SEventy Weeks are determined or allotted:] That is, The Holy City shall again be restored, and Lxx. weeks of yeares are allotted and limited for the continuance thereof, and thy people with it: and that for this end, that during the standing thereof, the Messiah, ac­cording to vision and prophecy, may come to expiate sinne, and be anointed in his Kingdome.

The word [...] here translated determined or allotted signifies properly to be cut, or cut out, and so may seeme to imply such a sense, as if the Angel had said to Daniel, Howso­ever your bondage and Captivity under the Gentiles shall not altogether cease, untill that succession of Kingdomes, which I before [Page 3] shewed thee, be quite finished: yet shall God for the accomplishing his promise concer­ning the Messiah, as it were cut out of that long terme and certain limited Time, during which, the Captivity of Judah and Jerusa­lem being interrupted, the Holy City and Common-wealth in some measure shall again be restored, and so continue till Lxx. Weeks of yeares be finished.

Here I distinguish the beginning of the Times of the Holy City from the beginning of Jerusalem: For the Holy City is so called of the Temple as the principall part; and therefore the Time of the restitution thereof, to be reckoned from the Time the Temple was builded. But by Jerusalem is understood (as appeares in the next verse) the externall buildings and wals of the City, which were not restored, till some time after the Temple and Sanctuary was finished.

As for the impletion, all are now agreed, That the Beginning of these Weeks is to be reckoned from some Restoring, either of the Temple; and that in the second, third, or sixt yeare of the Raigne of some Darius; or of [Page 4] the City in the seventh or twentieth yeare of some Artaxerxes, Kings of Persia. But it can­not be from Darius the first sirnamed Hysta­spis; for then they would come out long be­fore the Birth of Christ. Nor from the first Artaxerxes sirnamed Longimanus, for he was an hinderer of the work of the Temple, and forbad the building thereof, Ezra cap. vers. 11. ad finem. Nor from the second Artaxerxes sir­named Mnemon: for so they would far over­reach the Destruction of Jerusalem. There­fore it remaines that they be counted from Darius the second, sirnamed Nothus; in the second yeare of whose raign the work of the Temple, after a long interruption, began to revive. Ezr. 4. v. 24. Hag. c. 1. & 2. Zachar. c. 1. &c. and in the sixt yeare of his raign was finished, Ezra 6. ver. 15.

Secondly, these Lxx. Weeks are the time allotted for the continuance of the Holy Ci­ty, and therefore must they last, as long as it lasted, and end with the end thereof: but this cannot be, unlesse we fixe their Epocha in the beginning of Darius Nothus. Ergo.

Which in the event is most true. For from [Page 5] the third yeare of Darius Nothus, when the work of the Temple (by the incitement of Haggai and Zachary renewed the year before) was now confirmed by a new Edict from the King to be finished, unto the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, are exactly 490 yeares, that is, Lxx. Weeks of years fully compleat.

In this third yeare of the King, and at the end of this Olympiadicall yeare, in the be­ginning of August (as may be supposed) came [Page 6] forth the Edict of Darius, some ten moneths after Zorobabel and Ieshua had begun to renew the work the yeare before, Hag. 1. 14, 15. And so much time (halfe thereof being Winter) may well be allowed for their enemies, to hear of the work, to goe see and do their best to hinder it, when they could not, to write and send unto the King, the searching of the Rolles, and obtaining a new Edict.

FRom the going out of the Commandment] I take not this Epocha to be that of the whole Lxx. Weeks, but a second Root of another, [Page 10] and lesser period of time comprehended in them; whose Beginning was to be after the Lxx. were begun, and the end before they should be ended. The Root of this second Computation is described to be a time when two things should be done: A Command­ment should go forth both to cause to Re­turne and also to Build, not the Temple (for that should be done before) nor some few houses onely, but the whole Area or Street and the Walls of Jerusalem, which should then be re-edified, though in a strait of Times; that is, it should be such a time, when a Commission to cause the people to return and re-inhabite, should be seconded with another, to build the Wall of Jerusalem, and the Plot within the Wall. For by [...] here, I understand properly that circuit boun­ding out the limits of the City, whereon the Wall was builded, and anciently used to be marked out with a Plough earing a furrow round about. By [...], which implies a broad place, I understand the Area, or Plot of ground within, whereon the houses were to be builded. From such an Epocha, and a Com­mission [Page 11] thus characterized as ye have heard, must this second computation be reckoned.

Vnto MESSIAH the PRINCE] that is, unto [...], Luke 23. 2. Mark 15. 32. or [...], as the Angell styles him, Luke 2. 11. There is no exposition, no inter­pretation of any passage in this Prophecy could seem so harsh, but I would be content to admit it, rather then yeeld that by MES­SIAH the PRINCE here named, should be meant any other then CHRIST our LORD and Redeemer. For I am perswa­ded that the Church of Israel in the Gospel (and from them the Apostles took it) had no other place of Scripture, whence they did or could ascribe the name of Christ and Mes­siah unto him they looked for, but only from this of Daniel. For there is no other Prophecy in all the Old Testament besides this, where that Name is directly given him, but only by way of type.

Shall be sevens of weeks, even Lxij. weeks] The numerall word [...] I have here translated distributively, understanding by [...] Hebdomadae septenae, that is, many seven [Page 12] Weeks, or as our English handsomly expres­seth, Sevens of Weeks: the sense to be as if the Angel had said, As the whole time limi­ted for the continuance of the Holy City from the first beginning to the last ending, consisteth of many Sevens of Weeks, viz. Lxx. Weeks: So from this after- Epocha here men­tioned unto MESSIAH, should be like­wise Sevens of Weeks, (plures septenniorum hebdo­mades) even Sixty two Weeks of yeares. For as in Lxx. are ten Sevens of Weeks; so in Lxij. are ix. times seven wanting one, and that little want makes no matter, there being eight whole sevens besides in that number, and you shall see in that which follows, examples of the like. The Hebrews want those num­bers which the Grammarians call Distribu­tive or Divisive, Terni, quaterni, quini, seni, septeni, &c. which they most what supply by repetition, as [...] septem septem, but not alwayes, as may appear 2 Sam. 18. 4. And all the people came out [...] ad centum & millia. i. centeni & milleni, by hundreds and by thousands. 1 Kings 18. 4. ‘ Obadiah hid the Pro­phets of the LORD [...] quin­quaginta [Page 13] viros in spelunca, id est, quinquagenos, by fifty in a Cave.’ Gen. 6. 19. Of all flesh thou shalt bring into the Ark [...] duo, i. bina, Twoes; and therefore afterward c. 7. ver. 9. it is dou­bled [...] two and two: yet of clean Beasts whereof he was to take seven, there is an odde one. To these I adde Ezra 1. v. 9, &c. ‘ This is the number of the vessels (to wit, of the House of the LORD which Cyrus by the hand of Mithredath numbred unto Shesh­bazzar Prince of Iudah) thirty Chargers of gold, a thousand Chargers of silver, twenty nine knives: thirty Basins of gold: silver Basins of a second sort, foure hundred and ten, and other vessels [...] (not mille, a thousand, but millena (Tremel. per millia) Thousands,’ to wit, almost three thousand wanting but one hundred. Other­wise if we translate it as a Cardinall number [a thousand] the summe will far exceed the Parts. For it follows in the next words, ‘ All the Vessels of gold and of silver were 5400.’ But unlesse the last number be taken divisive, the particulars 30 1000 29 30 410 1000 2499 make but 2500. wanting one. Nor do I see how this difficulty would other­wise be solved.

[Page 14] Now whether these examples be sufficient to make probable the Translation which I have given, I will not affirm; let others judge. I propound it to the consideration of the lear­ned, who can do it, without whose appro­bation I shall not satisfie my self. Yet thus much I am sure of; that if this [...], which we are wont to translate seven weeks, could be well bestowed, the chiefest difficulty were taken from this Prophecy. For the Threescore and two Weeks alone counted from the Epocha here named, so well befits the di­stance from thence to CHRIST, that the event seemeth to argue, that they should be there fixed, and not reckoned from any other Beginning.

Moreover that [...] should be a generall expression of what in the Lxij. Weeks is after more particularly determined, may seem probable for these reasons. 1. Be­cause the Angel ascribes no proper event unto them; but having presently named the Lxij. Weeks, makes no farther reckoning of those other, but follows and dwels upon these on­ly, as though the other were implied and con­tained [Page 15] in them. 2. Those who count them for Xlix. years, and continue the Lxij. Weeks from the end of them to make up Lxix. Weeks in all, can give no sufficient reason why they should be thus separated and divi­ded asunder. For that which the followers of Funccius, (who reckon from Artaxerxes Longiman.) assign to be done in seven Weeks of years (to wit, that during all that time Je­rusalem with the rest of the Cities of Judah were building and repairing) is grounded neither upon Scripture, nor other Story, but pure and meer conjecture. Scaliger finds (Nehem. cap. 13. 6.) That Nehemiah returned again to Artaxerxes his Court, in the 32. year of his raign, and thence supposeth that the building of the City, about which he was sent, was finished but the year before, and that to be the determination of those seven Weeks; there being then 49. years expired from the time the Lxx. began at the Building of the Temple under Darius Nothus. But to make this good, he is fain to raise the Epocha of the Lxx. so high in the raign of Darius, that they end before the destruction of Jerusalem. [Page 16] Besides, he seems not to be aware, that these seven Weeks are by the Text to be counted from a time, when a Commission came out to cause to return and to build Jerusalem, and not from the time of building the Tem­ple. Nor does it follow, Nehemiah staid so long there, therefore the City was till then in building: Nay, what if the Text rightly con­strued, imports not that Nehemiah in the 32. year of Artaxerxes returned to the Court; but rather that obtaining new leave of the King, he came then to Jerusalem the second time, whence he had been long absent? For the particle [...] Cap. 13. ver. 6. seems not to be taken rationally for [Quia] but discretively for [...] id est, [Sed, But] as Ezra 4. 3. 2 Sam. 16. 18. Gen. 4. 8. and so that Text of Nehemiah to be read after this sense, And in all this time (saith he) I was not there; But in the 32. yeare of Ar­taxerxes, &c. I came to the King, that is, into his presence, to ask new leave; which after a lit­tle waiting he obtained. Nor is it very cre­dible, that the time he first set the King, cap. 2. ver. 6. should be twelve years.

If therefore [...] be granted to be a [Page 17] generall expression of what the Lxij. Weeks more particularly determine, the way where­by it may be translated to such a sense is as I have before represented: yet is it not the only one; I can adde two wayes more: as first this, [...] seven useth, we know, to be taken indefinitely for plurimi, multoties, &c. Thus [...] would without any ano­maly or novelty at all, signifie indefinitely [Many Weeks] if it might seem probable, that in a passage of reckoning by definite num­bers, some numerall word may be taken in­definitely. The sense would be all one with that I have followed. viz. As the whole time limited for the continuance of the Holy City consisted of many Weeks, even Lxx. Weeks: So also this lesser period contained therein, from the Epocha mentioned unto MESSI­AH, shall be a time of Many Weeks, even Lxij. Weeks. Another way, were it not somewhat harsh, might be this. The He­brew Nouns of Cardinall numbers do som­times substantivare, signifying their numbers in abstracto, like those Greek Numeralls, Mo­nas, Dyas, Trias, Tetras, Hebdomas. So Gen. [Page 18] cap. 7. 10. cap. 8. 12. we have [...] & [...], i. hebdomas dierum. Exod. 34. 29. [...], Decas verborum, Decalogus. Gen. 17. 12. [...], Filus ogdoadis dierum. Ioshua 14. 2. [...], Novenarius or Enneas tribuum. If they be Substantives in statu con­structo, were they not, or may they not be so in absoluto? In the third Chapter and 29. ver. of Damel [...] in absoluto, seems to be a Substan­tive having an Adjective joyned with it, [...], Whereso­ever be­sides in Scripture Seven weeks are mentioned the words are [...] or [...] which we translate [one seven times.] If this therefore may be admitted, [...] in our Text of Daniel will sound per Ellipsin conjunctionis Hebdomades & Hebdomas, Weeks and a Week, the sense being all one with the former, saving that one Week is implied as singular from the rest, which may be that which the Angel afterward mentions ver. 27. If it were pointed [...], as by the con­sonants it might be, there would be no great question but it might be translated Weeks and a Week.

But if [...], must needs import some limited time of 49. years; I would ra­ther choose to count the Lxij. Weeks from the [Page 19] same Epocha with them under Artaxerxes Mne­mon, then from the end of them, and yet leave as probable a conjecture to be made of what was done in them, as those who follow Func­cius from the other Artaxerxes, do use to give.

I have sometimes considered, whether, if it be translated seven Weeks, those seven Weeks might not be applyed as rotundus numerus to those Fifty and two dayes, Nehem. 6. 15. where it is said, ‘So the Wall was finished in the 25. day of the Moneth Elul in fifty two dayes;’ somewhat more indeed then seven Weeks, yet short of se­ven & an half, and so not regarded in accompt by Weeks. If this could be, then the reason of the Angels division of weeks into 7. and 62. would be because of divers kinds of Weeks understood; the first of dayes, wherein the Wall of Jerusalem should be finished: the second of years, from thence unto the Messi­ah. If it seem impossible or unlikely that the Wall of the City should be repaired in so short a time, and therefore those words, (ac­cording to Iunius) to be meant of setting up the doors and bars only: I could say first, that [Page 20] the Wall was not new builded from the foundations, but repaired upon the old ru­ines. Secondly, the speedy dispatch thereof was taken for a wonder, even by the Jews Enemies, who thereupon (saith the Text) ‘perceived it was the hand of their God:’ So that, were there no worse scruple then this, it were easily answered; nor would examples That re­nowned Palace and Court of Nebuchad­nezzar, within which were those Pen­siles Horti, was fini­shed (saith Josephus) in fifteen dayes. Antiq. Judaic. li. 10. c. 11. in the La­tine c. 13. be wanting to parallel with it, such as might make it seem at least possible. As that strange and speedy building of the Walls of Athens by Themistocles, after that Xerxes had demolished them, reported by Diodor. Sic. lib. 11. Yea, to come more near to the thing in question, Iosephus lib. 6. c. 13. De Bell. Iud. tells us, That Titus, dividing the work amongst his Army, begirt Ierusa­lem in three dayes space, with a Wall of thirty nine Furlongs, and thirteen Bulwarks to hinder the Jews excursions from with­in, and all relief from without. What the materials were, I know not, but he sayes it was a thing beyond all belief, and might have seemed to be a work of some Moneths. But leaving this digression, let [Page 21] us see the computation and impletion of our Lxij. Weeks.

ANd after the threescore and two Weeks shall, &c.] That is, when the Threescore and two Weeks aforesaid shall expire, and be fully compleat, (for so the word [after] sup­poses they must be) MESSIAH shall be cut off, not onely from the living, by the death he should suffer upon the Crosse (for that was a little before) but from being any longer the [Page 28] King and Priest of that People, they refusing him to be theirs, and he casting off them from being His, which is the meaning of the words following [...], And they none of his: For [...] is to be understood, that so the con­junction Vau may couple similia tempora, [...], Et non erit ei populus ejus, or [...], And they shall be none of His. And for the Verb [...], that it signifies not onely a cutting off from life, but also from reigning as a King, or from being a Priest; See for the first, 1 Kings c. 2. ver. 4. & chap. 9. ver. 5. 2 Chron ch. 7. ver. 16. Ier. 33. 17. [...], &c. ‘There shall not be cut off to David a man to sit upon the throne of the House of Israel:’ All which have refe­rence to 2 Sam. c. 7. ver. 16. For the second, cut­ting off from the Priesthood, 1 Sam. 2. 33. to Eli, ‘ And the man of thine whom I shall not cut off from mine Altar. Ier. 33. 18. Neither of the Priests, the Levites [...] shall a man be cut off before me, to offer burnt offerings, &c. and to doe Sacrifice con­tinually.’

HEre the Angell tels us what should be be done in the last Week, both of the first Computation, and of the second, that is, the last of the Lxx. and the last of the Lxij. And of this first, as comming first in time.

Neverthelesse (saith he) he shall confirme a Covenant with Many one Week] That is, though the Body of the Jewish Nation should be cast off, end be [...], None of the people of the MESSIAH, yet for one whole week he should offer himself unto them, and ga­ther many of them into the Covenant of the Gospel: and this Week was the last Week of the Threescore and two Weeks, which, as I shewed before, was wholly spent in preach­ing [Page 36] to those of the Circumcision. This there­fore is, as it were, a Prolepsis, lest Daniel might think that none of his people should enter into the Covenant under Messiah. These Many therefore are that Remnant whereof S. Paul speaks Rom. 11. ‘That, though Israel were cast off, yet was there A Remnant accor­ding to the election of grace;’ and therefore he limits the hardnesse happened unto Israel, by [...], as not being universall.

And in half a Week, being a Desolator, he shall cause the Sacrifice and offering to cease] A Desola­ter, [...], a word which otherwise much troubleth the Translator; but being thus made a suppositum or Nominative case to the verb [...], (which hath no other near it) it both much clears the sense, and retains its propriety of signification. Nor is the Postpo­sition of the Nominative case to the verb against the use of the tongue; nor the traje­ction here so great, but the Latin will admit the same order of the words, viz. Et abolebit sacrificium & munus, atque erit super alam abomina­tionum Desolator: Or, Et abolebit sacrificium, & munus, qui erit super alam abominationum, Desola­tor. [Page 37] Howsoever the Translation be, this week the Angel now speaks of, is the last of the Seventy which should be but half run out, when the Temple and City should be de­stroyed, and the legall service made to cease. For if we reckon (as I think we should) the Seventy Weeks from the sixt year of Darius Nothus (when the Temple was finished) the Destruction thereof by Titus will fall out (as is shewed) in the midst of the last Week, the whole half thereof, from the beginning till then, having bin spent in warlike preparations and exploits, which ended with the burning and desolation both of City and Sanctuary.

Of those who end the Seventieth Week compleatly with the Destruction of Jerusa­lem, some seem so to understand this first part of the verse, as if the one Week here men­tioned were the last of the Seventy, and the confirmation of the Covenant to be therein, to respect only the first half thereof, wherein Christ made good his Covenant of preser­vation to the beleeving Jews, namely, (as I would explain it) by sending Cestius Gallus President of Syria, in the middle or fourth [Page 38] year of the last Week, about seven dayes to environ Jerusalem with an Army, for to be that sign and watch-word mentioned in the Gospel of the near approaching Desolation thereof, Luke 21. 20. that so those which were in Iudea being warned, might flee into the Mountains (of Arabia Petraea to Pella) and deliver themselves from those dayes of ven­geance and wrath upon their people. And in the other half of the Week which remai­ned, he should cause the sacrifice and offe­ring to cease by sending Vespasian with that second and fatall Army which should bring those wofull and vengefull Desolations up­on them.

As for the phrase of Confirming a Cove­nant (if the rest suted well) it would be no straining to interpret it, to be meant of pre­servation and exemption from a common calamity: For we have the like speech Gen. 6. 17, 18. where God having said to Noah, that he would destroy by the Flood every thing that breathed upon the earth; addeth, But with thee will I establish my Covenant, and thou shalt come into the Ark, thou and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy [Page 39] sons wives with thee, &c. Thus much of the Week and Half Week: But for the Desola­ter who should cause the sacrifice and obla­tion to cease, whether and how it may be ap­plied to Messiah himselfe, or otherwise con­strued, we shall better understand when the next is expounded.

And that [being] over a wing of Abominations] [...], I think literally rendred, as was the former. If any man would also have the order of the words precisely kept, and therefore [...], i. Desolater to keep his sta­tion here, as in the Hebrew, he may render the words thus, He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, [...], And [commanding] over a Wing of Abominations [be] a Desolater or make Desolation; The sense is yet the same: Or thus, And over a Wing of Abomi­nations [shall he be] who makes Desolation: All of them requiring nothing else, but that so com­mon Ellipsis of the Verb Substantive, which in some expressions of this language is per­petuall. Now for the construing and ex­pounding this and the rest which remains of this verse, I have alwaies in mine eye that part [Page 40] of the Prophecy of our Saviour in the Gospel, Mat. 24. Mark 13. where he so expresly referres to this of Daniel, with an unwonted caveat not to passe it over sleightly, Let him (saith he) that readeth, understand: which admonition, as it implies the speciall need we have of our Sa­viours Key to unlock it; so it may seem to intimate that neither the Lxx. before, nor the ordinary construction of their Rebbies then, had hit the meaning of this Scripture. Where­fore S. Luke relates not here (as Matth. and Mark do) our Saviours words verbatim, but exegetically; of set purpose (so I am perswa­ded) expounding this place of Daniel, as will appear by that which follows.

Over a Wing of Abominations] Auth. op. imperf. in Mat. hom. 49. initio hanc expo­sitionem ad Petrum re­fert. Hoc & Petrus, inquit, a­pud Cle­mentem exponit. That is, An Army of Idolatrous Gentiles. Even the selfe same which S. Luke saith Chap. 21. Ierusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles; who also expoundeth Wing by Armies, putting in stead of those words of our Saviour, [ ‘ When ye shall see the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet, stand in the holy place] these, When ye shall see Ierusalem compassed with Armies;’ and in both it follows, Then let them [Page 41] which be in Iudaea flee into the mountains. The word [...] Wing is of the Verb [...], (but once found in the Hebrew Scripture) which sig­nifies according to the Chaldee and Arabick, To gather together: besides, in the Arabick, cir­cundare, to environ or compasse about; Both significations sute well to an Army, and the latter, that which beleaguers and begirts a City or Fort besieged. Had S. Luke any refe­rence to this, when he speaks of Jerusalem compassed with an army? The metaphor also of a Wing leanes most this way, whether we consider their figure and motion being stretched out, or their posture when Birds of rapine sit couring over their prey. I will not say, the Romane Eagle was here aimed at, though [...], is used, not onely for Ala, a Wing, but for Alatum & Volatile, a Fowle or Winged Creature. It is sufficient that neither the nature nor name of a Wing is strange or unaccustomed to an Army. But how (will you say) will an Army of Abominations be made an Army of Gentiles? I answer, The Scripture in many places calleth Idols by the name of Abominations, that [Page 42] is, [...]: So the Egyptian Idols, Exod. 8. ver. 26, &c. are called, The Abomina­tion of the Egyptians. Ezek. 7. 20. The Jews are said to have made the Images of their Abominations, [...], (Ier. 7. 20. to have set up [...]) that is, their Idols in the House of the Lord. So 2 Kings 23. Ashtaroth is called [...], the Abomination of the Sidonians, Cemosh [...], the Abomination of the Moabites; but M [...]lcom [...], the Abomination of the Chil­dren of Ammon. Wherefore 1 Kings 11. 5, 7. [...] is by the Seventy thrice Translated [...].

This being a thing manifest, we are to ob­serve further, That the Scripture useth also to expresse and imply under the names of the Gods, the Nations themselves which worshipped them. The Lord threatned to ‘scatter Israel among the Nations, and that there they should serve other Gods day and night, Gods, the works of mens hands, wood and stone, and which neither they nor their Fathers had known:’ That is, they should serve them not religiously, but politically, in as much as they were to be­come Slaves and Vassals to Idolatrous Nati­ons, [Page 43] even such Idolaters, as neither they nor their Fathers had ever heard of. Let it also be considered whether that of David, 1 Sam. 26. 19. be not to be expounded after the same Trope: ‘ They have (saith he) driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of the Lord, saying, Goe serve other Gods;’ i. they have driven me to serve a Nation of another Religion. Yea, Ezra 9. 14. fitly to our purpose, The Strangers with whom the people of Israel had contracted affinity, are called expresly [...], The people of Abominations, which the Seventy render [...], The people of the Lands, that is, Gentiles. And where we reade in the first verse, ‘ The people of Israel, &c. have not separated themselves from the people of the Lands according to their Abominations, &c. It is the same phrase with that of Moses, Cattell after their kinde, creeping things after their kinde:’ That is, the severall kinds of cattell & of creeping things: so the people of the Lands according to their Abominations is, the severall kinds of Ido­laters of the Lands about them. And thus we have shewed, that [...], the Wing of Abominations, is as much as [...], [Page 44] an Armie of people of Abominations, That is, of Gentiles and Worshippers of Idols.

But who is this Desolater, or Maker of Desolations, who should command over this Wing of Abominations, and bring these Gentiles against the Holy City? ℟ The words in the Originall stand indifferent to be applied either to the Romane Generall, or Messiah; but I could not render them so in­differently: For if I render them, And in half a Week a Desolater shall cause the sacrifice and offe­ring to cease, and that (being) over a Wing of Abo­minations, Or, Over a Wing of Abominations (shall he be) who makes desolation; This Desolater would then seem to be some other then Mes­siah, that is the Romane Generall: But ren­der them as I doe, And making desolation, or be­ing a Desolater, He shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease, and that, &c. Or, He shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease, and [commanding] over a Wing of Abominations, be a Desolater: ei­ther way of these, they will have reference to MESSIAH the Prince, who is the Person meant in the words immediately before, [He [Page 45] shall confirm a Covenant with many one Week.] And this I most incline to, that so the Person spoken of may be the same throughout, and a reason also appear of that additament, That this Desolater should be over an Army of Abominations: For if a Forein Generall were onely meant, what needed this Additi­on? what other Army could such a one lead, but Gentiles? But that Messiah himselfe should command over an Army of Ido­laters, this needed a speciall intimation.

And surely the Romane Army, though an Army of Abominations, was in this ser­vice the Army of Messiah: So the Para­ble aiming at this Prophecy tels us Mat. 22. 7. When the King heard how spitefully they en­treated his Messengers who came to tell them, the Wedding whereunto they had been bidden, was ready: ‘ He was wroth (saith the Text) and sent forth HIS Armies and destroyed those Murtherers,’ and burnt up their City. Whence it is, that the comming of this desolating Army of the Romans is called the comming of Christ, Iames 5. ‘ Weep and howl ye rich men (he writeth to Jews) for the miseries that shall [Page 46] come upon you; for you have heaped up goods for the last dayes;’ That is, (according to Oecu­menius) when the end of your State is a com­ming and the Romanes shall spoil you of all: which is expressed in the eighth verse by Christs comming; ‘ Be ye patient (saith he) untill the comming of the Lord,’ (he speaks to the beleeving Jews whom the rest persecu­ted) and in the next, ‘Stablish your hearts for the comming of the Lord draweth nigh;’ He mea­neth (saith Oecumenius) [...] So he takes that of Iohn, ‘ If I will that he stay till▪ I come,’ that is (saith he) [...], till the Destruction of Jerusalem. And proves that this comming of Christ is [...], Excidium Hierosolymorum, by that of Malachi Cap. 3. ‘ Behold, the Lord shall come, and who shall abide the day of his comming?’ And thus would I understand that Heb. 10. 37. For ‘yet a little while and He that shall come will come,’ and will not tarry. Messiah therefore himself seems to be that Desolater here meant, who should command over an Army of Abo­minations, when he came to destroy [Page 47] the City and the Sanctuary.

Thus it appears our Saviours citation in the Gospel is not of the very words of Daniel in this passage, but of the sense onely summa­rily expressed; and that [...], is to be expounded [...], The Abo­mination, or Abominable Army, over which he should be, who should make desolation. As for the Seventy, or whosoever else (for S. Hierome doubts) translated this Book, if their Translation here were originally as we now have it, and not translated thither out of our Saviours words in the Gospel, they seem to have accommodated the place, though of unlike construction and circumstance of sense, unto two other places, Chap. 11. 31. Chap. 12. 11. where some such kinde of Abo­mination is mentioned, and likewise the par­ticiples, [...]: But in all three of them, not well understanding what subject these participles included, they contented themselves onely to expresse by [...], or [...], a generall relation of desolation in the abstract, which might be diversly inter­pretable, [Page 48] otherwise it is not possible by any alteration of the points to expresse their Translation verbatim out of this place, un­lesse [...] were in statu constructo, as it is not.

And untill the finall time (even that which is de­termined) it shall continue upon the desolate] Here I have chosen to translate the verb [...] continue, as the Targum renders it, Ier. c. 7. 19. &c. 42. 18. and the Vulgar here perseverabit, as a meta­phoricall signification taken from a continu­ed pouring of water. It is the Feminine Gen­der, and therefore to be referred to a Femi­nine suppositum, which I take to be [...], Ala: This wing of Abominations, that is metonymice the Desolation wrought by it, or forein pos­session brought in by it, should continue up­on the Desolate, untill the finall time which was determined should be accomplished. Or those Gentile people of the Romane Em­pire, by whom Jerusalem was destroyed, should continue their dominion and posses­sion either of the place or desolate inhabitants once thereof, untill that finall time be accom­plished. Whether this or that sutes best; the [Page 49] meaning in S. Lukes language is thus expres­sed, ‘The Iews shall be carried captive over all Nations, and Ierusalem trodden down of the Gen­tiles,’ untill the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled: That is, (as was said before) untill the Mo­narchies of the Gentiles should be finished. For these Times of the Gentiles are that last period of the fourth Kingdome prophecied Dan. 7. of a Time Times and half a Time; at the end whereof the Angel swears unto Daniel, ca. 12. 7 That God should accomplish to scatter the power of the Holy People. This is that Fulnesse of the Gentiles, which being come, S. Paul tels us, ‘The Deliverers shall come out of Sion, and all Is­rael shall be saved.’ And the Angel in the Apoc. 10. 6. renews the same oath to S. Iohn, which he sware before to Daniel, ‘ That when these Times (N.B.) should end and be no longer, the my­stery of God should be finished, as he had declared to his servants the Prophets.’ Amen.