ceived and expressed in the exact spirit and form of the recorded prayer of Daniel*. Thus, so far as I can judge, the very basis of Mr. Davison's objection fails: and thus the retrogradation, which in principle he rightly censures, is found in point of fact to have no existence. CHAPTER VI. Respecting the Objection founded on the Declaration, that the System of the Gospel is a Mystery, which was hidden of old Time, but which now is made manifest. WE read in Holy Writ, that the Dispensation of the Gospel is a mystery, which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but which now at length is made manifest to the saints of Godt. On this passage, and on others of a similar purport, Mr. Davison has constructed yet another objection to the system, which would assign the divine institution of piacular sacrifice to the Patriarchal Dispensation. * See Dan. ix. 4- 19. † Coloss. i. 26. Compare Ephes. iii. 9. R "The doctrine of the atonement," says he, "is of the very essence of the Christian Faith: "it is the chief article of its characteristic 66 66 66 66 system: but it is also that one point of its "system, which is among the latest touched upon in the predictions of prophecy; not being directly introduced into a specific notice, so far as I know, before the predictions "of the prophet Isaiah. For, although some "of the prophetic psalms foreshew the sufferings " of the Messiah, they do not exhibit the vica"rious and expiatory import of those sufferings, "as the prophecy of Isaiah does. The un"searchable nature, therefore, of this doctrine "of the atonement, and its late appearance in "the volume of prophecy, equally tend to dis"countenance the belief, either that man had "explored, by means of sacrifice or by any "other prophetic sign, or that God had com 66 municated, in the prime of the world, a knowledge of this the most transcendent part of his "counsel in the Evangelical Dispensation. "We are confirmed in this negative belief, by some significant testimonies in the New "Testament. For the system of the Gospel is "described there, as the mystery, which hath "been hid from ages and from generations, but now "is made manifest to his saints*: as the mystery, "which, from the beginning of the world, hath "been hid in Godt. These passages do not import, that no disclosure of the plan of the 66 66 66 Gospel redemption had been granted to the foregone ages; but no disclosure sufficient to put men in possession of the perfect truth. Prophecy had been a continual and advancing developement of it. The same Apostle, there"fore, describes the Gospel of God, as that "which he had promised afore by his Prophets "in the Holy Scripture ; and as the revelation 66 66 of the Mystery, which was kept secret since "the world began, but now is made manifest, "and by the scriptures of the prophets §; and as being witnessed by the Law and the prophets. 66 66 "These are passages, which refer us to "no unwritten communications, explanatory of this great secret of God; but to the authentic "evidence of the Law and the prophets, con"tained in the Scripture ||." I. Such, in form, is Mr. Davison's objection. Its cogency I must confess myself unable to discover. In reality, it is effectively answered even by Mr. Davison himself. *Coloss. i. 26. † Ephes. iii. 9. Rom. i. 2. || Inquiry, p. 161, 162. The substance of what the learned writer here maintains, is precisely what I myself also maintain. I contend only for the primitive knowledge of the doctrine of AN atonement, shadowed out by the significant rite of piacular sacrifice. With respect to the degree of that knowledge, different persons, according as they estimate the weight of the evidence which presents itself, will obviously entertain different opinions. But the degree of such knowledge is not the point in debate. Our discussion respects the exist ence of the doctrine, not the circumstantial extent to which the doctrine was revealed. On this latter question, there will be a considerable difference of opinion even among those, who strenuously hold the affirmative of the former question. With this latter question, therefore, in our present discussion, Mr. Davison and myself have no manner of concern. The sole point, to be determined, is: Whether the texts, adduced Mr. Davison, are hostile to the opinion, that the doctrine of AN atonement through the medium of piacular sacrifice was revealed at the very commencement of the Patriarchal Dispensation. Let this point be determined by Mr. Davison himself. "These passages," says he, " do not import, 66 "that no disclosure of the plan of the Gospel redemption had been granted to the foregone ages; but no disclosure sufficient to put men "in possession of the PERFECT truth.” 66 I ask no more than the present concession. If our texts forbid not the necessary belief, that the doctrine of AN atonement was revealed under the Law: I see not, why they should forbid the argued belief, that the doctrine of AN atonement was revealed under Patriarchism. The measure of the knowledge, I repeat it, is not the question between us the true question is, simply, the existence of the knowledge. Hence, if the texts deny not the existence of the knowledge to the Levitical Dispensation: I am at a loss to comprehend, why they must be interpreted, as denying the existence of the knowledge to the Patriarchal Dispensation. II. Mr. Davison's statement of the present objection is marked by a certain indistinctness, which, after all, may possibly have led me to misapprehend his meaning. The statement, as given above, divides itself into three parts. Throughout its middle part, Mr. Davison seems to understand the Apostle's word Mystery in the sense of The system of the Gospel or in the sense of The general plan of |