(A LETTER TO A YOUNG BELIEVER)
I am sorry to hear that your faith in the inspiration of the Book of the prophet Daniel should be in any way shaken by the pernicious efforts of men who profess to uphold the integrity of the whole Book of God of which they are teachers; but who are dealing deceitfully with and corrupting it. And this they do to their own (we pray, not eternal) shame, and to the unsettling of those who follow their unhappy teaching. It remains true, however, that God declares He has magnified His word above all His name. You and I can rest assured, therefore, that in spite of the combined assaults of wicked men led by Satan with the object of undermining its veracity, when heaven and earth shall have passed away, God's word will remain, stable as His eternal throne.
This much the Lord Jesus surely meant when He said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away but my words shall not pass away” —an utterance which is calculated to convey great comfort to our hearts, since it is the word of the Son of God Himself; and the written word is equal in authority, surely, to His spoken word.
Your letter, however, is more particularly occupied with Daniel and the book of his prophecy, and your questions deal more with its authenticity. “Was Daniel the author?” You ask, was the book written in the sixth century B.C. or “circa 100 B.C.?” “Are its historical parts all true or mixed up with very much of fable?” “As it is claimed that the so-called prophetic parts were written after the events they describe, what proof have you that they were written before?” The above seem to be the most important of your questions, but as I cannot undertake to answer them all at present, I will confine myself in this letter especially to the prophetic parts of the book. And of the prophecies, that of the Seventy Weeks (chap. 9.) will answer our purpose as well as any other. For if this can be proved to have been written before the events therein mentioned took place, we may reasonably conclude that the remaining prophecies are equally authentic, and that the higher critics have, as usual, made a mistake.
This prophecy of seventy weeks Dean Farrar was pleased to call “a chronological prophecy.” He also asserted that the prophecies of Daniel were the only ones in the Bible of this class, and that “this fact tells overwhelmingly against its inspiration.”
Now this is a most extraordinary statement, and one that is not at all correct. Compare; for instance, the prediction by Jeremiah of the seventy years' captivity (29:10); the prediction given by Isaiah that within sixty-five years Ephraim should be broken, and not be a people (7:8); and the prediction through the prophet Ezekiel respecting the desolation of the land of Egypt for forty years (29:11, 12). These are surely plain instances of chronological prophecy, and show that, however, learned the higher critics may profess to be, they certainly do not seem to display a very intimate acquaintance with the letter of the word any more than with its spirit.
Now let us turn to the prophecy. “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city to finish transgression.... and to bring in everlasting righteousness.... and to anoint the most holy” (Dan. 9:24-27). Here is a general statement of the leading events of the period mentioned in the prophecy. And we find that everlasting righteousness is to be brought in before it closes, and the most holy place prepared for the worship of God. It is evident, therefore, that the end of the seventy weeks will usher in the thousand years of blessing.
The next verse gives details as to the starting point, and the divisions of the weeks. There can be no reasonable doubt, it would seem, that the seventy weeks began in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes' reign. In that year Nehemiah was commissioned to restore and build Jerusalem (Neh. 2), which is what we find in this chapter (9:25).
The decree to Ezra referred to the temple and had nothing to say to the city (Ezra 7). From the twentieth year, then, of this Persian monarch's reign, we have seven weeks marked off, or forty-nine years, in which the street and the wall of the city should be built in troublous times. The account of these times may be read in the book of Nehemiah.
The next division consists of sixty-two weeks, and these added to the previous seven weeks make in all sixty-nine weeks, and reach up to Messiah, the Prince. Thus we have sixty-nine weeks or 483 years, separated from the full term of seventy weeks or 490 years, of the prophecy. These begin, as we have seen, with Artaxerxes, and end with the Messiah as come in the flesh. Such being the case it becomes of paramount importance to ascertain when Artaxerxes ascended the throne of Persia, in order that the twentieth year of his reign may be accurately fixed upon.
Now the date given in our Bibles for the latter period is B.C. 446, which would make the commencement of his reign about B.C. 465. But according to a nearly contemporary historian, this event took place much earlier. Thucydides relates that the accession of Artaxerxes had taken place before the flight of Themistocles from Greece to. the Persians, and, though he gives no date for the event, he incidentally mentions that it was during the siege of Naxos by the Athenian Fleet.
Thucydides' statement is that Themistocles' purpose was to go to the king (of Persia), and finding a ship at Pydna, bound for Ionia, he embarked and was carried by foul weather upon the fleet of the Athenians that was blockading Naxos...after lying out at sea a day and a night, he arrived afterward at Ephesus. And Themistocles.... took his journey upwards in company of a certain Persian of the low countries, and sent letters to Artaxerxes the son of Xerxes, lately come to the kingdom; wherein was written to this purpose, “I, Themistocles, am coming to thee, who, of all. the Grecians, as long as I was forced to resist thy father who had attacked me, have done your house the most harm,” &c. (i. 137). Thus it may be seen both from the testimony of Thucydides, and the letter from Themistocles, that Xerxes had died, and his son was reigning in his stead.
Again, Plutarch, speaking of the flight to Persia, says, “Thucydides, and Charon of Lampsacus ... relate that Xerxes was then dead, and that it was to his son Artaxerxes that Themistocles addressed himself... The opinion of Thucydides seems most agreeable to chronology, though it is not perfectly well settled.” (Life of Thenaist.) Still it is well to remember that Thucydides and Charon were both nearly contemporary with the times of Artaxerxes, and their testimony more to be depended on, therefore, than that of much later historians who assert that the flight took place while Xerxes was still reigning.
It is unfortunate, however, that Thucydides gives no dates to guide us in our search, but there are other historians who do this. Diodorus places the flight of Themistocles in the second year of the 77th Olympiad (B.C. 471). The same date is given in the Armenian Chronicle of Eusebius; but in Jerome's Eusebius, Olym. 76. 4 is the date given, and this answers to B.C. 473. “Having then this point to start with, that the flight of Themistocles to the Persian court occurred during the year B. C. 473 when Artaxerxes was already, according to Thucydides, on the throne, we are warranted in supposing that his reign commenced before the time of the Passover of that year, from which the Jews were accustomed to date the beginning of the year. Consequently, the Passover of B.C. 473 would commence the second year of Artaxerxes' reign and B.C. 455, the twentieth year, when, as we learn from Nehemiah (Chap. 2.), he received his commission in the month Nisan (the time of the Passover) from the king, “to build up the broken down walls of Jerusalem.”