It is striking to find how a false start exposes souls to perilous delusion. In this case the effect was to discard openly the latter part of Daniel. And no wonder. Prophecy, as was assumed, has to do with general principle, history with particular facts. Now it is plain that Dan. 11, on the face of it, is as minute as a history, so far as it speaks. There are evident gaps, not by error but by design, in its course: one brief after verse 3, the other very great after the Maccabaean era till “the time of the end,” as verse 33 itself points out. This scripture should have arrested Dr. A.'s steps. Instead of judging himself and his fallacious principle, he fell into the sin of rejecting God's word, the root of infidelity. Inspired history is as suggestive of general principle as prophecy; and prophecy is occupied alike in the Hebrew and the Greek scriptures with distinct places, fixed times, definite persons, and particular facts. Even in the symbolic forms of Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah and the Revelation this holds good: how much more from Genesis throughout the entire range of discursive prophecy! The general difference is one of degree only. Prophecy is anticipated history, though it is much more; and its language is occasionally no less explicit, though we can understand that in divine wisdom it is often veiled so as to exclude human intention from its fulfillment. Thus it becomes all the more impressive when surprisingly accomplished. Scripture, whether historical or prophetic, is full of Christ, in contrast with the first man led of Satan. It abounds in particular facts and precise dates, which no wit of man could have anticipated. God divulged the future to act on souls there and then, according to spiritual zeal and intelligence, whilst not a little might remain only to be cleared up later. No maxim, however, is more erroneous than the assumption that it is only the event which explains. This is to deny the proper value of prophecy till, becoming history in effect, it ceases to be prophecy. Not so did Noah, Abraham, Daniel, Simeon, Anna, or those that looked for the redemption of Jerusalem. Doubtless it yields evidence when accomplished to convince unbelievers, but its proper function is to cheer, guide and edify believers beforehand. “Shall I hide from Abraham that which I do?”
The exceptional cases of Jonah with Nineveh, and of Isaiah with Hezekiah's sickness, were indeed admonitory; but they are perverted to overthrow the rule. When prophecy is made conditional, its true character is annulled. In an exceptional instance, conditions may be either expressed or understood, but to take advantage of this fact, which no one disputes, in order to deny the general current of absolute prediction, is deplorably evil. Is God to be shut out of prophecy? Can He not, does He not, know the end from the beginning? Man changes, no doubt; but God in prophecy reveals the future with absolute certainty and precision, and this is a mark of favor to His own. Nor is it merely as to their own circumstances, for God disclosed to Abraham the destruction which, concerning Lot far more than himself, fell with unmitigated severity on the guilty cities of the plain. Earlier still God had revealed the long affliction of the chosen race, in a land not theirs, but their coming out with great substance, and the divine judgment of their oppressors, and their entrance into Canaan in the fourth generation. There was ample evil in Israel, but it did not hinder the punctual fulfillment of the prophecy. Ishmael too had his lot, foreknown both to Hagar generally and to Abraham with yet more particularity, and independently of moral conduct. And what shall we say of the flood predicted with its defined space of warning for 120 years, to say nothing of the seven days that preceded the actual deluge (Gen. 7:4, 104For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth. (Genesis 7:4)
10And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth. (Genesis 7:10))? And Noah's curse on Canaan, as distinguished from the blessing of Shem and the enlargement of Japheth, what has conditionality to do with it? The word of the Lord endureth forever. One might dwell on Joseph's dreams and interpretations, as well as on Jacob's blessings on his sons, but enough is said to demonstrate the error, its grave character and its consequences.
The fact is that scripture everywhere rises up to break the theory that prophecy is uniformly conditional. The assumption would really annul the largest part, if not the whole, of proper prophecy. Its author felt surer of its harmlessness than of its truth; but he lived to point the moral for others, if not for himself, that an error in principle about God's word is an unmitigated evil which may injure ordinary men yet more, because in his own case the poison found an antidote in the ardent homage his soul paid to Christ and in unfeigned faith in His atoning work. But in itself falsehood defiles and severs from God's mind, as the truth gives communion and sanctification. Evil communications corrupt good manners. W. K.