” The litany of licentiousness in the history of the papacy is staggering, absolutely staggering. Bought and sold, fought over, murdered for, multiple popes, conflicting lists of popes with different names, different numbers. If it wasn’t so sad it would be like a joke. It wasn’t really until Gregory the Great, 590-604, that there was a legitimate Pope. Supposedly from Peter on there was a succession. Falsified, forged documents were intended to prove that. So you can literally obliterate the papacy because there is no apostolic succession. The claim is ridiculous; absolutely ridiculous. It was just a big battle for power and then they wanted to establish that power. Once it got centered on the bishop of Rome and he became the Pope, he wanted to affirm and magnify his power and so he created the idea of succession and started filling in the gaps going back.

It is unbiblical. Secondly it is unholy. You can read it for yourself. You can read the history of the papacy. It’s just horrific really. Terribly sinful and yet in The New Catholic Encyclopedia, claims the one receiving the sacrament, the Pope, and the ones who elect the Pope are to be characterized by “outstanding and habitual goodness of life, especially perfect chastity.” So the Pope is perfect and has to be chosen by perfect men. That’s impossible, obviously. I would say this. That the papacy is the biggest hoax ever foisted on the world. The biggest hoax ever. Popes who were fornicators and bribers and murderers, and some who were good men in the human sense, dot the landscape of this history and make it impossible to see in it the work of God or any apostolic succession.

Well since my time is gone, let me just give you one other thought. It is unbiblical, it is unholy and it is arrogant and idolatrous. The Pope has the right to pronounce sentence of deposition against any sovereign on the planet, so says the papacy. That means the Pope is the king of the world. He can depose any king. The Catholic Encyclopedia says “We declare, we say, we define, we promise that every being should be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” The Pope is the supreme judge, even of civil laws, and is incapable of being under any true obligation to them. He is above all law, he is above all kings. At the consecration of Roman Catholic bishops there is an oath of allegiance to the Pope; whenever a bishop is consecrated an oath of allegiance is given. Here’s what it says: “With all my power I will persecute and make war on all heretics, schismatic’s and those who rebel against our Lord the Pope and all his successors, so help me God and these holy gospels of God.”

So you swear to make war on anybody who rebels against the Pope. Where is humility in this? Romanism is a gigantic system of church worship, sacrament worship, Mary worship, saint worship, image worship, relic worship, priest worship and Pope worship. J.C. Ryle was right when he said it’s a huge, organized idolatry. A man wearing a gold crown triple-decked with jewels worth millions? A cardinal’s garb that costs tens of thousands of dollars? Peter said, “Silver and gold have I? None.” Paul said, “I coveted no man’s gold, no man’s silver, no man’s clothing.” “The Pope is surrounded by a dazzling display of arrogant overindulgence. Its theater is nothing more than theater to give the illusion of God, the illusion of transcendence, the illusion of spirituality. It is a pompous display of wealth. It is a lavish indulgence in ridiculous buildings with ridiculous robes, crowns and thrones to cover and mask a sinful system like the whitewashed tombs that Jesus referred to.”

There was never such a thing as a papal coronation before the 10th century and now the world has gone berserk over this as if it was true religion. I said this a few weeks ago. I’m going through Luke. The more liturgy, the more mystery, the more ceremony, the more apostasy. The Pope is in direct violation of everything in scripture and sets himself up as the greatest person on earth. But then friends, it’s not a bad guess to see the final antichrist as a pope. Colossians 1:18 speaks of Jesus Christ, “He is the head of the body of the church. He is the beginning. He is the first born from the dead so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything.” Who gets first place in everything? Christ. Christ. Oh, they’ve got a clever system. How to preserve error, how to perpetuate error, make heresy infallible and the arch heretic unassailable, irreformable and absolutely authoritative. It is possible that the final antichrist could be a pope because the final antichrist will be a dominating world leader. He will be not subject to any other world leader. He will be in an imitation of Christ, an antichrist, a pseudochrist. He will have international power. He will be a gentile. And his system seems, in the Book of Revelation chapter 17, to be headed up in Rome.

If the Pope can fool evangelicals, it seems to me that the antichrist won’t have much trouble doing the same with the world. Well, let’s leave it at that.

Webnaster’s comment

Apparently John Fullerton MacArthur doesn’t realize the Pope and the biblical antichrist are one and the same person! Most evangelicals today have been deceived to think that the Antichrist is a single individual who will arise from obscurity in the future, and only in the future!. This way of interpretation of Scripture is known as futurism. Protestants up till the 18th century did not hold such a view of a future only Endtime Antichrist. For more information, please see The Antichrist Is Hidden In Plain Sight

Continued from Chapter IV. The Mosaic Programme – Part II..

WE come now to the fifth section of the Divine program of universal history given to and through David, king of Israel.

That the writings of this remarkable man were largely prophetic there can be no question to any Christian believer, since the Apostle Peter calls him “a prophet,” and our Lord Himself asserts that David in the Psalms spoke by the Holy Ghost and wrote of Him a thousand years before the Christian era. (Acts 2:30; Luke 24:44)

We hope in this chapter to justify these sayings, by showing the demonstrably prophetic character of the Davidic foreview, and its strict and most wonderful accordance with the facts of history, as far as these latter have as yet gone. Only a part of the program is at present fulfilled; one-third of it is still future. The evidential argument arises of course solely from the two-thirds which already are accomplished.

David was, not only a prophet, but a king; and this fact naturally colors the special revelations given to him. God selects for His varied service instruments equally varied; and just as He chose a patriarchal father to be the channel of the revelation as to ?the Seed? in whom the world shall be blessed, just as He chose the founder and lawgiver of the Jewish nation to receive and impart the foreview of that people’s national history, so He chose a monarch to be the medium of His prophetic revelations as to the glorious kingdom of God and its King. The foreview given to David is not an indefinite or general one, like that presented to our first parents, not a mere ethnic outline, like that given to Noah; it is a more advanced and complex revelation, a right royal program for which a king was the fit channel. It consists of a promise about a kingdom and its king, and of a covenant confirmed by a solemn oath of Jehovah, as was the Abrahamic covenant previously. How appropriate, then, that this section of the Divine program of history should be given to the father and founder of a royal dynasty destined to reign and rule for centuries, to the first true king of God’s chosen people!

David was this, though he had, it is true, been preceded on the throne of Israel by Saul. But that son of Kish knew not how to obey, and could not therefore govern. God, whose word he rejected and despised, in due course rejected him from the throne he was unfit to occupy. Not from the tribe of Benjamin, but from that of Judah was to be the ruler of Israel. It was of this tribe that Jacob had foretold, “the sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come.” David, unlike Saul, belonged to this royal tribe, and, with all his imperfections and failures, he had a right royal heart and did right royal work, faithfully shepherding, defending, and governing the people whom God committed to his care, subduing all their enemies, providing both for the ark and worship of Jehovah and for the Levitical service and priestly courses, as well as for the glorious temple to be afterwards built by Solomon.

David was a man of a large, powerful, and richly various nature; he had a mind keen to perceive, a heart quick to feel, a conscience tender—though once, alas! seared as with a red—hot iron by sin—capable of being aroused into vigorous action and of exerting mighty control; he had eyes to weep in bitter contrition, a tongue to utter confession and prayer, a voice and lips to sing songs of tender pathos, of humble trust, or of triumphant exultation; he had feet to dance before the Lord for joy, a soul to be awed into silent veneration or to thrill with magnificent triumph, as the occasion might demand. He had also a sensitiveness which rendered his loves and his friendships warm and intense, which made filial ingratitude an agony to him, which caused sorrows and fears in anticipation to be a very real torture to his spirit. He could sink to the very lowest depths of woe and rise to the highest heights of enjoyment.

The human element was in him rich and strong, while the spiritual side of his being was even stronger; and the strange, varied experiences of his life called successively into play every part of his intense and vivid nature. Religious reverence, holy faith and courage, mental and moral superiority, tender affection, powerful passions, compassionate kindness, inflexible severity when demanded by justice, executive ability and ruling talent of the first order, all characterized in marked measure Israel’s first great king; and he had, in addition, the literary ability and musical skill which made him memorable as the sweet psalmist of Israel. He was no mere official monarch; no selfish, luxurious tyrant, oppressing his people, but a thoroughly natural, sympathetic, loving, large-hearted, God-fearing man, who underwent most remarkable and unique experiences. The events of his life were ordered in Divine providence that they might give occasion to thoughts, feelings, and anticipations, the natural expression of which would prove unconsciously to himself for the most part—to be prophecy.

What was the state of things when this fifth section of the Divine program was indicated to David, and to mankind through him? Some five hundred years had passed away since the days of Moses. Joshua had in the meantime divided to the people their Canaan inheritance, and during his life and the lives of his contemporaries Israel had answered the end for which it had been chosen of God, steering clear of idolatry and maintaining inviolate its monotheistic creed and worship. Among other peoples and nations polytheism and image-worship of the grossest kind everywhere prevailed, and had become systematized. Each country had its own special gods. The Zidonians worshipped Ashtoreth, the Ammonites Moloch, the Moabites Chemosh, and so on. After Joshua’s days defection had gradually set in among the Israelites. One after another the tribes fell into idolatry, and adopted the gods of their neighbours; and then, as Moses had predicted, came punishment and calamity: wars were waged on Israel by their heathen enemies, and the God whom they had forsaken suffered them to experience defeat after defeat, and servitude after servitude. Yet again and again He delivered them, raising up for them judges who governed and guided the people aright as long as they lived. These servitudes and deliverances alternated up to the days of Samuel the prophet, in whose old age the people first asked a king. Weary of their distinctive theocracy, they wished to be like their heathen neighbours. “We will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations.” God gave them their desire, foretelling at the same time that its gratification would bring them into future trouble, as proved to be the case. Overruling their evil for good, however, according to His wont, He revealed, in connection with the establishment of the Jewish kingdom and to its first great king, the grand outline we have now to consider, of the present and future kingdom of God.

The Adamic and Noahic programs were brief, occupying each but a few verses; the Abrahamic and Mosaic were longer and fuller, extending to entire chapters, and comprising many distinct and separate revelations given at considerable intervals. This Davidic program as to the kingdom and its king is still more ample. It is embodied, first, in certain direct revelations made to David, and, secondly, in the Book of Psalms, numbers of which are wholly devoted to it, while others contain features of it more or less amplified. It is consequently a very extensive and detailed program, and we must present it only in outline in an exceedingly condensed form, selecting the main, fundamental predictions alone out of the mass, and then comparing that part of the program which has been fulfilled with the history which has fulfilled it.

As given to David in its first brief and comprehensive form, it is found in 2 Samuel vii. The story is there related of how David had desired to build a house for the Lord, and of how Nathan the prophet was sent to the king to tell him that, for certain reasons, the erection of the temple was to be left to his son Solomon. This he did, and he then added:—

“Also the Lord telleth thee that He will make thee an house. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom…. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee thy throne shall be established for ever.”

“I have made a covenant with My chosen, I have sworn unto David My servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations…. My covenant, will I not break, nor alter the thing that hath gone out of My lips. Once have I sworn by My holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before Me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven” (Ps. lxxxix. 3, 4, and 34, 35, 36, 37).

“The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David; He will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. If thy children will keep My covenant and My testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore. For the Lord hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for His habitation. This is My rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it…. There will I make the horn of David to bud: I have ordained a lamp for Mine anointed. His enemies will I clothe with shame: but upon himself shall his crown flourish” (Ps 132:11, 12, 13, 14, and 17, 18).

Here is the first grand and simple outline, and we note in it—

I. DAVID’S SEED WAS TO BE ENTHRONED FOR EVER, TO GOVERN AN ETERNAL KINGDOM; both his house and his kingdom were to he established for ever. The two things, let it be observed, are distinct: first, his house was to he established, that is his dynasty, a literal begotten son of David was to he the everlasting ruler; and, secondly, his kingdom, with its political capital, its definite geographical location and its national relations, was also to be established for ever.

The eternal kingdom on the earth was to be ruled by a direct descendant of David, and was to be in some sense a continuation of David’s reign over Israel. The throne of Judah which had just been established in the house of David should be, it was promised, everlasting. Features both dynastic and political would be common to the kingdom of David and the eternal kingdom though combined, of course, with many and wide differences which were subsequently indicated; so that the latter would be in the strictest sense an everlasting continuation of the former. Solomon and his kingdom and the temple he was to erect are mentioned, but only as occupying the nearer future. They were the lesser and comparatively unimportant introductory details of the program, and over and above and beyond them, reaching right out into an unknown eternity, was to be another and a greater kingdom, the longer and more glorious reign of a king who, though literally descended from David, should reign for ever.

Note: Rev. Guinness’ statements that God’s promises to King David will be fulfilled in a literal physical kingdom on earth are clearly based on Zionism and Dispensationlism which was taught by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren. We can see right now the evil fruits of death and destruction in Gaza by a Jesus Christ rejecting people who call themselves “Jews” and “Israel” who insist on a definite geographical location for their homeland!

I found a very good explanation for the Davidic covenant on https://www.gotquestions.org/Davidic-covenant.html

This is foretold as clearly as words can express ideas, and Jehovah confirmed the promise with an oath; it became an everlasting covenant (Note: Fulfilled in Christ!), ordered in all things and sure; and although David realized that his house was not what it should be in God’s sight, and that he and his sons were not absolutely just and God-fearing men, yet he rested believingly on this great and infallible covenant promise, and said of it in his last words: “This is all my salvation and all my desire.” The revelation was clear, definite, repeated and solemnly confirmed, but it was unexplained and most mysterious. It suggested questions that could not be answered, and it must have given much food for reflection to the king. How could eternal sovereignty be associated with any son of David? Was not the very notion self-contradictory? A dynasty might indeed be perpetual, though history never yet knew such a one; but an individual? Had not Moses long since sung:–

“The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow for it is soon cut off and we fly away.”

How then could mortal man reign for ever? (Note: Only if the promise to David is fulfilled in Christ!) No further light was thrown on the problem; the revelation appealed to faith, not to reason; and David, like Abraham, knew God well enough to trust Him, though he could not understand how He would fulfill His great promise. “He was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform.” {Rom. 4:20, 21} We may well imagine his meditations would often connect this prediction about his own seed with that of Abraham’s seed, “in whom the world should he blessed,” and with the still earlier Eden promise about the woman’s Seed who should bruise the serpent’s head; and that he felt these three must be one. But he died in faith, not having received the promise, though having seen it afar off and embraced it; and having been permitted to see his son Solomon seated on his throne, as a first installment of the fulfillment of the Divine program.

But David was not only a recipient of prophecy, he was also a channel of prophetic revelation. He himself said: “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue,” and his tongue was the pen of a ready writer. Through him, though not to him, much more about the coming kingdom of his great predicted son was revealed line after line was added to the first faint shadowy sketch, until at last a clear picture was produced on the page. We must note these lines one by one, and allow the conception to become gradually perfected in our minds as each successive feature is added to the previous ones.

We cannot tell whether David ever understood all the predictions of which he was the channel; very probably not. He was most likely one of those prophets of whom Peter speaks, who “inquired and searched diligently what the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.” Our concern, however, is not with what he understood, but with what he wrote. We do not pretend to prove that David foreknew or foresaw the future, but that He who does so used David’s mind, heart, and pen to write for subsequent generations the program of then future events, which the lapse of time has already largely fulfilled.

The features of the coming King and kingdom revealed through David are mainly seven-fold. We have seen the first–its eternal duration; and we now note–

II. THE KINGDOM OF DAVID’S ILLUSTRIOUS DESCENDANT WAS NOT TO BE MERELY JEWISH, BUT UNIVERSAL.

“Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the heathen (or the Gentiles) for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.” {Ps 2:8}

“He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth. They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before Him; and His enemies shall lick the dust. The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. Yea, all kings shall fall down before Him: all nations shall serve Him…. His name shall endure for ever: His name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall he blessed in Him all nations shall call Him blessed…. Blessed be His glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with His glory.” (Ps 72:8, 9, 10, ii, 17, 19)

These predictions of the universality of the sway of David’s Son were no less astonishing than those of the everlasting duration of His reign. The Jewish people were essentially separate from all other nations. “For what one nation in the earth is like Thy people, even like Israel,” said David, “which Thou redeemest to Thyself from Egypt, from the nations and their gods? For Thou hast redeemed to Thyself Thy people Israel, to be a people unto Thee for ever and Thou, Lord, art become their God.” “Thou didst separate them from among all the people of the earth, said Solomon, “to be Thine inheritance.”

Israel was so emphatically a separate and peculiar people that the very conception of a world-wide kingdom, embracing all nations, was foreign to their ideas. “In Judah is God known,” was their creed; and in their day the limitation existed most strictly, for Israel alone possessed the knowledge of God and the light of revelation. David would therefore never have conceived of a universal kingdom, and yet the prediction of such a one shines forth clearly from the pages that he wrote. The coming kingdom was to be neither local in sphere, nor Jewish in character, nor temporary in duration; it was to embrace and bless all mankind throughout the whole earth, and it was to last for ever. It was, however, to be distinctly earthly in character, as we have seen; and great stress is laid on this point, which is repeatedly and distinctly mentioned in the predictions of the program itself and confirmed by the allusions to it of later prophets. This point is an important one, as it is a very common and deplorable mistake to confound the prophecies of this literal kingdom of David’s son with the spiritual kingdom of Christ which now exists, as if the former were fulfilled in the latter. No such spiritual kingdom could by any possibility fulfill the everlasting covenant made with David, which was to the effect that his kingdom as well as his dynasty should be everlasting.

Note: I strongly disagree with Rev. Guinness on this for reasons I explained above.

Now, just as no king of another family could fulfil the dynastic part of this promise, so no kingdom of another and wholly different nature could fulfil the national part of it. Reason alone would suggest that the kingdom of David’s son must be of the same nature as David’s own kingdom; but revelation settles it. Not only is it spoken of continually in the Messianic predictions as extending to the uttermost parts of the earth, and filling the whole earth with blessing and glory, but it is always presented as succeeding and replacing the earthly kingdoms of all Gentile rulers. It is also spoken of as succeeding the restoration and national conversion of Israel.

“For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days.” {Ho 3:4, 5}

“I will save them out of all their dwelling-places, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be My people, and I will be their God. And David My servant shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd: they shall also walk in My judgments, and observe My statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob My servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children’s children for ever: and My servant David shall be their prince for ever.” (Ezek. xxxvii. 23-25.)

The context in these passages settles the earthly nature of the kingdom. This salient feature of the program gave shape to the Jewish expectations of our Lord’s day, and He never denounced them as false or mistaken, but, on the contrary, admitted that they were correct, though defective by omission of something else destined to come first. These expectations were, in fact, the great ground of the Jewish rejection of the claims of Christ to be the Messiah; He made no attempt at that time to found the earthly kingdom they rightly anticipated..

Now, one of the leading attributes of God is unchangeableness, combined with variation of plan for the attainment of His purpose, as the case may require. It is plainly stated {Ro 11:29} that “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” Hence, the land of promise is entailed for ever to the seed of Abraham, and the sceptre of this earth—not some other sceptre—to the seed of David. An everlasting and universal kingdom on earth governed by a son of David, whose earthly throne is established on Mount Zion, is a fundamental feature of the Davidic program. (Note: See why I disagree.) The moral features of this kingdom are given with great fullness in the 72nd and other Psalms; it is to be marked especially by righteousness, by peace, and by unexampled prosperity, and also by universal diffusion of the knowledge of the Lord.

It was further revealed in the Psalms that—

III. THE KING WOULD BE DIVINE AS WELL AS HUMAN; HE WOULD BE GOD AND MAN IN ONE PERSON—DAVID’S SON YET DAVID’S LORD.

Note: In this section Rev. Guinness clearly points to Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of all God’s promises to David! It seems to me he contradicts what he said earlier in the statement, “It is a very common and deplorable mistake to confound the prophecies of this literal kingdom of David’s son with the spiritual kingdom of Christ which now exists, as if the former were fulfilled in the latter. No such spiritual kingdom could by any possibility fulfill the everlasting covenant made with David, which was to the effect that his kingdom as well as his dynasty should be everlasting.” Any comments about this are appreciated. Please write them in the comment section below.

A most marvelous revelation this, impossible almost of conception to a Jew of David’s day, and esteemed blasphemous by the Jews of our own day. It is not that incarnation is foretold as a doctrine, or that any dogmatic statement is made on the subject; but in various Psalms, and especially in three, expressions are used, statements are made, and pictures are presented, which admit of no other possible meaning.

In the 2nd Psalm we have a description of the enthronement of the Lord’s anointed King on His holy hill of Zion, in spite of the determined opposition of a league of inveterate enemies. The extent of the dominion and the nature of the rule prove that the Psalm does not refer to David, but to his greater Son, In the midst of this description occur the strange and most notable words: “I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto Me, Thou art My Son this day have I begotten Thee.” The son and heir of David is then the Son of God—not a mere man adopted as a son like Solomon, but the begotten Son of God. The statement embodied a strange, startling, new, and almost incredible idea when it was penned, though three thousand years later, in our nineteenth century, we can read it as an allusion to a familiar truth. Let us try and realize the marvel of the fact that it was placed on the page, as an item of the Davidic program, a thousand years before Christianity familiarized men’s minds with the doctrine of the Divine Sonship. It was placed there when it was not understood; the Jews never understood it,—they do not understand it now, they cannot account for it. Yet there it is—the royal son of David was to be the begotten Son of God. He who was to reign for ever was to share the Divine nature as well as the nature of man. This explains the possibility of an eternal rule, as well as many another apparent contradiction in the Davidic program. (Note: It looks like a contradiction to Rev. Guinness because he was under the influence of the doctrines of Darby’s dispensationalism.)

The 45th Psalm confirms the 2nd Psalm on this point. The meaning of the Psalm is defined in the first verse: “I speak of the things which I have made touching the king.” It treats of the person of the king, of his enemies and his victories, of his kingdom and righteous rule. In the midst of all this we find the following words addressed to him “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”

Now here it is evident that the one who is anointed is a human being, since he is fairer than the children of men, and grace is poured into his lips, and God has blessed him and anointed him with the oil of gladness above his fellows. He is as clearly the great predicted son of David, since he is to reign for ever. This one is addressed as God: “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre.” Even if the words were not quoted and applied in the New Testament as having this force, there is no mistaking the construction of the Psalm when it is carefully studied. The one addressed in the sixth verse is the one spoken of in the seventh (“Thy throne is for ever”; “Thy sceptre is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, therefore,” etc.). In the former he is called God, in the latter he is spoken of as anointed by God. Here again was a mysterious intimation which might have prepared Israel for a Messiah who, without blasphemy, could lay claim to a Divine nature. It did not have this effect; yet the prediction is plain.

And once more—in the 110th Psalm, which again treats of the great King, the rod of whose strength is to go forth from Zion, and who is to rule in the midst of His enemies and judge among the heathen, we have not only David speaking of his son as his Lord, but Jehovah inviting Him to sit at His own right hand until His foes should be made His footstool. This wonderful vision again implies the Divine as well as human nature of the Messiah King. For “to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool?” Without a recognition of this double nature there is no solution of the question which silenced the Jews in the days of Christ: “If David call him Lord, how is he then his son?”

Though not properly part of the program as given to David himself, yet as part of the Old Testament program concerning David’s seed, and as amplifying gloriously the everlasting covenant, passages from some of the later prophets ought to be considered here. The combination of divinity with humanity is specially clear in the following:

“Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon His kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.” {Isa 9:6, 7}

Here it is clear that the one who sits on the throne of David, and orders and establishes His kingdom for ever with judgment and with justice, is not only “born” as a child into his family, but is also “the mighty God, the Father of eternity.”

“Behold, the days shall come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment in the earth. In His days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is His name whereby He shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” (Jer 23:5, 6}

JEHOVAH TZIDKENU—a Divine title—is here given to a branch from the stem of David.

Again: “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” {Mic 5:2}

In these words it is evident that the Son of David, who is to issue from the town of David, and to be the foretold ruler in Israel, is one “whose goings forth” have been from the days of eternity.

Continued in Chapter V. The Davidic Programme. – Part II.

All sections of The Divine Programme of The World’s History By H. Grattan Guinness