belaboured, thereby to overthrow all that the Christians alleged from these prophecies for the Messiah, which he would have thought to be all false; and the other proposition he endeavoured to clear, thereby to make out, that the whole book was spurious, not written by Daniel, but by some one else, after the facts therein spoken of were done, as if that could not be prophetically foretold which was so exactly fulfilled. And for this reason was it, that he took upon him to prove those facts to be so exactly true as in those prophecies contained. For which purpose he made use of the best Greek historians then extant. Such were Callinicus Sutorius, Diodorus Siculus, Hieronymus, Polybius, Posidonius, Claudius Theon, and Andronicus Alypius; and from them made evident proof, that all that is written in the eleventh chapter of Daniel, was truly, in every particular, acted and done in the order as there related; and from this exactness of completion endeavoured to infer the assertion mentioned, that these prophecies were written after the facts were done, and therefore are rather historical narratives relating things past, than prophetical predictions foreshewing things afterwards to come. But Jerome turns the argument upon him, and with more strength of reason infers, that this way of opposing these prophecies gives the greatest evidence of their truth, in that what the prophet foretold is hereby allowed to be so exactly fulfilled, that he seemed to unbelievers not to foretel things to come, but to relate things past. Jerome, in his comments on Daniel, makes use of the same authors that Porphyry did; and what is in these comments are all the remains which we now have of this work of that learned heathen, or of most of those authors which he made use of in it. For this whole work of Porphyry is now lost, as are also most of the histories abovementioned which he quotes in it. For the histories of Callinicus Sutorius, Hier

q Hieronymus in Proœmio ad Comment. in Danielem.

r Jerome, speaking of Porphyry as to this matter, hath these words: Cujus impugnatio testimonium veritatis est. Tanta enim dictorum fides fuit, ut propheta incredulis hominibus non videatur futura dixisse, sed narrasse præterita.' In Proœmio ad Comment. in Danielem.

s This Hieronymus wrote an history of the successors of Alexander. See of him above, part 1, book 8, under the year 311.

onymus, Posidonius, "Claudius Theon, and "Andro nicus Alypius, are wholly perished; as is also the greatest part of Polybius and Diodorus Siculus. Had we all these extant, we might from them be enabled to make a much clearer and fuller explication of these prophecies, especially from Callinicus Sutorius, who lived in the time of Antonius Pius, the Roman emperor; and having, in ten books, written an history of the affairs of Alexandria, included therein much of the Jewish transactions. And it is to be lamented, that not only these authors, and this work of Porphyry, in which he made so much use of them, are now lost; but that also the books of Eusebius, Apollonarius, and Methodius,a which they wrote in answer to this heathen adversary, have all undergone the same fate, and are, in like manner, to the great damage both of divine and human knowledge, wholly lost, excepting only some few scraps of Methodius, preserved in quotations out of him by John Damascen and Nicetas. For, were these still extant, especially that of Apollonarius, who wrote with the greatest exactness of the three, no doubt, much more of those authors would have been preserved in citations from them than we now have of them, there being at present no other remains of those ancient historians (excepting Polybius and Diodorus Siculus) but what we have in Jerome's comments on Daniel, and his proem to them.

Jerome and Porphyry exactly agree in their explication of the eleventh chapter of Daniel, till they come to the twenty-first verse. For what follows from thence to the end of the chapter was all explained by Porphyry to belong to Antiochus Epiphanes,

t Posidonius was of Apamea in Syria, and wrote, in fifty-two books, a continuation of Polybius down to the wars of Cæsar and Pompey, in which time he flourished.

u Who Claudius Theon and Andronicus Alypius were, or of what times they wrote, we have no account.

x Hieronymus in Dan. xi, 1, 2, 3, &c.

y For he was contemporary with Galen, who lived in that time. Suidas in Καλλίνικος.

z Suidas, ibid.

a Hieronymus in Procemio prædicto.

b Philostorgius, lib. 8, c. 14.

c Hieronymus in Comment ad Dan. xi, 21, & in Proœmio ad Comment,

prædict.

VOL. III.

36

and to have been all transacted in the time of his reign. But Jerome here differs from him, and saith, that most of this, as well as some parts of the eighth and twelfth chapters of the same book, relate principally to Antichrist; that, although some particulars in these prophecies had a typical completion in Antiochus Epiphanes, yet they were all of them wholly and ultimately fulfilled only in Antichrist; and this, he saith, was the general sense of the fathers of the Christian church in his time. And he explains it by a parallel taken from the seventy-first Psalm, (that is, the seventy-second, according to the Septuagint,) which in some parts of it was typically true of Solomon, and therefore it is called a psalm for Solomon, but was wholly and ultimately only so of Christ. And therefore he would have these prophecies which are in Daniel viii, 9-12, 23-26; xi, 21-45; xii, 6-13, to be fulfilled in the same manner, that is, in part and typically in Antiochus, but wholly and ultimately only in Antichrist. The truth of the matter seems to be this, that as much of these prophecies as relate to the wars of the king of the North and the king of the South, (that is, the king of Syria and the king of Egypt) was wholly and ultimately fulfilled in those wars; but as much of these prophecies as related to the profanation and persecution which Antiochus Epiphanes brought upon Jewish church was all typically fulfilled in them; but they were to have their ultimate and thorough completion only in those profanations and persecutions which Antichrist was to bring upon the church of

Christ in after times.

the

One particular mentioned in these prophecies of Daniel, and fulfilled under Antiochus, is especially taken notice of, as typifying in him what was to hap pen under Antichrist in after times, that is, the profanation of the temple at Jerusalem, and the ceasing of the daily sacrifices in it. This Daniel said was to continue for a time, and times, and an half of time, that is, three years and an half, a time in that place signifying a year, and times two years, and an

d Daniel xii, 7.

half of

a time an half year, as all agree; and so long, Josephuse tells us, the profanation of the temple and the interrupting of the daily sacrifices in it lasted, that is, from the coming of Apollonius, and his profanation of the said temple, to the purifying of it, and the new dedication of that and the new altar in it by Judas Maccabæus. This prophecy, therefore, was primarily and typically fulfilled in that profanation and new dedication of the temple and altar at Jerusalem: but its chief and ultimate completion was to be in that profanation of the church of Christ which it was to suffer under the reign of Antichrist for the space of those twelve hundred and sixty daysh mentioned in the Revelation. For those days there signify so many years, and three years and an half, reckoning them by months of thirty days length, make just twelve hundred and sixty days. These days, therefore, literally understood, make the three years and an half, during which the profanation and persecution of Antiochus remained in the church of the Jews; and the same, mystically understood, make the twelve hundred and sixty years during which the profanation and persecution of Antichrist was to remain in the church of Christ, at the end whereof the church of Christ is to be cleansed and purified of all the profanations and pollutions of Antichrist, in the same manner as at the end of three years and an half the temple at Jerusalem was cleansed and purified from all the profanations and pollutions of Antiochus. One objection against this is, that Daniel, (xii, 11,) reckons the duration of this profanation by the number of twelve hundred and ninety days, which can neither be applied to the days of the profanation of Antiochus nor to those of Antichrist, for it exceeds both by the number of thirty. Many things may be said for the probable solving of this difficulty, but I shall offer at none of them. Those that shall live to see the extirpation of

e In Præfatione ad Historiam de Bello Judaico, & in ipsa Historia, lib. 1, c. 1; lib. 6, c. 11.

f 1 Maccab. i, 29-40. 2 Maccab. v, 24-26.

g 1 Maccab. iv, 41–60.

h Rev. xi, 3; xii, 6.

Antichrist, which will be at the end of those years, will best be able to unfold this matter, it being of the nature of such prophecies not thoroughly to be understood till they are thoroughly fulfilled.

But in the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, all the prophecies of Daniel that were concerning him, or any other of the Macedonian kings that reigned either in Egypt or Asia, having, as far as they related only to them, a full ending, I shall here also end this book.