the confidence of so many in the truth and value of its instructions. Christianity is a consistent system, - a reasonable system, a perfect system; and, when disconnected with the errors of man, it is the power of God unto salvation.

The abettors of this wild and absurd theory, this fanatical humbug, will lament the day when they stood up and virtually gave it their sanction. When they shall see those, now deceived by it, scoffing at religion, and mocking its teachers, then will they begin to feel the greatness of their error, and the wickedness of acting upon the principle, that the end sanctifies the means.

LECTURE IV.

MR. MILLER'S APPLICATIONS OF THE PROPHECIES EXAMINED AND REFUTED.

"Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And a host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised and prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spoke, how long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Dan. viii. 11-14.

IN my last Lecture I examined some of the principal calculations founded on the prophecy of Daniel, by which the attempt has been made to prove, that the world will be destroyed in 1843. In doing this I considered first, the idea, that 2300 days signifies so many years, and showed, that there was no evidence of this. Thus I proved, that we had no one prediction reaching forward to 1843.

In the second place, I inquired, if, by adding different predictions together, we could make out 2300 years, and found, that we fell short of this to the amount of 30 years. I showed, too, that

the author himself was obliged to suppose 30 years, to make his calculations come out right.

I also proved, that the author was wrong with regard to the different predictions; that he had reckoned days as years without any reason for so doing; and, that if he was right, Nebuchadnezzar must have been banished from his throne 2520 years, whereas the Scriptures say, he was banished just seven years. In this way did I show, that his reckonings were entirely false; that not the least reliance could be placed upon them; that they contradicted each other; that they rested on assumed premises, and that they could not be proved by any rule whatever.

This evening I shall ask your attention to this question, Is there a sufficient agreement between the predictions and those things to which they are applied, to justify us in applying them as the author of the Lectures has done?

In answering this question, we must keep two things constantly in mind; first, the dates fixed by our author with regard to the commencement and termination of the things prophesied of; and second, the character of the things predicted.

To proceed understandingly, we must know how the predictions are applied in the Lectures we are considering.

On page 37 of the Lectures we read, "It is very evident, when we carefully examine our text, that it is to be understood as referring to Pagan and Papal rites, for it stands coupled with the abomination of desolation,' and performs the same acts, such as are ascribed to the Papal abomination, To give both the sanctuary and host to be trodden under foot.""

sacrifice' means Pagan rites and sacrifices, and the transgression of desolation, the Papal; and both together shall tread under foot the sanctuary and host,' which brings me to show what may be understood by sanctuary and host.'"

On page 38 we read, "Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed or justified,' means the true sanctuary which God has built of lively stones to his own acceptance, through Christ, of which the temple at Jerusalem was but a type, the shadows having long since fled away, and that temple and people now destroyed, and all included in unbelief."

On page 51 we read, "We learn, that there are two abominations spoken of by Daniel. The first is the Pagan mode of worship which was performed by the sacrificing of beasts upon altars, similar to the Jewish rites, and by which means the nations around Jerusalem drew away many of the Jews into idolatry, and brought down the heavy judgments of God upon idolatrous Israel; and God permitted his people to be led into captivity, and persecuted by the very nations that they, the Jews, had been so fond of copying after in their mode of worship."

On page 52 we are told what the second abomination is." But satan, an arch enemy, found his Pagan abominations could have but little or no effect to draw the followers of Christ into idolatry, for they believed the bloody rites and sacrifices had their fulfilment in Christ. Therefore, in order to carry the war into the Christian camp, suffers the daily sacrifice and abomination to be taken out of the way and sets up Papacy, which is more congenial to the Christian mode of worship in its

outside forms and ceremonies, but retaining all the hateful qualities of the former."

1. Is our author right in saying the sanctuary means the church or Christians? To answer this, turn to Daniel's vision of the 70 weeks, where we read," And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come, shall destroy the city, and the sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined: and he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations, he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined, shall be poured upon the desolate." Dan, ix. 26, 27. Here we see, that the sanctuary means the temple at Jerusalem, and not the Christian people. Hence, treading the sanctuary under foot cannot mean, oppressions endured by the Christians; for sanctuary does not mean Christians. Neither can cleansing the sanctuary mean purifying Christians; for they are not called the sanctuary. The prophet, therefore, is not talking about the end of the world, but judgments which should come upon Jerusalem. He is describing the desecration of the temple, telling the time it shall be desecrated, and when it shall be cleansed.

The taking away of the daily sacrifice, therefore, was taking it from the sanctuary. This was its desecration, together with setting up an altar for sacrificing to idols, as we saw, in our last Lecture, was done by Antiochus Epiphanes, several hundred years before the final destruction of Jerusa