III. Swiss Lawyer Nicole-Cogent Reasoning on 2300Years

One of the most illuminating illustrations of the extent to which intelligent discussion of Daniel 8:11 was being con ducted in various lands of the Old World, appeared in an article by a prominent Swiss lawyer, which was printed in The Morning Watch (London). ALPHONSE M. F. NICOLE (1789-1874), doctor of jurisprudence and lawyer of Nyon (Canton de Vaud), French Switzerland, served as deputy in the Grand Council from 1814 to 1835, and was deputy to the Federal Diet in 1832, ^{22Dictionaire Historique & Biographique de la Suisse, tome 5. p. 142.} which legislative bodies correspond to the House of Representatives and the Senate in the United States Congress.PFF3 487.2

In the midst of his busy life this prominent civic leader made a valuable contribution in French under the title Recherche sur Daniel 8:13, 14 (Research Work on Daniel 8:13, 14). The title itself had significance. Nicole takes note of the contention that the number in Daniel 8:1 I should read 2400 instead of 2300, and that the period represented should be dated from the time of the vision, and therefore would end in 1847. In refutation, Nicole contends that it is “dangerous to put aside the number [2300] given in the original text.” ^{23Alphonse Nicole. “Recherche sur Daniel 8:13, 14.” The Morning Watch, September, 1829 (vol. 1. no. 3). p. 350.} In lieu of the weak arguments proffered, he offers a “more natural or normal interpretation.” ^{24Ibid., p. 350}PFF3 487.3

1. BEGINS WITH PERSIA; NOT BABYLON OR GRECIA

Nicole’s argument can best be grasped by noting each of his four points: “1. It is impossible to date, the beginning of this period from the moment when Daniel had the vision.” ^25Ibid. He supports this proposition by the fact that the vision starts with Persia, ^26Ibid. symbolized by the ram, and not with Babylon, which was still in existence when Daniel had the vision, with no mention of the overthrow. Instead, Daniel “begins his explanation at a time when this kingdom [Persia] already existed in strength, and greatness.” ^{27Ibid., p. 351.}PFF3 487.4

Nicole’s second argument is equally pertinent: “2. It is impossible to date the beginning of this period from the time when the kingdom of the Medes and Persians was overthrown by Alexander.” ^28Ibid. This, he says, is “proved by reasoning inversely.” The vision does not begin with the struggle between the Persian ram and the Grecian goat. Rather, that is “included in the period of the 2300 years,” which contains the “total of the events noted by the prophecy.” ^29Ibid.PFF3 488.1

2. BEGINS AT REBUILDING OF JERUSALEM AND TEMPLE

An alternative dating, based on the 2300 years, is introduced by Nicole’s third point: “3. It is possible to place the beginning of this period at the complete reestablishment of the Jewish worship after the return from the Babylonian captivity.” ^30Ibid. The perfect agreement with the “historical part of the prophecy” is stressed. Thus the vision begins with Medo-Persia “al ready existing in its full strength,” under which the Jews “returned to Palestine, rebuilt the temple, and then rebuilt the walls of.” ^31Ibid. Daniel 8:13 gives a “summary of all events symbolically represented in the vision,” and deals with the “state of the church of God and of Jesus Christ during the time which should precede the purification of the sanctuary.” The vision “divides all of the history into two parts”- the “length of time of the continual sacrifice,” and then later the length of the “desolation,” involving the sanctuary. The combined length of “these two periods, added one to the other and taken together,” will be 2300 years, “after which the sanctuary shall be purified.” ^{32Ibid., p. 352.}PFF3 488.2

This simple and literal interpretation leads Nicole to the suggestion as to the date for beginning the 2300 years, namely from “the end of the indignation” (verse 19), or Babylonian captivity, and the return of the Jews from Babylon to Jerusalem, and the “complete reestablishment of the religious services in the holy city.” ^33Ibid. Then, he asserts, will begin the 2300 years.PFF3 488.3

3. STARTS UNDER ARTAXERXES; NOT CYRUS OR DARIUS

Finally, under the heading, “4. More precise research of the beginning of the end of the 2300 years under consideration,” Nicole contends that the restoration of the worship was not complete in the first phase under Cyrus, so that could not be the starting point. The same reasons “oblige us to reject” the dedication of the second temple under Darius, in 575 B.C. This, therefore, leaves the reign of Artaxerxes upon which to “focus our attention.” ^{34Ibid., p.353.} Such dating, he adds, “merits the most exact examination.” The expiration of 2300 years from that date would occur “not very far from the time in which we live.” ^35Ibid.PFF3 489.1

Referring to the decrees issued to Ezra and Nehemiah, Nicole notes that only at this time was the Holy City raised up from its ruins and surrounded by new walls, with the worship of God established in a “stable manner.” This, then, was the beginning of the “seventy weeks of years,” during which the Mosaic worship would last, and would close “with the cessation of the sacrifice and the oblation.” ^36Ibid. Therefore, with the 2300 years dated from the reign of Artaxerxes, “the end of the 2300 years should follow in the year 1846 or 1847 of our era,” when “the faithful will be able to hope to see accomplished the purification of the sanctuary.” ^37Ibid.PFF3 489.2

Such is the close reasoning on the true number and dating of the 2300 years which the French lawyer Nicole of Nyon injected in 1829 into the widespread discussion of prophecy.PFF3 489.3