III. Tribune “Extra” Fails to Stem the Rising Tide

An elaborate attempt at popular opposition by the press, in the hope of stemming the rising tide of Millerism, was made by another noted editor, Horace Greeley, through his rival New York Tribune. This was in the form of a special issue dated March 2, 1843. It was a single sheet, of the usual Tribune page size and format, printed on both sides, and labeled “EXTRA” in bold black letters. On page one there was, interestingly enough, an exact reproduction of Litch’s prophetic charts illustrating and expounding both “Daniel’s Visions” and “John’s Visions”—picturing the various prophetic symbols, with a terse interpretation accompanying each major symbol. (Facsimile of portion of page one appears on opposite page.)PFF4 745.2

Picture 1: TRIBUNE EXTRA FAILS TO STEM RISING TIDE OF MILLERISM
Designd to Refute Rillers leading positions such reproductions actually resulted in Aiding Cause. This exact roproduction of Josiah prophetic charts occupied four fifths of the front page, the upper third of which is reproduced here. This publicity led fifths of the upper third of which is reproduced here. This publicity led to renewed study of propbecy
Page 747PFF4 747

These Millerite charts occupied five of the six columns of page one. The one remaining, or sixth, column, to the right, was inconspicuously headed, “Reply to Miller’s Theory.” The text of the attack was written by JOHN DOWLING, ^{16JOHN DOWLING (1807-1878) was born in England, of Church of England parentage, but at seventeen joined the Baptist church. He became an instructor in Latin at nineteen, and at twenty-one taught Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and French in a Classical Institute, and started a similar school of his own in 1829. But in 1832 he answered a call to a Baptist pastorate in Catskill, New York, and was transferred to New York City in 1836, serving in three Baptist churches in the next several years. He received an M.A. from Brown University in 1834, and a D.D. degree from Transylvania in 1846.} noted Baptist clergyman of Providence, Rhode Island, and occupied the entire six columns of the reverse side of the sheet as well, with the exception of a few inches reserved for advertisements at the bottom of the last column. This attempted refutation was evidently initiated by Greeley himself, for the editor speaks of having another article in hand which they had “intended to publish,” but “upon comparison had chosen this [Bowling article] as more full and to the point.” Greeley also speaks of having in hand “an argument by a distinguished Catholic clergyman, which is excluded only for lack of space.”PFF4 747.1

Dowling plunges at once to the heart of Miller’s fundamental thesis—that the 70 weeks of years are the first part of the 2300 years, and constitutes the “key” that unlocks the terminus of the longer period in “1843,” which Miller holds will be the end of the world.PFF4 747.2

Dowling cites Miller’s invitation for someone to point out the fallacy of this tie-in of the two periods-if it be a fallacy. This Dowling attempts to do in seven steps: (1) Examines the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, (2) the vision of the ram and he-goat of Daniel 8, (3) the little horn of Daniel 8; (4) then contends that this little horn refers to Aritiochus Epiphanes; (5) challenges Miller’s application of the 2300 evenings and mornings; (6) contends that it was literally fulfilled by Antiochus through the taking away of the daily Jewish sacrifices; and (7) challenges Miller’s date for the beginning of Miller’s 2300 year-days.PFF4 747.3

On the first point he takes “pleasure” in concurring with Miller on the 70 “weeks of years” as extending to the death of Jesus the Messiah. With Miller’s explanation he says, “I have no fault to find,” and adds that it accords with “Christian expositors generally.” He takes exception, however, to Miller’s dating of the period from 457 B.C. to A.D. 33—pressing on Christ’s birth as occurring in 4 B.C., with His crucifixion therefore falling in A.D. 29, and the longer period of the 2300 years ending in 1839—on the supposition that Miller’s year-day calculation of the longer period be a valid procedure.PFF4 748.1

On two Dowling likewise interprets the ram as Persia and the goat as Grecia, the notable first horn as Alexander the Great, and the four horns upspringing as the four divisions of Grecia, thus differing little from Miller except in details. On three the exceeding great horn is then expounded as Antiochus Epiphanes, king of Syria-though Dowling admits that various scholars hold it to be pagan and then papal Rome, which he states is the “opinion adopted by Mr. Miller,” while still others apply it to the Mohammedan delusion.PFF4 748.2

On four Dowling insists that the Antiochus Epiphanes theory is “by far the most probable supposition”—a single king of Syria rather than the Roman kingdom. According to Dowling, Antiochus was the king of “fierce countenance” who took away the Jewish “daily” sacrifice and profaned the Jewish temple in 168 B.C. ^{17This was, of course, the ancient counter-theory of Porphyry the Sophist, projected to meet Christianity and rejected by the early church, as well as by the early Reformation leaders. (See Prophetic Faith, Vol. I, pp. 326-330, and Vol. II.)}PFF4 748.3

On five, admitting that “sometimes” in prophetic language we are to understand a day for a year—“such as the 70 weeks and the 1260 year-days”—he contends that the evenings-mornings here simply mean natural days, and refer to evening and morning sacrifices of the Jews. Therefore he concludes that these are simply 1,150 natural days, or merely 3 years and 55 days. On six Bowling again asserts this period began in 168 B.C.PFF4 748.4

As to seven, even granting the 2300 days to be years, Dowling next seeks to show Miller to be “egregiously in error” in his calculation, or placement of them. The prophecy cannot, he holds, go back before Grecia to begin in 457 B.C., which he castigates as the “very height of absurdity.” Taking the time of Alexander’s conquest in 331 B.C. as a possibility, he believes the 2300 years would end in A.D. 1969. Or, if the date of the taking away of the daily sacrifice is assumed to be 168 B.C., such a calculation would then lead to the date A.D. 2132—either of which dates would invalidate Miller’s formula of 2300 years, minus 457 B.C., as equaling “1843.”PFF4 749.1

Thus Dowling challenges the propriety both of dating the 2300 years from 457 B.C., and of connecting the 70 weeks with the 2300 days and having a joint beginning, calling it an “absurd idea.” The Roman power, he countered, could not be dated before the battle of Pydna, 168 B.C., when it became a “horn,” or kingdom. Bowling’s conclusion is that these two visions present matters utterly “opposite in character,” and consequently unrelated, and that therefore they cannot have a common beginning. And as this is Miller’s main assumption, with its failure to prove out, “his whole system falls to the ground.”PFF4 749.2

Notwithstanding such attempts at opposition, the number of men of training and attainment coming to Miller’s platform continued unabated. Bowling’s attempt as a deterrent proved unsuccessful. In fact, Greeley’s Extra appeared actually to aid the Millerite cause, for it resulted in promoting greater personal study of the prophecies. And on page one a succinct illustrated Millerite exposition of the prophetic symbols, and their inseparable time periods, had actually been presented to the large reading constituency of the Tribune.PFF4 749.3