like the objector, to the late compofition of the book. He infers from it that Daniel was one of the greatest prophets, not like the objector, that he was no prophet at all. Lastly it is objected, that the book of Daniel fets forth facts very imperfectly, and often contrary to other historical relations, and the whole is written in a dark and emblematical stile, with images and symbols unlike the books of other prophets, and taken from the schools of the Greeks. As to Daniel's setting forth facts very imperfectly, he is perfect enough for his design, which was not to write a history but prophecies, and history only fo far as it relates to his prophecies. As to his writing contrary to other hiftorical relations, it is falfe. For moft of the main facts related by him are confirmed even by heathen hiftorians: but if he contradicted them, yet he would deferve more credit, as he was more ancient than any of them, and lived in the times whereof he wrote. As to his emblems being unlike the books of other prophets, and taken from the fchools of the Greeks, this is alfo falfe. For the like emblems are often used quit, leguntur hodieque apud nos: atque ii nobis fidem faciunt, Danielum cum Deo colloquia habuiffe. Non enim futura folum, quemadmodum by et alii vates, prædicere folebat, by other prophets, and are agreeable to the stile and genius of all the eastern writers of his time. They were so far from being taken from the fchools of the Greeks, that on the contrary, if they were ever ufed by the Greeks, the Greeks borrowed them from the oriental writers. But after all how doth this last objection confift and agree with the fifth and tenth? There divers matters of fact were spoken of with the clear nefs of history, and the author was convicted of forgery by his uncommon punctuality. Here all is dark and emblematical, imperfect and contrary to other hiftories. Such objections contradict and destroy one another. Both may be false, both cannot be true. These objections being removed, what is there wanting of external or internal evidence to prove the genuinness and authenticity of the book of Daniel? There is all the external evidence that can well be had or defired in a case of this nature; not only the testimony of the whole Jewish church and nation, who have constantly received this book as canonical; but of Jofephus particularly, who commends him as the greatest of the prophets; of the Jewish Targums and Talmuds, which frequently cite and appeal to his authority; of St. Paul and St. John, who have copied many of his prophecies; of our Saviour himself, who citeth his words, and ftileth him Daniel the prophet; of ancient historians, who relate many of the fame tranfactions; of the mother of the feven fons and of the father of the Maccabees, who both recommend the example of Daniel to their fons; of old Eleazar in Egypt, who praying for the Jews then suffering under the perfecution of Ptolemy Philopater, (3 Macc. VI. 6, 7.) mentions the deliverance of Daniel out of the den of lions, together with the deliverance of the three men out of the fiery furnace; of the Jewish high-priest, who showed Daniel's prophecies to Alexander the great, while he was at Jerufalem; and still higher, of Ezekiel, a contemporary writer, who greatly extols his piety and wisdom. Nor is the internal less powerful and convincing than the external evidence; for the language, the ftile, the manner of writing, and all other internal marks and characters are perfectly agreeable to that age; and he appears plainly and undeniably to have been a prophet by the exact accomplishment of his prophecies, as well thofe which have already been fulfilled, as those which are now fulfilling in the world. The genuinness and authenticity of the book of Daniel being therefore established beyond all reasonable contradiction, we may now proceed in our main defign: and the VOL. II. vifion C vifion of the ram and he-goat, and the prophecy of the things noted in the fcripture of truth, and the transactions of the kings of the north and the fouth, will find meditations this year. fufficient matter for our Another year will be fully employed on our Saviour's prophecies of the deftruction of Jerufalem and the difperfion of the Jews, together with St. Paul's prophecies of the Man of Sin, and of the Apoftacy of the latter times. The laft and moft difficult task of all will be an analysis or explication of the Apocalyps or Revelation of St. John. It is a hazardous attempt, in our little bark, to venture on that dangerous ocean, where so many ftouter veffels and abler pilots have been shipwracked and loft but poffibly we may be the better able to fail through it, coming prepared, 'ca-› reened and sheathed as I may fay for fuch a voyage, by the affiftance of the former prophets, having particularly Daniel and St. Paul as our pole-star and compafs, and begging withall of God's holy Spirit to fteer and direct our course. The conclufion will confift of reflections and inferences from the whole. In this manner, with the divine affistance, shall be employed the three years, which is the period usually allotted to these exercises; and it is hoped that the design of the honorable founder will in fome measure be answered by proving the truth of revelation from the truth of prophecy. It was indeed a noble design after a life spent in the study of philofophy, and equally devoted to the fervice of religion, to benefit pofterity not only by hisown useful and numerous writings, theological as well as philofophical, but also by engaging the thoughts and pens of others in defenfe of natural and revealed religion; and fome of the beft treatifes on thefe fubjects in the English language, or indeed in any language, are owing to his inftitution. This is continuing to do good even after death; and what was faid of Abel's faith, may also be said of his, that by it be being dead, yet speaketh. From the instance of this excellent perfon, and fome others who might be mentioned, it appears that there is nothing inconfiftent in fcience and religion, but a great philofopher may be a good Christian. True philofophy is indeed the handmaid to true religion: and the knowlege of the works of nature will lead one to the knowlege of the God of nature, the invisible things of him being clearly feen by the things which are made; even his eternal power and godhead. They are only minute philofophers, who are fceptics and unbelievers. Smatterers in science, they are but fmatterers in religion. Whereas C 2 the |