Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
can be seen in the 1913 convention report, indicated his thought that he was the one typed by Daniel in Dan. 6. In this chapter Darius represents our Lord, sometimes acting directly, and sometimes indirectly in His people. The kingdom (v. 1) here represents the Laodicean Church-the real and nominal church, as the nominal and real embryo Kingdom. The 120 princes (v. 1) type the leaders in the nominal church. The three presidents (v. 2) correspond to the three leaders of the three divisions of the Laodicean Church: the pope as leader of Catholicism, the head of the Federation of Churches as the leader of united Protestantism, and Bro. Russell as leader of the Truth people. Of these three (v. 2) Bro. Russell was chief, being the leader of the real people of God. The antitypical 120 as leaders of the nominal church were to render an account to these three leaders so that no damage accrue to the Lord Jesus. This arrangement had its start very early in the Parousia, reaching the Federation of Churches later. As Daniel was preferred by Darius above the other presidents and the 120 princes, because of his superior talents and character (v. 3), so antitypically Bro. Russell was preferred by our Lord for the same reasons above the pope, the Federation's head and the other leaders of the nominal church. The king's thinking to set Daniel over the whole kingdom (v. 3) represents our Lord's thinking to put Bro. Russell into that antitypical position, which, however, was never done. It has been said that envy is the tribute that inferiority gives to superiority. So was it in this case. As at first the two presidents and 120 princes sought to fault Daniel in his administration, but failed therein (v. 4), so did the pope, the Federation's head and the other leaders of the nominal church seek to do with our Pastor, but failed therein. As the former then decided that only on his religion could they get an advantage over Daniel (v. 3), so the latter decided that only on his religion could they entrap Bro. Russell.
(22) As the two presidents and 120 princes, etc., drew up a law forbidding anyone to make a petition to God or man for 30 days, except to the king (vs. 6, 7), so the leaders of Christendom and their representatives drew up progressively a decree that from 1881 to 1911 only the trinity, which in practice, though not in theory, usually means Jesus only, should be prayed to. It has always been the custom, though not the theory, to pray to Jesus almost exclusively in the nominal church. The nominal-church view of the Father as being enraged at the race and being intensely desirous of casting it into eternal torment, from which Jesus' intercession alone is thought to save them, has resulted in the practice that the Father is dreaded and is held afar from men, while Jesus is by them loved, trusted and sought in prayer. As a result, the custom, though not the theory, has arisen that in their prayers and affections most nominal-church members come to Jesus and not to the Father. Bro. Russell's anti-trinitarianism became the occasion for the votaries of the trinity stressing their doctrine to an extreme. The two presidents and the 120 princes, etc., coming to Darius to have the decree signed and sealed by the king, type the above-mentioned leaders coming to Jesus with their trinitarian agitation for His sanction. Jesus' permitting them to go on their course and allowing it to be prospered without attempting to hinder it, occasioned their getting the thought that He had sanctioned their purpose. With them silence, non-hindrance and success meant sanction! Of course, Jesus neither directly nor indirectly sanctioned such a thing. His dis-sanction of it is found in His giving the Truth on the subject through that Servant, especially in Studies, Vol. V.
(23) It should not strike us as unusual that Darius permitted himself to be worshiped. This was usual with ancient oriental monarchs, as it was the case in China until their empire was recently overthrown, and as it is still the case in Japan; for the heathen theory is
that their kings and emperors were of Divine begettal, hence were Divine and infallible, and as such should be worshiped. Hence the Persians and Medes so regarded their kings, and therefore considered their decrees infallible, and hence as unalterable—"the laws of the Medes and Persians alter not." As Daniel did not permit the erroneous decree to keep him back from worshiping the true God nor to make him do it in secret (v. 10), so Bro. Russell would not allow the Trinitarians to prevent him from worshiping, i.e., serving God. The open window represents the non-secrecy, i.e., the publicity, of the service. Its being open toward Jerusalem represents that our Pastor served God in the interests of the true Church. Daniel's doing this on his knees symbolizes Bro. Russell's spirit of consecration in his service of God, and doing it three times a day symbolizes that our Pastor did the antitypical service continually. As Daniel's enemies spied on him, so did our Pastor's enemies spy on him. As the former caught Daniel in the act (v. 11), so did our Pastor's enemies catch him in the act, as they thought. Their subtly securing the king's admission (v. 12) of the validity and unchangeability of the law types the crafty manner in which their antitypes sought to commit the Lord Jesus to a course that consistently, they thought, would force Him to realize their plot against our Pastor. Jesus by silence and the seeming prospering of their plot antitypes Darius' admission of the validity and unchangeability of the law, which they greatly desired.
(24) In Biblical symbols a pit symbolizes a condition of slander. This appears from Joseph's being put into the pit, as typing: (1) Jesus, (2) the star-members of the Church and (3) the entire Church, being slandered by the nominal church leaders. It also appears from the type of Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, slaying a lion in a pit, on a snowy day, wherein is pictured forth J.F. Rutherford, by his booklet issued
during the Time of Trouble (winter), A Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens, refuting the nominal church's slander against our Pastor (2 Sam. 23: 20). Hence to be put into a pit, which the lions' den was ("ere they came to the bottom of the den"; v. 24), means to be put into a condition of slander, the lions typing the slanders involved here. The plotters' informing Darius that Daniel was the decree-violator and the king-disregarder (v. 13) types the antitypical plotters' informing Jesus against Bro. Russell by the acts of their seeking slanderous stories against our Pastor. Darius' seeking to deliver Daniel from the lions' den (v. 14) types Jesus' by His Spirit, acting in the loyal Truth people, seeking to defend our Pastor against the slanderous course of his traducers. The insistence of the typical plotters (v. 15) types the persistence of their antitypes in their determination to slander our Pastor, despite the Spirit of Jesus in His people striving against it. Their claim of unchanging legality types the stress laid on the seeming providence of the Lord as sanctioning the purpose at hand and on its being an infallible, unchangeable thing. The king's yielding to the demands (v. 16) types Jesus' permitting the conspiracy to run its course and His seeming prospering of it. Daniel's being cast into the lions' den (v. 16) types Bro. Russell's being put into the condition of slander. The king's assuring Daniel that the God whom he served continually would deliver him (v. 16) types Jesus' assurance through His people that God would deliver our Pastor. The stone that was laid at the den's mouth (v. 17) types the providences that prevented Bro. Russell's escape from the condition of slander. It included adverse court decisions and a hostile press that would not allow vindication to be given him in its columns. The king's sealing the stone with his and his lords' signets (v. 17) types Jesus' allowing unhindered the experience to be our Pastor's.
(25) And certainly the slanderers were given full
play with their loose tongues. First of all, at the manipulation of nominal church leaders, the 1891-1894 sifters were allowed free course with their slanders against our Pastors' conduct of the work. These set him forth as a designing, cheating business man who sought to use religion and business to reap a harvest of wealth for himself at the cost of others. Secondly, at the manipulation of the nominal church leaders Bro. Russell's wife, after threatening to ruin him before the world (she became set against him because he would not allow her to dictate the contents of the Tower and the policies of the harvest work), brought suit for divorce against him, insinuating sexual improprieties against him, despite the fact that on the witness stand she was forced to admit that she did not have any ground for charging him with adultery, which charge her instigators spread broadcast against him as though made by her. Thirdly, they charged him with claiming to be a thorough Greek and Hebrew scholar, a claim he never made, and then got a court ruling that he was no Greek and Hebrew scholar, and then spread world-wide the slander that his alleged pretentions to Greek and Hebrew scholarship were by a court declared to be unfounded. Fourthly, through the misrepresentations of the 1908-1911 sifters his business transactions were represented worldwide as being permeated wholly with fraud and deceit, to the alleged impoverishment of his dupes and to his own enrichment. And, finally, in 1911, through the Brooklyn Eagle, they slandered him as selling at fabulous profits a wheat to which he was alleged to ascribe miraculous properties. Beside these major slanders, they added minor ones, as many as their minds, fertile in inventing falsehoods, imagined would seem plausible. These slanders were the lions, antitypical of those that glared, growled and crouched, as ready to leap, at Daniel. In both type and antitype the experience must have been heart and mind testing of the most extreme kind.
(26) The king's fasting, mourning and sleeplessness (v. 18) type the distress of Jesus in His faithful people, at the sad experiences of Bro. Russell in the antitypical lions' den. It seems that the 30 days of v. 12 types the 30 years' period from 1881, when the trinitarian doctrine started to be especially stressed, to 1911, when the last great slander— that on the miracle wheat—started. The early morning of v. 19 seems to type a time shortly after 1911, when the Lord Jesus arose to a stopping of the slanders against His faithful steward, typed by Darius hastening to the lions' den. Darius' asking Daniel whether his God had been able to deliver him (v. 20) types Jesus' Spirit in His people asking Bro. Russell whether God's grace was strong enough to sustain him in his sore trial. At the same time they feared for his maintaining his new-creaturely bearing amid the experience. Time and again the brethren during those long-drawn-out, slanderous experiences feared that he would become bitter, angry, hating, vindictive, unforgiving, revengeful, slanderous, etc., at the great injustices heaped upon him by his ecclesiastical enemies. These were the antitypes of Darius' fears. Daniel's first response (v. 21), "O king, live forever," types Bro. Russell's spirit as one that did not blame Jesus for permitting the slanders, but wished Him eternal prosperity. Next, Daniel's ascribing his preservation to the grace of God, ministered through an angel (v. 22), types Bro. Russell's ascribing, not to his own new-creaturely strength, but to God's goodness through His Spirit, Word and providence, his deliverance. Our Pastor's deliverance was not a physical one; it was one of his New Creature. It consisted in this, that God's grace was so faithfully used by him as to disarm the slanders from injuring his holy qualities of heart and mind. Instead of rancor, meekness; instead of anger, longsuffering; instead of hatred, forbearance; instead of implacability, forgiveness; instead of malice, sweetness; instead of revenge, well-
doing; instead of slander, blessing filled him. Hence his New Creature received no damage from the symbolic lions, as fierce, savage, malicious and violent as they were. Truly, they did not hurt him (v. 22). In both the type and the antitype, the reason was the same—"innocency" (v. 22). Daniel's consciousness that he did not wrong the king (v. 22) types Bro. Russell's consciousness that in putting God first and serving Him alone, he did Jesus no wrong, since he was also faithful to Jesus in all matters pertaining to Him.
(27) The king's rejoicing (v. 23) types that of Jesus both personally and in His people at Bro. Russell's spiritual victory. The charge to bring Daniel forth from the lions' den (v. 23) types Jesus' charge that the slanders cease, as the bringing of Daniel out of the lions' den types the deliverance of Bro. Russell from the condition of slander. From 1913 onward a great change of public sentiment and utterance set in as to our Pastor. A D.C. court's decision, valid therefore throughout the United States, except in Florida, against a publisher of a string of about thirty very prominent newspapers for his publishing these slanders, became the occasion of those papers publishing an apology, and as a penitential act these papers published Bro. Russell's sermons. This decision, shown to the other slandering editors, produced similar effects. Statesmen, educators and legislators vied with one another for the privilege of introducing him to audiences that filled to overflowing the largest auditoriums of America and other countries. Everywhere he was regarded as the greatest religious teacher of his times. At the Panama-Pacific Exposition its managers set aside a special Pastor Russell's Day as a part of the Exposition program, and the chairman of its board at a very largely attended meeting, after a laudatory address, presented him with a large bronze medal, on one side of which was embossed a figure of his face. Everywhere he went he was received with public manifestations
of favor and applause. Thus as Daniel's faith (v. 23) stopped the mouths of lions (Heb. 11: 33), so did our Pastor's faith stop the power of slanders from opening their mouths against him to his hurt. And as Daniel was given greater honors (v. 28), so was our Pastor—extending not only over the Parousia proper (Darius' time), but also into the third year of its lapping into the Epiphany (Cyrus' time).
(28) The king's commanding the designing presidents and princes, and their children and wives, to be thrown into the lions' den (v. 24) types Jesus' removing hindrances to slanders from opening their mouths against the leaders of the nominal church and their partisan supporters and organizations. The throwing of the former into the lions' den (v. 24) types the putting of them into the condition of slander; and thus in both cases was fulfilled the saying that he that diggeth a pit for his neighbor's feet shall himself fall therein. The lions' having the mastery over the two presidents and the 120 princes and their children and wives, types the slanders' mastering the leaders, their followers and their organizations. Their tearing these to pieces types how the characters of their victims were torn, in that anger, resentment, hatred, malice, vindictiveness, implacability, revenge and cursing, were aroused in them by the slanders. The tearing to pieces occurring before the victims fell even to the bottom of the den types the speed with which the pertinent characters were torn to pieces in their trial in the den of slander. Thus our Pastor's strength of character shines out in striking contrast with the weakness of their characters. Darius' decree types our Lord's proclamations of the supremacy of the Heavenly Father and of His benign reign forever and forever. This decree will forever manifest our Pastor's glorious victory in his sore trial: A part of that manifestation will be the making known that this antitypical Daniel has been found worthy to be the Lord's special representative
toward the Little Flock (Num. 4: 16) and the Ancient Worthies (Num. 3: 32) during the Millennium, as the individual Millennial Eleazar.
(29) As a line of distinction between Dan. 1—6 and Dan. 7-12, the following may be given: Dan. 1—6 is mainly historical and Dan. 7—12 is mainly prophetical. However there are a few prophetical matters in Dan. 1—6 and a few historical matters in Dan. 7—12. We must remember that it is not our design in this chapter to expound the book of Daniel prophetically, which our Pastor has done sufficiently, but to expound the book from the standpoint of type and antitype. This design will be adhered to in our explaining the second part of Daniel, as it was in our explaining its first part; and this is possible, because interspersed among the prophecies of its second part there are a number of historical facts and allusions. In Dan. 7 prophecy is mainly found, with but two historical allusions connected therewith; for this chapter contains the vision of the four beasts, which therein are expounded as representing the four universal empires of the Gentile times. Additionally, the horns, more particularly one of them, of the fourth beast come in for exposition. It also pictures forth the Ancient of days, and the One like the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven and with His associated saints, obtaining the Kingdom. Daniel's seeing this vision represents Bro. Russell's getting an indefinite idea of the course of history under the Gentile powers and of God's Kingdom to follow their overthrow as the result of God's judgment. This indefinite view he got partly from Scripture and partly from history. His indefinite view of these matters was not an understanding of them, even as Daniel's seeing the vision was not an understanding of it (vs. 15, 16). As Daniel asked and received the explanation of the vision from one who stood by (vs. 16-27), so Bro. Russell asked of, and received an explanation of the antitypical vision from Bro. N.H. Barbour, who later
denied the Ransom and became among the Truth people the first harvest-sifting leader. As Daniel was troubled over the vision and explanation (v. 28), so was Bro. Russell over the antitypes. Daniel's countenance being changed (v. 28) types the change of knowledge (2 Cor. 4: 6—face) that came to Bro. Russell on the pertinent subject. And Daniel's keeping the matter in his heart types Bro. Russell's abiding and loving interest in the subject.
(30) At this place there may well be introduced a record of the events connected with which the explanation of the antitypical vision was given. As we saw above, the misuse that the Adventists had made of prophetic time in forecasting the date of Jesus' allegedly fleshly Second Advent and its alleged annihilation of the physical universe had greatly prejudiced Bro. Russell against the use of prophetic chronology. Knowing that Jesus as a Divine Spirit would be invisible in His Second Advent, that the physical universe would last forever and that Jesus' Second Advent would annihilate the symbolic heavens and earth, preparatory to the establishing of His Kingdom to effect the restitution of all things, Bro. Russell laughed at their erroneous claims and ridiculed their unreasonable teachings. But he went further: he allowed their going into one extreme in the misuse of prophetic chronology to drive him into the other extreme of denying the use of prophetic chronology altogether. This, of course, was an error on his part. It was partly to combat the Adventist pertinent errors that he published and circulated his tract on The Object and Manner of our Lord's Second Advent. And he maintained his unbelief in, and ridiculing of prophetic chronology until into 1876, when the Lord helped him out of this error into the opposite Truth. This occurred as follows: In Jan., 1876, he received a magazine through the mails. Opening it, he saw from its frontispiece that it was an Adventist publication. Ridiculingly he said to himself,
"I wonder what date they are now fixing for Christ's coming in flesh and annihilating the universe!" In this attitude he began to read an article in the magazine. He saw that its writer was beginning to get his eyes slightly open on the object and manner of our Lord's return. The article told of how its author, a Bro. Barbour, disappointed at Christ's not coming in the flesh and annihilating the universe in 1874, had carefully reviewed many times the chronology to see whether there were not some flaw therein, and, unable to find one, was greatly perplexed over the resultant situation.
(31) While in such perplexity he received a letter from a Bro. B. W. Keith, of Danville, N. Y., an Adventist subscriber to Bro. Barbour's Herald Of The Morning. The former's pre-and post-1874 experiences with the chronology were like those of Bro. Barbour. After telling of these in his letter, he went on to say that he had lately been studying Matt. 24 through the Diaglott, which, he noticed, translated the word parousia by the word presence, whereas it was in the A.V. rendered by the word coming. He further stated in his letter that Matt. 24: 38, 39, compared with Luke 17: 26, 27, seemed to teach that during the presence of the Son of Man people would, in ignorance thereof, go on in their customary way of living: eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, etc. Then the letter asked Bro. Barbour whether, the chronology being proven to be flawless, our Lord had not since Oct., 1874, been invisibly present in His Second Advent (Reprints, 188, 6-10). Having in the article stated these matters, Bro. Barbour cautiously advanced the thought that probably our Lord was present invisibly in His Second Advent. As Bro. Russell read this article he for the first time saw that probably, after all, prophetic chronology had a place in revealed religion; for believing for over 15 months now that our Lord as a Divine Spirit would have to be invisible in His Second Advent, the question arose in his mind, How
apart from prophetic chronology, could we know that He was present? He could think of no other way of knowing it except through prophetic chronology. Hence for the first time he was willing with almost no prejudice to investigate as to whether prophetic chronology had a place in God's plan. Accordingly, he entered into a correspondence with Bro. Barbour over the matter, and arranged for a meeting to take place between them at Philadelphia, where for the period of the Centennial Exposition (May 10-Nov. 10, 1876) he had a store, in addition to two in Pittsburgh. His sending for Bro. Barbour was his first executive act as that Servant, according to the David type; for as David reigned 40½ years, so it was 40½ years from April 30, 1876, until the toga scene, Oct. 30, 1916.
(32) During the evenings of that summer these two studied the Bible together, since the store kept Bro. Russell busy during the day. Bro. Barbour enlightened Bro. Russell on the chronology and Daniel; and Bro. Russell enlightened him on the Ransom, the object and manner of our Lord's Second Advent, the eternity of the physical universe, the nature and destruction of the symbolic universe, the spirit existence of Christ since His resurrection, the Gospel Age as the time of the selection of the Church as Christ's Millennial Bride and Associate in blessing the non-elect, dead and alive, the nature of the Judgment Day, etc., etc. Thus it will be seen that Bro. Russell gave Bro. Barbour decidedly more Truth than the latter gave him. Moreover, what Bro. Barbour gave him he got from others, especially from Bro. William Miller and later Adventists, among whom was Bro. Keith, from whom he got the thought that Jesus was probably present invisibly since 1874. These facts help us to see the flimsiness of the claim that because Bro. Barbour showed our Pastor certain Truth on prophetic chronology and on Daniel he was the first one to hold the office of that Servant. When they met, Bro. Russell had decidedly more, and
more important Truth than Bro. Barbour, much of which he was the first to see in the end of the Age; and he gave Bro. Barbour more, and more important Truth than Bro. Barbour gave him. But even this fact did not prove Bro. Russell then to have been full-fledged as that Servant, a thing that he did not fully become until in 1879, during the struggle that he had on the matter of the sin-offerings, when they were made clear to him, though he in April, 1876, had the executive feature of that office (Chapter VI.). Of the two, Bro. Russell was decidedly more aggressive as a servant of the Lord even at that time, as witnessed by Bro. Barbour's readiness to give up, and his having to be encouraged and helped by Bro. Russell to go on with the work (Z '16, 171, pars. 11, 12). While this is true, our Pastor always felt grateful for the help that Bro. Barbour gave him on prophetic chronology and on Daniel's prophecies. We have here introduced these facts, because they are necessary to understand antitypically a number of facts in Dan. 7—12.
(33) In Dan. 8 we again meet a number of facts in Daniel's experiences that find their antitypes in some of Bro. Russell's experiences. We, for reasons already given, will not study this chapter prophetically, giving attention here only to its typical features, It will be noted that the vision of Dan. 8 does not deal with things connected with the Babylonian Empire. It commences with things connected with the Medo-Persian Empire (vs. 3, 4, 20). This fact proves that the 2300 days (v. 14), as well as their first 490 days (Dan. 9: 24), start during the time of the Medo-Persian Empire; for when the interpolated word "concerning" after the word "vision" in v. 13 is omitted, it will be seen that the question asks for the length of the time of the vision, as well as the duration of its most important parts. And the answer is given, until 2300 days. This fact unanswerably proves that the 2300 days are not literal days, that they began sometime during
the Medo-Persian Empire and that their beginning coincides with the beginning of the 490 days, or 70 weeks, i.e., Oct. 455 B.C., when Nehemiah put Artaxerxes' command into execution; for the 490 days of Dan. 9: 24, coinciding with the first 490 of the 2300 days, "seal the vision and the prophet (demonstrate the truthfulness of the vision and prophet of the 2300 days by certain fulfillments in their first 490 days)" (Dan. 9: 24). Since there was no vision in Dan. 9, and since the 490 days cannot refer to Daniel's 1260, 1290 and 1335 days, regardless of whether we refer them to literal years or days, because the 490 days end in 36 A.D., and since there is no other vision of days in Daniel except that of the 2300 days, these 490 days must be "cut off," determined, from the 2300 days of the vision given in Dan. 8. Hence the vision and prophet that are referred to as sealed in Dan. 9: 24 by the fulfillment of the 490 days' prophecy must be the vision of Dan. 8 and Daniel as the agent of that prophecy. This, of course, destroys J.F.R.'s view of the 2300 days as being literal days and as being connected with his work. Daniel's being at the time of the vision in Shushan, the capital (here the meaning of the word is palace) of Elam (v. 2), types our Pastor's dwelling in his consecrated life with our Lord among His people in the early Parousia time. The River Ulai (v. 2-pure water) here types the Truth that our Pastor had received up to Jan., 1876. Daniel's seeing the vision (vs. 3-12) at Ulai types our Pastor's getting indistinct views of the relation of the Medo-Persian, the Grecian and the Romano-Papal Empires to God's people and plan, while he was standing by the Truth (Ulai).
(34) Daniel's hearing one saint speaking (v. 13) types Bro. Russell's hearing William Miller in his writings explain certain things referred to in this vision. The other saint (v. 13) types Bro. Barbour, whom Bro. Miller taught almost everything on prophetic time that Bro. Barbour knew. Daniel's hearing the second
saint ask the first the duration of the vision and its main features (v. 13), types Bro. Russell's coming to understand that Bro. Barbour inquired of Bro. Miller, by searching his writings, the duration of the antitypical vision, etc., and received therefrom the answer that it would last 2300 years, i.e., up to the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary from its mass-connected defilements. The fact that the speaking saint (the first one) gave Daniel the answer (v. 14), and not the saint that asked him, types the fact that, while it was Bro. Barbour who seemingly explained the antitypical vision to Bro. Russell, it was in reality Bro. Miller who did it, inasmuch as the thoughts that Bro. Barbour expressed to him were such as he got from Bro. Miller. Daniel's seeking an explanation of the vision (v. 15) types Bro. Russell's seeking clearness on the indistinct ideas that he had on the subject matter typed by Daniel's vision in this chapter. The appearance of a man (v. 15) is the same as Gabriel of v. 16. In this chapter Gabriel types the brethren who made clear to Bro. Russell the antitypical vision, i.e., Bros. Miller, Keith and Barbour. The man's voice (v. 16) was doubtless that of the Logos, who commandingly spoke out from between the banks of the Ulai and who here types our Lord in the Second Advent. Speaking out of the Parousia Truth, Jesus arranged for the pertinent teachings to be explained to Bro. Russell.
(35) Gabriel's coming near to Daniel (v. 17) types Bros. Miller, Keith and Barbour by their teachings drawing near to Bro. Russell to explain them. This began in the article in The Herald Of The Morning above described; for that involved article showed that its writer was getting his eyes open on the object and manner of our Lord's return (Z '16, 171, par. 4). Daniel's standing place (v. 17) types Bro. Russell's doctrinal standpoint at the time that copy of The Herald Of The Morning reached him. But as Daniel feared Gabriel's approach, so Bro. Russell feared
(distrusted) the approach of these three brothers in the first mention of prophetic time in that article. Daniel's falling on his face (v. 17) types Bro. Russell's spiritually abject position as a reviler and ridiculer of prophetic time; for the feelings of revulsion thereat filled his mind as he read the first part of that article wherein Bro. Barbour narrated his experience of disappointment in 1874 and his reexamination of the chronology. Gabriel's saying that the vision was intended for help in the time of the end types Bros. Miller, Keith and Barbour showing by the chronology in that article that the antitypical fulfillment was for the benefit of the Lord's people during the time of the end. Daniel's being in a deep sleep on the ground when Gabriel was amid the first part of his speech (v. 18) types Bro. Russell as being asleep on prophetic time and its involved prophecies, while he was in a ridiculing attitude on the subject, and while reading the first part of that article in which Bros. Miller, Keith and Barbour were speaking to him. Gabriel's touching Daniel (v. 18) types these three brothers' in the pertinent article (Bro. Miller by his use of time prophecy, and Bros. Barbour and Keith by the article itself) connecting it with the real object and manner of our Lord's return, though indefinitely seen, and thus arousing the interest of Bro. Russell in prophetic time. Gabriel's making Daniel stand upright (v. 18) represents these three brothers', by their thoughts expressed in that article, taking away Bro. Russell's prejudice against, and arousing his favorable attitude toward prophetic time. Gabriel's promising Daniel to make him know what would be in the end of the indignation (v. 19) types Bro. Barbour's promise, given in his correspondence with Bro. Russell, which led up to their meeting and studying together in Philadelphia, that he would expound the involved matters, particularly as they referred to the time of the end. The explanation that Gabriel gave (vs. 20-26) types the explanation
that Bro. Miller through Bro. Barbour, and Bro. Barbour himself, gave Bro. Russell of the involved matters. Daniel's being sick (v. 27) seems to type the consciousness of his own weakness and of the distress that Bro. Russell must have felt over his rejection and ridicule of prophetic time, after he came to see its real and proper use. Daniel's afterward arising and doing work for the king (Belshazzar) types Bro. Russell's later activity that proved beneficial to the nominal people of God. Daniel's astonishment at the vision types Bro. Russell's astonishment at its antitype. None understanding the vision types the fact that at the time Bro. Russell first came to see it and was in astonishment over it, none, of course apart from the involved brethren, at that time understood it in its latest unfoldings.
(36) Dan. 9 contains Daniel's confession of Israel's sins leading up to the Babylonian captivity and the desolations wrought on Jerusalem, his petition for forgiveness and for the restoration of the people, temple and city and Gabriel's revelation of the 70 weeks in answer to Daniel's prayer. Daniel's being in Babylon, though under Darius' rulership (vs. 1, 2), types Bro. Russell's being in Christendom, though Jesus was in His Parousia reign. Daniel's learning (v. 2) from books (Lev. 26: 31-35; Jer. 25: 11, 12; 29: 10) that Jerusalem's wastings in the royal and sacred houses would be 70 years, types Bro. Russell's learning from various Scriptures that the true Church as God's embryo Kingdom and Temple was to be wasted by symbolic Babylon during the bulk of the Gospel Age. As Daniel in the beginning of the 70th year found out that the time of the deliverance of the people and the restoration of the temple and the city was at hand, so did Bro. Russell find out that the time of the deliverance of Spiritual Israel and the erection of the Church as God's embryo Kingdom and Temple were about due. As such knowledge led Daniel to seek the Lord's face, to confess Israel's sins as the cause of their captivity
and Jerusalem's wastes, to justify God for his judgments on Israel and to plead for Israel's restoration and the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple, so did Bro. Russell seek for himself and all Spiritual Israelites God's favor, confess their sins as the cause for the wastes of the true Church as God's embryo Kingdom and Temple, justify God for sending the punishments and entreat Him to restore the Church as God's embryo Kingdom and Temple. And as God sent Gabriel to Daniel to give him the assurance of his prayer's answer in the prophecy of the 70 weeks, and their preceding and subsequent implications, so God sent antitypical Gabriel to Bro. Russell to give him the assurance of his prayer's answer in the antitypical 70 weeks' prophecy and preceding and subsequent implications.
(37) All of us know that the 70 weeks' prophecy (Dan. 9: 24-27) is involved in the parallel dispensations and in the harvest parallels, and that hence it is in the Gospel-Age and Gospel-harvest parallels that we find its antitype. Hence these 70 weeks type the period from 1391 to 1881. Moreover, as the troubles (vs. 26, 27) that desolated Israel at the end of the Jewish Age, even up to 73 A.D., are in this prophecy given as the result of the sins of Israel committed during the last week, and thus as subsequent implications of the 70 weeks, so the events involved in wrath upon Christendom following its sins of 1874-1881, even up to 1918, are involved in the parallel as subsequent implications of the antitypical 70 weeks. Still further, as the events involved in the answer to Daniel's prayer up to the beginning of the 70 weeks form with the 70 weeks God's answer to his prayer, these also belong to the parallel, as preceding implications of the 70 weeks, i.e., the parallel from 536 B.C. to 455 B.C., or to put it more exactly, as the Edgar brothers put it, with Bro. Russell's approval, from 537 B.C. to 455 B.C., finds its parallel antitype from 1309 to 1391 A.D. as a preceding implication of the antitypical 70 weeks. Accordingly, a
series of events from 537 B.C. to 73 A.D. finds its antitype in the form of parallels from 1309 to 1918 A.D. And, finally, as the 70 weeks with their preceding and subsequent associated times and events are typical in the parallel dispensation and Jewish Harvest of times and events of the Gospel Age and its Harvest, so do we properly infer that Gabriel in giving the 70 weeks' prophecy and its preceding and subsequent associated times and events to the typical Daniel is also typical in this transaction, even as we have already found in Dan. 8 and will yet find in Dan. 10 to 12.
(38) Of whom is Gabriel in vs. 21-26 typical? We answer, evidently of those brothers—five in number—who gave Bro. Russell the parallels in times and events during the Gospel Age and its Harvest, corresponding to those of the Jewish Age and its Harvest. The first of these five brothers was Bro. Barbour, who gave Bro. Russell five of these parallel dates and events. The second was probably either Bro. Paton or Bro. Keith, but we have not yet been able to locate him with certainty. The third and fourth were Bros. John and Morton Edgar, who gave him the bulk of the parallels from 1309 to 1914. And the fifth was another brother who in Dec., 1903, pointed out to Bro. Russell that 69 A.D., not 70 A.D., ended the reaping time of the Jewish Age and that hence 1914, not 1910, which Bro. Russell then thought, would end even the garnering, would finish the reaping of the Gospel Harvest, even as he then (in 1903) thought that 1914 would end the wrath time, as the mistaken parallel of Jerusalem's destruction in 70 A.D. This fifth brother also pointed out to Bro. Russell that he was the parallel of the Apostles in time and events, indicated in the Acts of the Apostles, and finally pointed out to him in 1915 the details of the parallels involved in the siege of Jerusalem, the falls of Herodion, Macherus and Masada and the Alexandrian and Cyrenian massacres, events occurring between the Spring of 70 and the Summer of 73 A.D.,
the parallels finding their counterparts in the World War from April, 1915, to July, 1918. Gabriel's coming to Daniel swiftly (v. 21) types that speedy answers to Bro. Russell's prayers for pertinent light were given him by the Lord through the various members of antitypical Gabriel. Gabriel's coming to Daniel about the time of the evening oblation types these five brethren serving Bro. Russell during the reaping and gleaning time, the time of offering the last part of the Gospel-Age sacrifice. Gabriel's touching Daniel types these five brethren beginning to serve Bro. Russell in the pertinent matters. Gabriel's telling Daniel that he was going to make him skillful in understanding (v. 22), types, not the words, but the enlightening acts of these brethren as telling, without words, Bro. Russell that they were going to give him helps on the parallels.
(39) The speedy answer that God arranged to be given to Daniel's prayer (v. 23) types the quick answers to Bro. Russell's prayers for pertinent light that God arranged for him to receive. Three times Gabriel tells Daniel that he was greatly beloved (v. 23; Dan. 10: 11, 19). This types the assurances given to our Pastor that God greatly loved him. This is indicated in the name of Eldad (Beloved of God), given him typically in his capacity as a pilgrim (Num. 11: 26, 27), as it is also indicated in the name David (Beloved), given him typically as the ruler over the household. He was indeed beloved by God and the brethren. In the Fall of 1903 we said to him, "Bro. Russell, the brethren love you greatly; you are the most loved man on earth." Bro. Russell, whose humility eschewed praise, quickly replied, "Yes, and the most hated," and then added that to be so loved by the brethren "is a reward that the Lord gives me for serving the brethren." Gabriel (v. 23) encourages Daniel to understand and consider the vision, which is the one given in Dan. 8, as is also gathered from v. 21, there being no vision in Dan.
9. This proves that what