symbols a faithful portraiture of its abominations, make a wrong decision. Since we have read the work of the learned Stuart, we have rejoiced the more that our humble abilities have been directed to the defence of the old paths." Proph. Illus., p. 231.

Of Mr. Dowling, Dr. Breckenbridge said: "As for this disquisition of Mr. Dowling, we may confidently say, that it is hardly to be conceived that anything could be printed by Mr. Miller, or Mr. Any-body-else, more shallow, absurd and worthless. There is hardly a point he touches on which he has not managed to adopt the very idlest conjectures of past writers on the prophecies; and this so entirely without regard to any coherent system, that the only clear conviction a man of sense or reflection could draw from his pamphlet, if such a man could be supposed capable of believing it, would be that the prophecies themselves are a jumble of nonsense. Such answers as his can have no effect, we would suppose, except to bring the whole subject into ridicule, or to promote the cause he attacks." Spirit of the 19th Century, March No., 1843.

Again he says, in speaking of "the general ignorance which prevails on this subject," that of it "no greater evidence need be produced than the fact that this pamphlet of Mr. Dowling has been extensively relied on, yea, preached, as a sufficient answer " to Mr. Miller.

On surveying the whole field of controversy, Professor Bush, while he claimed that the Spiritualists were nearer the truth, said of them: "They have not answered the arguments of their opponents, nor can they do it on the ground which they themselves professedly occupy in respect to a millennium. Assuming that that period is yet future, and its commencement of no distant date, the Literalists, or Adventists, bear down with overwhelming weight of argument upon them, maintaining that the Second Coming precedes and ushers in that sublime era. The Spiritualists say nay, but refuse to commit themselves to a defined position. All that they know is, that there is to be a millennium of some kind, occurring at some time, introduced in some way, and brought to an end from some cause; and that immediately thereupon the Lord is to descend from heaven, burn up the earth, raise the dead, and administer the judgment; but as

to the what, the when, the how, the why-on these points they rest content in knowing nothing, because of the impression taken up that nothing is to be known."— N. C. Repos., 1849, p. 248.

Dr. Jarvis, in his sermons, was particularly severe on Mr. Miller, but afterwards did him ample justice, as in the following. He said: "Mr. Miller, in his eagerness to make out his scheme, absolutely falsifies the language of the Bible. He makes Jehoram to have reigned five years, where the Scripture positively says he reigned eight; and between Amaziah and Azariah, or Uzziah, he introduces an interregnum of eleven years, for which he has not even the shadow of an authority in the Bible. He quotes, indeed, chapters 14th and 15th of the 2d book of Kings; and this may be sufficient for those who are ready to take his opinions upon trust. But, if you examine the chapters to which he refers, you will be astonished to find that there is not in either of them one word upon the subject."-Sermons, p. 55.

In his preface to his sermons Dr. JARVIS makes the following correction of the above. He says:

"It will be seen that in speaking of the curtailment of the reign of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, from eight to five years, and the introduction of eleven years of interregnum between the reigns of Amaziah and Uzziah, he has censured Mr. Miller in too unmeasured terms. These par

ticulars he is bound to explain.

"It would have been easier, and perhaps more advantageous to the author, to have made the alterations silently, and omitted the censure. But would it have been equally

honest?

"In preparing the introductory volume of his Ecclesiastical History, he had carefully avoided reading modern writers on chronology, for fear of being biased by their systems. For this reason he had never read the learned work of Dr. Hales; and though familiar with Petavius, Usher, and Marsham, a good while had elapsed since he had consulted them on the parts of history connected with the prophecies. But these great writers being entirely silent as to any interregnum in the kingdom of Judah, the existence of such an interregnum was entirely a new idea to him. Mr. Miller quoted 2 Kings, 14, 15, without mentioning the

verses from which he drew the inference; and it was not till the author had read Dr. Hales' Analysis' that he saw the correctness of that inference. If this admission gives Mr. Miller an advantage, he is fairly entitled to it. We cannot, for one moment, suppose that he knew anything about Dr. Hales or his work. As a plain, unlettered man, his perspicuity in reading his Bible, and his Bible only, is much to his credit; and we ought to consider it as giving additional force to the reasons assigned by Dr. Hales, that an ignorant man, as Mr. Miller confessedly is, should, from the mere examination of the Bible, have arrived at the same conclusion. The censure, however, in the sermon, holds good with regard to the reign of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings 8: 17; 2 Chron. 21: 5); but, being equally applicable to Archbishop Usher, should not have been laid particularly at Mr. Miller's door."

CHAPTER XV.

HIS TREATMENT OF OPPONENTS

SPECIMENS OF HIS PREACHING

COLLOQUIAL, EXPOSTULATORY, EXPOSITORY, ETC.

MR. MILLER did not consider that his reviewers always treated him and his arguments with the utmost fairness; and, in speaking of them, he sometimes retorted in terms of great severity. Considering his treatment, by the religious and secular press, and the contumely which was incessantly heaped on him, that he should, at times, manifest a degree of impatience, was more an occasion of regret than of surprise. Few men have been called to endure so great an amount of reproach as fell to his lot; and few could have endured it as he did. He was human, and shared in all the weaknesses common to humanity; but, whenever he failed to endure the smart of undeserved wounds with all the sweetness of gospel charity, no one more sincerely regretted it than he did; and his liability to err in this respect was with him a subject of many prayers and tears.

His severity, however, was often richly merited; and he

knew how to be severe, without being uncourteous. Those who used their learning to fritter away the plain meaning of Scripture, and to make it teach something which the common reader would never have perceived in it,- merely for the purpose of opposing his conclusions, he had little inclination to spare.

The

In speaking of the 8th chapter of Daniel, and the question, "How long shall be the vision?" he says, answer is, 'Unto 2300 days.'

"But,' says the critic, it is "evenings-mornings."' "No matter: all men seem to understand it days; for it is so translated in every language with which we are acquainted at the present day. Therefore, this can never be made plainer, if this compound Hebrew word should be criticized upon until the judgment shall set. I am sick of this continual harping upon words. Our learned critics are worse on the waters of truth than a school of sharks on the fishing-banks of the north, and they have made more infidels in our world than all the heathen mythology in existence. What word in revelation has not been turned, twisted, racked, wrested, distorted, demolished, and annihilated by these voracious harpies in human shape, until the public have become so bewildered they know not what to believe? They have fouled the waters with their feet.' I have always noticed where they tread the religious spirit is at a low ebb; it becomes cold, formal, and doubtful, at least. It is the mind of the Spirit we want, and God's word then becomes spirit and life unto us.

"The words "evenings-mornings" convey to our mind the idea of days; thus this vision is 2300 days long,' says the reader.

"'Yes. But how can all this be?' says the inquiring mind. 'Can three kingdoms rise up and become great ; from a small people become a strong nation; conquer all the nations of the earth, and then, in its turn, be subdued and conquered by a kingdom still more fortunate; and so on through three successive kingdoms, and do this in little over six years? Impossible.'

"But God has said it, and I must believe. Now the only difficulty is in time.'

"How can this be?'

"Very well,' says the dear child of God; I remember me: God says I must "dig for the truth as for hid treasure." I will go to work, and, while I am digging, I will live by begging. Father in heaven, I believe it is thy word; but I do not understand it; show me thy truth.'

"I had rather have one humble prayer of this kind, with an English Bible in my hand, than all the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin Bro. S. ever knew.

"The child then takes the word day, and compares spiritual things with spiritual, to find what his heavenly Father means by days in a figurative sense. The first text he lights upon is in Num. 14: 34, each day for a year.'

666

May this not be it?'

says the child.

"He takes hold of it by faith, carries it home, lays it up in his cell of sweets, richer than a lord, and again goes forth in search of more. He now lights upon Eze. 4: 6: 'I have appointed thee each day for a year.' He is now rich in very deed two jewels in one cell. He does not stop to criticize, like a Stuart, and query, and reason himself out of common sense and reason too; but, Abraham-like, he believes, and lays up his treasure at home.

"I see,' says the child,' this use of days was so ordained by my Father in two cases; and two witnesses are enough. But I am not certain that I have a right to use these jewels in this place. I will go and beg, and dig again.'

"In this excursion he lights on Daniel 9: 23-27: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people.'

666

Seventy weeks of what?' says the critic.

"I do not care a fig,' says the believing child, 'whether you call it days or years: I know how long it was in fulfilling.' """How long?'

"Exactly four hundred and ninety years: from the decree given in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, four hundred and fifty-seven years before Christ, unto his death, thirty-three years after the birth of Christ, making exactly four hundred and ninety years, or seventy sevens of years of the vision.’”

Prof. Stuart having applied the days in Daniel 12th to the times of Antiochus, when the context shows that the resurrection will follow their termination, Mr. Miller said:

66

Suppose Prof. Stuart had been a believing Jew, and