2. Antichristianism of the unbelieving Jews and Cerinthians. p. 133.

3. Antichristianism of the Ebionites, Socinians, and Deists. p. 133.

4. Antichristianism of atheists. p. 134.

III. Import of the time of the end. p. 141.

1. It cannot mean the whole duration of the 1260 years, as Mr. Mede and Bp. Newton suppose. p. 142.

2. But it denotes the termination of that period; and apparently extends through the 75 years, which intervene between that termination and the commencement of the Millennium, being the period of God's great controversy with his enemies. p. 147.

CHAP. IV.

CONCERNING THE TWO FIRST PROPHECIES OF DANIEL, AND THE LITTLE HORN OF THE FOURTH BEAST.

FROM the days of Nebuchadnezzar to the commencement of

the Millennium, there are to be no more than four empires, universal so far as the Church is concerned: The Babylonian; the Medo-Persian; the Macedonian; and the Roman. These are doubly symbolized by the different parts of a large human image, and by four distinct beasts. The last or Roman beast is described as having ten horns, and a little horn rising up among and behind them. p. 154.

1. Opinions respecting the little horn. p. 159.

1. Its history is not an epitome of the whole history of Antichrist, considered as Papal, Mohammedan, and Infidel; as Mr. Kett supposes. p. 160.

2. Neither is the little horn itself revolutionary France; as Mr. Galloway thinks. p. 167.

II. An inquiry into its real character. p. 184.

1. Sir Isaac Newton, Mr. Mede, and Bp, Newton, are right

in supposing it to mean the Papacy, but wrong in
supposing it to mean the temporal kingdom of the
Papacy. p. 184. Because,

(1.) The actions ascribed to the little horn. were never per-
formed by the Pope as a temporal prince. p. 185.
(2.) The little horn is described as being in existence before
the eradication of the three horns. p. 186.

(3.) The scheme is chargeable with contradictoriness. p. 186.
2. It typifies the spiritual kingdom of the Papacy; which,
small as it originally was, grew at length into a ca-
tholic spiritual empire, symbolized by the second
beast of the Apocalypse. p. 188.

3. It was to be harmless during the first part of its existence: but, after the saints had been given into its hand by the secular power, it was to become an universal ecclesiastical tyrant, utterly inoffensive in the eyes of God. p. 189.

4. At the period of their being thus given into its hand, the 1260 years of the great apostasy of the man of siu, considered in its dominant state, commenced. p. 190. 5. The little horn was to arise in the period that the Roman empire was divided into ten kingdoms. p. 193.

6. Points of correspondence between the character of the

little horn and the character of the Papacy. p. 201.
(1.) The little horn was to be different from all the other
ten horns. p. 201.

(2.) It was to have like the
eyes
of
eyes a man. p. 201.
(3.) It was to have a mouth speaking great things. p. 202.
(4.) It was to have a look more stout than its fellows. p. 202.
(5.) It was to affect an equality with God. p. 203.

(6.) It was to change times and laws. p. 204.

(7.) It was to wear out the saints of the Most High. p. 205. III. An inquiry into the prophetic character of the three horns, which were to be plucked up before the little horn. p. 207.

1. They are not the Greek sovereignty in Italy, the kingdom of the Lombards, and the western imperial authority in Italy; as Mr. Mede supposes: neither are they the exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lom

bards, and the state of Rome; as Sir Isaac and Bp.
Newton suppose. p. 207.

2. But, since the ten horns are the ten kingdoms into which
the empire was originally divided, they must be three
primary kingdoms. p. 213.

(1.) Import of the prophecy respecting their fall. p. 213. (2.) What are the ten original kingdoms, among which they are to be sought. p. 216.

3. The three eradicated horus are the three original kingdoms of

(1.) The Heruli. p. 217.

(2.) The Ostrogoths. p. 218.

(3.) And the Lombards. p. 219.

4. The gradual rise of papal domination during the eradi cation of the three horns. p. 222.

IV. The ten horns are to be sought for only in the West; for the Constantinopolitan emperor was the representa

tive of the sixth head, and therefore cannot be esteemed one of the ten horns likewise. p. 227.

1. The opinion of Sir Isaac and Bp. Newton, that the eastern half of the Roman empire is not to be accounted a part of the body of the fourth beast, is untenable p. 229.

2. The body of the fourth beast comprehends the whole Roman empire, both in the East and in the West, p. 232.

3. It is vain to attempt to discover the ten horns among the

modern powers seated within the Roman empire, because they symbolize the ten primary kingdoms into which it was divided. p. 232.

CHAP. V.

CONCERNING THE VISION OF THE RAM AND THE HE-GOAT, AND THE LITTLE HORN OF THE HE-GOAT.

THE ram symbolizes the same power as the bear in the

preceding vision; and the he-goat, the same as the leopard: the ram therefore is the Medo-Persian empire; and the he

VOL. 1,

goat, the Macedonian. The great horn of the hé-goat is the imperial dynasty of Alexander. His four horns, that came up in the place of the great one, are the four Greek kingdoms erected by Cassander, Lysimachus, Ptolemy, and Seleucus. p. 236.

I. Opinions respecting the little horn. p. 238.

It cannot be Antiochus Epiphanes, as Sir Isaac and Bp. Newton have amply shewn: yet neither can it be the Roman power in Macedon and in the East, as those two commentators have attempted to prove. p. 238. (1.) Because it is improbable, that the same power, which in the former vision was represented under the image of a great and terrible beast, should now be described under that of a little horn; such a scheme being replete with confusion. p. 239.

(2.) Because it renders Daniel liable to the charge of unvarying repetition. p. 240.

(3.) And because such an interpretation cannot be reconciled with the prophet's chronological numbers. p. 241.

2. This appears from the following considerations; p. 242. (1.) The desolating abomination of Dan. xi. 31. must be that, which our Lord applied to the Romans under Titus. p. 242.

(2.) The desolating revolt of the he-goat's little horn cannot be the same as the desolating abomination of p. 245.

Dan, xi. 31.

(3.) Therefore the little horn itself cannot symbolize the Roman empire in the East. p. 249.

3. The little horn cannot be a compound symbol, typifying at once Antiochus Epiphanes, the Roman power in the East, Mohammedism, and the infidel republic of France; as Mr. Kett supposes. p. 259.

I An inquiry into its real character. p. 262.

1. A consideration of the chronology of the prophecy. p. 262.

(1.) The tyrannical reign of both the little horns is to be computed from the same year 606; the 1260 years being the latter portion of the 2200, 2300, or 2400,

years, whichever of these readings be the proper one.
p. 267.

(2) Import of the life and death of a beast. The 1260 years
are to be computed from the time wheu the Roman

beast revived. p. 269.

(3.) The 1260 years are to be computed from the time when the saints were given into the hand of the little horn of the Roman beast. This happened, when the Roman pontiff was declared by the secular head of the empire to be the universal bishop. p. 272. (4.) In the same year 606, Mohammed retired to the cave of Hera to digest the plan of that imposture, by which the desolating revolt of the East was completed. p. 282.

(5.) The period of the 2200, 2300, or 2400 years is the period of the duration of the whole vision of the ram and the he-goat. It must be computed from some time, when the ram was in a standing or quiescent state, and before an era remarkable for his pushings or victories. His quiescent state can only be the time immediately subsequent to the establishment of the Medo-Persian empire by Cyrus. The period of his subsequent victories must be the reign of Da❤ rius the son of Hystaspes. Therefore the date of the vision cannot be prior to the union of Media and Persia under Cyrus, nor posterior to the conquests of Darius. Now since the 2200, 2300, or 2400, years conterminate with the 1260 years, and since there is reason to believe that the 1260 years expire in the year 1866, we must compute Daniel's larger period, according to its several readings, backward from the year 1866, in order to ascertain both the proper date of the vision of the ram and the he-goat, and the proper reading of the number. Neither the reading 2200, nor the reading 2300, bring us to an era which can be properly esteemed the date of the vision; because they each bring us to an era subsequent to the period of Darius's conquests. But the reading 2400 brings us to the spring of the year A, C, C 2