and great men of the Jews. "Yea he magnified "himself even to the prince of the hoft," the Meffiah, the prince of the Jews, whom he put to death, anno Nabonaff. 780. "And by him the daily facri"fice was taken away, and the place of his fanctu'ary was caft down," viz. in the wars which the armies of the eastern nations, under the conduct of the Romans, made against Judea, when Nero and Vefpafian were emperors, anno Nabonaff. 816, 817, 818. "And an hoft was given him against the dai"ly facrifice, by reafon of tranfgreffion, and it "caft down the truth to the ground, and it practi"fed and profpered." This tranfgreffion, in the next words, is called the "tranfgreffion of defolation;" and in Daniel, 11th chapter, 31ft verfe, "the abo"mination which maketh defolate;', and in Math 24th chapter, 15th verfe," the abomination of de"folation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, ftanding in the holy place." And Sir Ifaac concludes this explication with the following accurate reafoning.

"This laft horn is by fome taken for Antiochus Epiphanes, but not very judicioufly. A horn of a beaft is never taken for a fingle perfon: It always fignifies a new kingdom, and the kingdom of Antiochus was an old one. Antiochus reigned over one of the four horns, and the little horn was a fifth under its proper kings. This horn was at first a little one, and waxed exceeding great, but fo did not Antiochus. It is defcribed great above all the former horns, and fo was not Antiochus: His kingdom, on the contrary, was weak, and tributary to the Romans, and he did not enlarge it. The horn was a king of a fierce countenance, and deftroyed "wonderfully, and profpered and practifed;" that is, profpered in his practices against the holy people: But Antiochus was frighted out of Egypt by a mere moffage of the Romans, and afterwards routed

*P. 1:3, 124. cf his obfervations on Daneil.

routed and baffled by the Jews. The horn was mighty by another's power; Antiochus acted by his own. The horn ftood up against the prince of the hoft of heaven, the prince of princes; and this is not the character of Antiochus, but of Antichrift. The horn caft down the fanctuary to the ground, and fo did not Antiochus; he left it ftanding. The fanctuary and hoft were trampled under foot 2300 days; and in Daniel's prophefies, days are put for years; but the profanation of the temple in the reign of Antiochus did not laft fo many natural days. Thefe were to laft till the time of the end, till the laft end of the indignation against the Jews; and this indignation is not yet at an end. They were to laft till the fanctuary, which had been caft down, should be cleanfed, and the fanctuary is not yet cleanfed."

Thus Sir Ifaac reafons with great ftrength of argument, and proves, that the Greek empire, feated at Conftantinople, is not to be reckoned among the horns of the fourth beaft, because it belonged to the body of the third.

To which purpose alfo, is the judicious obfervation of Mr Whifton, who remarks, that, in the 2d chapter of Daniel, 34th and 35th verfes, the whole image reprefenting the four monarchies, is fuppofed to be ftanding intire, till the "ftone cut out of the "mountain without hands, fmote it upon its feet, "and broke it to pieces; fo that the iron, the clay, "the brafs, the filver, and the gold, were broken "to pieces together." And in the interpretation, verse 44th, the kingdom of Chrift broke to pieces and confumed all these kingdoms. Which (fays he) is no otherwite directly accountable but by fuppofing, that, in the prophefies, all the four monarchies are confidered as well diflinct from each other geographically as chronologically, and entire from their beginning, till the utter deftruction of them altoge ther, at the laft fetting up of Chrift's kingdom *. SECT.

Whiton's effay on the Revelation, p. 258. and 259*

SE C T. IV.

Objections against the Opinion of Sir Ifaac Newton, and others, who fix the Era of the Beast to the eighth Century, when the Pipes were put in Poffeffion of the Exarchate of Ravenna, and the Dutchy of Rome, by Charles the Great,

SIR. with fuch deferved reIR Ifaac Newton having been fo often quoted fpect, the author acknowledges, that it is with great reluctance he is now obliged to differ from him. But amicus Socrates, amicus Plato, magis

amicus Veritas.

We have his opinion in the end of his 8th chapter of observations upon Daniel, in these words : By the converfion of the ten kingdoms to the Roman religion, the pope only enlarged his fpiritual dominion, but did not as yet rife up a horn of the beaft. It was his temporal dominion, that made him one of the horns: And this dominion he acquired in the latter half of the eight century, by fubduing three of the former horns, as above;" (viz. as he explains them, the exarchate of Ravenna, the dutchy of Rome, and the kingdom of the Lombards;) "and now, being arrived at a temporal dominion; and a power above all human judicature, he reigned with a look more ftout than his fellows; and times, and laws, were henceforward given into his hands, for a time, times, and half a time, that is, for 1260 folar years, reckoning a tine for a calendar year, of 360 days, and a day for a fo1. r year."

It is then owned by Sir Ifaac, that the little horn fignifies the papal power, and alfo that this power

fub-..

fubdued the three above named kingdoms; and yet, after all, he affirms that the conqueft of these three kingdoms gave rife to this horn. And is there not here a plain contradiction? For was it poffible, in the nature of things, for a power to act before it existed? And if it exifted, as certainly it muft, before the conqueft, how then can its origin be dated from it?

But perhaps it may be faid, that Pipin, and his fon Charles, fubdued the three kings; and, as the popes were the fprings and advisers in this affair, therefore their overthrow is afcribed to them; and that the after poffeffion of their territories by the popes was owing to fome of these lucky chances, which fometimes happen to favourites, from the folly of weak and prodigal princes. But this will by no means folve the difficulty; for though princes may confer gifts, and very confiderable ones too, upon their favourites, yet feldom or never do they throw away whole kingdoms to them, efpecially if they are capable to preferve them for them. felves. Befides, Charles, who established the popes in this temporal government, was neither weak nor prodigal, but one of the greatest and wifeft crowned heads mentioned in history, and one too who had the courage to oppose the designs of the pope's legates, in the fynod of Franckfort, when they used their utmost efforts to obtain a decree in favour of the prevailing idolatry.

Neither doth Sir Ifaac allow of fuch a folution; for, as he hath fhewn in his 8th chapter, that the fpiritual fupreme power of the popes had, fome centuries before this, been ftrongly eftablished, fo he tells us, that, in the year 751, pope Zechary depofed Childeric the laft of the race of Merovæus; and, abfolving his fubjects from the oath of allegiance, gave the kingdom of the Franks to Pipin the father of Charles.

Since

Since then the popes, by virtue of their spiritual authority, had at this time a power to depose kings and to dispose of their kingdoms, was it not both natural and prudent for Charles and Pipin (who had fo liberally shared in their bounty), to fupport them, and to befow a temporal government upon them, in requital for their own?

But the misfortune of Sir Ifaac lay in this, that, though he seems to make a distinction, yet he really confounds the spiritual with the temporal dominion of the popes; or rather imagined, that their fpiritual dominion was of little importance without the temporal. Whereas it is plain, that the fpiritual was the cause of the temporal; and that, for a long time, it had exifted and been exercised without the other. Thus, in the prophecy of Daniel, chapter 7th, verfe 8th, the little horn, which came up among the ten, is called another; In the feptuagint the word is Tego, which properly fignifies diverfe, or one of a different kind from the ten. Now this diversity could not poffibly confift in its being poffeffed of a temporal dominion, for in that refpect there was a fameness in kind with the reft 2 Nor could it on that account be faid to have a "look more ftout than its fellows," or a fupremacy over them; for feveral of the ten kings have always been, and still are fuperior to it in point of fecular greatness; and, though its temporal power has been of confiderable advantage to it, in fupporting its authority; yet by this alone it was never capable to defend itself.

The effential difference between this horn and the reft, is pointed out in the 8th verfe, "That he "had eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth fpeaking great things;" and in the 21ft verse, "that he made war with the faints, and prevailed against them;" and in the 25th verse, "that he "fhould speak great words against the Moft High,

" and