misunderstood, I shall pay some attention to it, and endeavour to fix it on that power to which it seems to me to refer.

Bishop Newton has, I think, very clearly shewn us, that the transactions of Antiochus Epiphanes end with the 30th verse, and that the same verse introduces the Romans, to whom he gives the remainder of the prophecy: I cordially agree with him to the end of the 35th verse; but here I must dissent, because he considers the two little horns to be one and the same, belonging to the Western church only: whereas I conceive them to be different symbols, the one of the Eastern imposture, the other of the Western corruption, forming together one grand apostacy, or falling away from the true church of God: I will therefore allow that this wilful king may and does personify the corruptions of the Western church, but it is in unison with the little horn of the east, to whom the most marked characteristics evidently belong.

In the first place let it be observed, that this chapter contains no new vision, but is given by the angel, as himself states, to Daniel, "to "make thee understand what shall befal thy

66

people." What was to befal his people the Prophet had already seen, and therefore to make him understand, I presume is so to arrange

his former visions as to bring clearly to the view of his understanding the bearings and connection of their chief points, the bearings and connection of the two little horns. In order to make the arrangement more clear, the angel begins with the contest between Persia and Greece. He tells of the establishment of the Grecian kingdom, and of its division into four parts. He speaks of the contests arising between two of those parts, and continues the history of Syria down to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes; the Romans then follow, who soon after his reign subverted that kingdom, and assumed the predominance over Judea; their destruction of the temple is mentioned, and the state of the church subsequent to this event: immediately after this the angel introduces the wilful king; "And the king shall do according to his will." Being thus brought forward, in this place, so immediately after the Romans, it would seem that this king must arise from the Roman power; so thinks Bishop Newton: and as the description of his character so much resembles the little horn of the goat, the Bishop was induced to take much pains to prove that the little horn of the goat arose in the Roman dominions, and to identify him with the little horn of the beast, and thus he finds the means of applying him entirely to the Western horn, or in other

words to the Papal power. But let it be observed, that this very abrupt introduction also implies the application of him to an object very recently or immediately under the contemplation of the Prophet, and what can this be, but the terrific vision, which he has so lately seen, which had so strong an effect upon him, which the angel was come to make him understand, and to which the whole narrative of the angel runs parallel, the vision of the goat? And therefore the wilful king must be the same as the little horn of the goat, which I trust I have already shewn is distinct from the little horn of the beast, and represents the apostacy of Mahomet. Still however the difference between the Bishop and myself is not so wide, but that it may be reconciled, as we both consider the

For this there is Bp. Newton's own authority in the following passage: "It is the usual method of the Holy Spirit "to make the latter prophecies explanatory of the former; "and revelation is as the shining light, that shineth more " and more unto the perfect day,' Prov. iv. 18. The four great empires of the world which were shewn to Nebu"chadnezzar in the form of a great image, were again more

66

particularly represented to Daniel in the shape of four

great wild beasts. In like manner the memorable events "which were revealed to Daniel in the vision of the ram "and the he goat, are here again more clearly and explicitly "revealed in this vision by an angel; so that this latter pro"phecy may not improperly be said to be a comment and "explanation of the former."

ultimate object to be the power of Antichrist. He, on the one hand, inducing from the wilful king the identity of the two little horns, fixes them both upon the Papal power; on the other hand I consider the two little horns as two different branches of the same falling away, arising in different parts of the empire, the east and the west, and uniting their characters in that of the wilful king we agree in the object, though not in the means of coming at that object: nor let this be considered as a light matter, since the one includes Mahomet, and the whole apostacy of the East, the other excludes him, and confines the falling away of St. Paul to the corruptions of the Western church only. But now let us turn our attention to the characteristics and marks of the wilful king, and observe those which are most applicable to the one horn, or the other and first let us compare the attributes of the two horns, and mark their diversity.

The little horn of the beast is to rise by his own power amongst the other kings, or in spite of them, and is to establish his dominion by subduing three of them: the saints are to be given into his hand for 1260 years; and they are then to take away his dominion, and to consume it

b 2 Thess. ii.

unto the end. The little horn of the goat is mighty, but not by his own power; he arises when the transgressions are come to the full, and therefore, though he practises and prospers, he has not dominion over the saints; he utterly subverts the daily sacrifice, he annihilates the purity of religion, and therefore has no saints amongst his followers; and he is to be broken without hand. The saints take away the dominion from the first horn, and consume it unto the end; which implies a space of time for consuming it. As a Protestant I may fairly challenge the denomination of saints as belonging to ourselves in this instance, who took away the dominion from the little horn of the beast at the Reformation, and are still consuming it; but the end is not yet, the horn still survives; he survives, but does not prosper. The little horn of the goat on the contrary still practises and prospers; but he is to be broken without hand : that is, by a sudden and immediate interference of almighty Providence. As the difference is great between the two little horns, the similarity is striking between them both and the wilful king.

The little horn of the goat shall be a king of a fierce countenance, shall be mighty, shall de

с

Job xxxiv. 20. Lam. iv. 6. Newton, vol. i. p. 244.