increase the number of errorists, they deem themselves justified in using all sorts of methods in opposing it. It would seem that the popish principle, that the end sanctifies the means, has come to be looked upon as a true principle of Christian action. Learning, wit, authority, traduction, misrepresentation, and ridicule, have done their utmost. From the theological professor and highest church dignitary, down to the obscurest country preacher, the system has had to suffer an exposure and overthrow. But it behooves all to look well to the grounds on which, and the means by which, the doctrine has been sought to be put down. The principles arrayed against the system, though hastily put forth and advocated to meet a specific form of alleged error, are not to be forgotten or cease to have an existence when the system shall have its catastrophe, as it is said it will shortly have. Those principles, on the supposition that we fail, will work an important revolution in the religious and theological views, hopes, encouragements and prospects of the church. Indeed, a new era has already commenced in prophetic exposition and biblical interpretation. Old and long-settled principles have been abandoned; the most undisputed and generally received views have been relinquished; and new views and principles hastily adopted, and urged with all the zeal and vehemence which a high determination to accomplish an end alone could

supply. In fact, in many cases, positions of great and vital importance in sentiment, have been changed, so that the opposers of this system find themselves in sweet and delightful fellowship and in the most cordial cooperation with those whom, heretofore, they have regarded as the most dangerous and hurtful errorists. And hence it behooves all to open their eyes, and see who are making the infidels. And more especially should they do it as they are confident that we shall fail, and time will continue, and that existing causes will continue to operate to make error as destructive of the souls of men as it has always been. If our system prove true, the errors opposed to it will soon cease to injure and ruin. All the evil they will do, will be confined to those who now cherish and practise them. If the Lord shall soon come, their evil influence can be but a little longer felt. He will cut it short abruptly. But not so, on the other hypothesis. The systems now advocated, the theories now advanced, will continue to mould the sentiments, and shape the practice, and decide the doom of millions, while time lasts. If the errors would cease when the hated system should receive by time its explosion, as such predict it will, less caution would be necessary. But so they will not.

I shall now present a brief statement of facts and evidences, to show that we are sus tained in our views on this subject, by the

plain teaching of the Scriptures, and the first and most judicious expositors of the church; and also to show that our leading opponents disregard that teaching, turn their backs on their expositors, and take positions favoring the three great errors—Infidelity, Romanism, and Universalism.

And I need only to allude to the views of but one of our opponents, as he has given character, shape and tone to the opposition. I refer to Professor Stuart, of Andover. The views thrown out in his "Hints," are, in different forms, the only ones opposed to us with any success. He, in the main, represents the whole host of the opposition. To present his views, therefore, will, in the main, be furnishing those of the whole class.

I have read the book of the Professor with much care and attention. I read it both before and since I embraced the doctrine of the Lord's speedy coming. The author's standing, the subject, a desire to furnish myself with something adequate to arrest the progress of the Second Advent heresy, prompted me to a first perusal. I have read it since, that I might be the more certain of the correctness of the impressions first produced. I had long desired Stuart to speak. I had seen, with mortification, the utter futility and puerility of the attempts of others to put down the views. Dowling had written speciously, yet unfairly, and therefore without great effect; Smith had

written sneeringly; Cambell feebly; Bush paradoxically; the Universalists bitterly; all ineffectually. From Stuart, a different work was expected; a work characterized with such coolness and cogency of reasoning, with such biblical and historical research, such ability and learning in prophetic exposition, as to carry conviction to all who could be affected by rational means. I remember I felt a secret delight when the work was put into my hands, believing, as I did, that it constituted the andidote desired. But how different my view, after a partial examination! It was, indeed, learned, cool, dignified in its style, and excellent in some of its parts; but its leading positions were so startling, so irrational, and so fraught with sceptical consequences, and its inconsistencies were so marked and glaring, that I closed the book with shame, mortification and disgust. Verily, I thought the wise had become mad. I had not a credulity that would admit of such a straining as would be necessary, to adopt such positions. And the thought of their being generally adopted, was truly alarming. I was bound to believe, from a knowledge of the circumstances, that Stuart had done his best. He had surveyed the whole field of prophetic interpretation; had an accurate knowledge of all the theories which had been advanced and advocated on the subject of prophecy; was aware of all the efforts that had been made to explode the system of Mr.

Miller; and had in his possession all the means which the learned world could furnish, for the construction of an exegetical work. Under such circumstances, with such means, and addressing himself to such a work, what should we expect of the ripest scholar of the age? We should dishonor the Professor to say, that he only intended to make a common effort. The time, the subiect, the means, the man, all uncommon; and should we expect a hasty, unmatured, bythe-way sort of an effort? We should rather look for his ripest, best matured, and most fully-digested thoughts. Having the collected wisdom and knowledge of all that had writ ten before him on the prophecies, and knowing the demands of the time, we should expect he would bring out the most able, plausible and tenable system of which he was capable. And that he has, every one may be assured. He has called to his aid all that could give him aid; and we have the results in his "Hints." And what are they? Truth, candor, and faithfulness demand that I say, a compound of Papacy, Neology, and Universalism. This will be shown, after we have given a synoptical view of the books of Daniel and John, the only calendars of the Christian.

The book of Daniel naturally divides itself into three parts,—historical, prophetical, and expository. Six of the chapters are properly history, three are prophecy, and three exposi