they cannot have been fulfilled in literal days, we know that the time, as well as the events, must also have been given by a type; and we accordingly interpret it by the Bible rule for all such cases. Also, when it can be demonstrated, that a part of any prophetic period has been fulfilled in years, the rational inference is, that the remainder of the same period will be fulfilled in like manner.

Mr. Colver says, of the prophetic days, in Daniel, that "If Daniel mean years in these numbers, there may be some plausibility in the 1843 interpretation,' but only some plausibility; for the fixing of their date from the origin of the seventy weeks, in the night vision, is both gratu itous and arbitrary. But if, on the other hand, Daniel mean what he says, 'days;' then is the whole scheme as baseless as an uninspired vision of the night." When he delivered the same lecture on the Sabbath, to his own people, he stated that if they were years, the world would end in 1843; and that any school-boy could see it, for if 490 terminated at the death of Christ, the 2300 days would terminate in 1843; and that then the world must end, unless it can be shown that some other event is then to take place, and he did not see how that can be done. He also admitted, at the same time, that the great body of our standard Protestant commentators had understood

them as years; and gave as the reason, that some one had first so called them, and the "others had followed in the same track, until they had got the cart rut so deep that they could not get out." He also admits in his book, "From the time of Mede, it seems to have been pretty generally taken for granted, by the great body of commen

tators and expositors, 'that, in the prophetic writings, a day stands for a year.'

p. 12. There is probably no point on which Protestant commentators have been so well agreed, as that the days in Daniel and John are so many years. Faber, Prideaux, the learned Joseph Mede, Scott, Bishop Newton, Sir Isaac Newton, and many other writers of note, have considered this a settled question. And the only way in which our modern theologians can defend themselves against the doctrine of Christ's coming, is by going back upon the old abandoned Popish ground, and finding in Antiochus Epiphanes the hero of Daniel's prophecy. Indeed, so universal has been this interpretation of these periods, that Prof. Stuart says in his "Hints on Prophecy," page 77, "It is a singular fact, that THE GREAT MASS OF INTERPRETERS in the English and American world have, for many years, been wont to understand the days designated in Daniel and in the Apocalypse, as the representatives or symbols of years. I have found it difficult to trace the origin of this general, I MIGHT SAY, ALMOST UNIVERSAL CUSTOM." To overturn, or set aside such an 66 UNIVERSAL CUSTOM," will require more than mere assertion. Even Mr. Colver admitted, in his second lecture, in the Marlboro' Chapel, that to prove his case, it would be as necessary for him to show their fulfilment in literal days, as it would for him to produce a tally with the same figures as those on the tag of his trunk, in order for him to get such trunk from the railroad depot; that if the tag of his trunk had the figures 1290, 1335 and 2300, he must produce tallies with PRECISELY THE same figures, or he could not get his trunk, and

that he must show those periods fulfilled in days, or he could not get his case. This, however, with many other things which he uttered in his own desk, and at the chapel, he has wisely omitted to give in the printed copy (?) of those lectures. We shall endeavor to show that as he has produced no tally with those numbers, that he cannot have his "trunk," and has not proved his case. That the "seventy weeks" are weeks of years, he dare not deny, but says of them, "It is somewhat amusing to notice the peculiar process to which these "seventy weeks" are subjected. It is admitted by all that they cover a period of four hundred and ninety years. But still, it is insisted that the angel meant weeks of days, and that, to understand him, we must first reduce them to days; and, then, that we must consider each day the symbol of a year, giving four hundred and ninety years. That is, he did not mean weeks, but days, that is, he did not mean days, but years." p. 15.

We admit that there is nothing said about days, at this time by the angel, neither is there anything said about years. The Hebrew is seventy heptades, or seventy sevens. Now a "seven" among the Jews, when applied to time, signified a week; and they had their weeks of years, and also weeks of days. It is, therefore, correctly rendered "seventy weeks." The question, then, is, are they weeks of years, or weeks of days? The angel told Daniel that he had come to make him understand the vision; and he could give him no understanding of the vision, unless the 70 weeks were weeks of just such periods of time as were denoted in the vision. If, therefore, the

2300 days were simply days, the seventy weeks were weeks of days; but if they are 2300 years, then the seventy weeks are weeks of years.

When we reflect that the vision, (not a part of it,) was to be 2300 days long, and that Daniel is told that the sanctuary will then be cleansed; that when Daniel had seen, from the 25th of Jeremiah, that the seventy years that they were to serve the king of Babylon were accomplished, and that he then prayed, (Daniel ix. 16, 17,) "O Lord, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain; because for our sins and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us. Now, therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord's sake:"-who does not see that he supposed that the 2300 days ended with the 70 years, and that the sanctuary would then be cleansed? for we find that he prayed for the very thing which God had promised to do at the end of the 2300 days. And when it is seen that, at the beginning of his supplications, the same angel GABRIEL that had explained all of the vision of the 2300 days, but the time, to Daniel, is commissioned to fly swiftly, and informs Daniel that he "has now come forth to give him skill and understanding," and exhorts him to "understand the matter, and consider the vision," and then begins where he left off before, shows him that "seventy sevens are cut off," (for the best scholars admit that such is the original, to "anoint the Most Holy;" that after that the people

of the prince that shall come, shall destroy the city and SANCTUARY, (not cleansed yet,) and that "for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate till the coNSUMMATION, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate," who cannot see that the sanctuary cannot be cleansed till it shall cease to be overspread by abominations at the consummation; that that determined must have reference to the 25th of Jeremiah, which Daniel was considering, which extends down to the end of the world; that the 2300 days must therefore extend to that time; and that therefore the "seventy sevens are cut off" from the 2300 days, are periods of the same length of time, and mark this commencement? When, therefore, it is proved that the seventy sevens are, years, will it not consequently follow that the 2300 days are years?

The title of Mr. Colver's book is, "The Prophecy of Daniel, literally fulfilled." The ques tion then is, has he shown a literal fulfilment of these prophecies, and that those days were fulfilled in literal days?

To prove its fulfilment in days, he makes Antiochus the HERO of Daniel's prophecy, and quotes largely from Rollin-a Roman Catholicto prove that instead of the fulfilment of the vision in 2300 days, a single act of Antiochus covered that length of time. Porphyry, a heathen, is also referred to, in support of the same views.

Mr. Colver admits that the 11th and 12th chapters cover the same ground that is covered by the 8th; and as those two bring us down to the resurrection, the "little horn" that waxed exceeding great, must exist to the same time, and the sanctuary will then be cleansed.